reasoning between native- and non-native-English-speaking students arebetter explained by cultural than language differences 2. engineering ethics education canincrease ethical reasoning abilities, and 3. ethical reasoning is positively associated with anemphasis on care, and negatively associated with an emphasis on loyalty. Shortcomings of thecurrent study and directions for further research are also discussed.IntroductionThis paper presents the motivations for and results of a preliminary study exploring theinfluences of culture, education, and moral dispositions on ethical reasoning among engineeringstudents in China. Previous research has examined the effects of engineering ethics education onethical reasoning, but this work has tended to take
faculty director of the Sustainable By Design Residential Academic Program, a living-learning community where interdisciplinary students learn about and practice sustain- ability. Bielefeldt is also a licensed P.E. Professor Bielefeldt’s research interests in engineering education include service-learning, sustainable engineering, social responsibility, ethics, and diversity.Dr. Daniel Knight, University of Colorado, Boulder Daniel W. Knight is the Program Assessment and Research Associate at Design Center (DC) Colorado in CU’s Department of Mechanical Engineering at the College of Engineering and Applied Science. He holds a B.A. in psychology from Louisiana State University, an M.S. degree in industrial/organizational
their work, thestudents can direct the focus of their research and what they will be learning through the IL process.The iterative nature of incorporating this feedback allows the instructor to provide a form ofguidance for the students towards understanding the socio-technological interactions in theirnuclear systems.ConclusionsOverall, we find that guided inquiry learning is an impactful approach to integrating engineeringethics education in a traditional, technical course. This study helped us identify important factorsthat supported our pedagogical design, which is specific to our local context. These include theinterest and knowledgeability of the instructional staff in the sociotechnical content (e.g.sustainability, policy, design ethics
resources practices, an ethical problem exists. Withoutthe business-provided greenhouse, the capacity for aquaponics food production would bediminished, and fewer people would benefit. This discussion was more meaningful to the studentsthan a published ethical case since it directly impacted the work of the team on their project.Another example of project-related ethics discussion arose from a team working on anentrepreneurial project. The goal of that project was to design a workable, marketable productduring the semester. Ethics discussions arose during the design and product development stages.For example: Due to cost to manufacture, will the product only be available to wealthierfamilies? What will be gained from this product and what will be
, bioengineering, computer science &engineering, human centered design & engineering, informatics, public health, radiology. Otheruniversities and colleges around the United States, both large and small, are likely to havesimilar levels of cross-disciplinarity represented in their HE efforts.Limitations of Traditional Engineering EducationLeydens & Lucena [4] make the point that traditional engineering education is too narrowlyfocused and disciplinary to prepare students very well for most humanitarian engineeringendeavors. While this shortcoming could conceivably be overcome in practice if effective multi-disciplinary teamwork were feasible, such teams are unlikely given typical HE projectconstraints. Leydens & Lucena also identify a
Paper ID #23781Interim Results of a Longitudinal, Multi-site Survey of Perceptions of Aca-demic IntegrityMr. Samson Pepe Goodrich, East Carolina University Samson is a junior studying bioprocess engineering at East Carolina University.Dr. Teresa Ryan, East Carolina University Dr. Teresa Ryan teaches mechanical engineering fundamentals such as Dynamics, Mechanics of Materi- als, Acoustics and Vibrations. She also focuses on technical communication skills within an engineering context. Her research interests include acoustics, the dynamics of complex structures, and the use of laser Doppler vibrometry for characterization of
education.Dr. Atsushi Akera, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute Atsushi Akera is Associate Professor and Graduate Program Director in the Department of Science and Technology Studies at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (Troy, NY). He received his M.A. and Ph.D. in the History and Sociology of Science, University of Pennsylvania. His current research is on the history of engineering education reform in the United States (1945-present). He is the immediate past chair of the ASEE Ad Hoc Committee on Interdivisional Cooperation; Chair of the International Network for Engineering Studies (INES); past chair of the ASEE Liberal Education / Engineering and Society Division; and a former member of the Society for the History of
. ConclusionIn this paper, we provided theoretical foundations supporting the need for moral imagination andreconstruction of relational identities when making ethical decisions. The disconnect betweenthese concepts and ways that ethics is traditionally addressed in engineering curriculum wasnoted. We then explained instructional approaches that can be considered in ethics instruction toprepare students for the moral imagination required to make ethical decisions. Examples wereprovided of assignments that were introduced in a senior level design class in order tocomplement traditional instruction. In practice these descriptions are intended to promotediscussion on how imagination can be included in instruction and integrated throughout thecurriculum
warrants any authorship status in first place?In other cases, and again under the disguise of getting experience, the graduate student will beasked to tackle the entirety of reviewers’ comments on a journal paper and send them to thementor and if the students expresses frustration for doing all this work and not even beingpersonally acknowledged for his hard work, the mentor would allegedly claim that this is the roleof the student being a first author. Such practices are, like many of the other co-author situations,at best research misconduct and, at worst, fraud. The work presented for publication does notbelong to the mentoring author. There is often confusion that sets in for this form of co-authorship because academics tend toapply the
State University program outcomes areachieved by exposing students to a variety of subject material across the undergraduatecurriculum and effectively teaching students across these courses how to preserve and enhancethe engineering profession including ethical and legal practices. The Department of Industrialand Systems Engineering of NC A&T engineering courses that specifically address ethics intheir objectives is GEEN 100- Engineering Design and Ethics, INE 289- Engineering Teams andLeadership, INE 389- Systems Approaches for Industrial and Systems Engineers, and INE 489-Professionalism and Ethics for Industrial and Systems Engineers. In order to effectively enhancethe engineering ethics curriculum and to assess and document the current
Paper ID #15373Perspectives of Engineers on Ethical Dilemmas in the WorkplaceDr. Angela R. Bielefeldt, University of Colorado, Boulder Angela Bielefeldt is a professor at the University of Colorado Boulder in the Department of Civil, Envi- ronmental, and Architectural Engineering (CEAE). She serves as the Associate Chair for Undergraduate Education in the CEAE Department, as well as the ABET assessment coordinator. Professor Bielefeldt is the faculty director of the Sustainable By Design Residential Academic Program, a living-learning community where interdisciplinary students learn about and practice sustainability
authors also suggest the use of active pedagogies(guided practice, learning by doing), and integration of ethics issues in design courses, whichinherently consider ethical tradeoffs presented by design problems [6].The importance of instruction in ethics and professionalism has been recognized generally by thebusiness and higher education communities. Consider, for example, Bryant University andBentley University – two business-oriented universities that showcase a focus on “ethicalreasoning” (an element of Bryant’s First-Year Gateway core curriculum), and a “commitment tobusiness ethics” where students learn about “management and moral behavior (highlightedthemes of Bentley’s general academic approach of integrating business studies with
institution,Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, for incoming first-year engineering students. The paper is theresult of early steps in the implementation of a longer-term, NSF-funded research project thatextends the inquiry to the development of students’ understanding of ethics over the entire arc oftheir undergraduate educational experience [1].Our argument unfolds in five steps. In the section that follows this introduction, we situate ourinquiry within the broader field of engineering ethics research, connecting in particular to workon “macroethics” [2] as it intersects with scholarly work in our primary fields of science andtechnology studies (STS) and engineering studies. The next section reviews in greater detail thisproject’s research design
extracurricular participation – on studentmoral development [17], but these have reported mixed effects.Within engineering more specifically, Cech’s pioneering research [18] suggests that manyundergraduate engineering programs are often characterized by a “culture of disengagement,”with engineering students becoming less oriented toward social and professional responsibilitiesas they progress toward graduation. Still other recent efforts suggest growing awareness for howengineering students’ pre-college experiences may impact their further ethical development. TheStudent Engineering Ethical Development (SEED) survey, for instance, was developed to“explore connections between the ethics education experiences of engineering undergraduatesand their ethical
Lecturer and a Science and Engineering Education Fellow at the Mechanical Engi- neering Department, Stanford University. She recently completed her PhD from the School of Engineering Education at Purdue where she focused on identifying and developing leadership and other socio-technical capabilities among engineering students and professionals. She is passionate about improving engineering education and practice and has been working in the areas of innovation, leadership development, diversity, equity, and inclusion, ethics, and, faculty development. Previously, she also worked for companies including Deloitte, Sprint, ProStem and Credit Suisse, both as an internal and external research consultant focusing on areas of
Science Foundation. Jonathan’s research focuses on questions of ethics, science, and representation. He teaches a wide variety of under- graduate and graduate courses on related topics.Dr. Justin L Hess, IUPUI, Indianapolis Justin L. Hess received his PhD from Purdue University’s School of Engineering Education along with his Master’s of Science and Bachelor of Science from Purdue’s School of Civil Engineering. Justin is currently a Postdoctoral Researcher in the STEM Education Research Institute at IUPUI. Justin’s research interests include developing pedagogical strategies to improve STEM students’ ethical reasoning skills; exploring the role of empathy within design, innovation and sustainability; synthesizing the
report that the programpositively affected their motivation to continue in engineering [75, p. 737]. While many project-based and service-based learning initiatives target graduates or upper-level students, early EPICSparticipation leads to EPICS having greater impact on retention [75, p. 739].To engage potential future engineers, one university program has developed a course for first-year mechanical engineering undergraduates that includes a 10-week project where studentswork in teams of 4-5 to build dancing robots for a robot flash mob for local elementary schoolstudents [75]. The elementary students participate as customers, meeting with team members,providing design specifications, and practicing design by creating their own
traditional ethical inquiry – research in these fields consists inempirical and descriptive explorations regarding the intuitive and emotional nature of moraljudgments28, 29, as well as the social and environmental mechanisms responsible for assessmentsof right and wrong, mentioned above. This is important, since findings suggest than many of thecommonsense intuitions grounding understandings of the relations between moral judgments anddecisions, and actions and behaviors, are incorrect.Intuitively, one might suppose actions/behaviors directly follow from judgments/decisions. Forexample, if a civil engineer makes a judgment regarding the permissibility of designing or thedecision to design a faulty bridge, then his or her actions and behaviors would
Paper ID #16036Ethics in the Classroom: The Volkswagen Diesel ScandalDr. Elisa L. Warford, University of Southern California Elisa Warford is a senior lecturer in the Engineering Writing Program at the University of Southern Cal- ifornia, where she teaches undergraduate and graduate courses in written and oral engineering commu- nication. Her current research interests include the rhetoric of science and portrayals of engineering and technology in American literature. She is also a professional technical editor specializing in engineering writing for academia and industry. She holds a Ph.D. in English from the University
Civil Engineering Students about Ethics and Societal Impacts via Cocurricular Activities.” This paper was recognized by the Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice as an Editor’s Choice. Currently working with Dr. Angela Bielefeldt as a research assistant. Preparing to submit three papers regarding ethics in engineering education as co-author at the 2020 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition.Dr. Angela R. Bielefeldt, University of Colorado Boulder Angela Bielefeldt is a professor at the University of Colorado Boulder in the Department of Civil, Envi- ronmental, and Architectural Engineering (CEAE) and Director for the Engineering Plus program. She has served as the Associate Chair for
attitude which serves to dissipate the many misunderstandings that have bedeviled nuclear energy. 4. Importance of pursuit of research and development in the nuclear field 5. Cost must be comprehensive and integrate a social component and an ecological component 6. working environment, specifically including the remuneration due to the nuclear workers, must not be detrimental nor tend to reduce the incentive for a safety culture 7. Optimization of working conditions designed to minimize human failures detrimental to the safety of the installations, environmental protection and health of the workers and the public 8. Continuing education of the personnel working in nuclear installations and raising of their level
motivated some of this paperoriginally. I would be remiss not to point out how Whitbeck [20] also made this point aboutethical decision-making as design as well.GF: First, thanks for bringing up the Whitbeck [20] article. I agree that there is overlap betweenengineering in ethics and “ethics as design,” inasmuch as both perspectives see ethical ends,judgments, and solutions as contingent upon the exigencies of a problem’s context, namely theconstraints, allowances, and specifications that delineate possibilities. While Whitbeck appearsto come to this conclusion through the experience of engineering design processes and practices,engineering in ethics was initially derived more from a Dewyian theory of experience and ethicalinquiry, as well as an
Colleges and Universities, has been the need for higher education toplace greater emphasis on helping graduates develop strong teamwork skills. Teamwork skillsare particularly necessary for professionals in the engineering fields where diverse groups mustwork together to solve complex problems. But how and in what context can those skills betaught? Once taught, how can these skills be assessed and how can faculty provide objectivefeedback to students when teamwork is often conducted outside the classroom? Based on thework of Patrick Lencioni and other leading authorities on teaming and organizationalpsychology, University of Houston – Downtown has developed a curriculum designed to teachstudents to be both good team members and to provide the
individual belongs toprofessionally, and/or voluntarily. Therefore, ethical conduct and practice is a traditional cornerstone ofeducation and the professional conduct and development of workforce in all industries.Today, engineers play a crucial role in the development of the direction of technology, research, economicgrowth and thereby impact on the safety, wellbeing, and lives of people. Engineers make decisions or areinvolved in the decision-making and operational processes of business, government, and/or non-profitorganizations at various levels (strategic, tactical, and operational). Since engineers’ design and makesolutions available to use for dealing with the societies’ complex problems, the direct and ripple effects ofthese decision-making
Activities Board (TAB).9 Page 26.977.4In December 1972, CSIT published the first issue of the IEEE CSIT Newsletter, whose coverlisted the new Committee’s purposes: 1. Develop means to encourage and support professional and social responsibility in the practice of engineering. 2. Promote sensitivity to and understanding of the interaction between technology and society. 3. Foster study, discussion and appropriate action involving IEEE members and others. 4. Promote the conception of means and implement programs for predicting and evaluating the impact of technology on society. 5. Take appropriate action to implement programs.10In a short editorial
turned in significantnumbers to the codification of best practices and ethical priorities. That burst of ethics-writingactivity was followed by others through the twentieth century, Davis explains, usually instigatedby moments of great growth in the profession or of notable outside pressures for self-regulation.1,2 Codes of ethics have customarily mandated rigorous, honest, and disinterestedengineering practice and depending on the sub-field, also more specific instructions regardingpertinent materials, technical processes, and commercial relations. These instruments are Page 26.1723.3essentially optimistic in projecting a desired future
many categorized the course as EE despite it being required for both majors. Thisperception may reflect the disciplines of the instructors, who were primarily affiliated with EE.However, since 12 of 14 focus group participants were MEs, that would not explain the differentratings across WI and WOI sections. The differences across sections are not generalizable due tolow sample size (WI n=7; WOI n=7).Research Question 1. When interpreted narrowly, RQ1 results in a list of classes students notedas including elements of social justice or social impacts of engineering. Within our four focusgroups, this list included NHV, Senior Design, Engineering Practices—Introductory CourseSequence (EPICS), Circuits, classes associated with the Humanitarian
and graduate student professional development.Dr. Thomas A. Litzinger, Pennsylvania State University, University Park Thomas A. Litzinger is Director of the Leonhard Center for the Enhancement of Engineering Education and a Professor of Mechanical Engineering at Penn State. His work in engineering education involves curricular reform, teaching and learning innovations, assessment, and faculty development. Dr. Litzinger has more than 50 publications related to engineering education including lead authorship of an invited article in the 100th Anniversary issue of JEE and for an invited chapter on translation of research to practice for the first edition of the Cambridge Handbook of Engineering Education Research. He
this statement with the program outcomes for ABET Criteria 3 which includethe following3: 3c) An ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs within realistic constraints such as economic, environmental, social, political, ethical, health and safety, manufacturability and sustainability; 3f) An understanding of professional and ethical responsibility; and 3h) The broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a global and societal context.Thus, integrating the theory and practice of sustainability into a curriculum is a critical issue forengineering educators to address. We seek to examine how best to insert these criteria ofsustainability into our
young engineer’s thinking”.3 AsBaura continues: “In preparation for being involved in unethical situations you cannot control, itis important to know your limits. Know your personal engineering ethics threshold for action.”3This paper proposes an engineering ethics course that will help students develop these personalengineering ethics and presents the outline of the content, assessment, and pedagogy for teachingthe Engineering Ethics course.As part of the course modules for ethics communications and group work projects have beendeveloped. The paper starts with a background outlining the context of the Engineering Ethicscourse, mentions some particular so called “best practices” to present such a course, exploresassumptions about the course