Paper ID #8857Developing Engineering Ethics through Expert Witness Role PlaysDr. Bradley J. Brummel, The University of Tulsa Bradley Brummel is an Assistant Professor of Psychology at The University of Tulsa. His research inter- ests include using role plays and other simulations to teach responsible conduct of research. He conducts interdisciplinary research with Mechanical Engineering, Neuroscience, and Computer Science. His work has appeared in journals such as Science and Engineering Ethics, Personnel Psychology, Human Rela- tions, and Journal of ManagementDr. Jeremy S. Daily P.E., The University of Tulsa
Paper ID #8996Ethical Concerns of Unmanned and Autonomous Systems in EngineeringProgramsProf. Richard S. Stansbury, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical Univ., Daytona Beach Dr. Richard S. Stansbury is an associate professor of computer engineering and computer science at Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University in Daytona Beach, FL. His research interests include unmanned aircraft systems, field robotics, and applied artificial intelligence. He is program coordinator for ERAU’s new MS in Unmanned and Autonomous Systems Engineering program, which began in fall 2013.Mr. Joshua Lloyd Olds, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical Univ., Daytona BeachDr
Ph.D. in Organization and Management is from Capella Uni- versity, Minneapolis. Elizabeth enjoys exploring and photographing the natural beauty of northern Min- nesota’s wilderness with her family and friends.Dr. Puteri S. Megat Hamari, Minnesota State University, Mankato Dr. Puteri S. Megat Hamari is currently an Assistant Professor in Integrated Engineering at Minnesota State University. Mankato. She is with the Twin Cities Engineering, a project-based learning program where students are taught through collaboration in small groups on industry sourced engineering projects. In addition to teaching engineering core competencies using project-based pedagogy, she also guides students in professional development. Dr
Texas at Tyler Dominick Fazarro is the Coordinator of the Nanotechnology focus group for ATMAE and IEEE Senior Member of the Nanotechnology Council. He is currently an Associate Professor in the Department of Human Resource Development and Technology at the University of Texas at Tyler. He is currently re- searching nanotechnology education, nanotechnology workforce development, and NANO-SAFETY.Dr. Jitendra S. Tate, Texas State University, San Marcos Dr. Tate, associate professor of manufacturing engineering, has established safe handling practices for industrial (such as nanoclay) and engineered (such as carbon nanotubes) nanoparticles in his research and teaching, dealing with advanced polymer nanocomposites. His
focuses on a group of five to six students discussing a complex, real-world scenario that includes current, multi-faceted, multidisciplinary engineering issues. Beforethe 30-45 minute long discussion begins, student participants all read a short scenario thatpresents some technical and non-technical details of the topic.Table 1 presents a summary of sample scenarios. As part of the EPSA, students are asked todetermine the most important problem/s and to discuss stakeholders, impacts, unknowns, andpossible solutions. Examples of the scenarios used in the EPSA are presented in Appendix A. Page 24.1349.2 Table 1. Summary of Sample ScenariosEnergy
. M. (1987). Utilizing the literatures in teaching the research paper. TESOL Quarterly, 21(1), 41- 68. 2. Crocker, J., & Shaw, P. (2002). Research student and supervisor evaluation of intertextuality practices. Hermes Journal of Linguistics, 28, 39-58. 3. Chandrasoma, R., Thompson, C., & Pennycook, A. (2004). Beyond plagiarism: Transgressive and nontransgressive intertextuality Journal of Language, Identity, and Education, 3(3), 171-193. 4. Linder, S. (2007, March 28). Ohio University revokes master's degree: Student found guilty of plagiarism. Outlook: Ohio University News & Information. Retrieved from http://www.ohio.edu/outlook/06
ofresults includes faculty observations of student learning experiences.BackgroundThe STEM scholarship is awarded on a competitive basis with an emphasis on selecting studentsto form a diverse cohort. The intention is to create a group of scholars representing differentSTEM majors, academic years, gender, race, socioeconomic background, and culturalexperience. Scholars are awarded a $5,000 scholarship (providing significant tuition assistance)which is renewable for up to three years. These scholarships are funded by a National ScienceFoundation S-STEM grant and the selected students must have demonstrated financial need andan eligible declared major (Mathematics, Biology, Chemistry, Physics, Information Technology;Electrical, Computer, Civil
participantsexperienced them.Limitations, Conditions and Future WorkIn conclusion, we discuss some limitations or conditions of our instrument and proposesuggestions for further research with the aim of improving the practical effectiveness of theinstrument in assessing students’ individual ethical decision-making in project-based designenvironment.Alternative Theoretical Framework(s)One of the most important issues we might want to take into account in our future research is: towhat extent do Kohlbergian-based instruments, and specifically the EERI, account for thedifferent kinds of ethical reasoning required by engineers in their design processes? Are therealternative theoretical bases that better account for the ethical considerations faced by engineersduring
of the Technology and Society (T & S) Division and as the ASME district B leader. He also serves as the treasurer and secretary for the ASEE Engineering Ethics Dvision.Ms. Nadia Sunny, Grand Valley State University Nadia Sunny is pursuing a Master’s degree in Biomedical Engineering at Grand Valley State University, Michigan. She received her Bachelor’s in Chemical Engineering from Bangladesh University of En- gineering and Technology in 2004 and Master’s in Business Administration from Institute of Business Administration, Dhaka University in 2008. She has a diverse work experience in mechanical fabrication company, urea process plant, telecommunication equipment vendor and bank. She received excellence awards
reviewer for several other technical journals. She has received a number of awards, including ASEE Fellow, the McGraw Award, and, most recently, the Berger Award. In addition to activity in the ethics division, she is also a member of the Engineering Technology Division’s executive board. She serves on several national committees. Marilyn is also active in the Association for Practical and Professional Ethics, serving as a moderator for the Ethics Bowl and proceedings editor, and the Association for Business Communication; she s a regional vice-president and a section editor for ABC’s pedagogical journal
of Applied Social Research, Columbia University 2. Davis, S.F., Grover, C.A., Becker, A.H. & McGregor, L.N. (1992). ‘Academic dishonesty: prevalence, determinants, techniques, and punishments,’. Teaching of Psychology, 19, 1, s. 16-20 3. Lester, M. C., & Diekhoff, G. M. (2002),. ‘A comparison of traditional and internet cheaters.’ Journal of College Student Development, 43(5), 2-7 4. Michael Vandehey, M. A., George Diekhoff, G. M., & Emily LaBeff, E. E. (2007), ‘College Cheating: A Twenty-Year Follow-Up and the Addition of an Honor Code,’ Journal of College Student Development, Volume 48(4), Number 4, July/August 2007, pp. 468-480 | 10.1353/csd.2007.0043 5. De Lambert, K,, Ellen, N., &
Challenges16-19. Whileethics instruction is common in first year engineering courses20-25, this instruction may notinclude social responsibility as a macroethical imperative. Some curricula with an ethics threadeducate students about macroethical issues in later years, such as a third-year course with ethicsintegration at Drexel26. Another way that engineering students may come to appreciate theimportance of social responsibility is via service-learning (S-L) courses, which is the basis forsome first year projects / design courses27-32.An emphasis on social responsibility within engineering may be significant beyond its intrinsicimportance to individuals and society. There may be important implications of SR for the
., Engineering Ethics, 4th Edition. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.2. Lathem, S., M. Neumann, and N. Hayden. 2011. The Socially Responsible Engineer: Assessing Student Attitudesof Roles and Responsibilities. Journal of Engineering Education, 100(3):p. 444-474.3. Redish, E., Smith, K., Looking Beyond Content; Skill Development for Engineers. Journal of EngineeringEducation. 97(3):p. 295-307.4. Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology. 1997.ABET Code of Ethics ofEngineers.http://wadsworth.cengage.com/philosophy_d/templates/student_resources/0534605796_harris/cases/Codes/abet.htm (accessed January 3, 2014).5. Gilbane Gold. 1989. 24 min. Lubbock, TX: National Institute for Engineering Ethics, Texas Tech University.(DVD)6. Sweeney, R. 2013