identify distincttypes of incidents. Critical incidents have been sorted into 25 themes and seven categories whichrepresented potential causes of changes in ways of experiencing engineering ethics in the healthproducts industry. Categories included: (1) Cultural Immersion, (2) Acting Ethically, (3) EthicalFailures, (4) Interpersonal Encounters, (5) Mentorship and Management, (6) Reflection andAssociation, and (7) Prior Ethics Training. These findings suggest the importance of workplaceculture in changing or solidifying individuals’ ways of experiencing ethical practice. Thesefindings can inform post-secondary engineering ethics instruction as well as workplace training.BackgroundSince ABET EC 2000, interest in and emphasis on engineering ethics
reflect on how ethics instruction can be modified to incorporate imaginationconcepts. Examples of modifications to an ethics curriculum that is currently in use for thesenior-level engineering class, Design of Steel Structures, in the Department of Civil andEnvironmental Engineering at the University of Massachusetts Amherst in the United States arepresented to initiate discussion.We invite educators to engage with the questions of moral reasoning and reflect on the role ofimaginal capacity in designing and developing pedagogies. Treating imagination in connectionwith fantasy and images of the impossible downplays the significance of its importance inreasoning and understanding, as illustrated by the scholars whose works we briefly review in
other words, the experience of relationality and ethical concern are ontologically priorto defining engineering’s role in a given moment. Returning to one of our recent publications [1],I would argue that we first feel and experience what is going on before we can reflectively thinkabout such experience. We feel and experience relationships with all that we encounter in a givenevent, and we are affected by those encounters. Responsibilities, obligations, and valuations arisetherefrom. In being affected by the multiplicity within an encounter, there is significant potentialfor conflict and difficulties associated with assigning/identifying value(s). Once the experienceoccurs, we objectify it, mine it for information, and seek to address it
Performance Virtues Autonomy Compassion (Empathy) Citizenship Confidence Critical Thinking Courage Civility Determination Curiosity Gratitude Neighborliness Motivation Judgment Honesty Service Perseverance Reasoning Humility Volunteering Resilience Reflection Integrity Community Teamwork Resourcefulness Respect Awareness (Collaboration) Justice (Equity, Equality)It
engineering macroethics. Even more discouraging is the fact thatthere is insufficient amount of work on integrated approaches to address both micro and macroissues in engineering, that is, linking personal and professional ethics as well as linkingprofessional and social ethics [1]. The micro-macro distinction, however, is not always clear andone might find it difficult to encourage ethical reflection at a micro level without taking macroaspects into account [4]. To understand how microethics and macroethics are related, we will nowdiscuss each in detail.Sensitivity to MicroethicsMicroethics focuses on issues for the most part internal to engineering practice, such as therelationship between individual engineers, or between the engineers and their
: Learning Objectives and Core Activities for Introduction Section Learning Objective Core Activities 1. Learn about other members in the group and 1. Introductions begin building a learning community 2. Reflect on group dynamics and ways to 2. Examining constructive and make the group functional destructive group behaviors 3. Establish ground rules for participation 3. Generate ground rulesThe introductory activities are particularly important because they help participants identifydeeper connections (beyond major or home department) and begin building trust and a learningcommunity. The list of suggested introduction activities that is provided as part of the
that fallunder 1-3 of the learning outcome categories. Figure 3 presents the number of students who havehighlighted each of the learning outcome categories, from 2017 to 2019. Since one student coulddescribe up to three learning outcomes of the same category, the counts do not reflect the totalnumber of mentions per category.Combining all data from 2017 to 2019 (Fig. 3), the responses were categorized according to theiralignment to the five key learning objectives of the course (Appendix I): Reactor Physics Theory(11 of 29 students), Nuclear Fuel Life Cycle (9 of 29), Reactor Technology (12 of 29), NuclearSafety (8 of 29), and finally the Connection between the Nuclear Sector and Society/Public (15 of29). The societal aspect of nuclear
why he left engineering, then the university altogether because he could not align hisown goals for systemic change with the many chemistry and math classes required of theengineering degree. He was much happier working with his hands, playing music, and gettinginto an Internet of Things startup company. Travis had more significant mental health challenges(medically diagnosed before entering college), and his story is further elaborated below.ConcussionsCombining both the physical and mental health issues were a surprising number of concussions.As referenced in the first section, traumatic brain injury is more common than may be expected,but it was still a surprising finding that three students: Miranda (yr2/reflect yr3), Tucker (yr
place whereall their needs will be met. Similarly, caregivers, such as physicians, nurses, therapists andmedical or biological researchers, find a place where their efforts to aid those in need of care arenot hampered by real-world limitations in time and resources.Figure 4: Caring IslandAnalysis of DataAs mentioned earlier, the literature reflects the difficulties in identifying reliable assessment toolsfor ethics education. [7, 8] A mixed methods approach has been employed to gather data aboutstudent self-assessment of course efficacy overall and of individual aspects of the course.Students answered survey questions, in addition to filling out freeform comments. Feedback wassolicited from former students in GESM 121: Science, Literature and
growing body of research that supports the belief that academic courses about appliedethics and the social implications of technology are not effective in increasing ethical knowledgebut rather knowledge and awareness is discovered and acquired during the years of educationand training [14], [2]. A key purpose of the NSPE code of ethics is to engage the members towork and behave according to the principles of the association and to protect the organization’sinterests [14].With experience practitioners acquire both knowledge about ethical issues and better strategiesfor working through ethical problems [12]. The survey results might reflect a lack of trainingand experiential learning in the practice of engineering as well as a need for greater