Paper ID #49047Assessment of FE ethics performance and experiences integrating ethics intothe curriculum in a Civil Engineering department at a military institution[Research Paper]Dr. Rebekah L Martin, Virginia Military Institute Dr. Martin completed her bachelor’s in Civil and Environmental Engineering at Bucknell University and her PhD in Civil Engineering at Virginia Tech. She is currently an assistant professor at VMI teaching fluids, environmental engineering and water resources courses. Her research focuses on drinking water quality and public health. She also co-advises the newly formed Society of Women Engineers at
four times per semester, approximately once per month, using the skills-based, learner-centered BOPS method. Finally, this paper describes the contents of the workshop, including thecompetencies the workshop aims to cultivate and exercises used to do so. This paper is not meantto be an exhaustive description of either the IREI project or workshop but, rather, a sketch of themotivations for and nature of workshop so far.Background and objectivesNational legislation in the US, such as the America COMPETES Act and, more recently, theCHIPS and Science Act, highlights the importance of research integrity in innovation andcompetitiveness of the US economy [1], [2]. Given federal funding mandates, researchinstitutions have developed interventions and
actions and decisions. It goes beyond merecompliance with rules to consider what is morally right or good. In the field of engineer-ing, for example, an ethical decision might involve prioritizing public safety even if it meansexceeding minimal compliance requirements. In summary, compliance focuses on adherenceto external rules, while ethics encompasses the internal principles of right and wrong thatinfluence choices and actions beyond legal obligations (21). In the field of engineering education, compliance is present throughout the curriculum, asit ensures that future engineers learn to adhere to the standards and regulations that governtheir practice. By integrating compliance into training, it ensures that engineers will knowand respect
description of the course in the official course catalog of the university. The course is or-ganized in such a way that the one-day seminar is held on a Saturday in the sixth or seventhweek of the semester. The case study is organized as an integral part of this Saturday, with atime slot scheduled from 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. This extended time span allows for a differentdidactic approach and the detailed treatment of a comprehensive topic.3.1. Part one: The Morning Session – Warm up and the PPPTo start the seminar and get some movement and attention of the group the day starts after ashort welcome with a group activation of a “living statistic”. This activation includes 10 ques-tions that can be answered with simple answer categories. It is about
lack of sufficient information to show thatactive, problem-based learning is more effective for teaching ethical reasoning and decisionmaking in college-level engineering courses than traditional lecture styles or other activelearning styles. Problem-based learning is an “instructional (and curricular) learner-centeredapproach that empowers learners to conduct research, integrate theory and practice, and applyknowledge and skills to develop solutions to a defined problem” [8]. The PBL approach helpsstudents determine their own learning needs and the strategies they need for learning [9]. Thiscontrasts with traditional approaches to teaching that only introduce problems after students haveacquired the relevant content knowledge and skills
traditional culture in different countries.Dena Plemmons, University of California, Riverside Dr. Plemmons is the Director of the Research Ethics Education Program at the University of California, Riverside. Her interests are in research on research integrity and curriculum development for integrity and leadership. She has consistently been funded, as PI and Co-PI, through NIH, NSF, and ORI for her research and curriculum development in research ethics, and investigations into common and best practices in areas of scientific practice, both nationally and internationally. She has served as Chair of the Executive Board of the Association for Practical and Professional Ethics, and is the former Editor in Chief of the
discussed inthe documents and how the findings can be used to integrate AI ethics into engineering education.3 Overview of AI Policy Documents3.1 US’s Blueprint for an AI Bill of Rights: Making Automated Systems Work for the American PeopleThe ”Blueprint for an AI Bill of Rights: Making Automated Systems Work for the American People” [23],hereafter mentioned as the AI Bill of Rights, is a white paper published by the White House Office ofScience and Technology Policy (OSTP) in October 2022, outlines five principles intended to guide theethical and responsible development and use of automated systems in the United States. While it is not anofficial policy document, it seeks to protect the American public from potential harms arising
-11].An engineering ethics course is an appropriate venue for addressing the issues of GenAI becauseethical concepts and critical thinking are central. Ethics has been a standard part of theengineering curriculum for decades [12, 13]. There is flexibility in how engineering ethicscourses are taught, and these courses typically integrate contemporary topics such as GenAI.Topics in engineering ethics courses include basic moral theories, principles of professionalconduct, codes of ethics, and case studies [12]. Case studies are narratives that demonstrateethical dilemmas around technical issues where relevant actors are faced with choices regardingtheir actions [14, 15].The efficacy of using case studies in engineering ethics education is well
Riley, Texas A&M University - Kingsville Dr. Celeste Riley is an Assistant Professor of Practice in the Department of Psychology and Sociology at Texas A&M University-Kingsville, RELLIS Campus. She earned her bachelor’s degree in Psychology and Biology from Southwestern University and her doctorate in Clinical Health Psychology/Behavioral Medicine from the University of North Texas. Her research explores interdisciplinary curriculum development in collaboration with STEM fields such as computer science, health science, and engineering.Virginia PedersonPierre Atieh ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2025 By-Design: Ethical Safeguards and Behavioral PsychologyCompetencies, A
, wherein technical subjects are portrayed as neutraland superior, while ethical, social, and political dimensions are tacitly constructed asperipheral or secondary [5], [6].Furthermore, when taught, ethics is prevalently introduced in the engineering curriculumthrough microethical approaches [7], often relying on historical or hypothetical case studiesthat do not reflect the integration required in real-world practice [8]. In recent years, tobroaden engineering ethics instruction, scholars and practitioners have advocated for moreauthentic and situated approaches that position ethics not as an abstract add-on but as part andparcel of engineering practice [9], [10]. One such approach calls for immersive ways toexpose students to ethical issues [11
leadership positions for professional organizations such as ASME and ASEE. He is a past chair of the Engineering Ethics Division at ASEE and past chair of multiple groups in ASME. Dr. Barakat is also a program evaluator for ABET and a consultant for engineering programs development and evaluation under other systems. Dr. Barakat is an active consultant who is currently collaborating with international teams of professionals from academia and industry to build capacity and education programs in areas such as: Engineering Leadership, Engineering Ethics, Professionalism, Societal Impact of Technology, Curriculum Development, and Communication. Dr. Barakat expertise and interest include also the areas of Mechatronics, Control