AC 2007-38: THEORY AND PRACTICE OF HUMANITARIAN ETHICS INGRADUATE ENGINEERING EDUCATIONJuan Lucena, Colorado School of MinesCarl Mitcham, Colorado School of MinesJon Leydens, Colorado School of MinesJunko Munakata-Marr, Colorado School of MinesJay Straker, Colorado School of MinesMarcelo Simoes, Colorado School of Mines Page 12.1488.1© American Society for Engineering Education, 2007 Theory and Practice of Humanitarian Ethics in Graduate Engineering EducationAbstractThe engineering education ethics focus on individual and social responsibilities has overlookedan important dimension of engineering practice that deserves clearer ethical articulation
assistance to the campus and community, and maintains the collec- tion in assigned subject areas. Her current research interests include information literacy instruction and assessment, the impact of student affect on learning, data literacy, and data management planning. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2016 Training Graduate Engineering Students in EthicsAbstractThe Howard R. Hughes College of Engineering at the University of Nevada, Las Vegasembarked on providing ethics instruction to incoming graduate students in the form of amandatory workshop. The College has a diverse graduate student population, including asizable international component, who are enrolled in several M.S. and
other scholarly journals. Canary is Co-principal In- vestigator for two inter-disciplinary projects of graduate ethics education, funded by the National Science Foundation. Her other research foci include organizational and family communication, particularly as those processes co-influence each other in contexts of disability, health, and public policies.Dr. Joseph R. Herkert, Arizona State University Joseph R. Herkert, D.Sc., P.E., is Lincoln Associate Professor of ethics and technology in the School of Letters and Sciences and the Consortium for Science, Policy & Outcomes at Arizona State University. He has taught engineering ethics and related courses for nearly 25 years. His work on engineering ethics has
c American Society for Engineering Education, 2014 Ethical Concerns of Unmanned and Autonomous Systems in Engineering ProgramsAbstract:Unmanned systems are entering educational curricula (both K–12 and post-secondary) becausethey capture student interest, provide multidisciplinary engineering opportunities, anddemonstrate many tangible science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM)concepts. In collegiate engineering programs, unmanned systems are used both within thecurriculum (e.g. capstone design projects) and as part of co-curricular/extra-curricular activities(e.g. the Associate for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International (AUVSI)’s student designcompetitions). Graduate programs dedicated
assessment of effective teaching and learning at the university level.Dr. Maria Brunhart-Lupo, Colorado School of Mines Maria Brunhart-Lupo is an adjunct faculty member in both the Design EPICS Program and the Depart- ment of Geology and Geological Engineering at the Colorado School of Mines. Her background is in geotechnical engineering, applied geology and geoscience/engineering education. Her research in STEM education currently centers around undergraduate and graduate course development and how to best teach STEM based materials to students of all levels. Page 24.540.1 c American
the graduate level [4].2. A User-Oriented Approach to Engineering Ethics EducationPrevious research has recognized the critical role engineering faculty members play ineducating students about engineering ethics [5][6]. Such recognition, however, contrastswith a general trend in engineering education: faculty members are usually slow andreluctant in adopting research-based pedagogical practice, a trend that challengesnumerous designers of educational innovations [7] [8] [9]. In particular, scholars havereported that educational innovations that follow a “replication model,” in which facultymembers passively accept and adopt pedagogical innovations designed by educationalresearchers, have very limited effect in generating faculty engagement
) throughout a student's education in datascience. Figure 5. Data Life Cycle [1]In our ongoing work, we are analyzing the coverage of topics in university technical ethicscourse syllabi [5]. We envision creating a heatmap or other visualization to show areas ofcommon emphasis as well as to identify gaps to be filled by creation of curricular materials. Datascience education needs good case studies (or even good fiction [20]) generally associated withstages in the pipeline and more specifically with techniques and algorithms deployed in technicalcourses. Consistent with the recommendations for intertwining ethical and technical studies [6],Tractenberg suggests that “a one-time ethics training ‘vaccine’” is not ideal
construction engineering and Research Assistant in the GERESE project. Her research interest include construction engineering issues and ethical issues related to research, construction and safety.Jorge Ferrer, University of Puerto Rico, Mayaguez Jorge J. Ferrer is Professor in the Humanities Department of the University of Puerto Rico at Mayagüez. Dr. Ferrer holds a doctorate in Theological Ethics and specializes in Bioethics. He has authored or co-authored 4 books and numerous scholarly articles in his field. He has been PI of the NSF funded GERESE (Graduate Education in Research Ethics for Scientists and Engineers) Project.William Frey, University of Puerto Rico, Mayaguez William Frey
… course material was presented in terms of questions for the students to work out, rather than as answers that the instructor already knows.” • “I thoroughly enjoyed this course.”Common reactions were an appreciation of the emphasis on class discussion; the opportunity tomeet expert opinion; the topicality of the material; and the sense that divergent points of viewcould be ‘safely’ and constructively expressed.F. ConclusionA new course on the Social and Ethical Implications of Nanotechnology was given, and wellreceived. Although, since ABET 2000, there is an expectation that graduate students inengineering disciplines will have undergone education in engineering ethics, this proved not tobe the case in this class. Because the majority of
Page 13.966.2 2programs, internships, field trips and other opportunities that create real-world learning. Suchpathways are also generated through collaborative partnerships between faculty and library staff.IntroductionWe are university educators who are not engineers but who frequently collaborate with ourengineering colleagues in the development of content, materials, and teaching strategies. Thesecollaborations are designed to support our students’ general education skills within theirengineering courses. One critical general education topic that may not be integrated intoengineering courses at technical universities such as ours is
of American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE), American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), and Association for Practical and Professional Ethics (APPE).Andrew Hable, University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee Andrew T. Hable is a Peace Corps Volunteer, living and working in rural Panama; he provides capacity development and technical assistance related to water distribution systems and basic sanitation. He was previously a Water Resources Engineer with Earth Tech, Inc. in Milwaukee. He graduated summa cum laude with a major in civil engineering and a minor in political science from the University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee, where he co-founded the student chapter of Engineers Without Borders
and ASU, she is leading enhancement of Life and Environmental Science ethics education materials for the Online Ethics Center as part of a National Science Foundation sponsored project to improve the site. In the School of Life Sciences, she teaches core graduate courses in Respon- sible Conduct of Research. Ellison also fosters graduate education at ASU through her positions as director of the Masters in Applied Page 26.1560.1 Ethics and the Professions, Biomedical and Health Ethics, executive director for the Biology and Society graduate programs, and a founding member of the university’s
using independent researchfields, now highlighting potential risks and achieved goals. It is aimed to deduce howthese goals can be achieved via educational solutions in various applications. Page 13.568.2 1. Introduction For the future, the nation will need a whole generation with inherent innovationskills, and a workforce equipped with more than literacy in reading, mathematics andscience. Down the road we need a workforce with the capacities of creative thinking andthriving for a ethically sound collaborative culture. If our goal is a research rich learningenvironment or one that is interdisciplinary, it
in informing a critical design peda- gogy, and the ways in which the pedagogy and underlying studio environment inform the development of design thinking, particularly in relation to critique and professional identity formation. His work crosses multiple disciplines, including engineering education, instructional design and technology, design theory and education, and human-computer interaction.Luciana de Cresce El Debs, Purdue University, West Lafayette Luciana Debs, is a Technology doctoral student and Graduate Research Assistant in the Department of Building Construction Management at Purdue Universitys College of Technology. She received her MS from the Technical Research Institute of Sao Paulo (IPT-SP), and
because it is very difficult to observe if a student understandssomething (Biggs & Tang, 2011). “Understanding” is also a relatively low-level category ofcognitive learning according to Bloom’s taxonomy (Bloom, 1956). Whereas, comprehending,analyzing, and making a decision about an open-ended problem such as an ethical dilemma is avery high-order cognitive function requiring one to utilize skills from the “Analyze” and“Evaluate” levels of Bloom’s taxonomy (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001).All things being considered, the CEAB (and ABET) made the graduate attributes (and studentoutcomes) as general on purpose in order to allow universities the flexibility to be innovative inhow they educate students (CEAB, 2017).The National Academy of
accrediting body, New England Association of Schools and Colleges (NEASC),now requires assessment of general education outcomes, and further mandates thatundergraduates demonstrate competence in written and oral communication; the ability forscientific and quantitative reasoning, critical analysis and logical thinking; and the capability forcontinuing learning, including information literacy.1 As a university, we aspire to promote andintegrate excellence in liberal and professional education. We have, therefore, undertaken aproject to identify a series of core undergraduate learning outcomes, to be addressed andassessed both in general education and in the majors. These outcomes will help our studentsdevelop the knowledge, skills, and habits of mind
almost uniformly taught asseparate from technical knowledge. These ideas were also accompanied by the theme pertainingto students generally receiving little exposure to ethical topics in their formal education. Twoexample quotes expressing these ideas were: “Our traditional engineering program tends to focus on technical design to the exclusion of sociocultural context. Awareness of the need to understand and reflect the needs and requirements of the client is growing, but still is infrequently taught in the classroom.” “I think many students graduate without placing a great deal of thought on these issues. Some are under the impression that material that does not require calculations is less
would see themselves in 10 years. They then needed to research what typesof skills/knowledge/certifications/courses they would need to get to this point in the future.Included in their assignment was the requirement to address how professional ethics directly tiedin to their ability to achieve their goal. When this portfolio assignment is given to the studentsthey are given a lesson on professional ethics. This lesson is geared toward these senior studentswho will be graduating soon and headed into the workforce. Since these students have now beenthrough all aspects of the professional ethics education in our department it was assumed thatthey would be very conversant on the topic and should be able to adequately discuss this topicwith the
interactive and web-based software AGORA-net: Participate - Deliberate! AGORA-net is on online world in which everyone can construct arguments or participate in debates. Its development is funded by the U.S. Department of Education. Most recently he works on collaborative and problem-based learning environments for ethics and for science education in which AGORA-net is used as a tool to focus and guide autonomous collaboration among small groups of students.Dr. Jason Borenstein, Georgia Institute of Technology Jason Borenstein, Ph.D., is the Director of Graduate Research Ethics programs at the Georgia Institute of Technology. He is also an Assistant Editor of Science and Engineering Ethics and Co-editor of the Stanford
is not a necessary component of these courses, and they are often housed outside of engineering departments, schools, or colleges. These courses may also be part of a university-wide ethics or general education requirement. 2. Ethics courses are housed within a content-driven department/school/college, but are standalone courses. These courses are often part of the major graduation requirements and are taught by technical faculty who may or may not have formal ethics training or may be team taught with an ethics-trained faculty outside of the technical discipline. 3. Ethics concepts are embedded into a major throughout content-driven courses. An ethics component or module is presented by a
, American Institute of Chem- ical Engineers, and Dance Marathon. She also works for the College of Engineering as a teaching assis- tant, student ambassador, and research assistant. After graduation, she hopes to attend graduate school to further her education. American c Society for Engineering Education, 2021 WIP: Piloting an Ethics Choose-Your-Own Adventure Activity in Early Engineering EducationAbstractEngineering requires designing, redesigning, and developing new technologies that can havelarge positive impacts on society. But engineering can also come with negative, oftenunforeseen, consequences, side effects, or by-products. Dynamite
students, potential forreplication at other institutions, innovative approach, and use of active learning. In addition, theexamples could be focused on microethics, macroethics, or both. The report also stated that theyreceived comments from those who submitted their education activities that noted “a lack ofconsensus on important topics and methods for incorporating ethics in an already overstuffedcurriculum (topical and pedagogical challenges)” [4, p. 2].The key question is: What defines exemplary ESI education for engineering students? It is likelythat different individuals would include diverse factors in this consideration, as well as weigh therelative importance of various factors differently. A few potentially impactful criteria
Philosophical History for EngineersAbstract Ethics education in the engineering curriculum is required by ABET. This paper presents anunconventional approach to meeting this requirement as surveyed and tested in the aerospaceengineering department of California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, with theintention of having a lasting impact on engineering graduates throughout their working career.All professions have common codes of competence, integrity, and intended good will towardshumanity. Often these codes presume internal regulation and constraint to guard against humannature’s self-serving inclinations and proclivities. Here, in addition to relying on studentexposure to and knowledge of a particular
reforms of engineering education, which seek to adapt the engineeringprofession to recent global economic and technological development [8]. Although some scholars recognize the influence of ancient Chinese philosophy oncontemporary engineering thinking and practice in China, formal research of engineeringethics did not start in China until the 1990s [9] [10]. Dong’s article, “The Backgroundand Status Quo of Engineering Ethics Education in the United States,” published in 1996,is the first academic publication in the Chinese literature on engineering ethics [11]. Thepublication of Xiao’s Engineering Ethics [Gong Cheng Lun Li Xue]—the firstmonograph on this topic—in 1999 marked the birth of engineering ethics as a field ofacademic research in
engagement and effectivenessof the activity, the generation of student-lead position papers on the topic, e.g., to be shared withpublic officials, could be explored. Finally, comprehensive literature reviews and rigorous Page 26.725.8research on existing pedagogies to promote engineering student recruitment and graduate successare necessary to maximize impact of future activities. Direct collaboration with educationprofessionals on the structure, delivery and assessment of these activities will also encouragealignment with the overall research aims and effectiveness in transferability of key findings.Conclusions: Two unique cohorts of
Paper ID #18383Factors Related to Faculty Views Toward Undergraduate Engineering EthicsEducationMr. Andrew Katz, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University Andrew Katz is a graduate student in the Department of Engineering Education at Virginia Tech. He holds a B.S. in chemical engineering from Tulane University and M.Eng. in environmental engineering from Texas A&M University. Prior to beginning his studies at Virginia Tech he taught physics at a high school in Dallas, TX.Dr. David B. Knight, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University David Knight is an Assistant Professor and Director of
the Trefny Institute for Educational Innovation at the Colorado School of Mines. She is also a senior associate editor of the Journal for Engineering Education. Her research interests include: measurement, assessment, outreach, and diversity.Ms. Deborath Silva, Colorado School of Mines Deborah Silva is a Graduate Research Assistant at the Colorado School of Mines. She is pursuing a M.S. in Electrical Engineering with interests in social justice applied to control systems engineeringMr. Justin Stephen Fantasky, Colorado School of Mines Justin Fantasky is an Undergraduate Research Assistant at the Colorado School of Mines. He is pursing a degree in Mechanical Engineering with a minor in Economics and Business with an
,methodology, or conclusions.The Long-Suffering and Unrecognized Graduate Assistant Co-AuthorIn working in their mentor relationships with graduate students, some faculty members do notframe a research problem for their students but, rather, tend to assign them a general topic (XYZ)to work on during their studies. This broad direction is an effective means for fostering graduatestudents’ independence, innovation, and creativity, which are needed skills for both theireducational experience and development and their future careers as academics. However, insome cases, the students are instructed, under the disguise of getting experience, to writeresearch proposals including the literature review, problem definition, objectives, methodology,and often even
AC 2007-2114: AN EDUCATIONAL FRAMEWORK FOR NURTURING ACULTURE OF ACADEMIC HONESTYDawn Bikowski, Ohio University Dawn Bikowski is the Director of the Graduate Writing Program at Ohio University. She teaches engineering graduate students about academic honesty within the context of developing a set of writing skills. She is also a doctoral student in Educational Studies. Her research interests include issues related to academic honesty and how technology can best be used in education.Melissa Broeckelman, Ohio University Melissa Broeckelman is a doctoral student in Communication Studies at Ohio University and is also the Academic Honesty Advisor for the Russ College of Engineering and Technology
learning and offers scheduling flexibility for busy STEM graduate students throughthe innovative use of educational and communication technologies. Grounded in Pask’s modelof conversation theory, the program engages student peers as well as patent and copyrightexperts in conversations using Web 2.0 technologies to encourage and capture group interactionand build critical thinking skills in the intellectual property domains of U.S. patent and copyrightlaw. Student learning and satisfaction were evaluated using pre- and post-tests, rubric-guidedexpert evaluation of conversation transcripts and problem solutions, focus groups, and feedbackforums, all designed to provide guidance for continuous improvement of course delivery andcontent. Investigators