sustainability components are incorporated into ethics education ofengineers it will allow students to a) identify the differences in ethical standards and implementation in different countries; b) identify the differences in ethical practice and the root causes and the cross impacts of these practices in an international environment; c) apply the principles in making ethical decisions.A major aim of a standard code of ethics is “to respect the inherent dignity of the individual”38.Civil engineers selecting materials and equipment in designing constructed facilities introducethe supply chain issue in a globalized economy. Current supply chains can cause desperationand death for many people, especially those living in developing countries
, 2011.[7] J. Haidt, The righteous mind: Why good people are divided by politics and religion. New York,NY: Vintage Books, 2012.[8] J. Graham, J. Haidt, & B. A. Nosek, “Liberals and conservatives rely on different sets of moralfoundations,” J. Pers. Soc. Psychol., vol. 96, no. 5, pp. 1029-1046, 2009.[9] O. P. John, E. M. Donahue, & R. L. Kentle, The Big Five Inventory – Versions 4a and 54.Berkeley, CA: University of California, Berkeley, Institute of Personality and Social Research,1991.[10] D. P. McAdams, M. Albaugh, E. Farber, J. Daniels, R. L. Logan, & B. Olson, “Familymetaphors and moral intuitions: How conservatives and liberals narrate their lives,” J. Pers. Soc.Psychol., vol. 95, no. 4, pp. 987-990, 2008.[11] J. Haidt, J
Paper ID #19225The Development and Evaluation of Expert Witness Role Play Instruction forTeaching Engineering EthicsMs. Alison J. Kerr, University of Tulsa Alison Kerr is a graduate student at The University of Tulsa. She is pursuing a doctoral degree in Industrial-Organizational Psychology. Her research interests include training development and evaluation as explored across a variety of academic disciplines and organizational settings. She is currently assist- ing on a number of training projects aimed at developing engineering students on relevant non-technical professional skills including ethical practice and
out in partial ignorance. This ignorance stems from thefact there are uncertainties in a) models used in the design, b) material properties, c) qualitycontrol in manufacturing and d) system response to actual use.It is pointed out to students that engineers have an obligation to protect the safety of humanbeings. Hence, engineers should be aware of the experimental nature of any project, forecastingpossible side effects, and should make an effort to monitor them.Legal regulations and the existence of many regulatory agencies such as EnvironmentalProtection Agency (EPA) are explained in this context. The case study of the Titanic disaster ispresented to demonstrate the uncertainties experienced by the designers and builder of Titanicand how
considerations Build information literacy skills Develop reflective judgment and critical thinkingThe assignment is broken into several parts with staggered due dates over the course of thesemester. Students deliver the following: A. A reflection on why it would be important to conduct LCAs, and where they might be helpfully applied in real-world contexts. Page 26.1286.4 B. A description of the products to be compared and how they are used locally, with particular attention to similarities and differences among products. C. Initial research on manufacturing and use of the products, beginning with extraction of raw
teach with cases, which allows studentsto think critically beyond their field of expertise and the subject matter knowledge of theircontent area? Page 12.1394.3 2Herreid12 stated that teaching with cases could be classified into four major types: (a) individualassignment; (b) lecture format; (c) discussion format; and (d) small group format. The discussionformat and the small group format seem to be the most appropriate methods for using cases asthey provide opportunities for students to be active and engaged in making the ethical
AC 2011-2701: THE UNIQUE VALUE OF HUMANITARIAN ENGINEER-INGRyan C. Campbell, University of Washington Ryan is pursuing his doctorate through the University of Washington Graduate School’s interdisciplinary Individual PhD (IPhD) program, in which he combines faculty expertise in the College of Engineering and the College of Education to create a degree program in the emerging field of Engineering Education. Ryan earned his M.S. in Electrical Engineering from SungKyunKwan University, Republic of Korea, and his B.S. in Engineering Science from Colorado State University, Ft. Collins, CO. Ryan’s research interests include: engineering education, ethics, humanitarian engineering, and computer modeling of electric
23, 2008 at http://www.wipo.int/academy/ en/teaching/teaching_research/index.html. Page 25.1468.125. Bloom, B., Ed. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives; the classification of educational goals, by a committee of college and university examiners. New York: Longmans, Green.6. Anderson, L. and Sosniak, L., Eds. (1994). Bloom’s taxonomy: a forty-year retrospective. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.7. Roselli, R. & Brophy, S. (2006). Effectiveness of Challenge-Based Instruction in Biomechanics. Journal of Engineering Education, 95 (4), 311-24.8. Bonwell, C. and Eison, J. (1991). Active
been justified byour analysis of the literature and the history of engineering practice in humanitarian activities andwas re-written in the form of a question in order to encourage students to reflect critically on andassess technology and/or engineering work. The set of HEE criteria is as follows: Page 12.1488.9A. Does this engineering work promote the good of all humans independent of nationality,religion, class, age, or sex? [Justification: Humanitarianism as an ethical tradition historicallyrejects the significance of such distinctions.]B. How might this engineering project be related to the protection and promotion of humanrights
Paper ID #21419Faculty Perceptions of Challenges to Educating Engineering and ComputingStudents About Ethics and Societal ImpactsMs. Madeline Polmear, University of Colorado, Boulder Madeline Polmear is a PhD student in the Department of Civil, Environmental, and Architectural En- gineering at the University of Colorado, Boulder. Her research interests include ethics education and societal impacts of engineering and technology.Dr. Angela R. Bielefeldt, University of Colorado, Boulder Angela Bielefeldt is a professor at the University of Colorado Boulder in the Department of Civil, Environ- mental, and Architectural
Ethics, 10(2),343-351.5. Fly, B. J., van Bark, W. P., Weinman, L., Kitchener, K. S., & Lang, P. R. (1997). Ethical transgressions ofpsychology graduate students: Critical incidents with implications for training. Professional Psychology: Researchand Practice, 28(5), 492-495.6. Antes, A. L., Murphy, S. T., Waples, E. P., Mumford, M. D., Brown, R. P., Connelly, S., & Devenport, L. D.(2009). A meta-analysis of ethics instruction effectiveness in the sciences. Ethics & Behavior, 19(5), 379-402.7. Herkert, J. R. (2000). Engineering ethics education in the USA: Content, pedagogy and curriculum. EuropeanJournal of Engineering Education, 25(4), 303-313.8. Goldstein, I. L., & Ford, J. K (2002). Training in organizations (4th ed.). Belmont
Google forms (S20) or Moodle (F20) based on his QM and RISEtraining. These digital records gave the instructor insight into whether the ethical content of aparticular lecture needed to be tweaked and it also provided the quantifiable data that is analyzedhere. The students were told that there were no right or wrong answers to these ethical dilemmas.Two pre-/ post- vignette viewpoints were a) not as much subject to prior exposure to the topicand b) might cause a significant swing in an expressed ethical viewpoint. These were the coch-lear implant debate re children who were deaf and Quality of Life issues of individuals with asevere non-verbal form of cerebral palsy.With cursory thought and after the engineering and neuroscience behind cochlear
prison time and owing large fines for various chargesstemming from an emissions-cheating scandal [4], [5]. Actions do have consequences. It isbetter to learn this axiom early, rather than late, in an engineering career. Engineering studentsare reminded of this throughout the course.The engineering-ethics guidance provided to students in the course may be summarized in thefour practical points below. 1. Work hard and do a good job 2. Do the right thing a. Be able to sleep at night b. Be able to look yourself in the mirror 3. Make executives earn their salaries 4. Do NOT go to jail!The first point is fairly self-explanatory and
in enforcing them. Thestudents were asked to submit reviews of these talks which were assessed by the instructor. Thepresentations were on five academic research topics such as Stream - Aquifer InteractionAssessment Using Riparian Evapotranspiration Estimates from Remote Sensing Algorithms,three industrial topics such as Industrial Waste Management and Environmental Engineeringcareers, and two on local and federal government agencies such as Careers in NRCS andRegional Air Pollution Control Agency & Ambient Air Quality Monitoring. Appendix-B providesthe assessment summary for EPS Fall 2010.However, to engage the students more and to include additional E&P issues into the course, theinstructors felt a need for a more traditional
systems of power that promote and perpetuate injustice. From this perspective, thesocial good of an international bridge expansion, or a new line of cars, or the delivery of drinkingwater to a large metropolitan area cannot be assessed, and certainly cannot be celebrated as amodern social feat, without taking into account the following: a) whose interests are served fromthe improved vehicle access to the customs plaza, or the determination of insufficient evidence toconduct an investigation into driver complaints, or the invalidation of high lead-in-watermeasurements, b) what the self-defined needs are of individuals who are excluded from thedecision-making table but are suffering from asthma, or experiencing their car engine shut downin the
Z score 1 0 −1 −2 −3 −4 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 website use rate (b)Figure 1: Midterm Z scores against Cramster use rates. (a) Linear regressions for Zscores on each exam for all students gave coefficients between −0.3 to −0.39. The bestfit line for all this data has slope −0.34. (b) Eliminating students with nonsubmissionrates greater than 40% gives linear regression coefficients between −0.73 and −1.1.The mean coefficient here is −0.85
behavioral adaptations to harsh environments in youth who have experienced adversity, so we can design educational interventions that work with, instead of against, these adaptations.Dr. Brian J. O’Leary, University of Tennessee at Chattanooga Dr. Brian J. O’Leary is Department Head and Associate Professor of Industrial-Organizational (I-O) Psychology at the University of Tennessee at Chattanooga (UTC), where he has worked since 2001. He completed his PhD in Organizational Behavior at the A. B. Freeman School of Business at Tulane University, focusing on justice in the workplace. He also holds a BA from the General Program of Liberal Studies at the University of Notre Dame, a BS in Accounting from Guilford College, and an
. [Online]. Available: https://peer.asee.org/inner-engineering-a-convergent-mixed- methods-study-evaluating-the-use-of-contemplative-practices-to-promote-resilience- among-freshman-engineering-students.[17] B. E. Pozos-Radillo, M. de Lourdes Preciado-Serrano, M. Acosta-Fernández, M. de los Ángeles Aguilera-Velasco, and D. D. Delgado-García, “Academic stress as a predictor of chronic stress in university students,” Psicología educativa, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 47–52, 2014.[18] J. A. G. Balanay, A. Adesina, G. D. Kearney, and S. L. Richards, “Assessment of occupational health and safety hazard exposures among working college students,” American journal of industrial medicine, vol. 57, no. 1, pp. 114–124, 2014.[19] S. A. Smith, E
significant group differences on either the pretestor posttest; accordingly this report only includes results from the ESIT instrument.Student-instructor interaction. Because student gains in knowledge and development may beinfluenced by instructor characteristics and classroom dynamics, several student-instructorinteraction variables were measured for experimental groups. These variables include: out-of-classroom communication with instructor (7), classroom climate (8), instructor verbalaggressiveness (9), and instructor verbal assertiveness (9). Additionally, two items askedparticipants how many conversations about research ethics they had in the previous three monthsoutside of the classroom/lab with (a) peers and (b) lab directors/principal
caused some contamination of the WindRiver aquifer near Pavillion, Wyoming and B) a shale gas well in northern Pennsylvania blewout during fracking and spilled thousands of gallons of fracking fluid onto surrounding land.Another concern is methane from the wells polluting either the air or water. A study performedby researchers at Cornell University suggested that up to 7.9% of the methane from wellsescapes to the atmosphere. By not reducing the leak rate of methane to the atmosphere, theenvironmental benefits of burning natural gas as opposed to coal would be eliminated.Sources 1. “Stop Fracking Up Our Waters-New Study Supports Water Contamination Due to Fracking,” EcoWatch, URL: http://ecowatch.org/2012/water-contamination-fracking
://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2018.06.057.[21] R. W. Chen, D. Navin-Chandra, and F. B. Print, “A cost-benefit analysis model of product design for recyclability and its application,” IEEE Trans. on Compon., Packag., and Manuf. Technol.: Part A, vol. 17, no. 4, Dec. 1994.[22] Z. Boz, V. Korhonen, and C. K. Sand, “Consumer considerations for the Implementation of sustainable packaging: A review,” Sustainability, vol. 12, no. 6, pp.2192, March 2020. Appendix 1: Grading ChecklistTo students: Please check and see if your final letter report meets the following gradingchecklist. Please bring this assignment sheet to class on peer review day.Letter Report Content____ Identifies a contemporary sustainability
Methods of educational and social science research- the logic of methods, 3rd ed., Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press, 2009, pp. 159–186.[9] J. Saldana, The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 2016.[10] J. W. Creswell and C. N. Poth, “Chapter 10: Standards of validation and evaluation,” in Qualitative inquiry & research design: choosing among five traditions, Washington, DC: Sage Publications, 2018, pp. 253–286.[11] E. G. Guba and Y. S. Lincoln, “Chapter 6: Competing paradigms in qualitative research,” in Handbook of Qualitative Research, 2nd ed., Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 1994, pp. 105–117.[12] R. A. Singleton and B. C. Straits, “Chapter 9: survey research,” in
during the final evaluation may involve: a. Adhering to the technical practices and reporting any inconveniences. b. Honesty when dealing with the public c. Reporting malpractices d. Design flaws (if any)Further Steps to Complement Ethics Teaching in the Nuclear Engineering ProgramsAcquiring the professional outcomes may not result simply from participation in a particularclass or set of classes. Rather, these outcomes are more often acquired or influenced throughsources both in and outside the classroom. This necessitates paying attention to the properplanning and monitoring of out-of classroom activities to be able to properly use them for ethicsteaching24.It is thus proposed to enhance ethics
template. Figure Bbelow depicts the Instructor Module template. It provides a list of optional elements fordevelopment. Figure B: EAC Instructor Module StructureIM’s link directly to SM’s; usually the SM is embedded in the IM as a link. (See figure Cbelow.) The IM supports the corresponding SM by outlining how others have used the module.It also provides new users with a forum through which they can (1) share their experiences withand insights about the module, (2) provide feedback to the SM’s authors, and (3) disseminate themodule adaptations they have made through the publication of derived copies. In short, the IMprovides a template to collect meta-data that guides future module development. But it servesthe more
desire to act ethically, which, asexplained below, is the norm) may increase the probability that one will act ethically. Forexample, if researchers know that falsification and fabrication are the most common types ofresearch misconduct and they know that people are more likely to act unethically when in agroup situation, they are more likely to move to level-2 when they are in a group situation whendealing with unwanted experimental results. This is similar to students moving to level-2 whenfaced with an abstract conditional statement (If A, then B). In addition, learning aboutsituationism may motivate students to take Doris’s advice and try to avoid putting themselves inethically challenging situations (Doris, 1998). For example, researchers
the Blackstone River: Hearings Beforethe Joint Standing Committee on Public Health, on the Matter of Restraining the City ofWorcester from Polluting the Blackstone River (1882). This document contains residentand witness statements and legal arguments by a) municipal representatives and otherswho argued against taking action to purify the water that empties into the BlackstoneRiver and Canal, and, b) agents in favor of taking action (i.e., downstream industrialistsand residents, doctors, social activists, laborers, etc.).In-class, in-character debate:Students were instructed to take a position on the question: “Should Worcester have toclean up the water it puts into the Blackstone River?” In an in-class debate, studentsrepresented their
. C. Lucena, and C. Mitcham, “Engineering ethics and identity: Emerginginitiatives in comparative perspective,” Sci. Eng. Ethics, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 463–487, 2007.[26] D. D. Carpenter, T. S. Harding, S. M. Montgomery, and N. Steneck. “P.A.C.E.S. - A studyon academic integrity among engineering undergraduates (preliminary conclusions),” presentedat ASEE Annu. Conf. Proc., Montreal, QC, Canada, Jun. 16-19, 2002.[27] B. E. Cox, K. McIntosh, R. D. Reason, P. T. Terenzini, “Working with Missing Data inHigher Education Research: A Primer and Real World Example,” The Rev. of Higher Edu., vol.37, no. 3, pp. 377-402, 2014.[28] G. Becker, “Creating comparability among reliability coefficients: the case of Cronbachalpha and Cohen kappa.,” Psychol. Rep
Science Foundation under Grant No.EEC # 1623105. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in thismaterial are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National ScienceFoundation.References1. Colby, A. and W.M. Sullivan, Ethics teaching in undergraduate engineering education. Journal of Engineering Education, 2008. 97(3): p. 327-338.2. Newberry, B., The dilemma of ethics in engineering education. Science and Engineering Ethics, 2004. 10(2): p. 343-351.3. Pantazidou, M. and I. Nair, Ethic of care: Guiding principles for engineering teaching & practice. Journal of Engineering Education, 1999. 88(2): p. 205-212.4. Bielefeldt, A.R., et al. Effective Ethics
moral judgment,” Sci. Eng. Ethics, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 387–407, 2010.[2] M. J. Drake, P. M. Griffin, R. Kirkman, and J. L. Swann, “Engineering ethical curricula: Assessment and comparison of two approaches,” J. Eng. Educ., vol. 94, pp. 223–231, 2005.[3] J. L. Hess, J. Beever, C. B. Zoltowski, L. Kisselburgh, and A. O. Brightman, “Enhancing engineering students’ ethical reasoning: Situating reflexive principlism within the SIRA framework,” J. Eng. Educ., vol. 108, no. 1, pp. 82–102, 2019.[4] M. J. Bebeau, “The defining issues test and the four component model: Contributions to professional education,” J. Moral Educ., vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 271–295, 2002.[5] D. J. Self and E. M. Ellison, “Teaching
. To ensure that students completing design projects takeprofessional responsibility seriously, below are four basic checklists that will help them throughan ethical analysis of their project. The checklists ask them: to identify stakeholders and their interests; to identify the standards or norms they are using to make decisions about a) technological development, b) economic impact, c) safety, d) public health, e) impact on society f) culture impact, i) equity, and j) environmental impacts; to assess whether they are adhering to the professional guidelines in the NSPE Code of Ethics; to review their project from at least three different ethical perspectivesOther pedagogical activities in this course