The Assessment of Ethical and Sustainable Engineering Studies in Undergraduate University Education

Maxwell Stuart Reid

Download Paper | Permalink

Conference: 2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition
Location: Vancouver, BC
Publication Date: June 26, 2011
Start Date: June 26, 2011
End Date: June 29, 2011
ISSN: 2153-5965
Conference Session: Aerospace Teaching and Learning I
Tagged Division: Aerospace
Page Count: 15
Page Numbers: 22.1429.1 - 22.1429.15
DOI: 10.18260/1-2--18340
Permanent URL: https://peer.asee.org/18340
Download Count: 397

Request a correction

Paper Authors

biography

Maxwell Stuart Reid Auckland University of Technology

visit author page

Dr Maxwell Reid lectures in telecommunications engineering, and computer network engineering, at the Auckland University of Technology. He has researched and published many journal and conference papers on technology education, the role of a university as a critic and conscience of society, the need for an engineering code of ethics, and the principles of ethical and values-based decision-making in engineering. He has also published papers on effective teaching methodologies for engineering education in the post-modern period.

Dr Reid is the Deputy Head of Electrical Engineering in the Faculty of Design and Creative Technologies at the Auckland University of Technology, Saint Paul Street, Auckland 1010, Private Bag 92006, Auckland 1142, New Zealand. Contact at maxwell.reid@aut.ac.nz.

visit author page

Download Paper | Permalink

Abstract

The assessment of ethical and sustainable engineering studies in undergraduate university educationAbstractThis paper reports on a 4-year cycle of action research to develop and refinea method of assessment for an engineering studies paper that contains bothethics and sustainability education for undergraduate engineering degrees atthe Auckland University of Technology (AUT) in New Zealand.The traditions of the Engineering School at AUT tend to perpetuate anassessment system based on formal examination of the quantitative. Whilethese existing assessment procedures were developed in the past forexpediency, the predictive value of such a rigid assessment process hadproven to be satisfactory in other engineering subjects I have taught.At the time of the inception of this ethics module in 2006, my natural andinstinctive path to an effective assessment procedure was a continuation ofthe procedure with which I was familiar in my own sub-culture oftelecommunications engineering, with the use of assignments, project-workreport, oral presentation and examination to assess student learning. Hence,the decisions I made with the initial assessment procedures were madepragmatically to achieve an assessment procedure that was aligned with themodule objectives.Although my intention was a method of assessment that included a multipleindicator perspective comprising a range and balance between written, oraland work-produced-report assessment, the assessment focus was shiftedfrom empirical assessment methods as a test of memory using thequantitative aspect of remembering facts, systems and procedures, to aqualitative aspect of conceptual understanding, and explanation. However,this shift included both formative and summative assessment scheme, inwhich the work would be subjective, rather than assessment of empirical factsand procedures which may be constrained to a teacher’s implicit interpretationand assessment of the syllabus content. 2As I progressed and adapted, I believe that I have achieved a balancedassessment procedure suitable for classes of 150 plus, comprising aformative assessment and feedback through essay and projects, a formativefeedback by the in-class case-studies and summative assessment byexamining the major case studies and their understanding of the coursematerial in a final examination. The requirements of such an assessmentscheme that provides alternative ways of responding can create labour-intensive demands on staff, and reluctance by staff members to mark essay-type answers may limit the outcomes. Essentially, the inhibiting factor ofeffective assessment may be a combination of the practicability ofassessment administration and the reluctance of teachers to mark thesubjective.This paper documents the development of this subjective and qualitative formof assessment, to achieve a balanced assessment procedure suitable forlarge classes. The explanation includes findings regarding the usefulness ofthe Turnitin programme and the caution required when interpreting thesereports.

Citation
Format

Reid, M. S. (2011, June), The Assessment of Ethical and Sustainable Engineering Studies in Undergraduate University Education Paper presented at 2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Vancouver, BC. 10.18260/1-2--18340

TY  - CPAPER
AB  -    The assessment of ethical and sustainable engineering studies in                     undergraduate university educationAbstractThis paper reports on a 4-year cycle of action research to develop and refinea method of assessment for an engineering studies paper that contains bothethics and sustainability education for undergraduate engineering degrees atthe Auckland University of Technology (AUT) in New Zealand.The traditions of the Engineering School at AUT tend to perpetuate anassessment system based on formal examination of the quantitative. Whilethese existing assessment procedures were developed in the past forexpediency, the predictive value of such a rigid assessment process hadproven to be satisfactory in other engineering subjects I have taught.At the time of the inception of this ethics module in 2006, my natural andinstinctive path to an effective assessment procedure was a continuation ofthe procedure with which I was familiar in my own sub-culture oftelecommunications engineering, with the use of assignments, project-workreport, oral presentation and examination to assess student learning. Hence,the decisions I made with the initial assessment procedures were madepragmatically to achieve an assessment procedure that was aligned with themodule objectives.Although my intention was a method of assessment that included a multipleindicator perspective comprising a range and balance between written, oraland work-produced-report assessment, the assessment focus was shiftedfrom empirical assessment methods as a test of memory using thequantitative aspect of remembering facts, systems and procedures, to aqualitative aspect of conceptual understanding, and explanation. However,this shift included both formative and summative assessment scheme, inwhich the work would be subjective, rather than assessment of empirical factsand procedures which may be constrained to a teacher’s implicit interpretationand assessment of the syllabus content.                                     2As I progressed and adapted, I believe that I have achieved a balancedassessment procedure suitable for classes of 150 plus, comprising aformative assessment and feedback through essay and projects, a formativefeedback by the in-class case-studies and summative assessment byexamining the major case studies and their understanding of the coursematerial in a final examination. The requirements of such an assessmentscheme that provides alternative ways of responding can create labour-intensive demands on staff, and reluctance by staff members to mark essay-type answers may limit the outcomes.     Essentially, the inhibiting factor ofeffective assessment may be a combination of the practicability ofassessment administration and the reluctance of teachers to mark thesubjective.This paper documents the development of this subjective and qualitative formof assessment, to achieve a balanced assessment procedure suitable forlarge classes. The explanation includes findings regarding the usefulness ofthe Turnitin programme and the caution required when interpreting thesereports.
AU  - Maxwell Stuart Reid
CY  - Vancouver, BC
DA  - 2011/06/26
PB  - ASEE Conferences
TI  - The Assessment of Ethical and Sustainable Engineering Studies in Undergraduate University Education
UR  - https://peer.asee.org/18340
DO  - 10.18260/1-2--18340
ER  -