Analysis of macroethics teaching practices and perceptions in engineering: a cultural comparison

Polmear, Madeline; Bielefeldt, Angela R.; Knight, Daniel; Canney, Nathan E.; Swan, Chris

doi:10.1080/03043797.2019.1593323

Cited by 26 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Assuming this responsibility requires the ability to make “well‐reasoned ethical decisions” in engineering practice (Beever & Brightman, 2016, p. 275) as well as commitment to ethical practice (Hess & Fore, 2018, but see also Abaté, 2011). However, a large body of research suggests that there is a lack of education in engineering ethics in many parts of the world (Colby & Sullivan, 2008; Polmear et al, 2019) and that existing ethics instruction is often ineffective (Barry & Ohland, 2012). For example, Shuman et al (2004) found low levels of ethical reasoning among engineering students in the United States and no significant difference between freshmen and senior students.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring the discursive construction of ethics in an introductory engineering course

Lönngren

2020

J of Engineering Edu

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Engineering education must prepare students to assume professional and ethical responsibility for the societal impacts of technology, but most engineering students do not receive adequate ethics teaching. In fact, engineering education has been described as characterized by a “culture of disengagement” in which ethical and societal concerns are constructed as different from and less important than purely technical concerns. Purpose/Hypothesis This study explores how a culture of disengagement is discursively constructed and perpetuated in engineering education by analyzing the discursive construction of ethics and ethical reflection in an introductory engineering course in Sweden. Design/Method The study is based on extensive ethnographic data in the form of field notes, lecture recordings, interview data, and course documents. The data are analyzed using a discourse analytic approach rooted in discourse theory. Results The results illustrate five processes through which ethics and ethical reflection are articulated as not the responsibility of the specific field of engineering, irrelevant for the profession, of low quality and status, and not very important for the engineering degree. Conclusions The results contribute to understanding how a culture of disengagement may be perpetuated in engineering education. The results also point toward pedagogical tools and strategies that instructors and program managers can use to construct ethics and ethical reflection as an advanced skill that is an important and integral part of engineering and engineering education—and thus better prepare future engineers to become responsible professionals.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring the discursive construction of ethics in an introductory engineering course

Lönngren

2020

J of Engineering Edu

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, not all content areas are of "equal value" for the goal of helping engineers connect their work to the broader community and exercise their societal responsibility (Haws, 2001, p. 227). More so, there is an uneven coverage of key ethical issues (Colby & Sullivan, 2008;Polmear et al, 2019), which is consistent with the difference in how instructors and students perceive the coverage of ethics. Even though faculty describe their instruction as including not only codes, but also a nuanced treatment of complex issues, students report hearing "simplistic, black-andwhite messages about ethics" (Holsapple et al, 2012, p. 101).…”

Section: Content Of Engineering Ethics Educationmentioning

confidence: 53%

A Multi-level Review of Engineering Ethics Education: Towards a Socio-technical Orientation of Engineering Education for Ethics

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper aims to review the empirical and theoretical research on engineering ethics education, by focusing on the challenges reported in the literature. The analysis is conducted at four levels of the engineering education system. First, the individual level is dedicated to findings about teaching practices reported by instructors. Second, the institutional level brings together findings about the implementation and presence of ethics within engineering programmes. Third, the level of policy situates findings about engineering ethics education in the context of accreditation. Finally, there is the level of the culture of engineering education. The multi-level analysis allows us to address some of the limitations of higher education research which tends to focus on individual actors such as instructors or remains focused on the levels of policy and practice without examining the deeper levels of paradigm and purpose guiding them. Our approach links some of the challenges of engineering ethics education with wider debates about its guiding paradigms. The main contribution of the paper is to situate the analysis of the theoretical and empirical findings reported in the literature on engineering ethics education in the context of broader discussions about the purpose of engineering education and the aims of reform programmes. We conclude by putting forward a series of recommendations for a socio-technical oriented reform of engineering education for ethics.

show abstract

“…Notably, the current analysis combines responses from the largely-U.S. distribution (spring 2016) and a later Anglo/Western European distribution (summer 2018) (Polmear et al , 2019 ). Most relevant in this study is that invitations to participate in the survey were distributed in 2016 to the Ethics, Community Engagement, Liberal Education/Engineering & Society, and Educational Research and Methods divisions of the American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE) and faculty advisors of university chapters of EWB, Engineers for a Sustainable World (ESW), and Engineering World Health (EWH); and in 2018 to 1220 individual faculty identified as education program leaders at 116 institutions in Western European and non-U.S. Anglo countries.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Educating Engineers to Work Ethically with Global Marginalized Communities

Bielefeldt

Polmear

Knight

et al. 2021

Environmental Engineering Science

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ethical reasoning is an important ability for engineers working with marginalized communities in global contexts. However, the ethical awareness and development that are critical for this work may not be included in traditional engineering education. This article presents faculty perspectives on the ethical and societal issues (ESI) that should be taught and the pedagogies that are used to prepare students for development engineering. Among 60 survey respondents who taught courses focused on global and/or development (GD) issues, the ESI topics that were particularly congruent included poverty, sustainability, social justice, and engineering decisions under uncertainty. Faculty interviews highlighted that GD should foreground the human side of engineering, respectful partnerships with communities grounded in an asset perspective, and considerations of historical elements. Discussions, case studies, design, and reflection are impactful pedagogies that can complement learning through service to achieve ESI educational goals.

show abstract

Analysis of macroethics teaching practices and perceptions in engineering: a cultural comparison

Cited by 26 publications

References 32 publications

Exploring the discursive construction of ethics in an introductory engineering course

Exploring the discursive construction of ethics in an introductory engineering course

A Multi-level Review of Engineering Ethics Education: Towards a Socio-technical Orientation of Engineering Education for Ethics

Educating Engineers to Work Ethically with Global Marginalized Communities

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About