Broadening Engineering Education: Bringing the Community In

Conlon, Eddie

doi:10.1007/s11948-013-9476-x

Cited by 16 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To develop knowledge about what has to be learnt and how to massively train citizens to assume these responsibilities is a current duty and aim of SET researchers and teachers as those of SERSEE network. (Doorn and Kroesen 2013) and in Germany (Hunger 2013); biosecurity education for life science professionals from around the world (Minehata et al 2013;Nixdorff 2013); PhD course for climate scientists at the University of Kiel (Børsen, Antia, and Glessmer 2013); and reflections on reforms of engineering education (Takala and Korhonen-Yrjänheikki 2013;Geerts 2013;Didier and Derouet 2013;Conlon 2013). 3.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Initiatives, experiences and best practices for teaching social and ecological responsibility in ethics education for science and engineering students

Børsen

Serreau²,

Reifschneider

et al. 2020

European Journal of Engineering Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Initiatives, experiences and best practices for teaching social and ecological responsibility in ethics education for science and engineering students

Børsen

Serreau²,

Reifschneider

et al. 2020

European Journal of Engineering Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Further, the freedom of engineers is restricted in that they typically work in "hierarchical organisations and have little room to follow their own choices" [17]. This refers to what is known as the captivity of engineering to corporate and managerial agendas [18].…”

Section: Engineering Ethicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A critical realist approach to engineering ethics

Conlon¹

2015

2015 IEEE International Symposium on Technology and Society (ISTAS)

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-This paper is focused on the teaching of engineering ethics (EE). Through a focus on safety and the lens of what sociologists call the agency/ structure relationship it examimes various approaches to this teaching. Drawing on Critical Realism it argues there are deficiencies in both the dominant approach and a number of proposed alternatives as they suffer from various forms of conflationism . By drawing on Critical Realism (CR) a more robust agenda for teaching engineering ethics can be developed. It is argued that CR offers a basis for understanding the range of factors which lead to accidents and disasters. It allows for a fuller consideration of agency/structure relations and the importance of changing the contexts in which engineers work in order to allow them to hold paramount the health, safety and welfare of the public.

show abstract

“…Ozaktas (2011) reports that there is a tendency in Turkey to fulfil the ABET requirements, but with minimal cost resulting, for example, in very big classes. Conlon (2013) discusses in a more general way the influence in Ireland of these accreditation criteria. He concludes that they ''can help in legitimising the broadening of engineering education even though their mere existence does not necessarily lead to a curriculum which adequately addresses the social and political issues involved with engineering.''…”

Section: Opportunities Created By External Demands For Teaching Sociamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Conlon (2013), writing on the Irish situation, states that ''… accreditation processes do not adequately interrogate the extent to which programmes address the specified learning outcomes. Accreditation panels,… are composed of industry representatives and engineering academics who seem to lack the expertise to adjudicate the provision of content relating to social responsibility within engineering programmes.''…”

Section: Barriers To Teaching For Social Responsibilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…• Educational policies such as ''Bologna'' and policies at the level of the university; • (Inter)national criteria and mechanisms for evaluating educational programmes, such as accreditation criteria and mechanisms (Conlon 2013); • Academic organisational structures (Liebert 2013;Fabregat 2013) and financing (Ozaktas 2011;Spitzer 2013); • Criteria and mechanisms for academic prestige and career advancement.…”

Section: Bottom-up and Top-down Processesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Editors’ Overview Perspectives on Teaching Social Responsibility to Students in Science and Engineering

Zandvoort

Børsen

Deneke³

et al. 2013

Sci Eng Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Global society is facing formidable current and future problems that threaten the prospects for justice and peace, sustainability, and the well-being of humanity both now and in the future. Many of these problems are related to science and technology and to how they function in the world. If the social responsibility of scientists and engineers implies a duty to safeguard or promote a peaceful, just and sustainable world society, then science and engineering education should empower students to fulfil this responsibility. The contributions to this special issue present European examples of teaching social responsibility to students in science and engineering, and provide examples and discussion of how this teaching can be promoted, and of obstacles that are encountered. Speaking generally, education aimed at preparing future scientists and engineers for social responsibility is presently very limited and seemingly insufficient in view of the enormous ethical and social problems that are associated with current science and technology. Although many social, political and professional organisations have expressed the need for the provision of teaching for social responsibility, important and persistent barriers -013-9495-7 stand in the way of its sustained development. What is needed are both bottom-up teaching initiatives from individuals or groups of academic teachers, and top-down support to secure appropriate embedding in the university. Often the latter is lacking or inadequate. Educational policies at the national or international level, such as the Bologna agreements in Europe, can be an opportunity for introducing teaching for social responsibility. However, frequently no or only limited positive effect of such policies can be discerned. Existing accreditation and evaluation mechanisms do not guarantee appropriate attention to teaching for social responsibility, because, in their current form, they provide no guarantee that the curricula pay sufficient attention to teaching goals that are desirable for society as a whole.Sci Eng Ethics (2013) 19:1413-1438 DOI 10.1007/s11948

show abstract

Broadening Engineering Education: Bringing the Community In

Cited by 16 publications

References 6 publications

Initiatives, experiences and best practices for teaching social and ecological responsibility in ethics education for science and engineering students

Initiatives, experiences and best practices for teaching social and ecological responsibility in ethics education for science and engineering students

A critical realist approach to engineering ethics

Editors’ Overview Perspectives on Teaching Social Responsibility to Students in Science and Engineering

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About