Download WSCA 2010 Presentation



Ethics Education in Science & Engineering
program, National Science Foundation
Interdisciplinary Project Team:





Joe Herkert, PI, Engineering Ethics
Heather Canary, Co-PI, Communication
Karin Ellison, Co-PI, Biology & Society
Jamey Wetmore, Co-PI, Science, Technology &
Society
How do we integrate education about “micro”
ethics (individual responsibilities) with
education about “macro” ethics (social
responsibilities of a profession, field, or
discipline)?

Four Goals of Ethics Education (Davis,
2006):
Increased ethical sensitivity
 Increased knowledge of relevant standards of
conduct
 Improved ethical judgment
 Improved ethical will-power


Four Instructional Models:




Stand-alone 1-credit course
Embedded units in 9-credit required course
Hybrid course
Lab engagement model

How do we best meet goals?


Compare outcomes across instructional models
How do we find out what differs across
instructional models?




Constant observation of all four models across
time not possible
Syllabi and course structure indicate one type of
difference
Student outcomes are measure of efficacy but
not of different processes
Student reflections about process best indicator
of how models differ

Quantitative Measures:





Instructor Argumentativeness
Instructor Verbal Aggressiveness
Out of Class Communication
Classroom Communication Climate
Qualitative Assessments:





How view role in society as scientist/engineer
(pretest & posttest comparison)
Most memorable topic/discussion (details)
Identify & evaluate ways ethics/social
responsibility presented (details)
How relevant were these discussions, why?
How valuable were these discussions, why?




Ethics education is an inter-disciplinary
concern
Fostering ethics discussions requires being
situated in professional context
Predict that student outcomes are related to
classroom dynamics
Content-specific discussions regarding
micro & macro concerns garner student
interest