An official website of the United States government
Engineering education commonly deemphasizes the moral and ethical teaching required for future engineers. Measuring the ethical values that engineering students and professionals possess, and how those views change over time, is a challenging prospect given the complexity of such concepts. One proposed method to characterize a person’s moral development is by asking them to identify a moral exemplar. In this paper, we explore who engineering students and early-career engineering professionals identify as moral exemplars and the traits and characteristics they use to describe these moral exemplars. The data used in this paper comes from a series of two longitudinal, mixed-methods projects which explored engineering students’ and professionals’ perceptions of ethics and social responsibility. During these projects, three interviews were conducted with longitudinal participants: one at the start of the first year of their engineering undergraduate studies (T1, n = 112), a second during their senior year (T2, n = 33), and a third 2-3 years after they graduated and started their engineering careers (T3, n = 20). This study focuses on interviewees' responses to one question: “Can you identify and describe someone, (for example, someone you know, a historical figure, or a famous person), that you think exemplifies moral character or professional or personal integrity?” In this paper, we identify and categorize the identities of these chosen moral exemplars. The list of categories was made and modified according to the trends we saw in moral exemplars of the engineering students. Occasionally, we had trouble determining how to categorize a response and, as a result, would put the moral exemplar into two categories. Additionally, we analyze the traits interviewees use to describe their moral exemplars, with the Big 5 Personality Traits used as an analytical framework [2]. When studying the personality traits of the moral exemplars, we would rank them from 1-10 depending on if they either positively (10) or negatively (1) align with the traits [2]. If the trait was not described, we would rank them a 0. From our analysis, a few notable patterns emerged. In T1, the largest category was family members accounting for 38% of the moral exemplars. In T2, family members were again the largest category, but now made up 22% of the moral exemplars. Additionally, around 60% of both the T1 and T2 participants cited their moral exemplars as someone they know personally. Interestingly the gender of the Moral exemplars for T1 and T2 is 68% male, 14% female and 18% other/not specified. We plan to compare the gender of the interviewees with the moral exemplars they identified to understand if there was any correlation between the two factors. We are also investigating longitudinal changes over time in the categories of the moral exemplars identified by participants. Finally, we are also comparing the personality traits of the moral exemplars described by our young engineer participants to prior work investigating the personalities of moral exemplars.
more »
« less
Evaluating Engineering Students’ Moral Sensitivity in a Natural Disaster Context
Engineered systems are designed to serve societal needs, from bridges providing mobility to communication systems enabling the transfer of information. It is essential that engineers recognize the social impact of their work to ensure they provide equitable benefits across communities when implementing such systems. In times of crisis, such as after natural disasters, these ethical considerations and awareness of community needs are especially important. Ethical development must begin when engineers are still students so that they can be trained to consider ethical issues before they begin working. Ethical development can be observed using James Rest’s Four-Component Model of Morality: moral sensitivity, moral judgement, moral motivation, and moral behavior. Previous work has focused largely on the second stage, moral judgement, which describes the ability to determine which action is morally right when confronted with an ethical issue. Here, however, we focus on the first stage, moral sensitivity, emphasizing one’s ability to recognize a moral issue. Studies show that while moral sensitivity does not always lead to moral behavior; moral sensitivity can help explain variances in moral behavior. Researchers argue that pinpointing students’ gaps in moral sensitivity can help educators identify gaps in engineering ethics curriculum. Towards this goal, we interviewed undergraduate engineering students to evaluate their moral sensitivity, using a current event, the 2021 Hurricane Ida in Southern Louisiana, as background. This natural disaster provided a useful context to evaluate moral sensitivity due to the complex effects of such a crisis on engineered, natural, and social systems. The story is framed using Lind’s Indicators of Ethical Sensitivity, providing the story characteristics, stakeholders, and consequences. We asked interviewees to provide the final indicator—ethical issues. Using a qualitative content analysis, we found that interviewees connected several ethical issues with the primary consequence of socioeconomic inequities. Identified ethical issues included topics of climate change, infrastructure, disaster planning, and corporate/government accountability. Implications of this study include recommendations for future moral sensitivity research and applications to improve classroom learning.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1926172
- PAR ID:
- 10488376
- Publisher / Repository:
- 2022 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- ASEE PEER
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Location:
- Minneapolis, MN
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Engineering education commonly deemphasizes the moral and ethical teaching required for future engineers. Measuring the ethical values that engineering students and professionals possess, and how those views change over time, is a challenging prospect given the complexity of such concepts. One proposed method to characterize a person’s moral development is by asking them to identify a moral exemplar. In this paper, we explore who engineering students and early-career engineering professionals identify as moral exemplars and the traits and characteristics they use to describe these moral exemplars. The data used in this paper comes from a series of two longitudinal, mixed-methods projects which explored engineering students’ and professionals’ perceptions of ethics and social responsibility. During these projects, three interviews were conducted with longitudinal participants: one at the start of the first year of their engineering undergraduate studies (T1, n = 112), a second during their senior year (T2, n = 33), and a third 2-3 years after they graduated and started their engineering careers (T3, n = 20). This study focuses on interviewees' responses to one question: “Can you identify and describe someone, (for example, someone you know, a historical figure, or a famous person), that you think exemplifies moral character or professional or personal integrity?” In this paper, we identify and categorize the identities of these chosen moral exemplars. The list of categories was made and modified according to the trends we saw in moral exemplars of the engineering students. Occasionally, we had trouble determining how to categorize a response and, as a result, would put the moral exemplar into two categories. Additionally, we analyze the traits interviewees use to describe their moral exemplars, with the Big 5 Personality Traits used as an analytical framework [2]. When studying the personality traits of the moral exemplars, we would rank them from 1-10 depending on if they either positively (10) or negatively (1) align with the traits [2]. If the trait was not described, we would rank them a 0. From our analysis, a few notable patterns emerged. In T1, the largest category was family members accounting for 38% of the moral exemplars. In T2, family members were again the largest category, but now made up 22% of the moral exemplars. Additionally, around 60% of both the T1 and T2 participants cited their moral exemplars as someone they know personally. Interestingly the gender of the Moral exemplars for T1 and T2 is 68% male, 14% female and 18% other/not specified. We plan to compare the gender of the interviewees with the moral exemplars they identified to understand if there was any correlation between the two factors. We are also investigating longitudinal changes over time in the categories of the moral exemplars identified by participants. Finally, we are also comparing the personality traits of the moral exemplars described by our young engineer participants to prior work investigating the personalities of moral exemplars.more » « less
-
Traditional engineering courses typically approach teaching and problem solving by focusing on the physical dimensions of those problems without consideration of dynamic social and ethical dimensions. As such, projects can fail to consider community questions and concerns, broader impacts upon society, or otherwise result in inequitable outcomes. And, despite the fact that students in engineering receive training on the Professional Code of Ethics for Engineers, to which they are expected to adhere in practice, many students are unable to recognize and analyze real-life ethical challenges as they arise. Indeed, research has found that students are typically less engaged with ethics—defined as the awareness and judgment of microethics and macroethics, sensitivity to diversity, and interest in promoting organizational ethical culture—at the end of their engineering studies than they were at the beginning. As such, many studies have focused on developing and improving the curriculum surrounding ethics through, for instance, exposing students to ethics case studies. However, such ethics courses often present a narrow and simplified view of ethics that students may struggle to integrate with their broader experience as engineers. Thus, there is a critical need to unpack the complexity of ethical behavior amongst engineering students in order to determine how to better foster ethical judgment and behavior. Promoting ethical behavior among engineering students and developing a culture of ethical behavior within institutions have become goals of many engineering programs. Towards this goal, we present an overview of the current scholarship of engineering ethics and propose a theoretical framework of ethical behavior using a review of articles related to engineering ethics from 1990-2020. These articles were selected based upon their diversity of scope and methods until saturation was reached. A thematic analysis of articles was then performed using Nvivo. The review engages in theories across disciplines including philosophy, education and psychology. Preliminary results identify two major kinds of drivers of ethical behavior, namely individual level ethical behavior drivers (awareness of microethics, awareness of macroethics, implicit understanding, and explicit understanding) and institutional drivers (diversity and institutional ethical culture). In this paper, we present an overview and discussion of two drivers of ethical behavior at the individual level, namely awareness of microethics and awareness of macroethics, based on a review of 50 articles. Our results indicate that an awareness of both microethics and macroethics is essential in promoting ethical behavior amongst students. The review also points to a need to focus on increasing students’ awareness of macroethics. This research thus addresses the need, driven by existing scholarship, to identify a conceptual framework for explaining how ethical judgment and behavior in engineering can be further promoted.more » « less
-
This work-in-progress study aims to qualitatively examine undergraduate students’ understanding of ethical dilemmas in aerospace engineering. Macroethics is particularly relevant within the aerospace industry as engineers are often asked to grapple with multi-faceted issues such as sustainable aviation, space colonization, or the military industrial complex. Macroethical education, the teaching of collective social responsibility within the engineering profession and societal decisions about technology, is traditionally left out of undergraduate engineering curricula. This lack of macroethics material leaves students underprepared to address the broader impacts of their discipline on society. Including macroethical content in the classroom helps novice engineers better understand the real implications of their work on humanity. Previous literature has explored how specific pedagogical interventions impact students’ decision-making, but few studies delve into undergraduate students’ awareness and perceptions of the issues themselves. Thus, it is essential to examine how students’ perceptions of macroethical dilemmas are evolving in order for instructors to effectively meet the needs of their students. This study addresses the need to better understand student awareness of macroethical issues by extending upon previous research to qualitatively analyze responses from an iteration of a macroethical perceptions survey (n = 81) administered to undergraduate aerospace engineers at a large, Midwestern, predominantly white, research-intensive, public university. Our prior work has been used to develop and iterate upon a mixed-methods survey that seeks to understand students’ perceptions of ethical issues within the aerospace discipline. In the most recent version of our survey instrument, thirty-one Likert-scale questions asked about students’ feelings towards the current state of aerospace engineering and their ideal state of the aerospace field. Within this survey, eight Likert-scale prompts are followed by open-ended questions asking students to explain their answers in-depth. For instance, if students agreed or strongly agreed with the statement ‘It is important to me to use my career as an aerospace engineer to make a positive difference in the world.’, a follow-up item asked students to explain what positive differences they would like to make in the world. Student responses were analyzed using a combination of a deductive and inductive thematic analyses. Researchers first applied an a priori coding scheme onto responses that was initially developed using constructivist grounded theory, then used inductive analysis to account for new themes that naturally emerged within the data. The analysis delved deeper into students’ moral engagement towards ethical issues, their perceptions of who is affected by these dilemmas, and how they have seen these dilemmas addressed in both academic and professional settings. Preliminary results from the study identified that students have a wide spectrum of awareness of relevant issues and express varying levels of acceptance about the state of aerospace engineering.While some students exhibited signs of inattentiveness, or limited ability to consider viewpoints beyond their own, others demonstrated abilities to see multiple perspectives and critically analyze systems of power that influence how macroethical issues are addressed. Similarly, students also demonstrated varying degrees of acceptance, some demonstrating signs of apathy or moral disengagement regarding the field of aerospace engineering, others indicating signs of conflict, or a heightened state of stress about opposing ideals and values, and a final group of students indicating a desire to challenge or reform the existing culture of the discipline. These emergent themes will be used to inform teaching practices concerning engineering ethics education, refine future iterations of macroethics lesson content and survey instruments, and further incentivize the integration of macroethical content throughout aerospace engineering curricula.more » « less
-
This work-in-progress study aims to qualitatively examine undergraduate students’ understanding of ethical dilemmas in aerospace engineering. Macroethics is particularly relevant within the aerospace industry as engineers are often asked to grapple with multi-faceted issues such as sustainable aviation, space colonization, or the military industrial complex. Macroethical education, the teaching of collective social responsibility within the engineering profession and societal decisions about technology, is traditionally left out of undergraduate engineering curricula. This lack of macroethics material leaves students underprepared to address the broader impacts of their discipline on society. Including macroethical content in the classroom helps novice engineers better understand the real implications of their work on humanity. Previous literature has explored how specific pedagogical interventions impact students’ decision-making, but few studies delve into undergraduate students’ awareness and perceptions of the issues themselves. Thus, it is essential to examine how students’ perceptions of macroethical dilemmas are evolving in order for instructors to effectively meet the needs of their students. This study addresses the need to better understand student awareness of macroethical issues by extending upon previous research to qualitatively analyze responses from an iteration of a macroethical perceptions survey (n = 81) administered to undergraduate aerospace engineers at a large, Midwestern, predominantly white, research-intensive, public university. Our prior work has been used to develop and iterate upon a mixed-methods survey that seeks to understand students’ perceptions of ethical issues within the aerospace discipline. In the most recent version of our survey instrument, thirty-one Likert-scale questions asked about students’ feelings towards the current state of aerospace engineering and their ideal state of the aerospace field. Within this survey, eight Likert-scale prompts are followed by open-ended questions asking students to explain their answers in-depth. For instance, if students agreed or strongly agreed with the statement ‘It is important to me to use my career as an aerospace engineer to make a positive difference in the world.’, a follow-up item asked students to explain what positive differences they would like to make in the world. Student responses were analyzed using a combination of a deductive and inductive thematic analyses. Researchers first applied an a priori coding scheme onto responses that was initially developed using constructivist grounded theory, then used inductive analysis to account for new themes that naturally emerged within the data. The analysis delved deeper into students’ moral engagement towards ethical issues, their perceptions of who is affected by these dilemmas, and how they have seen these dilemmas addressed in both academic and professional settings. Preliminary results from the study identified that students have a wide spectrum of awareness of relevant issues and express varying levels of acceptance about the state of aerospace engineering.While some students exhibited signs of inattentiveness, or limited ability to consider viewpoints beyond their own, others demonstrated abilities to see multiple perspectives and critically analyze systems of power that influence how macroethical issues are addressed. Similarly, students also demonstrated varying degrees of acceptance, some demonstrating signs of apathy or moral disengagement regarding the field of aerospace engineering, others indicating signs of conflict, or a heightened state of stress about opposing ideals and values, and a final group of students indicating a desire to challenge or reform the existing culture of the discipline. These emergent themes will be used to inform teaching practices concerning engineering ethics education, refine future iterations of macroethics lesson content and survey instruments, and further incentivize the integration of macroethical content throughout aerospace engineering curricula.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Conference Paper:
- The DOI is not currently available.
