Qin Zhu is a PhD student in the School of Engineering Education at Purdue University. His main research interests include global/comparative/international engineering education, engineering education policy, and engineering ethics. He received his BS degree in material sciences and engineering and first PhD degree in philosophy of science and technology (engineering ethics) both from Dalian University of Technology, China. His first PhD dissertation on improving the practical effectiveness of engineering ethics that draws on theories in hermeneutics, practical philosophy, and discourse ethics has recently been awarded the "Outstanding Dissertation Award" in Liaoning Province, China.

Background Little is known about how students engage in ethical decision‐making, especially when designing in messy, real‐life contexts. To prepare ethically competent engineers, educators need a richer understanding of students' ethical decision‐making throughout the course of the design process. Purpose/Hypothesis This study examines students' intuitive ethical decision‐making as it emerges throughout the design process as well as when and how students engage in ethical reflection. Outlining these processes enables educators to better structure and support students' ethical reasoning. Design/Method We conducted 103 semi‐structured interviews with students in a multidisciplinary service‐learning program. To capture how ethical decision‐making unfolded over time, we sampled 13 students who had participated for multiple semesters on the same projects. The resulting 30 interviews were transcribed, coded, and thematically analyzed. We then explicated when and how students appeared to grapple with the ethical principles of beneficence, nonmaleficence, autonomy, and justice. Results The findings trace which ethical principles emerged as salient in each phase of the design process as well as what conditions and activities stimulated students' reflection on their ethical decision‐making. Conclusions Although certain phases of the design process appear to prompt consideration of specific principles, students' interactions with users and project partners appeared to stimulate the most reflection on their ethical decision‐making. We discuss how educators can leverage these and other reflection triggers to better structure and support students' ethical reasoning as well as strategies for making intuitive processes more explicit.

Megan is a postdoctoral researcher in EPICS at Purdue University with a Ph.D. in Organizational Communication from the Brian Lamb School of Communication from Purdue University. Her research focuses on design, organizational identity, identification and socialization, team communication, innovation, and technology. She is currently working on an NSF grant examining ethical reasoning and decision-making in engineering project teams, and examining the relationship between teams and individuals in engineering design from a social constructionist and social network perspective. David is a second year doctoral student in the Brian Lamb School of Communication at Purdue University pursuing a PhD in Organizational Communication with a minor in data analysis and research methodology. His research interests reside at the intersection of organizational communication, organizational ethics, social network analysis, identity and identification, and leadership development.

Megan is a fourth year doctoral candidate in the Brian Lamb School of Communication at Purdue University pursuing a Ph.D. in Organizational Communication with a minor in mixed methods. Her research focuses on engineering education, design, organizational identity, identification and socialization, team communication, innovation, and technology. She is currently working on an NSF grant examining ethical reasoning and decision-making in engineering project teams, and examining the relationship between teams and individuals in engineering design from a social constructionist and social network perspective.

No abstract