Microethics and Macroethics in Graduate Education for Scientists and Engineers: Developing and Assessing Instructional Models

Abstract

While the government and the public look to universities to educate students in research ethics, those who teach ethics to science and engineering graduate students still struggle to find the most effective models for ensuring that their students internalize professional values and make them part of their scientific and technical practices. (1) This paper will report on a four year research project to develop and assess four different instructional models that introduce and educate science and engineering graduate students to the micro-and macroethical issues in their work. Efforts at integrating micro-and macroethics in graduate education of engineers and scientists have been few. To be effective such efforts require incorporation of interdisciplinary concepts and methods drawn from such fields as science and technology studies and applied ethics. The four models included in the project are: 1) a standalone course on societal implications of science and engineering; 2) micro-and macroethics material embedded in a required science course; 3) a hybrid online/face-to-face course on responsible conduct of research; and 4) engaging ethics in the lab. In the paper we discuss development of the course models and assessment results of students' knowledge of relevant standards, ethical sensitivity, and ethical reasoning, as well as student-instructor communication.

Ethics Education as Enculturation: Student Learning of Personal, Social, and Professional Responsibility

“…On the instructional front, educators are preparing students to attend to a wide range of modalities of ethics decision making. On the research front, scholars are tuned in to this instructional diversity and are investigating the effectiveness of ethics instruction across many dimensions, including comparisons of instructional modalities and strategies for integration with technical content/practice [3], student competencies across instructional modalities and institutional contexts [4], student experiences with ethics instruction [5], and student understandings of the social and professional responsibilities of engineers [6].…”

Justice, Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion Curriculum Within an Introductory Bioengineering Course

“…First, as students learn new technical skills, they simultaneously appreciate the professional responsibilities of engineers. 8,12 This allows the students to consider the societal context of their work throughout their training, rather than considering ethical responsibility as a separate domain. 13,15 The goal is to embed ethical considerations, including JEDI-focused considerations, as part of the design process.…”

Exploring the relations between ethical reasoning and moral intuitions among Chinese engineering students in a course on global engineering ethics

“…Higher levels of education, age, and more politically liberal views have been associated with higher P and N2 scores on the DIT and DIT2(Dong, 2011;Rest, Narvaez, Thoma, et al, 1999). On average, US citizens/native-English speakers score higher on these measures(Borenstein et al, 2010;Canary et al, 2012),…”