Simplify! using self-determination theory to prioritise the redesign of an ethics and history of technology course

Abstract

A course on ethics and history of technology, taught to 1886 first-year engineering students of 14 engineering departments was redesigned using Self-Determination Theory (SDT) by adapting many course elements at the same time. We applied the situational level of Vallerand's hierarchical model, analysing how the elements of this ethics and history course influenced basic needs and motivation in a mediating role, which influenced in turn course outcomes. Regression analysis demonstrated the central role of competence in the assignment for intrinsic motivation. A complementary qualitative analysis showed strong polarisation between different types of students and indicated many remaining challenges. We conclude that the Vallerand model was a useful tool for prioritising redesign in this course. We suggest further research in the use of this model, on the role and meaning of competence and on the role of frustration, in ethics and history courses in particular and engineering courses in general.

Using case studies in engineering ethics education: the case for immersive scenarios through stakeholder engagement and real life data

“…One approach for implementing immersive scenarios suggested by engineering ethics instructors was to involve external stakeholders and guest speakers. This preference mirrors emerging Challenge-Based Learning initiatives for developing and employing case studies that would closely replicate the context of engineering practice (Kalamas Hedden et al 2017;Holgaard and Kolmos 2018;Bombaerts & Spahn, 2021;Mattasoglio Neto, Lima, and Mesquita 2019). A second approach makes use of real data and documentation, such as environmental data and recordings, policy documents or court reports made publicly available by governmental organisations or community initiatives (Newberry, 2010;Byrne and Svanström 2012;Doorn & Kroesen, 2013;Shallcross 2013).…”

Motivational dynamics in basic needs profiles: Toward a person‐centered motivation approach in engineering education

“…We aimed to increase autonomy, as the feeling of being supported to be able to make meaningful choices in an activity. We simplified the course as we excluded history and kept ethics as a discipline (G. Bombaerts & Spahn, 2019), and as such, created more space and focused in the course. We offered weekly structured contact moments that allow for individual flexibility (G. J. T. Bombaerts et al, 2018).…”

“…Groups of three students ( R ) selected a case ( A ) and followed a five‐step cycle (van de Poel & Royakkers, 2007) to analyze the ethical aspects and historical forerunners, and based on the results, proposed improvements to current real‐life technologies ( C ). We focus on these course elements that have an important role in our analysis; we refer to G. Bombaerts and Spahn (2019) for a more detailed explanation of the course.…”

Enacting socio-technical responsibility through Challenge Based Learning in an Ethics and Data Analytics course

“…To address these challenges and encourage engineers to take their responsibilities to heart, engineering programmes need to familiarise students early with the features of a VUCA (Volatile, Uncertain, Complex and Ambiguous) problem, that requires a mix of socio-technical skills. Such ill-structured learning activities [43,45] can offer students a deeper exposure to ethics and enhance their motivation to engage with ethical topics ( [27,28,32,[39][40][41]). They can also contribute to students' awareness of the varied ethical situations they might encounter in their practice or the type of responsibilities they can take on in their profession [29].…”