Teaching Engineering Ethics using BLOCKS Game
Purchase on Springer.com
$39.95 / €34.95 / £29.95*
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.
The aim of this study was to investigate the use of a newly developed design game called BLOCKS to stimulate awareness of ethical responsibilities amongst engineering students. The design game was played by seventeen teams of chemical engineering students, with each team having to arrange pieces of colored paper to produce two letters each. Before the end of the game, additional constraints were introduced to the teams such that they faced similar ambiguity in the technical facts that the engineers involved in the Challenger disaster had faced prior to the space shuttle launch. At this stage, the teams had to decide whether to continue with their original design or to develop alternative solutions. After the teams had made their decisions, a video of the Challenger explosion was shown followed by a post-game discussion. The students’ opinion on five Statements on ethics was tracked via a Five-Item Likert survey which was administered three times, before and after the ethical scenario was introduced, and after the video and post-game discussion. The results from this study indicated that the combination of the game and the real-life incident from the video had generally strengthened the students’ opinions of the Statements.
- ABET. (2009). Criteria for accrediting engineering programs. http://www.abet.org/Linked%20Documents-UPDATE/Criteria%20and%20PP/E001%2010-11%20EAC%20Criteria%201-27-10.pdf. Accessed 3 August 2011.
- Billington, D. P. (2006). Teaching ethics in engineering education through historical analysis. Science and Engineering Ethics, 12, 205–222. CrossRef
- Bowyer, K. W. (2001). “Star Wars” revisited—a continuing case study in ethics and safety-critical software. 31th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, F1D-7.
- Bredemeier, M. E., & Greenblat, C. S. (1981). The educational effectiveness of simulation games: A synthesis of findings. Simulation and Gaming, 12, 307–332. CrossRef
- Bucciarelli, L. L. (1999). Design delta design: Seeing/seeing as. In Design thinking research symposium 4, Boston, pp. 23–25 April.
- Cannell, C. F., & Kahn, R. L. (1968). Interviewing. In G. Lindzey & E. Aronson (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology, 2: Research method. New York: Addison-Wesley.
- Chung, C. A., & Alfred, M. (2009). Design, development and evaluation of an interactive simulator for engineering ethics education (SEEE). Science and Engineering Ethics, 15, 189–199. CrossRef
- Colby, A., & Sullivan, W. M. (2008). Ethics teaching in undergraduate engineering education. Journal of Engineering Education, 97, 327–338. CrossRef
- Cruz, J. A., & Frey, W. J. (2003). An effective strategy for integrating ethics across the curriculum in engineering: An ABET 2000 challenge. Science and Engineering Ethics, 9, 543–568. CrossRef
- Dorn, D. S. (1989). Simulation games: One more tool on the pedagogical shelf. Teaching Sociology, 17, 1–18. CrossRef
- Fleddermann, C. B. (2000). Engineering ethics cases for electrical and computer engineering students. IEEE Transactions on Education, 43, 284–287. CrossRef
- Haywood, M. E., McMullen, D. A., & Wygal, D. E. (2004). Using games to enhance student understanding of professional and ethical responsibilities. Issues in Accounting Education, 19, 85–99. CrossRef
- Johnson, W. R., Sieveking, N. A., & Clanton, E. S. I. I. I. (1974). Effects of alternative positioning of open-ended questions in multiple-choice questionnaires. Journal of Applied Psychology, 59, 776–778. CrossRef
- Kline, R. R. (2001). Using history and sociology to teach engineering ethics. IEEE Technology and Society Magazine, Winter, 2001(2002), 13–20. CrossRef
- Kroesen, O., & van der Zwaag, S. (2010). Teaching ethics to engineering students: From clean concepts to dirty tricks. In I. van de Poel & D. E. Goldberg (Eds.), Philosophy and engineering, philosophy of engineering and technology 2 (pp. 227–237). Netherlands: Springer.
- Krosnick, J. A. (1991). Response strategies for coping with the cognitive demands of attitude measures in surveys. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 5, 213–236. CrossRef
- Krosnick, J. A. (1999). Survey research. Annual Review of Psychology, 50, 537–556. CrossRef
- Kuhn, J. W. (1998). Emotion as well as reason: Getting students beyond “interpersonal accountability”. Journal of Business Ethics, 17, 295–308. CrossRef
- Lawson, B. R. (1979). Cognitive strategies in architectural design. Ergonomics, 22, 59–68. CrossRef
- Lewis, S., van Hout, W., & Huang-Saad, A. (2010). 40th ASEE/IEEE frontiers in education conference.S3E−1.
- Lloyd, P., & van de Poel, I. (2008). Designing games to teach ethics. Science and Engineering Ethics, 14, 433–447. CrossRef
- Loui, M. C. (2006). Assessment of an engineering ethics video: Incident at Morales. Journal of Engineering Education, 95, 85–91. CrossRef
- Pritchard, M. S. (1992). Teaching engineering ethics a case study approach. http://ethics.tamu.edu/pritchar/an-intro.htm. Accessed 3 August 2011.
- Rabins, M. J. (1998). Teaching engineering ethics to undergraduates: Why? What? How? Science and Engineering Ethics, 4, 291–302. CrossRef
- Riley, K., Davis, M., Cox Jackson, A., & Maciukenas, J. (2009). Ethics in the details: Communicating engineering ethics via micro-insertion. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 52, 95–108. CrossRef
- Schwarz, N., Hippler, H. J., & Noelle-Neumann, E. (1992). A cognitive model of response-order effects in survey measurement. In N. Schwarz, S. Sudman, & (Eds.), Context Effects in Social and Psychological Research. New York: Springer.
- Sharp, L. M., & Frankel, J. (1983). Respondent burden: A test of some common assumptions. The Public Opinion Quarterly, 47(1), 36–53. CrossRef
- Smith, T. W. (2003). Developing comparable questions in cross-national surveys. In J. A. Harkness, F. J. R. Van de Vijver, & P. P. Mohler (Eds.), Cross-cultural survey methods (pp. 69–92). New Jersey: Wiley.
- Van der Burg, S., & van de Poel, I. (2005). Teaching ethics and technology with Agora, an electronic tool. Science and Engineering Ethics, 11, 277–297. CrossRef
- Teaching Engineering Ethics using BLOCKS Game
Science and Engineering Ethics
Volume 19, Issue 3 , pp 1357-1373
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Springer Netherlands
- Additional Links
- Engineering ethics
- Design game
- Historical case-scenario
- Author Affiliations
- 1. School of Engineering and Science, Curtin University Sarawak Malaysia, CDT 250, 98009, Miri, Sarawak, Malaysia
- 2. Curtin Sarawak Research Institute, Curtin University Sarawak Malaysia, CDT 250, 98009, Miri, Sarawak, Malaysia