Science and Engineering Ethics

, Volume 14, Issue 3, pp 433–447 | Cite as

Designing Games to Teach Ethics

Original Paper

Abstract

This paper describes a teaching methodology whereby students can gain practical experience of ethical decision-making in the engineering design process. We first argue for the necessity to teach a ‘practical’ understanding of ethical issues in engineering education along with the usual theoretical or hypothetical approaches. We then show how this practical understanding can be achieved by using a collaborative design game, describing how, for example, the concept of responsibility can be explored from this practical basis. We conclude that the use of games in design education can provide an excellent basis for discussing practical and ethical reasoning during the process of design.

Keywords

Games Design process Collaborative design Responsibility 

References

  1. 1.
    Davis, M. (1993). Ethics across the curriculum. Teaching Philosophy, 16, 205–235.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    van de Poel, I., Zaandvoort, H., & Brumsen, M. (2001). Ethics and engineering courses at Delft University of Technology: Contents, educational setup and experiences. Science and Engineering Ethics, 7, 267–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Casebeer, W. D. (2003). Natural ethical facts: Evolution, connectionism, and moral cognition. Bradford Books.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dewey, J. (1922). Human nature and conduct. Prometheus Books.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Johnson, M. (2003). Moral imagination: Implications of the cognitive sciences for ethics. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Whitbeck, C. (1998). Ethics in engineering practice and research. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dorst, K., & Royakkers, L. (2006). The design analogy: A model for moral problem solving. Design Studies, 27, 633–656.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Schön, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner. Temple Smith.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Winner, L. (1991). Engineering ethics and political imagination in Johnson, D. In Ethical Issues in Engineering. Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Holt, J. (1997). The designer’s judgment. Design Studies, 18, 113–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Vaughan, D. (1996). The challenger launch decision. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kuhn, J. (1998). Emotion as well as reason: Getting students beyond “interpersonal accountability”. Journal of Business Ethics, 17, 295–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bos, N. D., Shami, N. S., & Naab, S. (2006). A globalization simulation to teach corporate social responsibility: Design features and analysis of student reasoning. Simulation and Gaming, 37, 56–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gibson, K. (2003). Games students play: Incorporating the prisoner’s dilemma in teaching business ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 48, 53–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Reall, M. J., Bailey, J. J., & Stoll, S. K. (1998). Moral reasoning “on hold” during a competitive game. Journal of Business Ethics, 17, 295–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Habraken, N. J., & Gross, M. D. (1988). Concept design games. Design Studies, 9, 150–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Schön, D. A. (1992). Teaching and learning as a design transaction. In Research in Design Thinking. Delft University Press.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bucciarelli, L. L. (1999). Design delta design: Seeing/seeing as. In Design thinking research symposium 4, Boston, 23–25 April.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bucciarelli, L. L. (1994). Designing engineers. MIT Press.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Alexander, C., Ishikawa, S., & Silverstein, M. (1978). A pattern language. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lloyd, P., & van de Poel, I. (2004). Ethics for industrial design engineers: ID5471 course reader. TU Delft.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lloyd, P., & Busby, J. (2003). ‘Things that went well—no serious injuries or deaths’: Ethical reasoning in a normal engineering design process. Science and Engineering Ethics, 9, 503–516.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    van de Poel, I. (2001). Investigating ethical issues in engineering design. Science and Engineering Ethics, 7, 429–446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    van Gorp, A., & van de Poel, I. (2001). Ethical considerations in engineering design processes. IEEE Technology and Society Magazine, 20, 15–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Lloyd, P., & Scott, P. (1994). Discovering the design problem. Design Studies, 15, 125–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Bovens, M. (1998). The quest for responsibility. Accountability and citizenship in complex organisations. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Harris, C. E., Pritchard, M. S., & Rabins, M. J. (2000). Engineering ethics: Concepts and cases. Wadsworth.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Thompson, D. F. (1980). Moral responsibility and public officials. American Political Science Review, 74, 905–916.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Design and InnovationThe Open UniversityMilton KeynesUK
  2. 2.Department of Philosophy, Faculty of Technology, Policy, and ManagementTU DelftDelftThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations