Abstract
How can a course on engineering ethics affect an undergraduate student’s feelings of responsibility about moral problems? In this study, three groups of students were interviewed: six students who had completed a specific course on engineering ethics, six who had registered for the course but had not yet started it, and six who had not taken or registered for the course. Students were asked what they would do as the central character, an engineer, in each of two short cases that posed moral problems. For each case, the role of the engineer was successively changed and the student was asked how each change altered his or her decisions about the case. Students who had completed the ethics course considered more options before making a decision, and they responded consistently despite changes in the cases. For both cases, even when they were not directly involved, they were more likely to feel responsible and take corrective action. Students who were less successful in the ethics course gave answers similar to students who had not taken the course. This latter group of students seemed to have weaker feelings of responsibility: they would say that a problem was “not my business.” It appears that instruction in ethics can increase awareness of responsibility, knowledge about how to handle a difficult situation, and confidence in taking action.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bok, D. (1982). Beyond the ivory tower: Social responsibilities of the modern university. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Colby, A., & Damon, W. (1993). The uniting of self and morality in the development of extraordinary moral commitment. In G. G. Noam & T. E. Wren (Eds.), The moral self (pp. 149–174). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Colby, A., Ehrlich, T., Beaumont, E., & Stephens, J. (2003). Educating citizens: Preparing America’s undergraduates for lives of moral and civic responsibility. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Cross, K. P., & Steadman, M. H. (1996). Classroom research: Implementing the scholarship of teaching. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Davis, M. (1991). Thinking like an engineer: The place of a code of ethics in the practice of a profession. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 20, 150–167.
Davis, M. (2002). Can professional ethics be taught? In M. Davis (Ed.), Profession, code, and ethics (pp. 231–246). Hants, England: Ashgate Publishing.
Dunbar, W. S. (2005). Emotional engagement in professional ethics. Science and Engineering Ethics, 11, 535–551.
Harris, C. E., Davis, M., Pritchard, M. S., & Rabins, M. J. (1996). Engineering ethics: What? Why? How? And when? Journal of Engineering Education, 85, 93–96.
Harris, C. E., Pritchard, M. S., & Rabins, M. J. (2000). Engineering ethics: Concepts and cases (2nd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thompson Learning.
Herkert, J. R. (2000). Engineering ethics education in the USA: Content, pedagogy and curriculum. European Journal of Engineering Education, 25(4), 303–313.
Loui, M. C. (2005). Ethics and the development of professional identities of engineering students. Journal of Engineering Education, 94, 383–390.
Newberry, B. (2004). The dilemma of ethics in engineering education. Science and Engineering Ethics, 10, 343–351.
Nucci, L., & Pascarella, E. T. (1987). The influence of college on moral development. In J. C. Smart (Ed.), Higher education: Handbook of theory, research (Vol. III, pp. 271–326). New York: Agathon Press.
Pascarella, E. T., & Terenzini, P. T. (1991). How college affects students: Findings and insights from twenty years of research. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Pfatteicher, S. K. (2001). Teaching vs. preaching: EC2000 and the engineering ethics dilemma. Journal of Engineering Education, 90, 137–142.
Pritchard, M. S. (1998). Professional responsibility: Focusing on the exemplary. Science and Engineering Ethics, 4, 215–234.
Self, D. J., & Ellison, E. M. (1998). Teaching engineering ethics: Assessment of its influence on moral reasoning skills. Journal of Engineering Education, 87, 29–34.
Sindelar, M., Shuman, L., Besterfield-Sacre, M., Miller, R., Mitcham, C., Olds, B., Pinkus, R., & Wolfe, H. (2003). Assessing engineering students’ abilities to resolve ethical dilemmas. In Proceedings, Thirty-Third Annual ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, Westminster, Colo., November 5–8, 2003 (pp. S2A-25–S2A-31).
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Sullivan, W. M. (2005). Work and integrity: The crisis and promise of professionalism in America (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Weiss, R. S. (1994). Learning from strangers: The art and method of qualitative interview studies. New York: The Free Press.
Acknowledgments
We thank the eighteen students for participating in the interviews. Other students also contributed to this project. Neville Vazifdar and Matthew Buk pilot-tested the interview protocol in the summer of 2004. Elif Basar transcribed the audio tapes in the fall of 2004 and discussed the results with us. Emily Echevarria interviewed the prospective ECE 216 students in January 2006, and Paige Martin transcribed the audio tapes of those interviews. Our faculty colleagues offered helpful suggestions. Tracey Patton recommended that we investigate the actions that students would take as professionals, and she reminded us to also interview students who had not done well in the course. Thomas Schwandt helped us interpret the consistency of the responses of ECE 216 students across the different versions of the two cases in parts 13, 14, 17, and 18 of the interview protocol in the Appendix below. Donna Charlevoix and Cleo D’Arcy hypothesized that students who take ECE 216 may have had different understandings of ethics a priori. Michael Davis, I-Ju Liao, and anonymous reviewers suggested improvements to previous drafts of this paper. Loui was supported by the National Science Foundation under Grants SES-0138309 and EEC-0628814, and by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. Hashemian’s research was supported by an Intel Undergraduate Research Scholarship.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
The views, opinions, and conclusions of this paper are not necessarily those of the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, the Intel Corporation, Maddock Douglas, Inc., the National Science Foundation, or the University of Illinois.
Appendices
Appendix: Interview Protocol
Interview Date:
Interview conducted by:
-
(1)
Student Name:
-
(2)
Sex:
-
(3)
Class year:
-
(4)
College major:
-
(5)
Why did you choose your engineering major?
-
(6.1)
What pre-professional employment have you had?
-
(6.1)
-
(6.2)
How did this experience affect you as an engineer?
-
(7)
(for students who took ECE 216 only) How do you feel ECE216 has influenced your understanding of engineering ethics and professionalism?
-
(8.1)
Give an example of someone you consider to be an ideal professional engineer.
-
(8.2)
What are the qualities and characteristics of this person that make him/her ideal?
-
(9.1)
What people and experiences have shaped your understanding of the characteristics and responsibilities of an ideal professional engineer?
-
(9.2)
How have they done so? Describe specific incidents or actions you have taken. Possible sources could include relatives, friends, employment, courses, student organizations, etc.
-
(10.1)
To what extent do you feel that you have these characteristics and are prepared for these responsibilities? Why or why not?
-
(10.2)
How would you know that you are a professional engineer? Give specific criteria.
-
(11.1)
Can you tell me about an incident in your classes or work where you weren’t sure about the right course of action?
-
(11.2)
How did it become clear to you what to do?
-
(11.3)
How do you deal with pressures from other people or disagreements with your beliefs or practices?
Please read the following case and answer the questions below. We are interested in your thinking process and reasons for your actions. Please think aloud. There are many ways to answer each question and we are not looking for anything specific.
Payroll Problem
Your friend Jesse is a manager at Macrohard Computer Systems, which helps organizations acquire and set up affordable, workable data processing systems.
One day, over coffee, Jesse starts telling you a story about a project that Macrohard was working on years ago for Bigness Oil Company. Months after completing the system installation, he was looking through old files and realized that the system had a small intermittent glitch in which payroll calculations could be off by a few pennies after every pay period. Since his company was no longer on the project and a different team was in charge of maintenance, he kept quiet. He didn’t know how to solve the problem so informing someone about it would only make him and his team look bad and might have even cost him his job. Although the system was used for a long time, no one ever noticed and Jesse believes that a different system is being used now.
You are taken aback by this apparently innocent revelation. You frown and say to Jesse, “We have to report this problem, you know.”
Jesse is incredulous. “But there is no problem. Even if we looked for it, we probably could not find it; and even if we did, it makes no sense whatsoever to try to fix it or bother with it if it’s probably not being used anymore. It would take a long time to calculate the amount of money that may have been lost or gained by anyone over the time that it was used.”
“But I think that we have to report…,” you reply.
“Hey, look. I told you this in confidence. Your own engineering code of ethics requires client confidentiality. And what would be the good of reporting an old problem? There is nothing to be done. The only thing that would happen is that the company would get into trouble and have to spend useless dollars to correct a situation that cannot be corrected and does not need remediation.”
“But…”
“Let me be frank. If you report this, you will not be doing anyone any good.”
-
(12.1)
How do you think you should deal with this situation? Why?
-
(12.2)
How do you feel about your reaction and what you would do? What are your reasons for acting for or against Jesse’s demands?
-
(12.3)
What arguments would you give Jesse to convince him one way or the other? Why?
-
(13)
Now imagine the story a little differently. You are a consultant working with the Macrohard Computer Systems local affiliate, but not an employee of the company. You have established a strong, trusting relationship with Jesse, manager of the local company. The company, on your recommendations, has followed all of the regulations to the letter.
Jesse has been so pleased with you work that he has recommended that you be retained as the corporate consulting engineer. This would be a significant advancement for you and your consulting firm, cementing your steady and impressive rise in the firm.
Now Jesse is telling you the same story, but it happened to him while he was working at the same company you are consulting for. What do you do now?
How do you feel about your decision and plan of action?
-
(14)
Now imagine another scenario. You are an employee of Macrohard Computer Systems when Jesse, the manager of the local company, tells you this story. When you object he tells you that reporting this problem will not help anyone and certainly not help your career. “I cannot have an engineer who does not value loyalty,” he says.
Now what do you do? How do you feel?
Microwaves
Your first job after completing your undergraduate engineering degree is with the Kitchen Shortcuts Company. Shortcuts manufactures microwave ovens and other time-saving kitchen equipment. You are hired into a low-level engineering position. Your first task is to test a series of microwave ovens to determine their defrosting capabilities. You proceed to your lab where you find a few dozen microwave ovens in their boxes waiting for you to start your testing. You notice that virtually every brand of microwave oven is here, including all of Shortcuts’ competitors’ brands.
You unpack all the microwave ovens and begin your tests. The process is rather slow. So while you are waiting for test items to defrost, you begin to dig through the cabinets in your lab to see what is there. You discover that this used to be the lab where they tested microwave oven doors for radiation permeability (the amount of radiation that could escape through the glass door of microwave ovens). You also find an intriguing little piece of hand-held equipment that apparently was used to measure radiation levels. Because you are an engineer, you cannot resist trying it out.
You switch on the meter and point it around the room and out the window. You notice that when you point the meter at some of the microwave ovens, it gives a very high reading. You turn off all the other microwave ovens and discover that the reading is not a fluke. The ovens you are standing in front of are emitting much higher-than-average levels of radiation. You discover that all of the ovens are from Home Helpers, Shortcuts’ archrival. These microwave ovens are currently the two best-selling ovens on the market, primarily because they are the least expensive. It seems that these bargain ovens may not be as safe as they seem.
-
(15)
What would you do in this situation? How would you feel about your decision and actions?
-
(16)
Now imagine that two of the ovens that you found emitting high levels of radiation were Shortcuts ovens. You decide to look around a little more. You find the test report that discusses the radiation emissions from all of Shortcuts’ models of microwaves. You learn that only the top of the line and the midlevel microwaves were thoroughly tested. The bargain ovens’ results apparently were extrapolated from the test results from the other ovens. Now what do you do? How do you feel about your plan of action?
-
(17)
Now imagine that you have not just come across these old files, but have come across a fellow employee who is working on this project. Reporting the high emission rates may undermine him or even jeopardize his job. What do you do now? How do you feel about what you are going to do?
-
(18)
What if you are not a new-hire in a low-level engineering position, but an experienced engineer with a P.E. license? Your comments and suggestions will have a higher weight with your coworkers, but you have much more to lose. What do you do differently in any of the three variations of the situation presented above? Why? How do you feel about your reaction?
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hashemian, G., Loui, M.C. Can Instruction in Engineering Ethics Change Students’ Feelings about Professional Responsibility?. Sci Eng Ethics 16, 201–215 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-010-9195-5
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-010-9195-5