Leconte, M

Robinson, S

Stevenson, J

English

Leeds Beckett Repository

ALT JOURNAL NUMBER 6: SUMMER 2009 7Background and contextLeeds Met aims to be “a healthy, ethical,environmentally-friendly and sustainablecommunity… whose members... value belonging tothis community and sharing a sense of identity”,expressed in the University’s Vision and Characterstatement, endorsed by the Board of Governors(Leeds Metropolitan University, 2006).These core values are designed to underpineverything the institution does and inform howstudents, staff and governors behave and respond toeach other and the wider community – national andinternational – during their time at Leeds Met andsubsequently. They also underpin the overall aim ofhigher education as inspiring and enabling individualsto serve the needs of an adaptable, sustainable,knowledge-based economy and to shape ademocratic, civilised, inclusive society (NCIHE, 1997).However, there are several difficulties with theconceptualisation of these values, particularly ethics,ethical principles and what comprises ethicalbehaviour at Leeds Met. First, the notion of what itmeans to be ‘ethical’ has not been made explicit andthere is, perhaps, an assumption that all individualsand groups understand ethics in the same way.However, since educational institutions aremicrocosms of an increasingly diverse culture andthe society that supports them, “claims to universalprinciples can easily be a mask to excuse oneparticular group imposing their ethics on another”(Strain, 2005, p. 46), while a set of universal ethicalprinciples that is no particular group’s principles isnot a set of principles at all (MacIntyre, 1981).Second, while recent work (CIHE, 2005) has identifiedthe broader ethical challenges that higher educationinstitutions need to explore and tackle, there hasbeen insufficient exploration of ethics and ethicalunderstanding among governors, staff and studentswithin different Faculties at Leeds Met. Third, not allawards (and particularly not all levels within awards)explicitly explore notions of ethics with students.Consequently some students may not develop therequisite ethical understanding needed to matureinto the type of learners and democratic citizensreferred to above. Fourth, and on a more pragmaticlevel, students should have sufficient ethicalawareness to enable them to conduct research in anethical manner. However, our experiences as currentor former members of research ethics sub-committees indicate that this is not always so.Finally, good practice in developing notions of ethicalresponsibility with students is not being sharedacross the institution and there are insufficientexemplars of teaching materials that can be usedwith students.The researchWe are conducting research funded through theTeaching Quality Enhancement Fund exploring howconsideration of ethical practice can be embeddedwithin the curriculum. The research will identifycommon understandings of ethics, ethicalprinciples and ethical behaviour and the ethicalknowledge, awareness, dispositions, skills andabilities that staff and students might need todevelop to enable them to behave ‘ethically’ withinthe institution, develop as ethical researchers andunderstand and apply notions of professional ethics.MethodsTo date a web-based questionnaire has been sent toall academic staff and to undergraduate studentsregistered on 42 courses and postgraduates on 20courses – every fourth course in the list of Leeds Metcourses. The response rate was low – 165 responsesfrom 70 staff and 95 students – but highly diverse,although it is recognised that those who respondedmight not be typical of the sample as a whole. We didnot survey staff outside Faculties as we were initiallyinterested in exploring differences between studentsand the academic staff who teach them. Thequestionnaire asked a series of 30 questions headed“a university and its staff should…” and “a studentshould…”. Respondents were asked to grade theirresponses from 0 (completely disagree) to 5(completely agree) and to complete the questions:“an ethical university is…”, “an ethical member ofstaff is…” and “an ethical student is…”. Allrespondents were invited to participate in a follow-upsemi-structured interview or focus group and allthose who responded were either interviewed (5students and 5 staff) or took part in a small focusgroup (6 staff) designed to explore responses indetail. We also requested interviews from allmembers of the Senior Executive Team andgovernors and undertook 10 further interviews withthose who agreed to be interviewed.Embedding ethics and ethical practice within and across thecurriculum: emerging findings from a TQEF-funded projectJacqueline Stevenson, Marie-Odile Leconte and Simon Robinson36485_ALT Journal6:Layout 1  3/8/09  12:53  Page 9ALT JOURNAL NUMBER 6: SUMMER 20098ResultsResults were very mixed with strong agreement insome areas (see Figures 1a–d) and significantdisagreement in others (see Figures 2a–d).1a. Lead by example1b.Try to do what is right even if no one is watching orcompelling to do the right thing1c. Treat everyone with dignity and respect1d. Encourage university staff to conduct themselveswith integrity in all dealings on behalf of the university2a. Engage students and staff in social justice issues2b. Never conduct business with governments orbusinesses which fail to uphold basic human rights orhave oppressive regimes36485_ALT Journal6:Layout 1  3/8/09  12:53  Page 10ALT JOURNAL NUMBER 6: SUMMER 2009 9Areas of agreementThere was agreement that students and staff shouldbehave towards each other in ways deemed to befair. This included how students treated each otherand how they implemented academic practice. Forexample, an ethical university was considered to be“one which is principled and upholds standards ofequity, fairness and trust, treats all with respect andstrives to achieve its stated aims fairly” (academic).An ethical member of staff one who is “fair,unbiased, respectful of students and others”(postgraduate student) and an ethical student one“fair to the lecturers and other staff when it comesto their shortcomings” (Level 2 student).There was also consistent agreement thatindividuals should lead by example, even when theymight not be being observed (see Figures 1a and1b). For example, an ethical university was viewedas “one which upholds its ethical standards, leadsby example, and attempts to educate others onethical standards, their importance, and theirimplementation” (postgraduate student), with anethical member of staff “one who is willing to sharetheir ethical beliefs in the classroom and who leadsby example” (Level 2 student).Respondents also showed similarity across groups inarguing the need for individuals to be constantlyreflective about their personal values and how theseare put into practice. Thus an ethical university was“one which accepts its flaws, and constantly strives toimprove” (Level 1 student), an ethical member of staffwas “someone who accepts diverse religious,psychological, philosophical cultures its students andco-workers derive from. Someone who reflects, and‘grows’ based on their consciousness change.Someone who questions, why? What is right? And ifso how did it come to be right? Will it be right nextyear?” (Level 1 student) and an ethical student “onewho continues to reflect on and question theinfluence he/she has on local and global communitiesand acts on the findings” (postgraduate student) andwho is “thinking hard about ethics, and is striving,through reading and discussion, to find a consistentpath through the ethical minefield” (academic).Areas of disagreementThe area that engendered the greatest discrepancyin response was how to put ethical beliefs intopractice, particularly where that practice might2c. Never ignore or disobey policies even if not inagreement with them2d. Always protect the university's interestsResponse: 0Response: 1Response: 2Response: 3Response: 4Response: 5Key36485_ALT Journal6:Layout 1  3/8/09  12:54  Page 11ALT JOURNAL NUMBER 6: SUMMER 200910require choices that have far-reachingconsequences. Many respondents felt that ethicalbehaviour involved action, so that “an ethicalmember of staff walks the walk as well as talks thetalk. They do not discuss the shameful behaviour ofa company ... and then go along and buy theirproducts” (academic). There was significantdisagreement about what form this action shouldtake, for example whether a university and its staffshould “never ignore or disobey policies even if notin agreement with them” or “conduct business withgovernments or businesses which fail to upholdbasic human rights or have oppressive régimes”.Both of these are actions that might havepotentially significant personal consequences,which might explain the variety of responses.CommentaryClearly our research is only a small-scale snapshotof staff and student opinions. Nonetheless we haveshown that, while there are commonalities ofopinion amongst our diverse respondents regardingwhat they consider ethical principles and ethicalbehaviour to be, there are also clear differences. Itis perhaps not unexpected that in an institution witha highly diverse staff and student population thesedifferences of opinion will exist. However, ourresearch not only challenges the notion of a sharedethical identity but raises more important questionswhich need to be explored further: how do we dealwith ethics in a multicultural world? Where doesthe balance lie between respecting culturaldiversity and ethical universalism? If we believe inuniversal ethics then what are our essential firstprinciples? Should we make these first principlesmore explicit and require our staff and student bodyto sign up to them? What should we do if staff orstudents subsequently transgress them? What isthe connection between personal, professional andinstitutional integrity?We presented our findings at the Staff DevelopmentFestival in 2008 and many suggestions were madeabout how we could explore the notion of ethicalbehaviour further within the University. Theseincluded developing a ‘teaching ethics’ workinggroup, with the aim of extending ethics teaching inPersonal Development Planning and conventionalmodules, sharing good practice, and developingcentral resources; feeding findings from theresearch into the newly formed University-wideCorporate Social Responsibility group; andestablishing a programme of seminars andworkshops designed to explore specific areas ofinterest over the next year. We welcome furthercomments and suggestions.ReferencesCouncil for Industry and Higher Education (2005)Ethics Matters: managing ethical issues in HigherEducation. London: Institute of Business Ethics.Leeds Metropolitan University (2006) Vision andCharacter. Available at:www.leedsmet.ac.uk/the_news/docs/visionandcharacter08.pdfMacIntyre, A. (1981) After Virtue. London: Duckworth.National Committee of Inquiry into Higher Education(1997) Higher Education in the Learning Society [theDearing Report]. London: NCIHE. Available athttps://bei.leeds.ac.uk/Partners/NCIHE//Strain, J. (2005) The importance of caring: ethics,communication and Higher Education. EthicalSpace: The International Journal of CommunicationEthics 2(1), 48.Jacqueline StevensonLeslie Silver International FacultyMarie-Odile LeconteCarnegie Faculty of Sport and EducationProfessor Simon RobinsonLeslie Silver International Faculty36485_ALT Journal6:Layout 1  3/8/09  12:54  Page 12

Embedding ethics and ethical practice within and across the curriculum: emerging findings from a TQEF-funded project

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Leeds Beckett Repository