Bombaerts, GJT

Martin, Diana Adela

Bombaerts, Gunter

Pure OAI Repository

 Case studies in engineering ethics educationCitation for published version (APA):Bombaerts, G., & Martin, D. A. (2019). Case studies in engineering ethics education. In B. V. Nagy, M. Murphy,H-M. Jarvinen, & A. Kalman (Eds.), Varietas delectat… Complexity is the new normality: Proceedings SEFI 2019· SEFI 47th Annual Conference · Budapest, 16-20 September, 2019 (pp. 2039-2041). European Society forEngineering Education (SEFI).Document status and date:Published: 31/10/2019Document Version:Publisher’s PDF, also known as Version of Record (includes final page, issue and volume numbers)Please check the document version of this publication:• A submitted manuscript is the version of the article upon submission and before peer-review. There can beimportant differences between the submitted version and the official published version of record. Peopleinterested in the research are advised to contact the author for the final version of the publication, or visit theDOI to the publisher's website.• The final author version and the galley proof are versions of the publication after peer review.• The final published version features the final layout of the paper including the volume, issue and pagenumbers.Link to publicationGeneral rightsCopyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright ownersand it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights.            • Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research.            • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain            • You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal.If the publication is distributed under the terms of Article 25fa of the Dutch Copyright Act, indicated by the “Taverne” license above, pleasefollow below link for the End User Agreement:www.tue.nl/taverneTake down policyIf you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us at:openaccess@tue.nlproviding details and we will investigate your claim.Download date: 16. Nov. 20232039Proceedings of the SEFI 47th Annual Conference · Workshops[3] Freeman, R. B., & Huang, W. (2014). Collaboration: Strength in diversity. Nature News, 513(7518), 305. [4] OECD. (2014). Education at a Glance 2014: OECD Indicators. OECD Publishing.Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/edu/Education-at-a-Glance-2014.pdf [5] SEFI position paper on diversity, equality and inclusiveness (2018) Retrieved from https://www.sefi.be/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Diversity-2018-links.pdf [6] Van Maele, J., & Mertens, K. (2014). Towards an experience-driven approach to teaching intercultural communication. IKSI Scientific Publishing House (Warsaw University)   CASE STUDIES IN ENGINEERING ETHICS EDUCATION   G. Bombaerts Technische Universiteit Eindhoven, The Netherlands D. A. Martin Technological University Dublin, Ireland Topics: Gender, Inclusion and Ethics Keywords: ethics education, case studies Background and Rationale Case studies are the prevalent teaching method employed in engineering ethics education, but despite their popularity, there is little or no empirical evidence supporting their effectiveness (Colby and Sullivan 2008; Yadav and Barry 2009). The most common use of case studies focuses on individual dilemmas set in scenarios of crisis (Haws 2001). There is less concern with incorporating realistic professional settings and topics such as public policy or the broader social mission of engineering (Colby and Sullivan 2008; Bielefeldt et al 2016). While students do show an ability to recognize obvious black and white ethical dilemmas, they fail to do so for “more subtle but possibly more serious dilemmas” (Schuman et al 2004, p 11). Significance The growing criticism of individualistic engineering ethics case studies highlights the need to  develop and use case studies that can capture the complexity of the profession and realistic features of the professional environment (Lynch and Kline 2000; Bucciarelli 2007; Conlon and Zandvoort 2011). Motivation and learning outcomes The workshop aims to respond to the need for more complex ethics case studies and to facilitate the participants’ use of the method in their own teaching. The workshop has two major outcomes. First, participants will gain an enhanced awareness of different approaches to case studies. The second expected outcome is facilitating the development of case studies by participants themselves, based on the workshop exercises. The case studies developed can be incorporated by the participants in their teaching, and can deliver input to the SEFI ethics working group. Participant engagement The session is highly interactive. It follows a constructivist approach of introducing first a short case study exercise to make the participants experience strengths and weaknesses of the method and by facilitating discussions in small groups and with the Proceedings of the SEFI 47th Annual Conference · Workshops2040entire audience. Participants will thus be divided into small groups, meant to foster a reflective dialogue on their experience using case studies, as well as providing clarity about relevant outputs such as the drafting of new case studies and providing input for the SEFI Ethics working group. Agenda 1. welcome, introduction and overview 2. short case study exercise and debriefing on strengths and weaknesses 3. small group discussions guided by the following questions:  Q1: what are your (own, students’, university’s) expectations from the use of ethics case studies?  Q2: how do you choose case studies in your teaching?  Q3: which learning objectives or what characteristics of the engineering profession and work environment do you hope to convey to students through your choice?  Q4: what are the challenges encountered and your success stories? 4. Each group reports back, leading to an engaged dialogue with other participants.  Exercise  Groups can be reorganized according to common themes identified in the previous exercise. Each group is invited to draft answers to the formulated questions. This can serve as an initial approach for developing a case study which is in tune with their expectations from the method or the particular features of their module or geographic region. After the completion of the exercise, groups will report back. Tips and tricks to collaborate with real engineering stakeholders on the ethics case studies drafted will also be considered, based on the experience of the Author with engaging stakeholders in ethics case study instruction. 5. wrap up and concluding discussion on follow up strategies and initiatives Takeaway Participants will receive samples of ethical case studies and a list of references. Given that the workshop offers a platform to initiate the development of new case studies, participants also have the opportunity to follow up and finalize the case studies drafted, which in the future can be used in their own teaching.  2041Proceedings of the SEFI 47th Annual Conference · Workshopsentire audience. Participants will thus be divided into small groups, meant to foster a reflective dialogue on their experience using case studies, as well as providing clarity about relevant outputs such as the drafting of new case studies and providing input for the SEFI Ethics working group. Agenda 1. welcome, introduction and overview 2. short case study exercise and debriefing on strengths and weaknesses 3. small group discussions guided by the following questions:  Q1: what are your (own, students’, university’s) expectations from the use of ethics case studies?  Q2: how do you choose case studies in your teaching?  Q3: which learning objectives or what characteristics of the engineering profession and work environment do you hope to convey to students through your choice?  Q4: what are the challenges encountered and your success stories? 4. Each group reports back, leading to an engaged dialogue with other participants.  Exercise  Groups can be reorganized according to common themes identified in the previous exercise. Each group is invited to draft answers to the formulated questions. This can serve as an initial approach for developing a case study which is in tune with their expectations from the method or the particular features of their module or geographic region. After the completion of the exercise, groups will report back. Tips and tricks to collaborate with real engineering stakeholders on the ethics case studies drafted will also be considered, based on the experience of the Author with engaging stakeholders in ethics case study instruction. 5. wrap up and concluding discussion on follow up strategies and initiatives Takeaway Participants will receive samples of ethical case studies and a list of references. Given that the workshop offers a platform to initiate the development of new case studies, participants also have the opportunity to follow up and finalize the case studies drafted, which in the future can be used in their own teaching.  Acknowledgements We thank our colleagues for the continuous feedback on the research on case based learning and on the design of case-based ethics courses, as well as to our students who took part over the years in the exercise. Participation of Gunter Bombaerts is supported by the H2020 SCALINGS project on scaling up co-creation. This project has received funding form the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under Grant Agreement No. 788359.   

English

Case studies in engineering ethics education

Repository TU/e

https://pure.tue.nl/ws/files/145626381/SEFI2019_Proceedings.pdf

Case studies in engineering ethics education

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Pure OAI Repository

Repository TU/e