Research in Engineering Education Symposium 2011 - rees2009

Universidad Politécnica de Madrid (UPM) Página 617 de 957
Cases
Engineering being a verb, and this sense of action and engagement being ingrained in the
very concept of engineering, educators have long used cases to bring to life examples of
their otherwise more pedestrian lessons. This is true now more than ever, especially since
the appearance of Harris, Pritchard, Rabins’s book Engineering Ethics: Concepts and Cases
(2005). Treatments of cases might best be separated into two main types: those that
simply offer (as a resource, aid, or guide) a series of cases presenting ethically-relevant
scenarios from engineering practice (such as the many listed on onlineethics.org, 2011),
and those that combine with their cases thoughtful exegeses, sometimes in relation with
primers in ethical theory (see below) (such as Harris, Pritchard, Rabins, 2005;
Schlossberger, 1993; Whitbeck, 1998). Humphreys (1999) provides cases from the NSPE
board of ethical review, complete with their rulings and accompanying rationale. It should
be said, though, that cases such as these meet our understanding of engineering ethics
only when they include explanations of what makes them philosophically relevant. Not all
engineering cases are ethically relevant, ofcourse, and those that are require the
highlighting of their ethical character.
Problem-Solving Methods and Formulae
Ethics in practice must be operationalized if it is to be of any use. Typically philosophers
will reserve the word “morals” for the actual behavior that results from following one’s
ethical beliefs. The process of choosing how to act in an ethically-relevant situation is
referred to as moral decision making. While the study of moral decision making more
properly falls under the purview of psychological research, rather than philosophy (Rest,
1999), the operationalization of ethics inherent in engineering practice means moral
decision making is properly a part of engineering ethics.
Many of the works in our study describe problem solving methods for engineering ethics
problems (whether they used the language of moral reasoning or not). Harris, Pritchard,
Rabins (2005, p. 56) provide a “process of moral thinking.” Martin and Schinzinger (2004)
have a useful chapter on moral reasoning and resolving ethical dilemmas. Fleddermann
(2008) describes ethical problem solving techniques. Jonassen et al (2009) present a more
research-oriented approach to problem solving inengineering ethics. There has been
prominent work done in the field of psychology outlining the ways in which people might
engage in moral decision making in the professions (Rest, 1999), but this work has yet to
appear in the engineering ethics literature.
Primers in Ethical Theory
Many, though not all works in engineering ethics offer at least a primer in the basic ethical
theories. As with cases, primers are often presented either by themselves––the more
common approach––(see Fleddermann, 2008; Robinson et al, 2007; Whitbeck, 1998;
Humphreys, 1999; Spier, 2001), or integrated with engineering examples (Harris,
Pritchard, Rabins, 2005; Schlossberger, 1993). When works are authored or coauthored
by ethicists, these sections do tend to be reflective of philosophical tradition and are likely
Proceedings of Research in Engineering Education Symposium 2011
Madrid, 4 th - 7 th October 2011