Ethics Across the Curriculum

Dr José A. CruzDr. William J. Frey

Dr. Halley D. Sanchez

Introduction Team Introductions El Centro Para La Etica En Las Profesiones

(Center for Ethics in the Professions) Series of EAC Workshops

4 ABET workshops for UPRM College of Engineering 1 EAC workshop for UPR Deans of Academic Affairs Series of Dissemination Workshops (APPE and

ASEE) Paper on Workshop in ASEE 2002 Proceedings

Our goals for today

Present ABET 2000 ethics requirements Advocate EAC as an effective and efficient response

to these requirements Model two successful ethics integration modules Develop short scenarios to include in templates of

these modules for engineering Identify pilot ethics integration projects for

mainstream engineering courses Set forth tools for documenting and assessing pilot

projects

ABET Ethics Criteria ABET, Criterion 3, f and h: f: an understanding of professional

and ethical responsibility h: the broad education necessary

to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a global and societal context

ABET Ethics Criteria Criterion 4 Mandates a major design experience… “based on the knowledge and skills acquired

in earlier course work and incorporating engineering standards and realistic constraints that include most of the following considerations: economic; environmental; sustainability; manufacturability; ethical; health and safety; social; and political

Three things to remember Bean-counting is not enough ABET requires outcomes-based assessment:

Program identifies desired outcomes Implements a process of documentation and

assessment to show success in achieving these outcomes

ABET requires the implementation, documentation and assessment of a program that allows for continuous improvement.

Ethics Across the Curriculum

HolisticInterdisciplinaryMisconceptions

What is EAC? Ethics Across the Curriculum “One of the leading trends in

ethics pedagogy today is to have an ethical component or module incorporated into the actual professional or occupational course to supplement the freestanding ethics course.”

EAC is holistic

EAC requires establishing an overall plan that coordinates a series of activities: Freestanding Course (Required or

Elective) Ethics Integration Projects for

mainstream engineering courses Special Activities

Freestanding Course Course in engineering ethics taught by an

ethicist, engineer, or both Repository of Research, Knowledge, and

Innovation Effective means for faculty to keep up to date in the

field of engineering ethics. Viable option for engineering students who

want to study ethical issues in more depth But it need not be required for all students Remaining students can be reached through special

ethics integration activities or projects

Ethics Integration Activities

Today’s Two Examples: Introductory Ethics Module for Introduction

to Computers (Dr. Cruz’s exercise) Introduces students to ethical issues in computing Introduces students to ethics cases and basic ethical

frameworks

Gray Matters (Module that Frey uses in Mechanical Engineering Capstone Design Class)

Promotes integration of ethical issues into a rational decision-making process

Special Activities These activities occur outside the the

main curriculum Examples

Special Presentations (Three UPRM engineering professors—industrial, mechanical, civil—present on super-aqueduct accident in Puerto Rico)

Student Activities (UPRM students revise CIAPR code of ethics for Co-Op students)

Competitions (APPE’s Ethics Bowl)

Coordination is Important These activities must be recognized,

documented, and coordinated… to provide interventions for all engineering

students to form a multi level sequence in which later

interventions build on earlier ones to target core curriculum classes to realize a coherent set of targeted outcomes to allow for assessment and documentation to be synthesized into a plan that allows for

continuous improvement

EAC is Interdisciplinary EAC recognizes that ethical problems in

engineering practice must be approached from an interdisciplinary standpoint Ethical issues in the design of coolants Cases that integrate ethical, technical and

mathematical components Extended interdisciplinary study of Challenger

Case Engineering Ethics (like Medical Ethics) has

entered a stage where problems and solutions are interdisciplinary

Misconceptions about EAC

EAC is not realized by forcing engineering professors to teach ethics in their classes against their will

EAC does not mandate that teachers devote substantial parts of their classes to teaching ethics at the expense of engineering content. You do not have to stop teaching engineering to

teach ethics (Satisficing ethical and engineering content not trading one off against the other)

While EAC requires sensitivity to ethical issues arising in engineering, it does not require expertise in meta-ethics, public policy, law, or religion.

The Basis In response to these

misconceptions… You know more about ethics than you

think you know You know enough to have a significant

impact on your students’ moral development

You know enough to comply with ABET You have enough time to carry out an

effective ethics integration project

Moral Minimum

Harm, Reversibility, Publicity, and Feasibility: Satisficing

Constraints

Roughly Hewn Tools Definition of Ethics: the systematic and

critical study of social practices Example: Engineering ethics is the

systematical and critical study of the social practice of engineering. Systematic: employs principles and logical

argument in assessing the norms of a practice. Critical: Systematic examination may show

that practical norms fail to meet ethical criteria.

The Moral Minimum Question: What is the minimum basis from

which we can start the process of ethical reflection in engineering?

Agreement on three broad-based principles: Harm: Engineers ought to avoid causing harm.

They also ought to prevent harm when it is in their power to do so

Reversibility: We ought to impose on others only what we would have them impose on us.

Publicity: We ought to act only on the basis of that with which we are willing to be publicly associated.

Other Versions (Moral Minimum)

Werhane: Avoid negatives such as injustice, dishonesty, needlessly harming others, etc.

Rawls: Those principles that rationally self-interested individuals would agree to under a veil of ignorance.

Pinkus, Shuman, Hummon, Wolfe: competence, responsibility, and Cicero’s Creed II (Safety)

Three Principles, Three Tests Reversibility:Would I think this a

good choice if I were among those affected by it?

Harm: Does this action do less harm than any available alternatives?

Publicity:Would I want this action published in the newspaper?

Reversibility: Steps 1. Determine who is going to be

affected by your action. 2. Determine how they will be

affected. 3. Reverse roles: put yourself in

their place. 4. Answer this question: if you were

in their place, would you still find the action acceptable?

Harm Test: Steps 1. Identify those who will be affected by your action. 2. Identify the impact your action will have on these

people. 3. Determine whether this impact is harmful. (Does it

violate any rights? Does it produce physical or mental suffering? Does it impose financial or non-financial costs? Does it deprive others of important or essential goods?

4. Repeat these steps for each of the best available alternatives and compare them in terms of the net harm they produce.

Conclude by answering this question: which alternative produces the least net harm?

Publicity Test: Steps 1. Consider, first, that the action you are

about to perform provides a window through which others can see who you really are.

2. Then take the perspective of those others who are about to judge your character through your action.

3. Ask the following question: Would others view you as a good person for what you are about to do?

Feasibility Test: Considerations

Time: is there a deadline within which your solution has to be enacted? Is this deadline negotiable?

Financial: Are their cost constraints on your solution? Are these negotiable?

Legal: Does your proposed alternative violate any laws, statutes, or regulations?

Personal: Do the personalities of the people involved impose any constraints on your solution?

Social, Cultural, or Political: How would your solution be viewed through the social, cultural, and political milieu in which it is being enacted?

Partial Encapsulation Each of these tests provides us with an initial

access to one or more major ethical approaches: Harm: harm minimization is an essential

component of utilitarian theory Reversibility is an essential component of

respect for others, a component shared by deontology and rights theory

Publicity reveals aspects of virtue theory if we assume that the actions with which we are publicly associated provide others with windows through which they can view and evaluate our characters.

Gray Matters

An Ethics Integration Module

Instructions for Gray Matters

1. Read the scenario and solutions. 2. Examine each alternative in terms of harm,

reversibility, publicity, and feasibility. 3. Which of the solutions “satisfices” the

constraints raised by these tests? 4. If you can design a better solution than the

ones proffered, then do so. 5. Justify your best available alternative in

terms of the 4 tests and the idea of satisficing. 6. Think about the questions and problems that

arise as you work with the ethics tests framework.

Pacemaker Case

A pacemaker manufacturing company (PACE Inc.) located in a small town in Puerto Rico provides jobs to about 80% of the town’s workforce. Profit margins are thin in this competitive field which includes larger U.S. companies. You are on an R&D team for PACE that has studied two options for the circuitry: BULK CMOS and SOI. The team favors BULK CMOS because the manufacturing process is simpler and cheaper. But the chips will be larger and consume more energy; this means more surgery for the patients to replace the batteries. Overall, the use of BULK CMOS would reduce patient life expectancy by 15%. Given this knowledge, what should you do?

Alternatives 1. Go along with the team and advocate

the simpler and cheaper process. 2. Oppose the team and advocate the

more complex, more expensive, but safer process. Try to persuade the team members to opt for safety.

3. Oppose the team. Force agreement by threatening to blow the whistle.

4. Resign from PACE, Inc. 5. Design your own solution.

Inkjet Case

You are a UPRM engineering graduate from a small town in Puerto Rico and have started working in your first job as a member of a research and development team charged with designing a new generation of printers for a market leader in this area. The company you work for wants to maintain its leadership in this area. It also wants to respond to the emerging environmental problem caused by the disposal of the inkjet cartridges used in its current model. However, these inkjet cartridges are made in your hometown. If the new generation of printers does not use disposable cartridges, then this plant will close, putting friends and family out of work. Your company is a leader in empowering its employees. But what should you do with this newly found power?

Inkjet Solutions 1. Resign from the R&D team because you have

a conflict of interest. 2. Use your position on the team to argue that

the company does not need to develop a new generation of printers. In this way guarantee that your friends and family will keep their jobs.

3. Sit back and see what the senior members of the team want. Then enthusiastically embrace this.

4. Advocate designing a recyclable cartridge that could be manufactured in the hometown plant.

5. Design your own solution.

Designing Integration Exercises

Teaching and Writing Cases

Teaching and Writing Cases

Case Discussion helps students learn ethics. Discuss Real World cases that portray

everyday situations rather than focus exclusively on big news/bad news cases.

Students will modify their moral views in response to arguments by teachers and peers.

Closure in the sense of reaching the definitive right answer is not necessary

Exposure to different arguments and practice using decision making and ethical frameworks is important.

Teaching and Writing Cases

There are two perspectives from which to discuss real world cases Evaluator or Judge Perspective: Taking a

standpoint outside the case, students pin moral labels on the participants and their actions.

Participant Perspective: The student takes up the role of one of the participants and plays out the situation by making a decision.

Participant Perspective The student is encouraged to make a

decision from the point of view of one of the participants.

The case is interrupted at the moment of decision

The decision is made under various constraints (time/money) and in the face of uncertainty about consequences.

Teaching and Writing Cases An Example: Aquaculture Case from NSF

SBR-9810253 Original version: A local aquaculture

facility near Ponce was closed by the EPA for violating standards; they were shooting birds who ate the lobster fingerlings and dumping dirty water into the local river.

Question: Was the EPA just or unjust in closing the facility?

Teaching and Writing Cases

The students rewrote this case: The EPA has informed an aquaculture facility that

they are in violation of environmental regulations (shooting endangered birds and improper disposal of waste water). This facility has two months to submit a compliance report. To write this report, they have hired a group of engineers as consultants. You are one of the consultants. Your job is to write a report that describes several possible compliance responses. Include information on how to implement these responses and their costs.

Teaching and Writing Cases

What is different about the students’ version? It places the analyzer in the participatory point

of view, rather than that of the evaluator. It elicits a decision that integrates technical

and ethical components; it is interdisciplinary Engineering skill and knowledge is required to

formulate the ethical/environmental problem. It elicits a proactive rather than a reactive,

judgmental response.

Writing Cases for Gray Matters Write the case from participant point of

view. You are a technical consultant hired by a local

aquaculture firm. Localize the circumstances. (The students

put the case in Ponce, Puerto Rico with its laws, culture, and tradition.)

Keep the story line simple. Interrupt the narrative at a point of

decision.

Adapting to Gray Matters Build solutions around four generic

options: (1) give in, (2) negotiate, (3) oppose, (4) resign.

Adapting to Gray Matters Add an opportunity for students to develop

their own solution Solutions can be combined or synthesized. Students can form a plan of action that goes

from one solution to another. The successors serve as backup plans in case the first fails.

Reinforce the idea that real world cases are not necessarily dilemmas, that is, situations that offer only limited and forced options to the participant.

Issues for Scenarios CIAPR Code of ethics Public health, safety, and welfare Avoiding Conflicts of Interest Maintaining Confidences Faithful Agency Collegiality Uphold honor, integrity and reputation of

the profession Promote professional autonomy

Issues in Computer Ethics From Impact CS

www.seas.gwu.edu/~impactcs/paper3/pg6.html

Quality of life Use of Power Risk & Reliability Property Rights Privacy Honesty & Deception

Is There Enough Time?

Integration projects that are also time savers

Time Savers Look for cases where it is necessary to solve

engineering and mathematical problems to formulate the ethical problems.

Mayaguez Land Fill Case Participants must determine the capacity of land

fill liner to conduct electricity Participants must also reflect on local weather

conditions These factors make possible recognizing the

concern about the liner starting fires due to conducting electricity from lightening.

Time Savers

The biggest objection to EAC integration projects is the lack of time How can I teach ethics when I don’t have

time to teach the required engineering skills?

Assumption: One has to stop teaching engineering in order to teach ethics

Time Savers: Benefits Time saver cases have two benefits: Ethical problems provide real world

situations in which students can apply engineering concepts

They show how ethical and engineering issues are integrated because one must solve engineering and mathematical problems in order to formulate ethical problems

An EAC Plan

Promoting Ethical Empowerment in a Five Year

Program

Example of EAC Plan Based on exercises we presented

earlier Introductory Ethics Integration Exercise Gray Matters

Based on frameworks presented above Ethics Tests, RDP, Codes of Ethics

Multi-Level, Sequential Program Five Ethical Empowerment Skills

EAC Outcomes Ethical Empowerment which

includes… Ethical awareness Ethical evaluation Ethical integration Prevention Value Realization skills

First Intervention: Awareness

Ethical Awareness: The ability to perceive ethical issues embedded in complex, concrete situations.

Framework Codes of Ethics and Issues Lists

Exercise Introductory Ethics Integration demonstrated by Dr.

Cruz (Pre-test) Discuss short scenarios that show ethical issues in

everyday engineering practice Target

1st year, introductory, required course

Second Intervention: Evaluation

Ethical Evaluation: The ability to assess an action, product, or process in terms of different ethical approaches such as utilitarianism, rights theory, deontology, and virtue ethics

Framework Ethics Tests: Harm, Reversibility, Publicity

Exercise Modified Introductory Exercise

Target Required course at 2nd year level

Third Intervention: Integration

Ethical Integration: The ability to integrate ethical considerations into an activity so that these play an essential, constitutive role in the final product

Framework Ethics tests plus feasibility test Rational Decision Procedure Practice “satisficing” conflicting constraints

Exercise Gray Matters analyzed in terms of 7-step procedure

Target 3rd year required course

Fourth Intervention: Prevention

Preventive Skills: The ability to uncover ethical surprises and design preventive measures to stop them from becoming full-blown dilemmas.

Framework Empirical Tools: Designing questions for interviews Ethical Tools: Issues List plus ethics tests

Exercise Social Impact Analysis (see computingcases.org)

Target 4th year students do SIS on 5th year student designs.

Fourth Intervention: Value Realization Skills

Value Realization Skills: The ability to recognize and exploit opportunities for using one’s skills and talents to maintain and promote ethical values.

Framework Previously mentioned frameworks

Exercise Major design experience evaluated according to

considerations mentioned in Criterion 4 Target

5th year capstone course in design

Will this waste time? Five hours out of a five year program? By carefully designing the intervention

exercises and cases, these ethics activities could also be used to present and apply engineering and mathematical concepts.

These exercises also “spill over” into other ABET criteria: working in teams, communicating skills, global issues, integrating ethics into a major design experience, etc.

Two Concluding Questions

How do we assess our workshop?

Will it work at other universities?

Workshop Assessment Formal Evaluation Form Informal Debriefings carried out by

the workshop team (did we achieve the goals mentioned at the beginning)

Results: Exercises Modeled, Cases Generated, Exercises Recognized, and Pilot Projects

Cases Generated Over thirty real world cases Displayed on our web page:

www.uprm.edu/ethics Further case criteria

Discipline covered by case Synthesis between technical and

ethical content Number of uses

Exercises Developed For each workshop, we have filled

two exercise templates (Introductory Exercise and Gray Matters

For ideas on generating other kinds of exercises, see… Impact CS www.computingcases.org

Exercises Discovered During our workshops, participants

have informed us of projects they have already implemented into their classes

Having been recognized, these efforts can now be documented and assessed for ABET

Integration Project (Recognized)

Course: INEL/ICOM (Dr. Luis Jimenez) Exercise Title: “Etica e Ingenieria: Modulo

de Ethca para cursos de INEL/ICOM Objectives: ethical awareness, evaluation,

and integration (ABET 3f, 3h, and 4) Outcomes: learn about utilitarianism,

deontology, virtue, codes, global and environmental impacts of engineering

Assessment: students develop virtue and duty lists for professors and students

Pilot Projects Course: INEL 4151 & 4152 (Electromagnetic

Group) Required Course Exercise Title: Health/Safety Case (Mayaguez

Land Fill) Objectives: Ethical Evaluation Outcomes: Students will evaluate a scenario

using ethics tests of harm, reversibility, and publicity after solving numerical problems.

Mode of Assessment: test questions and class discussion

Implicit Criteria Workshop assessed in terms of the product

it generates (cases and exercises) Workshop assessed in terms of what is

implemented (syllabi, classes, commitments)

Workshop assessed in terms future possibilities opened (proposal to generate an ethics toolkit to facilitate the generation and implementation of ethics integration activities)

Last Question… Will this work at my institution? We are more alike than you think Treating engineering faculty with respect (we

have learned as much from them as they have from us)

Develop positive responses to comfort issues (include interactive activities) and time problems (develop sample exercises from syllabi and by rewriting textbook exercises)

ABET visits are also a motive

Last Task Please fill out the evaluation forms. Thank you for your participation We can be contacted through our

web page: www.uprm.edu/ethics w_frey@rumac.uprm.edu