Transforming Ethics Education Through a Faculty Learning Community: “I’m Coming Around to Seeing Ethics as Being Maybe as Important as Calculus”

IF 2.7 2区 哲学 Q1 ENGINEERING, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Science and Engineering Ethics Pub Date : 2024-09-09 DOI:10.1007/s11948-024-00503-2
Justin L. Hess, Elizabeth Sanders, Grant A. Fore, Martin Coleman, Mary Price, Sammy Nyarko, Brandon Sorge
{"title":"Transforming Ethics Education Through a Faculty Learning Community: “I’m Coming Around to Seeing Ethics as Being Maybe as Important as Calculus”","authors":"Justin L. Hess, Elizabeth Sanders, Grant A. Fore, Martin Coleman, Mary Price, Sammy Nyarko, Brandon Sorge","doi":"10.1007/s11948-024-00503-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Ethics is central to scientific and engineering research and practice, but a key challenge for promoting students’ ethical formation involves enhancing faculty members’ ability and confidence in embedding positive ethical learning experiences into their curriculums. To this end, this paper explores changes in faculty members’ approaches to and perceptions of ethics education following their participation in a multi-year interdisciplinary faculty learning community (FLC). We conducted and thematically analyzed semi-structured interviews with 11 participants following the second year of the FLC. Qualitative themes suggested that, following two years of FLC participation, faculty members (1) were better able to articulate their conceptualizations of ethics; (2) became cognizant of how personal experiences, views, and beliefs informed how they introduced ethics into their curriculum; and (3) developed and lived instructional principles that guided their ethics teaching. Results thus suggested that faculty members benefitted from exploring, discussing, and teaching ethics, which (in turn) enabled them to see new opportunities and become confident in integrating ethics into their courses in meaningful ways that aligned with their scholarly identities. Taken together, these data suggest faculty became agents of change for designing, implementing, and refining ethics-related instructional efforts in STEM. This work can guide others interested in designing faculty learning communities to promote instructional skill development, faculty members’ awareness of their ethical values, and their ability and agency to design and integrate ethics learning activities alongside departmental peers in an intentional and continuous manner.</p>","PeriodicalId":49564,"journal":{"name":"Science and Engineering Ethics","volume":"29 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Science and Engineering Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-024-00503-2","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Ethics is central to scientific and engineering research and practice, but a key challenge for promoting students’ ethical formation involves enhancing faculty members’ ability and confidence in embedding positive ethical learning experiences into their curriculums. To this end, this paper explores changes in faculty members’ approaches to and perceptions of ethics education following their participation in a multi-year interdisciplinary faculty learning community (FLC). We conducted and thematically analyzed semi-structured interviews with 11 participants following the second year of the FLC. Qualitative themes suggested that, following two years of FLC participation, faculty members (1) were better able to articulate their conceptualizations of ethics; (2) became cognizant of how personal experiences, views, and beliefs informed how they introduced ethics into their curriculum; and (3) developed and lived instructional principles that guided their ethics teaching. Results thus suggested that faculty members benefitted from exploring, discussing, and teaching ethics, which (in turn) enabled them to see new opportunities and become confident in integrating ethics into their courses in meaningful ways that aligned with their scholarly identities. Taken together, these data suggest faculty became agents of change for designing, implementing, and refining ethics-related instructional efforts in STEM. This work can guide others interested in designing faculty learning communities to promote instructional skill development, faculty members’ awareness of their ethical values, and their ability and agency to design and integrate ethics learning activities alongside departmental peers in an intentional and continuous manner.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
通过教师学习社区转变伦理教育:"我逐渐认识到伦理学可能与微积分一样重要
伦理是科学和工程研究与实践的核心,但促进学生伦理养成的一个关键挑战是提高教师将积极的伦理学习体验融入课程的能力和信心。为此,本文探讨了教师在参与多年跨学科教师学习社区(FLC)后,对伦理教育的方法和看法的变化。我们在 FLC 第二年对 11 名参与者进行了半结构式访谈,并对访谈内容进行了主题分析。定性主题表明,在参加了两年的 FLC 之后,教师们(1)能够更好地阐述他们对伦理学的概念;(2)开始认识到个人经历、观点和信仰如何影响他们如何将伦理学引入课程;以及(3)制定并实践了指导伦理学教学的教学原则。因此,研究结果表明,教师们从探索、讨论和教授伦理学中获益匪浅,这(反过来)又使他们看到了新的机遇,并有信心以有意义的方式将伦理学融入他们的课程,从而与他们的学术身份保持一致。总之,这些数据表明,在设计、实施和完善科技、工程和数学领域与伦理学相关的教学工作时,教师们成为了变革的推动者。这项工作可以为其他有志于设计教师学习社区的人提供指导,以促进教学技能的发展、教师对其伦理价值观的认识,以及他们与系里的同行一起有意识地、持续地设计和整合伦理学习活动的能力和能动性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Science and Engineering Ethics
Science and Engineering Ethics 综合性期刊-工程:综合
CiteScore
10.70
自引率
5.40%
发文量
54
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Science and Engineering Ethics is an international multidisciplinary journal dedicated to exploring ethical issues associated with science and engineering, covering professional education, research and practice as well as the effects of technological innovations and research findings on society. While the focus of this journal is on science and engineering, contributions from a broad range of disciplines, including social sciences and humanities, are welcomed. Areas of interest include, but are not limited to, ethics of new and emerging technologies, research ethics, computer ethics, energy ethics, animals and human subjects ethics, ethics education in science and engineering, ethics in design, biomedical ethics, values in technology and innovation. We welcome contributions that deal with these issues from an international perspective, particularly from countries that are underrepresented in these discussions.
期刊最新文献
"Business as usual"? Safe-by-Design Vis-à-Vis Proclaimed Safety Cultures in Technology Development for the Bioeconomy. Justifying Our Credences in the Trustworthiness of AI Systems: A Reliabilistic Approach. Know Thyself, Improve Thyself: Personalized LLMs for Self-Knowledge and Moral Enhancement. Authorship and Citizen Science: Seven Heuristic Rules. A Confucian Algorithm for Autonomous Vehicles.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1