Cargando…

Engineering Students as Co-creators in an Ethics of Technology Course

Research on the effectiveness of case studies in teaching engineering ethics in higher education is underdeveloped. To add to our knowledge, we have systematically compared the outcomes of two case approaches to an undergraduate course on the ethics of technology: a detached approach using real-life...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bombaerts, Gunter, Doulougeri, Karolina, Tsui, Shelly, Laes, Erik, Spahn, Andreas, Martin, Diana Adela
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Netherlands 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8302512/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34297187
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11948-021-00326-5
_version_ 1783726895081193472
author Bombaerts, Gunter
Doulougeri, Karolina
Tsui, Shelly
Laes, Erik
Spahn, Andreas
Martin, Diana Adela
author_facet Bombaerts, Gunter
Doulougeri, Karolina
Tsui, Shelly
Laes, Erik
Spahn, Andreas
Martin, Diana Adela
author_sort Bombaerts, Gunter
collection PubMed
description Research on the effectiveness of case studies in teaching engineering ethics in higher education is underdeveloped. To add to our knowledge, we have systematically compared the outcomes of two case approaches to an undergraduate course on the ethics of technology: a detached approach using real-life cases and a challenge-based learning (CBL) approach with students and stakeholders acting as co-creators (CC). We first developed a practical typology of case-study approaches and subsequently tested an evaluation method to assess the students’ learning experiences (basic needs and motivation) and outcomes (competence development) and staff interpretations and operationalizations, seeking to answer three questions: (1) Do students in the CBL approach report higher basic needs, motivation and competence development compared to their peers in the detached approach? (2) What is the relationship between student-perceived co-creation and their basic needs, motivation and competence development? And (3) what are the implications of CBL/CC for engineering-ethics teaching and learning? Our mixed methods analysis favored CBL as it best supported teaching and research goals while satisfying the students’ basic needs and promoting intrinsic motivation and communication competences. Competence progress in other areas did not differ between approaches, and motivation in terms of identified regulation was lower for CBL, with staff perceiving a higher workload. We propose that our case typology model is useful and that as a method to engage students as co-creators, CBL certainly merits further development and evaluation, as does our effectiveness analysis for engineering ethics instruction in general and for case-study approaches in particular.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8302512
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Springer Netherlands
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-83025122021-07-27 Engineering Students as Co-creators in an Ethics of Technology Course Bombaerts, Gunter Doulougeri, Karolina Tsui, Shelly Laes, Erik Spahn, Andreas Martin, Diana Adela Sci Eng Ethics Original Research/Scholarship Research on the effectiveness of case studies in teaching engineering ethics in higher education is underdeveloped. To add to our knowledge, we have systematically compared the outcomes of two case approaches to an undergraduate course on the ethics of technology: a detached approach using real-life cases and a challenge-based learning (CBL) approach with students and stakeholders acting as co-creators (CC). We first developed a practical typology of case-study approaches and subsequently tested an evaluation method to assess the students’ learning experiences (basic needs and motivation) and outcomes (competence development) and staff interpretations and operationalizations, seeking to answer three questions: (1) Do students in the CBL approach report higher basic needs, motivation and competence development compared to their peers in the detached approach? (2) What is the relationship between student-perceived co-creation and their basic needs, motivation and competence development? And (3) what are the implications of CBL/CC for engineering-ethics teaching and learning? Our mixed methods analysis favored CBL as it best supported teaching and research goals while satisfying the students’ basic needs and promoting intrinsic motivation and communication competences. Competence progress in other areas did not differ between approaches, and motivation in terms of identified regulation was lower for CBL, with staff perceiving a higher workload. We propose that our case typology model is useful and that as a method to engage students as co-creators, CBL certainly merits further development and evaluation, as does our effectiveness analysis for engineering ethics instruction in general and for case-study approaches in particular. Springer Netherlands 2021-07-23 2021 /pmc/articles/PMC8302512/ /pubmed/34297187 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11948-021-00326-5 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Original Research/Scholarship
Bombaerts, Gunter
Doulougeri, Karolina
Tsui, Shelly
Laes, Erik
Spahn, Andreas
Martin, Diana Adela
Engineering Students as Co-creators in an Ethics of Technology Course
title Engineering Students as Co-creators in an Ethics of Technology Course
title_full Engineering Students as Co-creators in an Ethics of Technology Course
title_fullStr Engineering Students as Co-creators in an Ethics of Technology Course
title_full_unstemmed Engineering Students as Co-creators in an Ethics of Technology Course
title_short Engineering Students as Co-creators in an Ethics of Technology Course
title_sort engineering students as co-creators in an ethics of technology course
topic Original Research/Scholarship
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8302512/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34297187
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11948-021-00326-5
work_keys_str_mv AT bombaertsgunter engineeringstudentsascocreatorsinanethicsoftechnologycourse
AT doulougerikarolina engineeringstudentsascocreatorsinanethicsoftechnologycourse
AT tsuishelly engineeringstudentsascocreatorsinanethicsoftechnologycourse
AT laeserik engineeringstudentsascocreatorsinanethicsoftechnologycourse
AT spahnandreas engineeringstudentsascocreatorsinanethicsoftechnologycourse
AT martindianaadela engineeringstudentsascocreatorsinanethicsoftechnologycourse