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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |