Active/Collaborative Learning Student Teams Integrating Technology Effectively Women and Minorities Assessment and Evaluation EC2000 Emerging Technology Foundation Coalition Curricula Concept Inventories
 
 
 
 
 
EC2000 Modules - Ethics
 
UA | College of Engineering

Overview


This module provides instructional material to teach ethics. In developing the modules we used a consistent philosophy and set of guidelines (specifications) to ensure a consistent "look".

Developer

 

Status

Name

Dr. Harold Stern

Tested in classroom, revised and ready for use.

Department

Electrical and Computer Engineering
University of Alabama
Tuscaloosa AL

 

Email

hstern@coe.eng.ua.edu

 

Phone

205-348-8669


Available Material


Day 1 Material

 

Day 3 Material

 

Filename

Kb

Filename

Kb

Appendix A - Day 1 Lesson Plan

21

Appendix C - Day 3 Lesson Plan

23

Pinto Reading List

85

Von Braun Reading List

91

Excerpt from Iacocca Autobiography

73

Donefer Material

26

Pinto Quiz

5

Lyrics

7

Student Summary for Day 1

61

Mittelbau DORA material

32

 

 

MSNBC material

109

Day 2 Material

 

Von Braun Quiz

6

Filename

Kb

Student Summary for Day 3

56

Appendix B - Day 2 Lesson Plan

14

 

 

Day 2 Assignment

39

Related Material

 

Additional Resources Available for Ethical Issues

62

Instructors Guide

 

A Seven-Step Guide to Ethical Decision Making

97

Summary for Ethics Module

 

Student Summary for Day 2

54

 

 


Papers on this module


Short, Instructional Modules for Lifelong Learning, Project Management, Teaming, and Time Management
Beth Todd, Marcus Brown, Russell Pimmel, and James Richardson
Proceeding of Southeastern Section of ASEE Annual Conference
2002

Changes in Student Confidence Resulting from Instruction with Modules on EC 2000 Skills
Russell Pimmel, Robert Leland, and Harold Stern
Proceeding of ASEE Annual Conference
2002

Student Evaluation of Instructional Modules on EC 2000 Criteria 3 (a) – (k) Skills
Russell Pimmel, Robert Leland, and Harold Stern
Proceeding of ASEE Annual Conference
2002

 

Contact Information

Module

Developer

Project

Director

Name

Dr. Harold Stern

Name

Dr. Russ Pimmel

Email

Email

Phone

205-348-8669

Phone

205-348-1753

 

Reviewers and Potential Users

We encourage engineering instructors to review this module. If you have an interest in trying this modules, please contact . Also you should look at potential user's page for information.

Sponsor

We developed these modules as a part of the Foundation Coalition with support from the Engineering Education Program of the National Science Foundation under Award Number EEC-9802942

 

References for Further Information

  1. D. Woods et al. (1997) Developing Problem Solving Skills: The McMaster Problem Solving Program, J. Eng. Ed. 86:75-91

    Abstract: This paper describes a 25-year project in which we defined problem solving, identified effective methods for developing students skill in problem solving, implemented a series of four required courses to develop the skill, and evaluated the effectiveness of the program. Four research projects are summarized in which we identified which teaching methods failed to develop problem solving skill and which methods were successful in developing the skills. We found that students need both comprehension of Chemical Engineering and what we call general problem solving skill to solve problems successfully. We identified 37 general problem solving skills. We use 120 hours of workshops spread over four required courses to develop the skills. Each skill is built (using content-independent activities), bridged (to apply the skill in the content-specific domain of Chemical Engineering) and extended (to use the skill in other contexts and contents and in everyday life). The tests and examinations of process skills, TEPS, that assess the degree to which the students can apply the skills are described. We illustrate how self-assessment was used.

  2. D. Woods, R. Felder, A Rugarcia and J. Stice, Future of Engineering Education III Developing Critical Skills, Chem. Eng. Ed. 34:108-117, 2000.

    Abstract: In third paper in the series we consider the application of some of those methods to the development of the desired skills. Process skills are “soft” skills used in the application of knowledge. The degree to which students develop these skills determines how they solve problems, write reports, function in teams, self-assess and do performance reviews of others, go about learning new knowledge, and manage stress when they have to cope with change. Many instructors intuitively believe that process skills are important, but most are unaware of the fundamental research that provides a foundation for development of the skills. Their efforts to help their students develop the skills may consequently be less effective than they might wish.

    Fostering the development of skills in students is challenging, to say the least. Process skills—which have to do with attitudes and values as much as knowledge—are particularly challenging in that they are hard to define explicitly, let alone to develop and assess. We might be able to sense that a team is not working well, for example, but how do we make that intuitive judgment quantitative? How might we provide feedback that is helpful to the team members? How can we develop our students’ confidence in their teamwork skills?

    Research done over the past 30 years offers answers to these questions. In this paper, we suggest research-backed methods to help our students develop critical skills and the confidence to apply them. As was the case for the instructional methods discussed in introduced in Part II,3 all of the suggestions given in this part are relevant to engineering education, can be implemented within the context of the ordinary engineering classroom, are not the sorts of methods that most engineering professors would feel uncomfortable doing, are consistent with modern theories of learning, and have been tried and found effective by more than one educator.

    Research suggests that the development of any skill is best facilitated by giving students practice and not by simply talking about or demonstrating what to do. The instructor’s role is primarily that of a coach, encouraging the students to achieve the target attitudes and skills and providing constructive feedback on their efforts. A number of approaches to process skill development have been formulated and proven to be effective in science and engineering education, including Guided Design, active/cooperative learning approaches, Thinking- Aloud Pairs Problem Solving (TAPPS) and the McMaster Problem Solving program.

  3. Seat, E. and Lord, S. (1999) Enabling Effective Engineering Teams: A Program For Teaching Interaction Skills, J. Eng. Ed. 88:385-390.

    Abtract: A program for teaching interaction skills to engineers and engineering students has been developed. Based on cognitive style theory, this customized program uses the typical engineer’s problem solving strengths to teach skills of interviewing, questioning, exchanging ideas, and managing conflict. The goal of this program is to enable these problem solvers to apply their technical skills more effectively by improving interpersonal interactions. The modular nature of the training program makes it easily transportable, and all or part of it can be used in courses that require students to work in teams. This paper discusses what makes this training “a good fit” with engineering students, the background for its content, and the program’s six modules. Personal experiences with teaching this material and recommendations for implementation are discussed. Similarities and differences between teaching the engineering professional and student, themes of student perceptions about the training, and future directions are also addressed.

 

Related Links:

Togel178

Pedetogel

Sabatoto

Togel279

Togel158

Colok178

Novaslot88

Lain - lain

Partner Links