|
UPSI Digital Repository (UDRep)
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Abstract : Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris |
| This paper reports the fndings of a comparative study in which students’ perceived attainment of the objectives of an engineering ethics education and their attitude towards engineering ethics were investigated and compared. The investigation was carried out in Japan and Malaysia, involving 163 and 108 engineering undergraduates respectively. The research method used was based on a survey in which respondents were sent a questionnaire to elicit relevant data. Both descriptive and inferential statistical analyses were performed on the data. The results of the analyses showed that the attainment of the objectives of engineering ethics education and students’ attitude towards socio-ethical issues in engineering were signifcantly higher and positive among Japanese engineering students compared to Malaysian engineering students. Such fndings suggest that a well-structured, integrated, and innovative pedagogy for teaching ethics will have an impact on the students’ attainment of ethics education objectives and their attitude towards engineering ethics. As such, the research fndings serve as a cornerstone to which the current practice of teaching and learning of engineering ethics education can be examined more critically, such that further improvements can be made to the existing curriculum that can help produce engineers that have strong moral and ethical characters. |
| References |
1. Antes, A. L., Murphy, S. T., Waples, E. P., Mumford, M. D., Brown, R. P., Connelly, S., & Devenport, L. D. (2009). A meta-analysis of ethics instruction efectiveness in the sciences. Ethics and Behavior, 19(5), 379–402. 2. Balakrishnan, B., Er, P. H., & Visvanathan, P. (2013). Socio-ethical education in nanotechnology engineering programmes: A case study in Malaysia. Science and Engineering Ethics, 19(3), 1341–1355. 3. Basart, J. M. (2015). Teaching engineering ethics in the classroom: Issues and challenges. In Contemporary ethical issues in engineering (pp. 144–158). Hersey: IGI Global. 4. Berne, R. W., & Schummer, J. (2005). Teaching societal and ethical implications of nanotechnology to engineering students through science fction. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 25(6), 459–468. 5. Clark, S. (2000). Engineering ethics in Japanese corporations: A view from the feld. Engineering Academy of Japan Information, 97, 17–31. 6. Colby, A., & Sullivan, W. M. (2008). Ethics teaching in undergraduate engineering education. Journal of Engineering Education, 97(3), 327. 7. Creswell, J. W. (2013). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Beverley Hills: Sage Publications. 8. Delany, C., Kosta, L., Ewen, S., Nicholson, P., Remedios, L., & Harms, L. (2016). Identifying pedagogy and teaching strategies for achieving nationally prescribed learning outcomes. Higher Education Research & Development, 35(5), 895–909. 9. Harris, C. E., Pritchard, M. S., Rabins, M. J., James, R., & Englehardt, E. (2013). Engineering ethics: Concepts and cases. Boston: Cengage Learning. 10. Hayden, N. J., Rizzo, D. M., Dewoolkar, M. M., Oka, L., & Neumann, M. (2010). Incorporating systems thinking and sustainability within civil and environmental engineering curricula at UVM. In American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE) St. Lawrence section meeting. Rochester, NY: Rochester Institute of Technology. 11. Hoover, E., Brown, P., Averick, M., Kane, A., & Hurt, R. (2009). Teaching small and thinking large: Efects of including social and ethical implications in an interdisciplinary nanotechnology course. Journal of Nano Education, 1(1), 86–95. 12. Iino, H. (2005). Introductory and engineering ethics education for engineering students in Japan. International Journal of Engineering Education, 21(3), 378–383. 13. King, I. M. (1981). A theory for nursing systems, concepts, process. https://philpapers.org/rec/KINATF. Accessed 1 May 2017. 14. Lathem, S. A., Neumann, M. D., & Hayden, N. (2011). The socially responsible engineer: Assessing student attitudes of roles and responsibilities. Journal of Engineering Education, 100(3), 444–474. 15. Lynch, W. T., & Kline, R. (2000). Engineering practice and engineering ethics. Science, Technology and Human Values, 25(2), 195–225. 16. Newberry, B. (2004). The dilemma of ethics in engineering education. Science and Engineering Ethics, 10(2), 343–351. 17. Pine, A. (2012). Grave new world. ASEE Prism, 22(3), 35. 18. Simonson, M. R., & Maushak, N. (1996). Instructional technology and attitude change. http://nsuworks. nova.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1011&context=fse_facbooks. Accessed 28 April 2017. 19. Tochinai, F., & Kanemitsu, H. (2016). Engineering Education at Kanazawa Institute of Technology: To foster engineers who can make ethically and professionally appropriate decisions. In 2016 Regional conference in engineering education. 20. Troesch, V. (2015). What is it to be an ethical engineer? A phenomenological approach to engineering ethics pedagogy. Dissertation, Michigan Technological University. 21. Zandvoort, H. (2008). Preparing engineers for social responsibility. European Journal of Engineering Education, 33(2), 133–140. 22. Zandvoort, H., Børsen, T., Deneke, M., & Bird, S. J. (2013). Editors’ overview perspectives on teaching social responsibility to students in science and engineering. Science and Engineering Ethics, 19(4), 1413–1438. 23. Zhou, C., Otrel-Cass, K., & Børsen, T. (2015). Integrating ethics into engineering education. In Contemporary ethical issues in engineering (pp. 159–173). Hersey: IGI Global. 24. Zimbardo, P. G., & Leippe, M. R. (1991). The psychology of attitude change and social infuence. New York: Mcgraw-Hill Book Company. |
| This material may be protected under Copyright Act which governs the making of photocopies or reproductions of copyrighted materials. You may use the digitized material for private study, scholarship, or research. |