Macroethics in Aerospace Engineering: Implementing Ethics Lessons into Undergraduate Courses and Analyzing Student Perceptions of Issues within the Discipline

Elizabeth A. Strehl, Mary H. Ennis, Corin L. Bowen, A. Johnson
{"title":"Macroethics in Aerospace Engineering: Implementing Ethics Lessons into Undergraduate Courses and Analyzing Student Perceptions of Issues within the Discipline","authors":"Elizabeth A. Strehl, Mary H. Ennis, Corin L. Bowen, A. Johnson","doi":"10.1109/ethics57328.2023.10155052","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This poster provides an overview of a project that embeds macroethics lessons into undergraduate aerospace This poster provides an overview of a project that embeds macroethics (Herkert, 2005) lessons into undergraduate aerospace engineering courses and investigates students' perceptions of ethical issues within the discipline. Macroethics education in engineering, which addresses the collective social responsibility within the engineering profession and societal decisions about the use of technology, has been traditionally left out of U.S. aerospace engineering programs, often leaving students ill-equipped to assess and address the positive and negative impacts of their future career field on humanity (Benham et al., 2022; Bielefeldt et al., 2017; Herkert, 2005). Teaching macroethical analyses help novice engineers better understand the real implications of their work in society (e.g. Andrade & Tomblin, 2018; Benham et al., 2021; Colby & Sullivan, 2008; Gupta, 2017; Jimerson et al., 2013; Palmer et al., 2022; Wareham et al., 2006). Aerospace engineering is not exempt from its own social responsibility, as is seen through the issues such as climate change, space resource mining, space debris, the military-industrial complex, and space settlement. Aerospace is also a discipline that has been historically dominated by white, cis-gendered, affluent men, which affects the lens through which macroethical concepts in the field are perceived. Thus, the inclusion of macroethical concepts in undergraduate aerospace engineering curricula also addresses improving diversity, equity, and inclusion in the field. In our design-based research, we simultaneously design macroethics curricula for undergraduate aerospace engineering courses and develop contextualized knowledge about undergraduate students' perceptions and awareness of macroethical issues in aerospace engineering. Our research has been conducted at two large, historically white, research-intensive, public universities in the Western and Midwestern United States. These universities are referred to as WU and MU in this abstract. We collected data on WU students� experiences from the lesson via anonymous Qualtrics surveys and used the results to inform the development of another survey that was distributed to students in the MU aerospace engineering program. Macroethics lessons have been implemented in two consecutive years of a sophomore aerospace vehicle design course at WU. An updated version of the macroethics lesson was then piloted in a junior-level spacecraft dynamics course at MU in Fall 2022, introducing students to a relevant macroethical topic for the course: orbital debris. In Spring 2023, another iteration of the lesson was implemented again in a sophomore-level aerospace vehicle design course at WU, that allowed students to discuss and explore diverse perspectives on topics such as space settlements and the military-industrial complex. The sociotechnical components of these lessons present the concepts of stakeholders, positionality, and ethical lenses 978-1-6654-5713-2/23/$31.00 �2023 IEEEto students, aiming for students to gain the resources and confidence necessary to analyze macroethical considerations in aerospace engineering. By bringing these lessons into “technical” aerospace engineering courses we also emphasize that engineering technology cannot be separated from its societal impact. More specifically, the goal of these lessons is to understand that there are a variety of perspectives on any given issue and that power and positionality affect how people think about these issues. Within this work, we report on Qualtrics survey data from the most recent implementations of the lessons at MU (n = 69) and WU (n = 109) which include both Likert-scale and open-ended responses in order to capture students� perceptions of the lesson and macroethics in general. Responses for each of the open-ended questions were read through and inductively coded by the first and second authors. After an introductory pass through the responses, the researchers met together to review their initial codes, discuss similarities and differences across student responses, and ask clarifying questions about their interpretations of the responses (Charmaz, 2006; Chun Tie et al., 2019). The researchers then developed a shared list of focused codes to encapsulate their analyses of student responses and began defining their initial codebook. Details concerning the development of the macroethics lesson, its most recent implementation, reflections of the lesson, and future implications are presented in the poster. Results of student surveys exploring feedback from the lesson, reflections of macroethical content in their own education, and perceptions of macroethical topics in aerospace engineering are also reported. From both surveyed populations, the majority of student respondents stated that they enjoyed our lesson and would like to have macroethics lessons in the future. Initial qualitative themes that emerged from the open-ended survey data showed that students have varied levels of awareness about macroethical issues, some demonstrating acceptance of the current state of the aerospace industry and others demonstrating resistance with a desire to change the industry. These results will be used to refine future iterations of the macroethics lesson and inform teaching practices of instructors. Our overarching research goal is to restructure aerospace engineering curricula to incorporate macroethics education throughout students' entire undergraduate careers, and this intervention is a stepping stone toward changing classroom ‘cultural spaces’ (Cech, 2013). Integrating discussions of power within technical aerospace courses draws engineering out of a positivist and meritocratic mindset and can help move toward a reconstruction of science and engineering that is founded in justice.","PeriodicalId":203527,"journal":{"name":"2023 IEEE International Symposium on Ethics in Engineering, Science, and Technology (ETHICS)","volume":"28 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2023 IEEE International Symposium on Ethics in Engineering, Science, and Technology (ETHICS)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ethics57328.2023.10155052","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This poster provides an overview of a project that embeds macroethics lessons into undergraduate aerospace This poster provides an overview of a project that embeds macroethics (Herkert, 2005) lessons into undergraduate aerospace engineering courses and investigates students' perceptions of ethical issues within the discipline. Macroethics education in engineering, which addresses the collective social responsibility within the engineering profession and societal decisions about the use of technology, has been traditionally left out of U.S. aerospace engineering programs, often leaving students ill-equipped to assess and address the positive and negative impacts of their future career field on humanity (Benham et al., 2022; Bielefeldt et al., 2017; Herkert, 2005). Teaching macroethical analyses help novice engineers better understand the real implications of their work in society (e.g. Andrade & Tomblin, 2018; Benham et al., 2021; Colby & Sullivan, 2008; Gupta, 2017; Jimerson et al., 2013; Palmer et al., 2022; Wareham et al., 2006). Aerospace engineering is not exempt from its own social responsibility, as is seen through the issues such as climate change, space resource mining, space debris, the military-industrial complex, and space settlement. Aerospace is also a discipline that has been historically dominated by white, cis-gendered, affluent men, which affects the lens through which macroethical concepts in the field are perceived. Thus, the inclusion of macroethical concepts in undergraduate aerospace engineering curricula also addresses improving diversity, equity, and inclusion in the field. In our design-based research, we simultaneously design macroethics curricula for undergraduate aerospace engineering courses and develop contextualized knowledge about undergraduate students' perceptions and awareness of macroethical issues in aerospace engineering. Our research has been conducted at two large, historically white, research-intensive, public universities in the Western and Midwestern United States. These universities are referred to as WU and MU in this abstract. We collected data on WU students� experiences from the lesson via anonymous Qualtrics surveys and used the results to inform the development of another survey that was distributed to students in the MU aerospace engineering program. Macroethics lessons have been implemented in two consecutive years of a sophomore aerospace vehicle design course at WU. An updated version of the macroethics lesson was then piloted in a junior-level spacecraft dynamics course at MU in Fall 2022, introducing students to a relevant macroethical topic for the course: orbital debris. In Spring 2023, another iteration of the lesson was implemented again in a sophomore-level aerospace vehicle design course at WU, that allowed students to discuss and explore diverse perspectives on topics such as space settlements and the military-industrial complex. The sociotechnical components of these lessons present the concepts of stakeholders, positionality, and ethical lenses 978-1-6654-5713-2/23/$31.00 �2023 IEEEto students, aiming for students to gain the resources and confidence necessary to analyze macroethical considerations in aerospace engineering. By bringing these lessons into “technical” aerospace engineering courses we also emphasize that engineering technology cannot be separated from its societal impact. More specifically, the goal of these lessons is to understand that there are a variety of perspectives on any given issue and that power and positionality affect how people think about these issues. Within this work, we report on Qualtrics survey data from the most recent implementations of the lessons at MU (n = 69) and WU (n = 109) which include both Likert-scale and open-ended responses in order to capture students� perceptions of the lesson and macroethics in general. Responses for each of the open-ended questions were read through and inductively coded by the first and second authors. After an introductory pass through the responses, the researchers met together to review their initial codes, discuss similarities and differences across student responses, and ask clarifying questions about their interpretations of the responses (Charmaz, 2006; Chun Tie et al., 2019). The researchers then developed a shared list of focused codes to encapsulate their analyses of student responses and began defining their initial codebook. Details concerning the development of the macroethics lesson, its most recent implementation, reflections of the lesson, and future implications are presented in the poster. Results of student surveys exploring feedback from the lesson, reflections of macroethical content in their own education, and perceptions of macroethical topics in aerospace engineering are also reported. From both surveyed populations, the majority of student respondents stated that they enjoyed our lesson and would like to have macroethics lessons in the future. Initial qualitative themes that emerged from the open-ended survey data showed that students have varied levels of awareness about macroethical issues, some demonstrating acceptance of the current state of the aerospace industry and others demonstrating resistance with a desire to change the industry. These results will be used to refine future iterations of the macroethics lesson and inform teaching practices of instructors. Our overarching research goal is to restructure aerospace engineering curricula to incorporate macroethics education throughout students' entire undergraduate careers, and this intervention is a stepping stone toward changing classroom ‘cultural spaces’ (Cech, 2013). Integrating discussions of power within technical aerospace courses draws engineering out of a positivist and meritocratic mindset and can help move toward a reconstruction of science and engineering that is founded in justice.
航空航天工程中的宏观伦理学:在本科课程中实施伦理学课程并分析学生对学科内问题的看法
这张海报概述了一个将宏观伦理学课程嵌入本科航空航天工程课程的项目,该项目将宏观伦理学(Herkert, 2005)课程嵌入本科航空航天工程课程,并调查了学生对学科内伦理问题的看法。工程领域的宏观伦理教育,旨在解决工程专业中的集体社会责任和有关技术使用的社会决策,传统上被排除在美国航空航天工程项目之外,往往使学生没有能力评估和解决他们未来职业领域对人类的积极和消极影响(Benham等人,2022;Bielefeldt等人,2017;Herkert, 2005)。教授宏观伦理分析有助于新手工程师更好地理解他们的工作对社会的真正影响(例如Andrade & Tomblin, 2018;Benham et al., 2021;Colby & Sullivan, 2008;古普塔,2017;Jimerson et al., 2013;Palmer et al., 2022;Wareham et al., 2006)。从气候变化、空间资源开采、空间碎片、军工综合体和太空定居等问题可以看出,航空航天工程也不能免除其自身的社会责任。航空航天也是一门历史上一直由白人、顺性别、富裕的男性主导的学科,这影响了人们对该领域宏观伦理概念的看法。因此,在本科航空航天工程课程中纳入宏观伦理概念也有助于提高该领域的多样性、公平性和包容性。在我们基于设计的研究中,我们同时为本科航空航天工程课程设计宏观伦理课程,并开发关于本科生对航空航天工程宏观伦理问题的感知和意识的情境化知识。我们的研究是在美国西部和中西部的两所历史悠久的大型白人研究密集型公立大学进行的。这两所大学在本摘要中分别称为吴大和MU。我们通过匿名Qualtrics调查收集了WU学生从课程中获得的经验数据,并利用结果为另一项调查的发展提供信息,该调查分发给MU航空航天工程专业的学生。宏观伦理学课程已连续两年在吴大航天飞行器设计课程中实施。宏观伦理学课程的更新版本随后于2022年秋季在MU的初级航天器动力学课程中进行了试点,向学生介绍了该课程的相关宏观伦理学主题:轨道碎片。在2023年春季,该课程的另一次迭代再次在吴大学二年级的航空航天飞行器设计课程中实施,该课程允许学生讨论和探索关于太空定居和军事工业综合体等主题的不同观点。这些课程的社会技术组成部分向学生展示了利益相关者,定位和道德镜头的概念978-1-6654-5713-2/23/$31.00 - 2023 IEEEto学生,旨在让学生获得分析航空航天工程中宏观道德考虑所需的资源和信心。通过将这些课程引入“技术性”航空航天工程课程,我们还强调工程技术不能与其社会影响分开。更具体地说,这些课程的目标是理解对任何给定问题都有各种各样的观点,权力和地位会影响人们对这些问题的看法。在这项工作中,我们报告了来自MU (n = 69)和WU (n = 109)最近实施课程的质量调查数据,其中包括李克特量表和开放式回答,以捕捉学生对课程和宏观伦理的总体看法。每个开放式问题的回答都由第一和第二作者通读并归纳编码。在对这些回答进行介绍之后,研究人员聚在一起回顾他们的初始代码,讨论学生回答的异同,并就他们对这些回答的解释提出澄清性问题(Charmaz, 2006;春铁等,2019)。然后,研究人员开发了一个共享的重点代码列表,以封装他们对学生反应的分析,并开始定义他们的初始代码本。关于宏观伦理学课程的发展、最近的实施、课程的反思和未来的影响的细节都在海报中展示。学生调查的结果探索从课程反馈,宏观伦理内容在他们自己的教育的反思,以及对航空航天工程宏观伦理主题的看法也被报道。从这两个调查人群中,大多数学生受访者表示他们喜欢我们的课程,并希望在未来上宏观伦理学课程。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信