TY - JOUR
T1 - Engineering Students as Co-creators in an Ethics of Technology Course
AU - Bombaerts, Gunter
AU - Doulougeri, Karolina
AU - Tsui, Shelly
AU - Laes, Erik
AU - Spahn, Andreas
AU - Martin, Diana Adela
N1 - Funding Information:
The empirical research performed for this paper was part of the SCALINGS (“Scaling up Co-creation: Avenues and Limits for Integrating Society in Science and Innovation research project”), funded by the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under Grant Agreement 788359. We especially wish to thank our colleagues for their valuable time and insights and the students who took part in this research study. We thank Mandi Astola for her insightful comments on an earlier version of this paper.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2021, The Author(s).
PY - 2021/7/23
Y1 - 2021/7/23
N2 - 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.
AB - 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.
KW - Challenge-based learning
KW - Co-creation
KW - Competence development
KW - Effectiveness model
KW - Engineering-ethics education
KW - Self-determination theory
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85111329795&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s11948-021-00326-5
DO - 10.1007/s11948-021-00326-5
M3 - Article
C2 - 34297187
AN - SCOPUS:85111329795
SN - 1353-3452
VL - 27
JO - Science and Engineering Ethics
JF - Science and Engineering Ethics
IS - 4
M1 - 48
ER -