Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Using the Chernobyl Incident to Teach Engineering Ethics

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Science and Engineering Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper discusses using the Chernobyl Incident as a case study in engineering ethics instruction. Groups of students are asked to take on the role of a faction involved in the Chernobyl disaster and to defend their decisions in a mock debate. The results of student surveys and the Engineering and Science Issues Test indicate that the approach is very popular with students and has a positive impact on moral reasoning. The approach incorporates technical, communication and teamwork skills and has many of the features suggested by recent literature.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

DIT-2:

Defining issues test version 2

ESIT:

Engineering and science issues test

ABET:

Accrediting board for engineering and technology

RBMK:

Reaktor Bolshoy Moshchnosti Kanalniy

NSPE:

National society of professional engineers

References

  • ABET. (2010). Criteria for accrediting engineering programs, 2011–2012 review cycle. Reference document. Accrediting Board for Engineering and Technology. http://www.abet.org/Linked Documents-UPDATE/Program Docs/abet-eac-criteria-2011-2012.pdf. Accessed July 15, 2011.

  • Ballantyne, R., & Bain, J. (1995). Enhancing environmental conceptions: An evaluation of cognitive conflict and structured controversy learning units. Studies in Higher Education, 20(3). Available from: EBSCOhost. Accessed August 3, 2011.

  • Bernstein, J. L., & Meizlish, D. S. (2003). Becoming congress: A longitudinal study of the civic engagement implications of a classroom simulation. Simulation & Gaming, 34(2), 198–219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bero, B., & Kuhlman, A. (2010). Teaching ethics to engineers: Ethical decision making parallels the engineering design process. Science and Engineering Ethics. June 04 2010 (Online 1st).

  • Bird, S. R., & Erickson, K. A. (2010). A constructive controversy approach to “case studies”. Teaching Sociology, 38(2), 119–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borenstein, J., Drake, M. J., Kirkman, R., & Swann, J. L. (2010). The engineering and science issues test (ESIT): A discipline-specific approach to assessing moral judgment. Science and Engineering Ethics, 16(2), 387–407.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, K. M. (1994). Using role play to integrate ethics into the business curriculum: A financial management example. Journal of Business Ethics, 13(2), 105–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brummel, B. J., Gunsalus, C. K., Anderson, K. L., & Loui, M. C. (2010). Development of role-play scenarios for teaching responsible conduct of research. Science and Engineering Ethics, 16(3), 573–589.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colby, A., & Sullivan, W. M. (2008). Ethics teaching in undergraduate engineering education. Journal of Engineering Education, 97(3), 327–338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crain, W. C. (2011). Kohlberg’s stages of moral development. In Theories of development: Concepts and applications (pp. 157–179). Boston: Prentice Hall.

  • D’Eon, M., & Proctor, P. (2001). An innovative modification to structured controversy. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 38(3), 251–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeNeve, K. M., & Heppner, M. J. (1997). Role play simulations: The assessment of an active learning technique and comparisons with traditional lectures. Innovative Higher Education, 21(3), 231–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doron, I. (2007). Court of ethics: Teaching ethics and ageing by means of role-playing. Educational Gerontology, 33(9), 737–758.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drake, M. J., Griffin, P. M., Kirkman, R., & Swann, J. L. (2005). Engineering ethical curricula: Assessment and comparison of two approaches. Journal of Engineering Education, 95(2), 223–231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harris, C. E., Davis, M., Pritchard, M. S., & Rabins, M. J. (1996). Engineering ethics: What? Why? How? And when? Journal of Engineering Education, 85(2), 93–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hatfield, D. B., & Zelinski, B. J. (2010). Computational materials engineering: A tool whose time has come. Technology Today 2010, Issue 2. Raytheon web publication. http://www.raytheon.com/technology_today/2010_i2/comp_eng.html. Accessed February 12, 2011.

  • Haws, D. R. (2001). Ethics instruction in engineering education: A (mini) meta-analysis. Journal of Engineering Ecutation, 90(2), 223–229.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herkert, J. R. (2002). Continuing and emerging issues in engineering ethics education. The Bridge, 32(3). National Academy of Engineering web publication. http://www.nae.edu/Publications/Bridge/EngineeringEthics7377/ContinuingandEmergingIssuesinEngineeringEthicsEducation.aspx.

  • Hertel, J. P., & Millis, B. J. (2002). Using simulations to promote learning in higher education: An introduction. Sterling, VA: Stylus Pub.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holtzapple, M. T., & Reece, D. (2008). Concepts in engineering (2nd ed.). Dubuque, Iowa: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, G. M., & Richert, A. E. (2005). Reflection on the teaching of ethics in physical therapist education: Integrating cases, theory, and learning. Journal of Physical Therapy Education, 19(3), 78–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, B. J., & Corser, R. (1998). Learning ethics the hard way: Facing the ethics committee. Teaching of Psychology, 25(1), 26–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1979). Conflict in the classroom: Controversy and learning. Review of Educational Research, 49(1), 51–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. (1985). Classroom conflict: Controversy versus debate in learning groups. American Educational Research Journal, 22(2), 237–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Smith, K. A. (2000). Constructive controversy: The educative power of intellectual conflict. Change, 32(1), 28–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jorenby, M. K. (2007). Comics and war: Transforming perceptions of the other through a constructive learning experience. Journal of Peace Education, 4(2), 149–162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krain, M., & Lantis, J. S. (2006). Building knowledge? Evaluating the effectiveness of the global problems summit simulation. International Studies Perspectives, 7(4), 395–407.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kraus, R. (2008). You must participate: Violating research ethical principles through role-play. College Teaching, 56(3), 131–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loui, M. C. (2009). What can students learn in an extended role-play simulation on technology and society? Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 29(1), 37–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, J. M., Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2002). Are all types of cooperation equal? Impact of academic controversy versus concurrence-seeking on health education. Social Psychology of Education, 5(4), 329–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newberry, B. (2004). The dilemma of ethics in engineering education. Science and Engineering Ethics, 10(2), 343–351.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oakes, W. C., Leone, L. L., & Gunn, C. J. (2009). Engineering your future: A comprehensive introduction to engineering, 2009–2010 Ed. Chesterfield, MO: Great Lakes Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poling, D. A., & Hupp, J. M. (2009). Active learning through role playing: Virtual babies in a child development course. College Teaching, 57(4), 221–228.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prince, M. (2004). Does active learning work? A review of the research. Journal of Engineering Education, 93(3), 223–231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raisner, J. A. (1997). Using the “ethical environment” pardigm to teach business ethics: The case of the maquliadors. Journal of Business Ethics, 16(12/13), 1331–1346.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rest, J. (1999). Postconventional moral thinking : A Neo-Kohlbergian approach [e-book]. Ipswich, MA: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Available from: EBSCOhost. Accessed July 19, 2011.

  • Rest, J. R., Narvaez, D., Thoma, S. J., & Bebau, M. J. (1999). DIT2: Devising and testing a revised instrument of moral judgment. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(4), 644–659.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rest, J., Thoma, S. J., Narvaez, D., & Bebau, M. J. (1997). Alchemy and beyond: Indexing the defining issues test. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89(3), 498–507.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosnow, R. L. (1990). Teaching research ethics through role-play and discussion. Teaching of Psychology, 17(3), 179–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Santi, P. M. (2000). Ethics exercises for civil, environmental, and geological engineers. Journal of Engineering Education, 89(2), 151–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sanyal, R. N. (2000). An experiential approach to teaching ethics in international business. Teaching Business Ethics, 4(2), 137–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shaw, C. M. (2004). Using role-play scenarios in the IR classroom: An examination of exercises on peacekeeping operations and foreign policy decision making. International Studies Perspectives, 5(1), 1–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, K., Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1981). Can conflict be constructive? Controversy versus concurrence seeking in learning groups. Journal of Educational Psychology, 73(5), 651–663.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strohmetz, D. B., & Skleder, A. A. (1992). The use of role-play in teaching research ethics: A validation study. Teaching of Psychology, 19(2), 106–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tichy, M., Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Roseth, C. J. (2010). The impact of controversy on moral development. Journal of Applied Psychology, 40(4), 765–787.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vesilind, P. A. (1996). Using academic integrity to teach engineering ethics. Journal of Engineering Education, 85(1), 41–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wareham, D. G., Elefsiniotis, P. T., & Elms, D. G. (2006). Introducing ethics using structured controversies. European Journal of Engineering Education, 31(6), 651–660.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The author would like to thank Jason Borenstein and Matt Drake—co-authors of the ESIT—for their assistance in its use.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Muskingum University, New Concord, OH, USA

    William R. Wilson

Authors
  1. William R. Wilson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to William R. Wilson.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Wilson, W.R. Using the Chernobyl Incident to Teach Engineering Ethics. Sci Eng Ethics 19, 625–640 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-011-9337-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-011-9337-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation