Microethics and macroethics in graduate education for scientists and engineers: Developing and assessing instructional models

ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Conference Proceedings

Volumn , Issue , 2012, Pages

  Canary, Heather E ^a   Herkert, Joseph R ^b   Ellison, Karin ^b   Wetmore, Jameson M ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF UTAH   (United States)

^b ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CURRICULA; EDUCATION; EDUCATION COMPUTING; ENGINEERING EDUCATION; ENGINEERING RESEARCH; PHILOSOPHICAL ASPECTS; TEACHING;

GRADUATE EDUCATION; INSTRUCTIONAL MODEL; RESPONSIBLE CONDUCTS; SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING; SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY STUDIES; SCIENTISTS AND ENGINEERS; SOCIETAL IMPLICATIONS; STUDENT-INSTRUCTORS;

STUDENTS;

EID: 85029110849     PISSN: None     EISSN: 21535965     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (13)

1. Herkert, J., Wetmore, J., Canary, H., & Ellison, K. (2009). Integrating microethics and macroethics in graduate science and engineering education: Developing instructional models, Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference, http://soa.asee.org/paper/ conference/paper-view.cfm?id=11085.
2. McGregor, J., & Wetmore, J. (2009). Researching and Teaching the Ethics and Social Implications of Emerging Technologies in the Laboratory. NanoEthics, 3(1), 17-30.
3. Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
4. Borenstein, J., Kirkman, R., & Swann, J. (2005). Engineering and Sciences Issues Test version 1.0p. Georgia Institute of Technology.
5. Rest, J., & Narvaez, D. (1998). DIT-2: Defining issues test. St. Paul, MN: University of Minnesota.
6. Lind, G. (2009). The Moral Judgment Test.
7. Myers, S. A., Martin, M. M., & Knapp, J. L. (2005). Perceived instructor in-class communicative behaviors as a predictor of student participation in out of class communication. Communication Quarterly, 53, 437-450.
8. Rosenfeld, L. R. (1983). Communication climate and coping mechanisms in the college classroom. Communication Education, 32, 167-174.
9. Myers, S. A., & Rocca, K. A. (2000). The relationship between perceived instructor communicator style, argumentativeness, and verbal aggressiveness. Communication Research Reports, 17, 1-12.
10. Borenstein, J., Drake, M. J., Kirkman, R., & Swann, J. L. (2010). The Engineering and Science Issuees Test (ESIT): A discipline-specific approach to assessing moral judgment. Science and Engineering Ethics, 16, 387-407.
11. Peterson, D., Rhoads, A., & Vaught, B. C. (2001). Ethical beliefs of business professionals: A study of gender, age and external factors. Journal of Business Ethics, 31(3), 225-232.
12. Department of Education, Office of Planning, Evaluation, and Policy Development. (2009). Evaluation of evidence-based practices in online learning: A meta-analysis and review of online learning studies. Washington, D. C.: Department of Education.
13. Gale, K., & Bunton, K. (2005). Assessing the impact of ethics instruction on advertising and public relations graduates. Journalism & Mass Communication Educator, 60, 272-285.