ArticleScience and engineering ethics2019
Using Student Engagement to Relocate Ethics to the Core of the Engineering Curriculum.
Article in Science and engineering ethics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Engineering Ethics Interventions and Assessments: A Systematic Literature Review.Science and engineering ethics · 2026Pooled it
- Developing Ethical Responsibility in Future Nanoscience Professionals Through Scenario-Based Assessment.Science and engineering ethics · 2025Article
- A Multi-level Review of Engineering Ethics Education: Towards a Socio-technical Orientation of Engineering Education for Ethics.Science and engineering ethics · 2021Article
- The Importance of Ethics in Modern Universities of Technology.Science and engineering ethics · 2019Article
- Ethics and the UN Sustainable Development Goals: The Case for Comprehensive Engineering : Commentary on "Using Student Engagement to Relocate Ethics to the Core of the Engineering Curriculum".Science and engineering ethics · 2019Article
- The Survival Imperative : Commentary on "Whither the University? Universities of Technology and the Problem of Institutional Purpose".Science and engineering ethics · 2019Article
- Reengineering Biomedical Translational Research with Engineering Ethics.Science and engineering ethics · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
One of the core problems with engineering ethics education is perceptual. Although ethics is meant to be a central component of today's engineering curriculum, it is often perceived as a marginal requirement that must be fulfilled. In addition, there is a mismatch between faculty and student perceptions of ethics. While faculty aim to communicate the nuances and complexity of engineering ethics, students perceive ethics as laws, rules, and codes that must be memorized. This paper provides some historical context to better understand these perceptual differences, and suggests that curriculum constraints are important contributing factors. Drawing on the growing scholarship of student engagement approaches to pedagogy, the paper explores how students can be empowered to effect change in the broader engineering curriculum through engineering ethics. The paper describes a student engagement approach to pedagogy that includes students as active participants in curriculum design-a role that enables them to critically reflect about why ethics is a requirement. Including students in the process of curriculum design leads students to reframe ethics as an integrative tool with the capacity to bring together different engineering departments and build bridges to non-engineering fields. This paper argues that students can and should play an active and important role in relocating ethics from the periphery to the core of the engineering curriculum.
Indexed as
Identifiers
23595501What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.