1 / 16

Teaching Ethics through Role Playing in a Nanotechnology Class for First Year College Students

Teaching Ethics through Role Playing in a Nanotechnology Class for First Year College Students. Kurt Winkelmann Sustainable Nanotechnology Organization Conference November 4, 2012. The need for nanoethics training. Students need practice so they can apply it as professionals

simon-moreno
Download Presentation

Teaching Ethics through Role Playing in a Nanotechnology Class for First Year College Students

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Teaching Ethics through Role Playing in a Nanotechnology Class for First Year College Students Kurt Winkelmann Sustainable Nanotechnology Organization Conference November 4, 2012

  2. The need for nanoethics training • Students need practice so they can apply it as professionals • Scientists & engineers should consider ethical issues before starting research • Understanding societal impacts helps them engage public • Increasingly important to funding agencies

  3. Case studies • Students role play characters involved in an ethical dilemma • Case studies provide experience that students can draw upon later • Examples illustrated in Nanotechnology: The Power of Small

  4. The Power of Small TV show • powerofsmall.org • PBS broadcast • Panelists: Science experts Policy makers Journalists

  5. Intro to Nanotech lab ethics activity • Intro to Nanotech lab designed for freshmen • 1-credit lab with synthesis experiments and instrumentation (STM, AFM) use • Final exam addresses societal issues or applications of nanotech • Spring 2012 students participated in case study activity similar to Power of Small

  6. Activity details • 22 students divided into 3 panels • Each panel debates a topic • Does a student want to carry an RFID card that monitors his shopping habits? • Should Florida Tech allow local police to monitor people on campus? • Will Florida Tech support a local company building a nanofilm manufacturing plant near campus?

  7. Student responsibilities • Read background info about scenario and character to role play • Perform research to backup character’s views • Participate in debates, act in character • Listen to other panels, ask questions • Write reflection paper about their own views before and after research and activity

  8. Learning objectives • Perform research • Provide citations from reliable sources • Constructively and actively participate as member of panel and audience • Debate scored by instructors using rubric • Reflect on any change of their views • Reflection paper scored by instructors using rubric

  9. Structure of panel debate • Emotionally rich, relevant topics • Students given character background and views to act out • Balanced number of advocates for each side • Fictitious but realistic scenarios • Debate precedes action in scenario

  10. Achievement of learning objectives • Perform research • All provided sources were reliable • Information sources were easy to find • Some reflection papers did not contain or cite sources

  11. Achievement of learning objectives • Constructively and actively participate as member of panel and audience • Most students received high score using rubric • Debates lasted twice as long as expected • Students acted in character • Audience asked many good questions • Students debated same issues as in Power of Small

  12. Achievement of learning objectives • Reflect on any change of view • Students clearly explained their views of debate topics before and after activity • Most initially in favor of nanotechnology • 30% changed view of their panel’s topic • 20% changed view of other panel’s topics • Most changes shifted opinions to less favorable view of nanotechnology

  13. Student opinion • Frustrated by speculation of nanotechnology’s societal impacts • Enjoyed opportunity to actively participate • Better than individual presentations • Benefited from learning about non-technical issues related to nanotechnology

  14. Ethical frameworks • Analysis based on reflection papers • RFID shopping: Utilitarianism or egoism Voluntarily trading privacy for financial gain • Campus security: Rights based or utilitarianism Privacy vs. security • Nanofilm facility: Utilitarianism or egoism Community financial benefit but possible environmental problems

  15. Future work • Will perform activity in spring 2013 • Include information about ethical frameworks for student reflection

  16. Acknowledgements Jim Brenner, Florida Tech course co-instructor Spring 2012 Intro to Nanotech Lab students Camille and Henry Dreyfus Foundation NSF NUE in Engineering

More Related