In one recent graduate engineering class, my final assignment was to write a mock NSF proposal on a topic of my choosing. While reviewing the assignment, the professor offhandedly remarked there was “obviously no need for us to develop a broader impact section” as the proposal would never be submitted to the NSF. Implied in this statement is the belief that is shared across wide swaths of engineering: ethical considerations are regarded as formalities that must be addressed to satisfy funding agencies.
Participating in Global Perspectives: Engineering Ethics Across International and Academic Borders gave me a new understanding of the role of ethics in engineering. Before starting the program I had a narrow definition of engineering ethics, understanding it as a list of rules, codes, and laws applicable to select situations. I found the real value of the program to be in the way in which my understanding of engineering ethics was transformed. I now appreciate the way in which every decision an engineer makes has the potential for ethical implications.
Many engineers and ethicists have heard of Robert Moses' low bridges. The story goes Moses built overpasses high enough for cars but too low for public buses, limiting access to parts of New York to those able to afford cars. This story is told to highlight the ethical implications of engineering decisions, but it fails to elicit the complexity associated with the actual process of making decisions. Today, an engineering student that hears this story quickly understands it is ethically wrong to build bridges that exclude an entire socio-economic class. What is much harder to teach is the way that ethical decisions are baked into every choice an engineer makes. Where to focus research effort, for example, is rife with ethical implications: What areas will you research? Perhaps more importantly, what areas will you not research? Do you truly believe you will follow through on the grand promises of your proposal?
Global Perspectives succeeded in highlighting the complicated way in which all engineering decision making is filled with ethical choices. Early in the week we spent a few hours reviewing the traditional engineering ethics education approach. This discussion provided a springboard to understand the differences between how ethics are taught and how ethics are practiced. Creating this self-awareness was the first step in shifting my perspective on the importance of engineering ethics. This understanding solidified over the rest of the week as I discussed these issues with the other faculty and graduate students in the program. The mixture of ethicists and engineers amongst this group was critical. It was unpacking the differences in our viewpoints, and the eventual shared understanding we reached, that was so valuable. As I struggled to explain decision making in my own discipline to outsiders, I became more aware of the ways I was overlooking the role of ethics.
One question that remains for me is how to scale the success of this program. Such a labor-intensive approach was incredibly valuable to me personally, however, it is hard to conceive of running such a program for all 1800 graduate engineers at UC Berkeley. One aspect of the program that could be replicated is the formation of interdisciplinary ethics courses. Instructors could integrate ethics education across the curriculum to include voices from all disciplines, thereby facilitating a cross disciplinary dialogue. This would undoubtedly present some challenges, but if executed properly the benefits could be significant.
Far from being a formality required for grant proposals, ethics are at the very core of engineering. Global Perspectives presented a unique opportunity for those that participated to reshape their understanding of ethics. I gained a new understanding of how my decisions as an engineer often have non-obvious ethical consequences. I hope the ethical education community can build on the lessons learned from Global Perspectives to improve the educational experience for all engineers.
Notes on contributor
Gordon Hoople is a PhD student in Mechanical Engineering at University of California, Berkeley. His research interests lie at the intersection of mechanical engineering and biology. He builds microfluidic devices to perform single-cell analysis in an effort to develop improved tools for clinicians. He is also interested in the ethical responsibilities of engineers and finding ways to improve engineering education.