A 4-tier rubric for evaluating engineering students’ ethical decision-making (EDM) skills: EDM model as a tool for analysing and assessing ethical reasoning

ABSTRACT

Ethical decision-making (EDM) is an important element in the engineering profession. This paper explores the use of an ethical decision-making model (EDMM) as a tool for analysing and assessing the ethical reasoning skills of student engineers and their ability to apply the rationale of EDM process for ethical vignettes. The tool, distilled from several existing EDMMs, was tested against interview data collected from 12 graduating students at one private university in Malaysia. The students were asked to examine two ethical vignettes of varying scenarios and difficulty levels. This was followed by a semi-structured, face-to-face interview (corresponding to the first four steps of EDMM) to gauge their ethical reasoning behind their decision for each vignette. Their verbal responses were analysed and categorised into a four-tier rubric developed in accordance with the four steps of EDMM. Findings revealed that generally, students were able to identify the underlying issue (step 1) and the affected parties and the consequences (step 2), but they did not give much thought to potential course of action (step 3) or to testing available options (step 4). Levels of development of ethical reasoning provided by students varied between the first and second vignette. Findings suggest that the EDMM holds promise as a way to better understand and diagnose students’ readiness to face ethical challenges in their profession.

KEYWORDS:

• Engineering students
• ethical decision-making (EDM)
• ethical decision-making model (EDMM)
• ethical reasoning
• ethical vignette
• rubric

Acknowledgments

1. The author wishes to thank the respondents of this study.

2. The author carried out this study during her tenure as a postdoctoral research fellow with the Strategic Research Initiative (SRI) programme in Taylor’s University (TU), Malaysia. She completed the writing of this manuscript after completing her fellowship at TU.

3. The author wishes to thank Ms Noor Zafirah Abu Bakar, the lecturer of Professional Engineers & Society (PES) module, for facilitating the process of identifying the respondents.

4. The author extends her heartfelt gratitude to the anonymous reviewers and the Editor, Professor Shannon Chance, for their back-to-back constructive feedback and detailed input in helping me to reorganize this paper.

Disclosure statement

The author declares that she has no conflict of interest.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained in writing prior to interviews from all the students who participated in this study.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Mathana Amaris Fiona Sivaraman

Mathana Amaris Fiona Sivaraman is a researcher.  This paper is based on her reserach work at Taylor's University, Malaysia.  She completed her PhD in Science & Technology Studies (STS) focusing on Bioethics and Bachelor of Science with Education (BScEd) with first class honors from University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur. Her research interests include Ethics Education, STS, and Science Communication, focusing on qualitative research. She has taught postgraduate module on