Evidence-Based Practice: Looking Good When It Matters: How Engineering Students Regard the Virtue Ethics Framework

Abstract Our first-year engineering ethics unit contained an introduction to and guided practice in ethical decision making under each of four ethical frameworks: Deontology, Virtue Ethics, Consequentialism, and Utilitarianism. Students received a briefing about each framework to learn about its basic features and how to apply them. Prior studies with first-year engineering students and these ethical frameworks revealed that rules-based Deontology and outcome-based Consequentialism and Utilitarianism were readily understood and applied, while Virtue Ethics remained obscure. Clearly, additional guidance and a reframing of the in-class and homework exercises in Virtue Ethics were necessary to enable students to understand and be able to apply this framework more clearly. As part of a feedback and assessment tool called an Exit Survey, we asked the students to describe a difficult situation in their own lives and how they resolved it, and then describe how their solution reflected upon their character and reputation as viewed by others. This approach embodies the essence of Virtue Ethics: how would a person act in a way that demonstrates virtue in the eyes of others? The survey question was as follows: Think of a time when you made a decision that was influenced by how other people would think of you. Describe that decision and where you made it. What was the "virtue" that you wanted others to think that you showed? This question is also framed by Flanagan's critical incident theory, wherein questions containing specific criteria prompt for the recall of "critical incidents. " Flanagan's respondents demonstrated greater and more accurate detail of incidents involving the traits being sought by the questions. The need for greater specificity and detail in recall arose during the early days of World War II, when pilots in training were evaluated for their ability to fly safely and effectively based on little direct evidence of what they could do under combat conditions. By asking trainers to recall certain types of "critical incidents" in pilot performance more closely related to what a pilot might see in combat, the trainers were able to identify competent pilots more easily and accurately. This method was also applied after the war to civilian settings such as the industrial workplace for the evaluation of supervisory personnel. Preliminary results from first-year engineering students' responses revealed a focus on virtues such as honesty, integrity, morals, and fairness. More often, however, we observed desires for recognition in demonstrating care for others, acting with social or personal maturity, taking responsibility for more constructive actions, striving to appear socially adept, going along with what peers were doing, and following current fashion, all of which were relevant for this age group. There were relatively few responses that indicated a lack of concern with one's impression on others, which may indicate, instead, a lack of consciousness, recognition, or caring about how their actions may have affected those who observed them.