GE ENGINEERING IN SOCIETY

Transcription

1 GE ENGINEERING IN SOCIETY Course Outline ( Term 1) Instructors: Denard Lynch, P. Eng. Office: 3B11 Phone: denard.lynch@usask.ca Calendar description: Designed to create an awareness of the diverse and oftencontradictory impacts of science and technology on society. The consequences of current technological changes and those of the recent past are explored from a professional ethics point of view to illustrate the complexities of technological-societal interrelationships. Course rationale: Everyone makes ethical decisions every day. While many are straight forward, some create internal conflicts and are much more difficult. As professionals, engineers must be prepared for, and are expected to, make difficult ethical decisions. Society also expects its leaders and professionals to be good examples of ethical behaviour, and to be a desirable model. Engineers are purveyors of technology, and society will expect sound advice on technology which considers the safety and welfare of humankind and the environment, and which is not self-serving. This class studies why engineering is a profession and what it means to be a professional. The technological artefacts we design and deliver can have both positive and negative impacts on society. As creators, engineers have responsibility for these impacts and a duty to society, in return for which engineers are afforded certain privileges. Engineers have certain rights, as professionals, to operate autonomously and without interference to fulfill this responsibility. Engineers have a paramount responsibility for the safety of the public, the workplace and the environment. Engineers also have an obligation to exhibit, and maintain, competence in their field. Engineers potentially conflicting obligations to society, clients and self often make ethical decisions complex, and the knowledge to deal effectively with these situations is an important part of every engineer s education. Course objectives: (a) Understand the impact of the engineering profession on society and the environment (b) Develop frameworks with which to recognize and analyze ethical and moral dilemmas, determine possible courses of action and select the most suitable. (c) Understand the structure of the engineering profession in Canada, and the Act and Association regulating the practise of Professional Engineering in Saskatchewan. (d) Understand the engineer s responsibility for the safety of the public, workplace safety and the protection of the environment. Denard Lynch, Aug

2 Learning objectives: Upon successful completion of this course, the student will: understand basic ethical theories and their relevance to decision making be able to analyze an ethical situation and recommend a suitable course of action be aware of their duty to society, including that for safety and the environment, and their professional responsibilities and rights. know the basic structure of the profession in Canada and the regulatory framework in Saskatchewan have a general understanding of the challenges created by cultural differences appreciate legal and regulatory requirements for safety, and engineers responsibility for establishing and maintaining safe practices. Learning activities: Classroom activities are based on student participation and student directed learning. Attendance is essential to acquire the knowledge necessary to meet the course objectives and get the maximum benefit from this course. Using the text, reference material and the instructor as a guide; students study the various theories about ethical decision making and apply these to case studies and exercises. Students will apply the knowledge gained by researching a relevant topic and presenting the results to their colleagues and instructor. Students will also gain insight into professional issues through a interview term assignment. Main Topic Areas (order may vary): (a) Basis for Moral and Ethical Views and Standards of Behavior Ethical theories and philosophies, moral dilemmas Cultural effects and influences (b) Professionals and Professionalism Trustworthiness, moral responsibility, moral autonomy, personal integrity, accountability The Engineering and Geoscience Professions Act, Bylaws and Regulations, APEGS administration, Laws and Codes of Ethics (c) Engineering as Experimentation A model of engineering as a social experiment Engineer s responsibility for safety Public risk and personal choice; informed consent (d) Engineers Rights and Responsibilities Engineer s responsibility for public and worker safety The root causes of failures and the basis of safe practices Human rights, employee rights, professional rights Conflict of interest, bribery and corruption Duties to profession, employers, the public Professional obligations and duties Denard Lynch, Aug

3 (e) Engineering in a Global Environment Global issues and international operation Cultural considerations and issues (e) Engineering and the Environment Engineers responsibility for the environment Sustainability Engineering and the environment Prerequisite(s): 45 credit units from EN Senior Courses (200, 300 & 400 level). Pre/Corequisite(s): EN Third Year Common Core Courses (e.g. RCM 300.3) Text: References: Additional References: Evaluation: Engineering Ethics - 3 rd edition, Charles B. Fleddermann, Pearson Prentice Hall, 2008, ISBN: (Acceptable alternate): Engineering Ethics 2 nd edition, Charles B. Fleddermann, Pearson Prentice Hall, 2004 ISBN: Engineering in Society, Denard Lynch, Publisher: Pearson Prentice Hall, ISBN-10: The Engineering and Geoscience Professions Act - APEGS Publisher: Association of Professional Engineers & Geoscientists of Saskatchewan (will be provided to class registrants courtesy of APEGS) Ethics in Engineering - fourth edition Mike W. Martin and Roland Schinzinger, McGraw-Hill Ryerson, ISBN: Getting to Yes, Roger Fisher, William L. Ury Publisher: Penguin Group USA, ISBN: By-laws and Code of Ethics of APEGS - The Engineering and Geoscience Professional Act APEGS (will be provided to class registrants courtesy of APEGS) Denard Lynch, Aug

4 Class Participation 1 Included in Presentation Assignment Presentation Assignment 2 25% Combination of peer/self and Instructor evaluation of presentation assignment. Interview Assignment 3 15% Interview Report Assignment Midterm* 15% (common) Final Exam* 45% (Details TBA) (common) (*students must pass at least one of the examination in order to receive a passing grade in this course) Note 1: In-class discussions: In-class discussions are an integral and valuable part of the learning experience. Students will be asked to contribution to these discussions and evaluate their own participation as well as that of their peers. Note 2: Class Presentation assignment: Students will be required to participate in a group presentation exercise (nominally maximum 6/group). The expectations and other details for this Assignment are posted elsewhere. The Class Presentation Assignment will be graded by you, your peers and the instructor, and your presentation grade will depend, in part, on your participation in this evaluation. All members of the class will be expected to evaluate: i) The quality of other students presentations using the worksheets provided (instructions on how to submit your evaluation data will be given in class). ii) The relative contribution of the members of their own group to their presentation project (both peer and self evaluation). Note: In order to receive a grade for this assignment, both your presentation evaluation mark summary and your peer/self evaluation must be submitted by the end of the term. A reasonable and objective evaluation is expected; the instructor reserves the right to reject any inconsistent or unreasonable data. The final mark for this assignment will be composed of a weighted average of the class and the instructor evaluations of your presentation multiplied by the average of your peer/self evaluation. Example: Average of class evaluation of your group s presentation: 8/10. Instructor evaluation of your group s presentation: 7/10. The other 5 members of your group assessed your contribution as 16, 15, 18, 12, 20; and you rated yourself as 17. You observed and submitted reasonable evaluation scores for 10 of the 12 presentations in your section. Your presentation grade (out of 25%): {.5(16)+.5(17.5)}x{( )/100}{10/12}{25%} = 15.3% Note 3: Interview assignment: As a parallel assignment, to gain knowledge on professionalism and the engineering profession, pairs of students are asked to conduct and report on an interview with a subject of their choice. The Interview Report will be graded by your instructor. Denard Lynch, Aug

5 Further details regarding expectations and suggestions for the Class Presentation and the Interview assignments will be posted on the course web site or in PAWS. Denard Lynch, Aug