Evaluating the Impact of Ethics Instruction on Student Awareness

Engineers must frequently make decisions during their careers without understanding or knowing the full set of consequences. These decisions can have unintended or harmful results. Therefore, it is imperative that engineers consider the ethical dimensions of their decisions while working to satisfy their employer’s interests even if these decisions conflict with their organization’s objectives or their own goals. Engineers have a responsibility to uphold a level of ethical standards that produces trust in not only their organization but also in their profession. Students entering the workforce must reflect the same level of ethical standards expected of their profession. Therefore, it is crucial to educate students on the importance of ethics and its impact on their future careers. This research examined the impact of ethics training in an upper-level engineering course consisting of 156 students. Students were presented with several scenarios that required them to make ethical judgments in the role of an engineer. A questionnaire, which evaluated the degree of ethical behavior of the students, was distributed at the start of the study. The same questionnaire was administered to the students after attending an educational session on ethics and ethical considerations in the engineering workplace. The responses were analyzed using the Chi-square test of independence and Wilcoxon signed-rank test to assess if ethics training had a significant impact on the ethical perspectives of the engineering students. Introduction The large amounts of capital and stakeholders involved in each stage of a construction project have made the industry vulnerable to unethical practices and have made the construction industry one of the most fraudulent industries in the world (Transparency International, 2005). Unethical practices such as bribery, bid-rigging, tender-manipulation, and conflicts of interest are increasingly prevalent in the construction industry (Adnan et al., 2012). Unethical practices lead to a waste of economic resources, missed opportunities for other businesses, and poor quality of completed projects (Rahman et al., 2007). Despite the reduction in the overall number of industrial accidents, the number of fatalities in the construction industry has risen (Adnan et al., 2012). Unethical behavior by engineers can erode the public’s trust in not only their employers, but also in their professional fields. Therefore, it is important to educate the next generation of engineers on ethical decision making. Ethics training in recent years has included various forms of ethics education including case studies, online programs, and role-playing. Engineering ethics education covering both moral ethics and professional ethics has been delivered through general and discipline-specific curricula (Abate ́, 2011). It is important for students to develop not only an understanding of ethical principles, but also the skills to make ethical decisions in a complex work environment with uncertain consequences. This paper examines the impact of ethics training in a class of civil engineering students. Several hypothetical ethical dilemmas from the construction industry were used to educate the students. The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. First, a literature review of current studies evaluating ethics training in higher education is presented. Next, the method of conducting the study is discussed and presented along with the results of the Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed-rank test and Chi-square test of independence of the students’ responses to an ethics preand post-survey. Finally, a discussion of the significance of the results, their implications, and directions for future research are offered. Literature Review Zhu and Jesiek (2017) present a review of current approaches to ethics education in engineering and propose a more practical approach to ethics education with a focus on real-world problems faced by engineers. A case study format to ethics training is recommended by Abate ́ (2011), who cautions against equating ethics training with morality, arguing that training based on morals itself cannot equate to the benefits of a case study approach that will force the students to use analytical and critical thinking, and pattern recognition to solve ethics problems. A review of several historic cases involving engineers is presented by Billington (2006) to illustrate the ethical issues that engineers face in various engineering disciplines. Perri et al. (2009) present a methodology for ethics instruction where students analyze various ethical situations in different contexts and choose ethical solutions to those situations. Alpay (2013) presents a studentcentered pedagogical method for ethics education where the students select the ethics education activities that are related to their discipline. van der Burg and van de Poel (2005) describe the development and features of a web program that students can use to train their ethical understanding and skills using case studies. A study by Chung and Alfred (2009) analyzing different forms of engineering ethics training showed a 32% statistically significant improvement in student scores for the group using an interactive multimedia web-based training simulator compared to the group provided with non-interactive web-based resources. A study to examine the impact of ethics education on the moral reasoning of students by May and Luth (2013) revealed that ethics education in engineering had a positive effect on the students. However, a study conducted by Jones and McGuire (2016) did not find any significant impact of business ethics education on the students’ response to ethical situations. Bairaktarova and Woodcock (2017) present a model that measures the ethical awareness of the students and predicts their ethical behavior. The existing studies have investigated training methods, modes of instructions, impacts of ethics education, and measured ethical awareness of students in higher education. These studies have been useful to develop questions regarding ethical work practices and workplace scenarios for the current study. Methods The study was carried out using a cohort of 156 civil engineering students enrolled in a required senior seminar. The data were collected using surveys in the 2018 fall semester at Missouri University of Science and Technology. The surveys were disseminated to students using the Qualtrics online survey platform. The questionnaire contained 19 scenarios based on regular ethical work practices and workplace situations such as handling contract bidding, employer and client interests, contractor relations, and several additional similar scenarios identified through the literature review that are typically encountered by civil engineers. The students were asked to respond to each statement using a 5-point Likert scale including strongly disagree, somewhat disagree, neither agree nor disagree, somewhat agree, and strongly agree. The statements are provided in Table 1. Table 1. Survey Statements QID Statements 1 It is important to adhere to applicable laws and regulations even when unethical actions cannot be traced back to you. 2 Your obligation to your employer is secondary to your obligation to society. 3 During an open bid for a project, it is acceptable to work with other contractors to determine their bids. 4 It is acceptable to underbid on a contract and then add extras as you anticipate your subcontractors will do the same. 5 It is normal to show a subcontractor a rival's bid to obtain the best price for your firm. 6 As long as one's actions are not illegal, they are ethical. 7 Bad decisions made from ignorance are just as unethical as those from greed. 8 The degree of your ethical behavior is influenced by that of your peers. 9 It is okay to share confidential information with one's partner if he/she does not work in the same industry. 10 It is more important to be ethical on public projects than private projects as you are spending tax dollars on the former. 11 One must place their client's interests before his/her employer's interests. 12 Slight misrepresentations of one's qualifications is acceptable if they can be easily acquired when needed. 13 It is sometimes acceptable to give small gifts to officials as it is not equivalent to bribing because you have no intention of swaying the official's decision on your project. 14 It is important to intervene when you see a colleague participating in unethical activities. 15 It is appropriate to accept small gifts from contractors who are bidding on your firm's projects. 16 Inappropriate behavior outside one's work environment reflects poorly on his/her employer. 17 It is acceptable to take travel funding from companies bidding for your firm's projects. 18 In a competitive bidding environment, it is acceptable to spread negative rumors about your firm's rivals as they are probably doing the same. 19 It is acceptable to take clients with you when moving from one firm to another. The study used a within-subjects preand post-survey design to evaluate the impact of an ethics lecture on the perspectives of a group of civil engineering students enrolled in a one-hour senior seminar course. The ethics lecture provided an overview of the following topics: • What is the difference between ethics and morality? • What do we mean by “profession”? What is a professional? • Why do we have engineering registration / licensure? • What are the basic tenets of the engineering profession? • What are the seven canons of the ASCE Code of Ethics? • What are the consequences of an ethics violation? Further, eight scenarios that engineers might encounter in the workplace were discussed. These scenarios addressed the following topical areas: • Information sharing with the general public • Change orders and cost increases • Subject matter competency • Responsibility to society • General vs specific experience and training • Ne