Premium
Linking personal and professional social responsibility development to microethics and macroethics: Observations from early undergraduate education
Author(s) -
Schiff Daniel S.,
Logevall Emma,
Borenstein Jason,
Newstetter Wendy,
Potts Colin,
Zegura Ellen
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
journal of engineering education
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 3.896
H-Index - 108
eISSN - 2168-9830
pISSN - 1069-4730
DOI - 10.1002/jee.20371
Subject(s) - prosocial behavior , social responsibility , ideology , meritocracy , psychology , professional development , qualitative research , personal development , pedagogy , public relations , sociology , social psychology , political science , social science , politics , law , psychotherapist
Abstract Background Developing social responsibility attitudes in future engineers and computer scientists is of critical and rising importance. Yet research shows that prosocial attitudes decline during undergraduate engineering education. Purpose Influenced by the Professional Social Responsibility Development Model (PSRDM), this study explores the connection between undergraduate personal social responsibility attitudes and the development of professional social responsibility attitudes. We consider a wide range of college and precollege influences and inhibitors. Design/Method We conducted and analyzed 21 semistructured interviews of second‐year undergraduates, predominantly in engineering and computer science. The interviews form the first collection of qualitative data for a multiyear mixed methods study which has followed a cohort of students since they entered college. Results We find preliminary evidence that social responsibility attitudes tend to be conceptually separated for early undergraduates along two lines: personal and professional considerations, and microlevel and macrolevel concerns. This leads some students to assume that social responsibility obligations can be considered as a weekend project, may fall into place later in one's career, and can generally be deprioritized compared to technical education and career pursuits. Candidate explanations for this divide include early influences from parents, religious values, collegiate social interaction, students' limited familiarity with their future profession, and a social/technical divide and meritocratic ideology in engineering culture. Conclusions This study provides qualitative evidence to advance the conceptual understanding of professional social responsibility development. The findings highlight key individual and institutional influences and barriers for scholars and practitioners interested in nurturing prosocial attitudes among engineering students.