Engineering Ethics
Science and Engineering Ethics, Volume 10, Issue 2, 2004 373
design, we would set up exercises in which they would be required to practice environmentally responsible design. They learned about regulations when the exercise required them to comply with regulations. The instructor could then use this experience as an opportunity to outline how the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and State Department of Natural Resources (DNR) or Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) have structured regulations. We also could teach them where the details could be found when needed.
The results of our efforts7 received awards from the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) and from the Michigan Society of Professional Engineers (MSPE) for the innovative approach. The most important thing to note is that the approach was, and still is, very effective. We knew that we had to involve students in the practice of what we were trying to teach and that they had to encounter it in almost every major learning experience. This was carried forward into our approach to ethics.
The PSE Approach – Under Development In the early 1990’s the PSE faculty adopted a Mission and Values Statement. In this we followed the example of many of the manufacturing plants in our area (many of them co-op employers associated with PSE) that adopted such statements as a part of the quality movement. We also emulated the military academies who clearly publish a mission statement. Such a statement serves to focus faculty efforts and it serves as a guide for new efforts. The last paragraph of the PSE Values Statement specifically addresses a broadening of our approach, “…beyond technical knowledge to include ethical responsibility in the practice of our profession.” For many years this statement served to guide faculty thinking and framed copies of the Mission and Values Statement were predominantly displayed. The problem was that because there was no requirement for the students to wrestle with the meaning of this statement, it was difficult to get them to “buy into” it.
Honor Code Last year, in response to numerous “misunderstandings” on the part of students, the PSE faculty adopted an Honor Code very similar to the Honor Code at West Point. We have always had the university student code of conduct, but (like the Mission and Values Statement) we found that most students had never bothered to read it. Certainly they had never wrestled with how to apply these ideas to their own professional lives. The same was true for the professional engineering society codes of ethics.
On their first day at the academy, cadets at West Point are given a card to carry in their wallets with the Honor Code on one side and three “rules of thumb” to be used in the application of the honor code on the other side. We decided to produce a similar card, to laminate it to give a sense of permanence, and (like West Point) to make the introduction to this concept a memorable event. Introduction to the Honor Code occurs either in freshman orientation or in the first engineering course near the beginning of
S. T. Fleischmann
374 Science and Engineering Ethics, Volume 10, Issue 2, 2004
the semester. Students are welcomed into the profession of engineering and an overview of the status of our profession as a highly honorable one is provided. Students are told that the integrity of the profession can be assured only if the integrity of every member is assured. They are then told that as newcomers to the profession, they must establish personal integrity as a primary virtue. The Honor Code is presented as part of a larger Honor Concept – also explained on the folded card into which the laminated card is inserted. The two sides of the laminated card are shown in figure 1 and the Spirit of the Honor Concept (printed on the folded card) is shown in figure 2. The folded card also has a list, on the back, of all of the professional engineering societies with student chapters at Grand Valley. This adds to the perception of the Honor Code as something much bigger than just a local school requirement; it is a professional requirement, and students are welcomed into the profession as “card-carrying” members. Note that the Spirit of the Honor Concept includes an application section that is to be signed by the student. Students carry the card with them but they also sign a copy of this card that is filed in their student record. Signing such a statement when they enter the School of Engineering helps to heighten the student’s perception that they are entering a profession with high standards for conduct.
FIGURE 1: Both sides of the laminated Honor Code card.
We felt that it was important to place the honor code within the context of
professional expectations, so we prefaced the statement of the code with an explanation of its importance. The rules of thumb were adapted to our concerns – especially the first rule. As is the case for cadets, the rules of thumb are printed on the back of the card. (Please note that the wording of the PSE Honor Code statement is almost identical to the West Point statement; we checked with officers at West Point to be sure that this was allowed. The statement is considered to be part of the public domain.)
While knowledge and skill are certainly important to engineering practice, an engineer’s integrity is even more important. You must establish this integrity as a student. The professional engineering community monitors itself to establish trustworthiness or integrity. For that reason:
