Matthew W. Keefer

Moral Reasoning and Case-Based Approaches to Ethical Instruction in Science

In this chapter, I would like to explore and expand upon a conception of moral reasoning with moral cases that follows a classical conception of moral thinking (outlined briefly in the introduction). The classical account is founded on a unified conception of practical reason or practical rationality. Accordingly, a rational action is action undertaken for a reason, and reasons carry normative force when they support or explain actions as good or valuable in some aspect or to some degree. It follows then, that moral responses, or for that matter any sort of practical resolution of a values’ conflict, is deemed rational to the extent that it is responsive to reason. On the surface, this view may not seem so much different from commonsense notions, yet I will argue that it differs fundamentally from all of our most influential and recent philosophical and psychological conceptions. Moreover, this view holds important pedagogical implications for the development and implementation of case-based approaches to ethical instruction in science and science education. This chapter will present four sections which will: 1) Contrast modern and classical approaches to moral reasoning and moral cases; 2) Present a unified conception of reasoning with moral cases; 3) Provide empirical support for the classical conception; and 4) Consider implications for case-based approaches to science and science education.

The Importance of Formative Assessment in Science and Engineering Ethics Education: Some Evidence and Practical Advice

Recent research in ethics education shows a potentially problematic variation in content, curricular materials, and instruction. While ethics instruction is now widespread, studies have identified significant variation in both the goals and methods of ethics education, leaving researchers to conclude that many approaches may be inappropriately paired with goals that are unachievable. This paper speaks to these concerns by demonstrating the importance of aligning classroom-based assessments to clear ethical learning objectives in order to help students and instructors track their progress toward meeting those objectives. Two studies at two different universities demonstrate the usefulness of classroom-based, formative assessments for improving the quality of students’ case responses in computational modeling and research ethics.

A critical comparison of classical and domain theory: some implications for character education

Contemporary approaches to moral education are influenced by the ‘domain theory’ approach to understanding moral development (Turiel, 1983; 1998; Nucci, 2001). Domain theory holds there are distinct conventional, personal and moral domains; each constituting a cognitive ‘structured‐whole’ with its own normative source and sphere of influence. One of the strengths of domain theory is that separating convention from morality and distinguishing morality from self‐interest provides a conceptual critique of both conventional values and the pursuit of self‐interest. Relying on the work of Joseph Raz, this paper will show how a classical, neo‐Aristotelian conception can also provide conceptual space for an ethical critique of convention and self‐interest, yet deny that it must emanate from different normative sources. Practical implications for both of these theories will also be considered, pointing out the strengths of, as well as some areas of vulnerability for, both.

Getting Started: Helping a New Profession Develop an Ethics Program

Both of us have been involved with helping professions, especially new scientific or technological professions, develop ethics programs—for undergraduates, graduates, and practitioners. By “ethics program”, we mean any strategy for teaching ethics, including developing materials. Our purpose here is to generalize from that experience to identify the chief elements needed to get an ethics program started in a new profession. We are focusing on new professions for two reasons. First, all the older professions, both in the US and in most other countries, now have ethics programs of some sort. They do not need our advice to get started. Second, new professions face special problems just because they are new—everything from deciding who belongs to the profession to formalizing ethical standards so that they can be taught. Our purpose in this paper is to generalize from our experience and to identify some of the fundamentals for getting an ethics program started in a new profession. We present our recommendations in the form of response to 6 questions anyone designing an ethics program for a new profession should ask. We realize that our brief discussion does not provide a complete treatment of the subject. Our purpose has been to point in the right direction those considering an ethics program for new profession.

The changing role of knowledge in education

This case study explored one teachers understanding of knowledge using an adaptation of the Approach to Knowledge Scheme. By using this Scheme it was possible to see how this teachers views impacts what knowledge Mrs. Smith (a pseudonym is used) found valuable and how she transmits these values to students and in so doing, provided an opportunity to see how knowledge objectification and knowledge work translated into classroom practices. Content analysis of interviews and classroom discourse revealed that the majority of the teachers utterances (67.8%) focused around Approach III where knowledge is perceived as a tool, a conceptual artifact, and can be improved upon. She had a deep understanding of her subject matter and expected the same from her students. Previous research is extended by illustrating the applicability of the Scheme in a classroom setting from the teachers perspective. Future research could explore its taxonomic utility.

A Subtle Tyranny: Rediscovering the Purpose of the Liberal Arts

Discord in the academy currently manifests in divisions over political correctness, the content of the canon and the defects of modernity. As scholarly and intellectual matters these concerns arise exclusively from the domain of the liberal arts. At their core, these controversies arguably develop from deep epistemic roots reflecting fundamental differences concerning the nature, purpose and value of the liberal arts. At issue is the integrity of the liberal arts and understanding the nature, purpose and value of these fields depends upon appreciating the distinction between professional, theoretical, and moral studies. One can begin to understand these distinctions by considering the contrast in ordinary language between knowledge and wisdom. For it is arguable that while the notion of wisdom is presumably irrelevant to production or dissemination of knowledge in all other disciplines, it is demonstrably central to the purpose and value of both research and teaching in each and every liberal art. If this can be shown then it is possible to understand why emphasis on expertise and professionalism, on knowledge for its own sake undermines commitment to common purposes and concerns. By institutionalizing new patterns of behavior, stress on professionalism changes the nature and conception of liberal arts scholarship in ways that produce deep confusions about meaning and value in these fields. The object of this article is to show that unlike other disciplines the liberal arts depend upon shared purposes and concern such that participation of in a common moral discourse is essential to the integrity and worth of each field. Commentaries are from Daniel Little Multiple goals in the liberal arts and Matthew Wilks Keefer Adressing a major epistemological bias. J.Wagner replies.

Responsible conduct of research in computational modeling

Computational modeling is a growing area of mechanical engineering that focuses on the use of numerical simulation to examine complex phenomena. Computational modeling includes work in finite element analysis, computational fluid dynamics, and multi-body dynamics modeling. Intrinsic to most of these modeling efforts are common elements including:1. Assumptions that are made to reduce a problem to a solvable mathematical problem,2. Formulation of a mathematical representation based on scientific principles,3. Reduction of the mathematical representation through the removal of terms of small effect (neglected terms)4. Collection and use of input data,5. Algorithm development using numerical methods and discretization of the mathematical problem,6. Implementation of the algorithm in computer code,7. Creating representations of the model results,8. External validation of the model, and9. Dissemination of the model and model computer code.Copyright