Xiaofeng Tang

Contextualizing the Code: Ethical Support and Professional Interests in the Creation and Institutionalization of the 1974 IEEE Code of Ethics

ABSTRACT In many engineering ethics classes, codes of ethics are presented as if they are self-evident yardsticks for gauging ethical decisions in engineering. In this article, we argue that focusing solely on the content of ethics codes without examining the professional contexts in which codes are created – and are made meaningful – misses important opportunities to understand the engineering professions ethical aspirations and how such codes affect engineers’ professional identities. Our analysis demonstrates a ‘contextualized reading’ of an engineering code of ethics through a historical case study consisting of two successive episodes: In the first episode, we show how engineers’ yearning for ethical support and their competing interpretations of professional interests catalyzed the creation of the first Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) Code of Ethics in 1974; the second episode of the case documents the complex institutional processes followed by IEEE members to ensure compliance with the code of ethics in professional practice. For engineering studies scholars, tracing the historical context of codes of ethics offers a pathway to understand engineers’ ‘existential struggles’ – that is, how engineers responded to major challenges and crises as a profession – at a particular historical moment. For engineering ethics educators, revealing how ethics codes operate in the institutional context of professional organizations prepares students to appreciate the ethical horizon of the profession they inherit as well as to redirect or expand that horizon moving into the future.

Understanding EU and Danish Higher Education Governance through a Comparison With US Reforms

In this contribution, we describe the changing landscape for higher education in Europe and Denmark under the Bologna Process, as viewed through the eyes of two historical case studies in US higher education reform. Our focus will be on governance. As a quintessential public good, higher education has always been within the province of the state.

Institutional Responses to the Bologna Process in Danish Engineering Education

The aim in this chapter is to present and discuss our detailed, empirical findings with regards to the institutional-level responses to the Bologna Process among Danish engineering schools and universities. It also documents their responses to new Danish national policies as they relate, both directly and indirectly, to the Bologna Process.

Bridging the two cultures and forging a holistic culture: a response to the liberal studies in engineering workshop

I was excited when I learned that Larry Bucciarelli and David Drew were organizing a workshop to explore educational opportunities for liberal studies in engineering, an idea that had inspired my dissertation research. For that project I studied three undergraduate engineering programs which actively integrate engineering and liberal arts education. Visiting these programs opened my eyes to the possibilities of educating more well-rounded engineers with dedicated teachers, interactive pedagogies, and creative curricula that balance technical learning with analysis of the social context. Larry and David’s article (present in this issue) pushes the experiment of broadening engineering education even further: they propose a liberal studies program which would allow students to study engineering contents from the perspectives of the liberal arts. This bold proposal provoked a heated and productive discussion during the two-day workshop. It was illuminating to hear colleagues sharing their research, insights, and real-world experiences about improving engineering education by extensively incorporating the liberal arts. The exchanges at the workshop shed light on a number of crucial factors that enable or constrain the transformation of engineering education with the liberal arts: institutional challenges, philosophical differences, curriculum design, instructional methods, etc. I trust the authors in this issue will provide effective summary and constructive comments on these factors. In the following paragraphs I offer two additional proposals in the hope of continuing the conversation started at the workshop.