Empowering Professional Teaching in Engineering. John Heywood

Чтение книги онлайн.

СКАЧАТЬ have promoted a code of ethics. Cheville and Heywood have discussed the problems of developing a code of ethics for engineering education with reference to those in use in engineering (world-wide) and other professions, and suggested the code shown in Exhibit 1.2 [16]. As yet there is no universally recognized system of training engineering educators that is the hallmark of a profession.

      It is evident from the foregoing that what has been written about accountability in the school system applies equally to higher education.

The beginning engineering educator finds her/himself in a situation where it seems that she/he may have to choose between different priorities or to balance those priorities as best as he/she can. In 1994 Michael Bassey President of the British Educational Research Association published a book with the title “Creating Education through Research” [17]. He used the second page of his introduction to adapt and develop work by W. G. Perry whose study of student intellectual development in higher education is of considerable importance [18, see chapter VIII]. The last two paragraphs read,

      “My fifth discovery was that I am not a watcher of the world but an actor in it. I have to make decisions and some of them have to be made now. I cannot say, ‘stop the world and let me get off for a bit, I want to think some more before I decide.’ Given differences of opinion among reasonable people, I realize that I cannot be sure that I am making the ‘right’ decisions. Yet because I am an actor in the world, I must decide. I must choose what I believe in and own the consequences.”

Restricted Professionality in Engineering Education	Extended Professionality in Engineering Education
Instructional skills derived from experience	Instructional skills derived from mediation between experience and theory
Perspective limited to immediate time and place	Perspective embracing broader social context of education
Lecture room and laboratory events perceived in isolation	Lecture room and laboratory events perceived in relation to institution policies and goals
Introspective with regard to methods of instruction	Instructional methods compared with those of colleagues and with reports of practice
Value placed on autonomy in research and teaching	Value placed on professional collaboration in research and teaching
Limited involvement in non-teaching professional and collegial activities	High involvement in non-teaching professional and collegial activities
Infrequent reading of professional literature in educational theory and practice	Regular reading of professional literature in educational theory and practice
Involvement in continuing professional development limited and confined to practical courses mainly of a short duration	Involvement in continuing professional development work that includes substantial courses of a theoretical nature
Instruction (teaching) seen as an intuitive activity	Instruction (teaching) seen as a rational activity
Instruction (teaching) considered less important than research	Instruction (teaching) considered as important as research
Assessment is a routine matter. The responsibility for achievement lies with the student	Assessment is designed for learning Achievement is the co-responsibility of the institution, instructor (teacher) and student

Exhibit 1.1: An adaptation of Hoyle’s descriptions of restricted and extended professionalism on school teaching for higher education.

      Engineering education has a large impact on the world, serving the ideal of human development through education and the ideal of truth through scholarship. Engineering educators respect the impacts culture and individuality have on these ideals. To serve these ideals engineering educators:

      1. recognize that engineers and engineering works may impact the world for good or for ill. Engineering educators strive to develop their own and students capacity for moral purpose, serve as an example for life lived well, and recognize the rights of others to define their own welfare and quality of life;

      2. treat others fairly, support others’ learning at all times, and honor differences between learners that arise through opportunity and culture;

      3. balance responsibilities of the multiple roles they assume within the education system:

      a. in the role of a teacher or mentor the engineering educator seeks to support learning, professional development, and enabling human thriving through education;

      b. in the role of a scholar the engineering educator dedicates himself or herself to seeking truth and awareness of his/her own ideology;

      c. in the role of an administrator, the engineering educator is guided by principles of fairness, justice, and compromise;

      d. in the role of a patron, constituent, or client the engineering educator provides actionable feedback to improve education and helps support others professional development; and

      While most times these rules are harmonious, in some cases the engineering educator will face ethical dilemmas that arise from overlaps of these roles. Resolving such conflict requires both adherence to law and moral judgment, tempered with respect for colleagues and students, and the recognition that vulnerable populations may often lack a voice. The engineering educator acknowledges the tensions inherent in supporting individual learners and an educational system with limited resources while undertaking unbiased evaluation of learning.

      4. serve educational needs through:

      a. supporting the needs of learners and upholding the rights of all individuals to an education with particular care for the vulnerable and disadvantaged;

      b. recognizing the impact of credentials and the limitations inherent to measuring learning, and striving to improve how learning is assessed;

      c. recognizing that learning occurs within a community and valuing the diverse expertise and contributions of their colleagues and the supports offered by the wider educational institution in which they function; and

      d. building professional liaisons with others across the education system, and those who employ engineering graduates.

      5. uphold standards of professionalism in any role they play within the education system;

      6. balance their role as an educator with their role as an engineer by accurately interpreting state-of-the-art engineering theory and practice for learners, and drawing upon the science of learning to effectively promote and support student development;

      7. act in ways that develop and hold the trust and confidence of others so as to support their role as teacher and mentor;

      8. seek to advance, apply, and integrate the state of the art in both education and engineering theory and practice and dedicate themselves to life-long professional development; and

      9. СКАЧАТЬ