Collaborative Research: Practical Ethical Instruction with Expert-Analyzed Cases

合作研究：实践道德指导与专家分析案例

• 批准号: 9617071
• 负责人: Kevin Ashley
• 金额: $ 2.39万
• 依托单位: University of Pittsburgh
• 依托单位国家: 美国
• 项目类别: Standard Grant
• 财政年份: 1997
• 资助国家: 美国
• 起止时间: 1997-08-01 至 2000-01-31
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=9617071&HistoricalAwards=false
• 关键词: Collaborative; Research; Practical; Ethical; Instruction

This project undertakes a systematic study of cognitive processes that support students in learning important concepts and skills concerning practical ethical reasoning in a professional domain. The investigators will build a corpus of cases, strategies, and analyses from three general sources: (1) the case examples and exercises taken from leading textbooks in engineering ethics (2) the knowledge, reasoning skills and case examples provided by engineering ethicists and professional engineers as revealed in protocols which the investigators will acquire and analyze, and (3) the findings of the investigators' previous empirical study of different strategies for analyzing practical ethical dilemmas employed by novice and more experienced ethical reasoners. As a result of that study, the investigators found that experienced ethical reasoners are careful to identify issues and to specify conditions under which specific professional role obligations recommend particular actions, that they elaborate conditions which would affect the moral analysis of a problem, in part through posing hypothetical variations of the problem, and that they justify resolutions in terms of those conditions which they conclude apply in the problem. The investigators will develop techniques for using the corpus to challenge and instruct novices in a manual tutoring intervention and assess the pedagogical value of those techniques. They will present an experimental group of novices aspects of the experienced analyses and invite them to compare those conclusions with their own reasoning. The goal will be to assess how novices understand the use of hypothetical variations and their moral significance for the analysis of the problem. A control group will not be exposed to the experts' reasoning and conclusions, and their conclusions will be compared with the experimental analysis of the same problems. The experimental design will also allow investigators to contrast the protocols of novices analyzing problems from the corpus and compare them to the experienced or expert analyses of the same problems. Results will be reported in journals and at meetings and can form the basis for developing a computational model and designing an interactive tutoring system. The significance lies in the development of a better understanding of a pedagogical strategy widely used in practical ethical instruction. The study will shed light on how experts' analyses comparing problems to variations can assist students in learning the process of ethical reasoning.

该项目对认知过程进行了系统的研究，该过程支持学生学习有关专业领域实践道德推理的重要概念和技能。研究人员将建立三个一般来源的案例，策略和分析的语料库：（1）案例示例和练习是从工程伦理学领先的教科书中采取的案例和练习（2）工程伦理学家和专业工程师提供的知识，推理技能和案例示例，这些协议中揭示了研究人员将获得和分析的策略研究，以及（3）研究人员的研究，以及（3）研究人员的研究，以及（3）研究者的差异，以及（3）由新手和经验丰富的道德推理者雇用。这项研究的结果是，研究人员发现经验丰富的道德推理者谨慎地发现问题并指定条件，并在哪些条件下，在哪些专业角色义务建议特定行动的情况下，他们详细措施会影响问题的道德分析，部分原因是对问题的假设变化，并证明他们在这些条件下对这些条件进行了合理的解决方案，而这些解决方案适用于问题。 研究人员将开发用于使用语料库来挑战和指导新手进行手动辅导干预措施的技术，并评估这些技术的教学价值。 他们将展示经验丰富的分析的实验新手方面，并邀请他们将这些结论与自己的推理进行比较。目的是评估新手如何理解假设变化的使用及其在对问题分析的道德意义。 对照组将不会暴露于专家的推理和结论，并将其结论与对相同问题的实验分析进行比较。实验设计还将允许研究人员对比分析研究问题的新手方案，并将其与相同问题的经验或专家分析进行比较。 结果将在期刊和会议上报告，并可以为开发计算模型和设计交互式辅导系统的基础。 意义在于对在实践伦理教学中广泛使用的教学策略进行更好理解的发展。这项研究将阐明专家的分析如何将问题与变化进行比较可以帮助学生学习道德推理的过程。