Author(s):
- Priliepo Nataliia Volodymyrivna, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4182-7405
- Borovyk Olena Yuriivna, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3115-7257
DOI: https://doi.org/10.32782/2307-9770.2025.13.02.02
Paper Language: ENG
Abstract
In an era of rapid technological advancement and escalating societal expectations, the effective teaching of engineering ethics has become an indispensable imperative. While traditional pedagogy successfully imparts foundational ethical principles and codes of conduct, a significant body of literature suggests a critical chasm between this theoretical knowledge and the complex, high-pressure realities of professional practice. This study addresses this existing gap between the abstract ethical principles taught in engineering curricula and real-life practice, aiming to empirically investigate the shortcomings of current pedagogical approaches and propose evidence-based recommendations to enhance graduate preparedness. The methodology involved a targeted study with a test group of students, who were assessed through scenarios designed to simulate real-world professional challenges, including conflicts of interest, organizational pressures to cut corners, and psychological factors like obedience to authority. The results revealed a significant discrepancy: while students demonstrated competent theoretical knowledge of ethical codes, they proved largely ill-equipped to apply these principles under simulated organizational pressure, empirically confirming the hypothesized gap. The originality of this research lies in providing empirical validation of the inadequacies in traditional ethics education, moving beyond widespread theoretical critique. It challenges pedagogical models focused solely on abstract principles by demonstrating the decisive impact of organizational and psychological factors on decision-making and refutes the assumption that knowledge of codes is sufficient for ethical practice. Consequently, the findings have profound practical significance, providing a clear mandate for pedagogical change. They form the basis for an actionable framework for educators, advocating for the integration of experiential learning, such as high-fidelity case studies and role-playing, to cultivate practical wisdom and moral courage, thereby offering a blueprint for curriculum enhancement and a foundation for future longitudinal research.
Keywords
ethics, education, methodology, societal context, decision-making, organizational pressure
References
1. National Society of Professional Engineers (NSPE). (2019). NSPE Code of Ethics for Engineers. Retrieved from https://www.nspe.org/career-growth/nspe-code-ethics-engineers.
2. Petroski, H. (1985). To Engineer Is Human: The Role of Failure in Successful Design. St. Martin’s Press.
3. Vaughan, D. (1996). The Challenger Launch Decision: Risky Technology, Culture, and Deviance at NASA. University of Chicago Press.
4. Harris, C. E., Jr., Pritchard, M. S., James, R.W., Englehardt, E.E., & Rabins, M. J. (2019). Engineering Ethics: Concepts and Cases (6th ed.). Cengage Learning.
5. Ewing, J. (2017). Faster, Higher, Farther: The Volkswagen Scandal. W. W. Norton & Company.
6. Baase, S., & Henry, T. M. (2017). A Gift of Fire: Social, Legal, and Ethical Issues for Computing and the Internet (5th ed.). Pearson.
7. O’Neil, C. (2016). Weapons of Math Destruction: How Big Data Increases Inequality and Threatens Democracy. Crown.
8. Whitbeck, C. (1998). Ethics in Engineering Practice and Research. Cambridge University Press.
9. Newberry, B. (2004). The dilemma of ethics in engineering education. Science and Engineering Ethics, 10(2), 343-351. DOI: 10.1007/s11948-004-0030-8.
10. Hess, J. L., & Fore, G. (2018). A systematic literature review of US engineering ethics interventions. Science and Engineering Ethics, 24, 551–583 (2018). DOI: 10.1007/s11948-017-9910-6.
11. Conlon, E., & Zandvoort, H. (2011). Broadening Ethics Teaching in Engineering: Beyond the Individualistic Approach. Science and Engineering Ethics, 17(2), 217–232.DOI: 10.1007/s11948-010-9205-7.
12. Hammar Chiriac, E. (2014). Group work as an incentive for learning – students’ experiences of group work. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 558. DOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00558
13. Priliepo, N., & Borovyk, O. (2025). Facilitating first-year student adaptation through the study of “University Education”. Visnyk Cherkaskoho natsionalnoho universytetu imeni Bohdana Khmelnytskoho. Seriia: «Pedahohichni nauky», 1, 58-64. DOI: 10.31651/2524-2660-2025-1-58-64.
14. The University of Alabama. (2023). Center for the Study of Ethical Development. Retrieved from https://ethicaldevelopment.ua.edu/about-the-dit/.
15. Davis, M. (1998). Thinking like an engineer: Studies in the Ethics of a Profession. Oxford University Press.
16. Bowman, S.L., & Lieberoth, A. (2018). Psychology and Role-Playing Games. In Zagal, José P. and Deterding, S. (eds.), Role-Playing Game Studies: Transmedia Foundations. New York: Routledge, 245-264. DOI: 10.4324/9781315637532-13.
17. Gentile, M. C. (2012). Giving Voice to Values: How to Speak Your Mind When You Know What’s Right. Yale University Press.
18. ABET. (2024). Criteria for Accrediting Engineering Programs, 2025-2026. Retrieved from https://www.abet.org/accreditation/accreditation-criteria/criteria-for-accrediting-engineering-programs-2025-2026/.
19. Milgram, S. (1974). Obedience to authority: An experimental view. Tavistock, London.
20. Zhu, Q., & Jesiek, B. K. (2019). Practicing Engineering Ethics in Global Context: A Comparative Study of Expert and Novice Approaches to Cross‑Cultural Ethical Situations. Science and Engineering Ethics 26 (4):2097-2120. DOI: 10.1007/S11948-019-00154-8
21. Bielefeldt, A. R., Polmear, M., Knight, D., Swan, C., & Canney, N. (2019). Sustainable engineering ethics: Teaching sustainability as a macroethical issue. 2019 IEEE International Symposium on Technology and Society (ISTAS), 1-6. DOI: 10.1109/ISTAS48451.2019.8937862.
22. Nelson, M. E., & Ahn, B. (2018). Virtual Reality Activities for Teaching Engineering Students Professional Development Skills. 2018 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE). DOI: 10.1109/FIE.2018.8659258
23. van de Poel, I. (2021). Design for value change. Ethics and Information Technology, 23, 27–31. DOI: 10.1007/s10676-018-9461-9.
24. Downey, G. L., Lucena, J. C., & Nichols-Belo, A. (2006). The globally competent engineer: Working effectively with people who define problems differently. The Research Journal of Engineering Education, 95(2), 107-122. DOI: 10.1002/j.2168-9830.2006.tb00883.x.
25. Noble, S. U. (2018). Algorithms of Oppression: How Search Engines Reinforce Racism. New York University Press. DOI: 10.2307/j.ctt1pwt9w5.
26. Riley, D. (2008). Engineering and Social Justice. Springer Cham. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-031-79940-2
27. Ford, M. (2015). Rise of the Robots: Technology and the Threat of a Jobless Future. Basic Books.