1.1 Eac toolkit - instructor module for uprm ethics bowl activity  (Page 5/5)

Instructional / pedagogical strategies

Which pedagogical or instructional strategies are used or suggested for this module. (For example: Discussion/Debate, Decision-Making Exercise, Presentation, Dramatization or Role Playing, Group Task, Formal or Informal Writing, Readings, among others)

This module employs the following pedagogical strategies:

• Informal Writing : Students prepare their cases by writing short summaries.
• Formal Writing : After ethics bowl competition, students in teams prepare a formal, in-depth case analysis of the case they debated during the competition.
• Cooperative Learning : Students are divided into teams to prepare for debate, carry out debate, peer review as judges other debates, and prepare an in-depth follow-up analysis. The also prepare preliminary and final self-evaluations to assess the effectiveness of their work together as teams.
• Pre-Debate Skills : Theethics bowl requires considerable preparation. Students need practice with ethical and practical frameworks as well as work on researching cases and working with the basic and intermediate moral concepts posed in the cases. Students also need an orientation to the competition that includes the rules, time line, and debating and presenting strategies. Finally, it is important to explain carefully to students the ethics bowl scoring criteria.

Assessment / assurance of learning

What assessment or assurance of learning methods are used or suggested for this module? (For example: 1-minute paper, Muddiest Point, Quiz/Test Items, Oral Presentation, Student Feed-back, among others). What did or didn't work?

The figures below provide handouts for assessing this module. The Ethics Bowl scoring sheets contained in the Student Module also provide excellent means for assessing this activity.

Pedagogical commentary

Any comments or questions regarding this module? (For example: suggestions to authors, suggestions to instructors (how-to), queries or comments directed o EAC community, pitfalls or frustrations, novel ideas/approaches/uses, etc.)

• Case selection is everything. Identify themoral concepts you wish to cover. Then choose cases that involve these concepts. The debate itself, especially the question and answer session with the judges, can be used to generate a discussion of these concepts.
• The Ethics Bowl is definitely a student-centered activity. It is best for the teacher to assume the role of moderator and intervene only to keep the discussion focused. If students are properly oriented for the competition, then they assume responsibility themselves for keeping the debate orderly.
• Debriefing is important. Students get plenty of feedback from the competition and need help interpreting it and receiving it constructively. The peer review students also need advice on how to deliver the feedback proactively. We tend to approach the debate from the standpoint of the virtue of reasonableness and provide students with plenty of opportunities to practice this virtue before the competition.

Appendix (annotated)

Bibliographical information

• Robert F. Ladenson (2001) "The Educational Significance of the Ethics Bowl". Teaching Ethics 1(1), March 2001: 63-78.
• Jose A Cruz, William J. Frey, and Halley D. Sanchez. (2004) "The Ethics Bowl in Engineering Ethics at the University of Puerto Rico- Mayaguez". Teaching Ethics 4(2), Spring 2004: 15-32.
• Michael Davis (2004) "Five Kinds of Ethics Across the Curriculum". Teaching Ethics 4(2), Spring 2004: 1-14.
• Michael Davis (1998) Thinking Like An Engineer: Studies in the Ethics of a Profession. U.K.: Oxford University Press: 119-156.
• Michael S. Pritchard (1996) Reasonable Children: Moral Education and Moral Learning. Lawrence, KS: University of Kansas Press: 140-163
• James Rest, Darcia Narvaez, Muriel J. Bebeau, and Stephen J. Thoma (1999) Postconventional Moral Thinking: A Neo-Kohlbergian Approach. Mihway, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers: 104.
• Mark Johnson (1993) Moral Imagination: Implications of Cognitive Science for Ethics. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press: 8-9.
• Jose A Cruz and William J. Frey (2003) "An Effective Strategy for Integrating Ethics Across the Curriculum in Engineering: An ABET 2000 Challenge" Science and Engineering Ethics 9(4): 546-548.
• Chuck Huff and William Frey (2005) Moral pedagogy and Practical Ethics, Science and Engineering Ethics, 11(3): 389-408.

Additional information or annotations for instructors regarding the Student Module Appendix