MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2184466117

AC 2011-1501: A CASE STUDY-BASED GRADUATE COURSE IN ENGI- NEERING ETHICS AND PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY

2011· article· en· W2184466117 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Craig T Evers

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEngineering Education and Curriculum Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAeronauticsContext (archaeology)EngineeringApolloAtmosphere (unit)CrewLawForensic engineeringPolitical scienceHistoryMeteorologyArchaeology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examines in detail the development of a graduate-level course in engineering ethics and professional responsibilities. Case studies covering the field from the Texas A&M Bonfire to Bhopal, the Quebec Bridge to the Kansas City Hyatt Regency, and many other notable incidents are used extensively to give the students insight into how a lack of ethics or an abrogation of professional responsibility has resulted in some of the major engineering failures for which we have records. Students prepare in advance for a discussion of the day’s topics through researching the historical record. The class leader then guides the class through a close examination of cultural, managerial, commercial, governmental and human factors in the context of the time in which the failures occurred. In one 3-hour class, as an example, aerospace and aviation was the topic as seen through the stories of Apollo 1 (1967), TWA Flight 800 (1996) and the Concorde crash (2000). In Apollo 1, faulty wiring in an explosive atmosphere led to loss of the capsule and crew. (Three years later, Apollo 13 was almost lost due to faulty wiring in an explosive atmosphere.) Almost thirty years later, TWA Flight 800 was lost with all aboard due to faulty wiring in an explosive atmosphere. The Concorde, which had a long history of tire failures causing wing and fuel tank damage, was lost when it hit debris and a tire failed, fatally damaging the wing and fuel tank. Disasters rarely happen without a string of warnings. The manner in which these warnings are handled is a fertile ground for class discussion of how professional responsibilities were or were not handled in an ethical way. The course uses as a text the book “Truth, Lies, and O-Rings: Inside the Space Shuttle Challenger Disaster” by Allan J. McDonald. This is a first-hand account of the events leading up to and following the loss of Challenger. It is written in a very readable style, and students in the course have expressed a keen interest in the story, both as a “good read” and as one of the best, most detailed accounts of ethics, professional responsibility and even management politics to be found anywhere. Additionally, research papers and presentations explore cultural views on these topics and more detailed personal analyses and applications of the material.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.352
Threshold uncertainty score0.634

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.093
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.231 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEngineering Education and Curriculum DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207