As communication teachers attempting to bridge the gap between school and industry, we need to give students a true understanding of what it means to be a professional. We may be spending too much time trying to get them to write and speak like professionals without also imbuing them with sufficient understanding of their responsibilities to behave as professionals. Students need to be practiced in the communication and decision-making situations they will encounter in their workplaces. These decisions involve ethical reasoning as well as technical problem solving. Teaching students to appreciate the consequences of their recommendations, through the use of fault-trees and cost/benefit analyses in realistic simulations, effectively bridges the gap between the classroom and boardroom. A sample situation is explained and analyzed for its use in any technical communications class.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BerryW., Standing by Words, in Poetry and Politics, JonesRichard (ed.), Quill, New York, pp. 208–242, 1985.
2.
FergusonR. W., “Fear God and Take Your Own Part!”: Ethical Imperatives and Technical Writing—Some Turn-of-the-Century Examples, Proceedings, Twenty-seventh International Technical Communications Conference, Minneapolis, pp. W195–W197, 1980.
3.
HawkinsN., Maxims and Instructions for the Boiler Room, Theo Audel Company, New York, 1903. Quoted in 2, W196.
4.
OliverC. E., The Miller and Milling Engineer, Merchants Printing Company, Indianapolis, 1913. Quoted in 2, W197.
5.
LeeW. M., Ethics Education in College, Panel Discussion quoted in Conference on Engineering Ethics, ASCE, New York, pp. 59–71, 1975.
6.
PearceJ. A.Newcomers' Need for a Code of Business Ethics, The Collegiate Forum, p. 11, Fall, 1978 cited in GolenS.PowersC., and TitkemeyerM. A., How to Teach Ethics in a Basic Business Communication Class—Committee Report of the 1983 Teaching Methodology and Concepts Committee, Subcommittee 1, The Journal of Business Communication, 22:1, pp. 75–83, Winter, 1983.
7.
StevensG. E.Ethical Inclinations of Tomorrow's Citizens: Actions Speak Louder?, Journal of Business Education, 59, pp. 147–152, 1984.
8.
StevensG. E., The Pressure to Compromise Personal Ethics, Business Week, p. 107, January 31, 1977.
9.
OwensJ.Business Ethics in the College Classroom, Journal of Business Education, 58, pp. 258–262, April, 1983.
10.
FeinbergS. and GoldmanJ., Content for a Course in Technical Communication: Results of a Survey, Technical Communication, Second Quarter, pp. 21–25, 1985.
11.
JonesW. T.Public Roles, Private Roles, and Differential Moral Assessments of Role Performance, Ethics, 94, pp. 603–620, July, 1984.
12.
KipnisK.Engineers Who Kill: Professional Ethics and the Paramountcy of Public Safety, Business and Professional Ethics Journal, 1:6, pp. 77–91, 1981.
13.
Suggested Guidelines for Use with the Fundamental Canons of Ethics, reprinted in Ethical Problems in Engineering: Volume One, Readings, FloresA. (ed.), Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute Center for the Study of the Human Dimensions of Science and Technology, New York, pp. 66–69, 1980.
14.
SchraderC. R.Professionalism—and a Relevant Code of Ethics, Engineering Issues—Journal of Professional Activities, Proceedings of the American Society of Engineers, 100:E14, October, 1974. Reprinted in FloresA. (ed.), [13, pp. 254–256].
15.
CollinsF.The Special Responsibility of Engineers, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 196:10, 1973. Reprinted in FloresA. (ed.), [13, pp. 246–248].
16.
MillerC. R.Technology as a Form of Consciousness: A Study of Contemporary Ethos, Central States Speech Journal, 29:4, pp. 228–236, Winter, 1978.
17.
RomanoJ. A., Ethics Education in College—Panel Discussion. Quoted in Lee, [5, pp. 63–67].
18.
MeadD., Why a Code of Conduct?, in Ethical Problems in Engineering: Volume One, Readings, pp. 6–7, 1980.
19.
StewartW. T. and PaustenbachD. J.Analysis Techniques Help IEs Evaluate Ethical Dimensions of On-the-Job Decisions, Industrial Engineering, 16, pp. 68–76, April, 1984.
20.
CaplanA. L.Ethical Engineers Need Not Apply: The State of Applied Ethics Today, Science, Technology, and Human Values, 6:33, pp. 24–32, Fall, 1980.
21.
MacLeanD.Benefit-Cost Analyses, Future Generations, and Energy Policy: A Survey of the Moral Issues, Science, Technology, and Human Values, 5:31, pp. 3–10, Spring, 1980.
22.
FloresA. and JohnsonD. G.Collective Responsibility and Professional Roles, Ethics, 93, pp. 537–545, April, 1983.
23.
NelsonC. and PetersonS., Ethical Decisions for Engineers: Systematic Avoidance and the Need for Confrontation, Civil Engineering Education, ASCE, New York, pp. 628–634, 1979. Reprinted in FloresA. (ed.), [13, pp. 81–85].
24.
DowieM., Pinto Madness, in Ethical Problems in Engineering: Volume Two, Cases, BaumR. J. (ed.), Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute Center for the Study of Human Dimensions of Science and Technology, New York, pp. 167–174, 1980.
25.
MathesJ. C. and StevensonD. W.Completing the Bridge: Report Writing in “Real Life” Engineering Courses, Engineering Education, 67:8, pp. 154–158, November 1976.
26.
WeissW. H., Decision Making for First-Time Managers, Amacom, New York, 1985.
27.
MartinM. W. and SchinzingerR., Ethics in Engineering, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1983.
28.
NelsonB., Team Teaching … In Separate Classes, Publication of the Midwest Society for Engineering Education, Conference Proceedings, March 1984.
29.
HallD. G.Overcoming Negative Attitudes Toward Standard Usage in Technical Writing Classes, The Technical Writing Teacher, 13:1, Winter, 1986.
30.
HallD. G., Technical Writing Class: Day One, Courses, Components, and Exercises in Technical Communication, StevensonD. W. (ed.), NCTE, 1981.
