|
Track Report:
Teaching Computer Ethics
Keith Miller
Members: Mary Carian (Alverno College), Yvon Cayoette (Philosophy, University of Quebec), Eduardo Chaves (Brazil), Peter Danielson (Applied Ethics, University of British Columbia), Ed Davis (Westfield Companies), Batya Friedman (CS, Colby College), Don Gotterbarn (CS, East Tennessee State University, J.A.N. Lee (CS, Virginia Tech), Ivon Lowsley (CS, Southwest Missouri State University, Roberta Barta Mohagen (BUED), Eric Roberts (CS, Stanford University), Mary Robinson-Slabey (CS, Mansfield University), Bill Schnippert (Business & Economics, Elmira College), Evelyn V. Stevens (Computing Services, University of Delaware), Bob Workman (Southern CT State University).
Eric Roberts acted as the moderator of group 2, and he produced this list of recommendations from the group:
1. Increasing Support for Computing and Values
- Need to improve the status of computing and values within CS:
- ensure more attention to teaching values in tenure and promotion cases
- place more value on teaching in general
- expand notion of what constitutes CS faculty
- change expectations of what constitutes a reasonable research grant size
- ACM, IEEE, and CSAB are important forces toward enhancing status
- need a scholarly journal in the field
- Does enhancing academic status diminish student acceptance?
- status is enhanced by firmer grounding in traditional disciplines, such as philosophy, but students are most receptive to applied ethics
- counterpoint: CS departments need people with the expertise to apply classical analysis
- Need to develop ethical expertise within CS programs:
- do we all need to be half computer science and half philosophy?
- consider joint appointments with other fields
- consider team-teaching courses with faculty from other fields
- propose to NSF that they solicit a half-dozen proposals for position papers on how to solve the staffing problems propose some kind of Chataqua-style courses for faculty development
- Need to strengthen the intellectual depth of the field:
- no good body of intellectual work yet exists
- consider carefully the question of language: computer ethics is too restrictive and we need to include a wider spectrum of social and ethical concerns
- encourage Communications of the ACM to include more material on social implications
- Need to develop greater involvement by employers:
- employers are not getting what they need: more education and less training
- counterpoint: current curriculum is too highly focused on employment.
- Need to consider educational issues across the university:
- students are not getting a broad education; more exposure is needed to social science and humanities as background to computing and values
- might need a fifth year to provide time to cover both technical and social issues
- may need to narrow focus, leaving rest to broader curriculum
- we should export our material to other disciplines
2. Resources and Materials
- Need more communication channels for exchanging resources:
- Canadian mailing list offered as example
- ETHICS-L distribution list
- comp. risks and the anthologies in Software Engineering Notes
- SIGCAS is a useful reference and distribution medium
- Arthur Anderson ethics group
- essential to be inclusive: networks are important but by no means universal and we need to maintain traditional postal distribution
- can the Research Center on Computing & Society be of help
- offer: Evelyn Stevens will distribute her ongoing materials collection assuming minimal support is available for postage (important to check with authors)
- offer: Peter Danielson has a collection of materials gathered from comp.risks and other sources on Caller ID, and he will make resource lists available
- Need collections of case studies:
- Donn Parker’s SRI collection
- CACM computing and ethics self-assessment
- useful to have real situations as opposed to hypotheticals
- comp.risks provides a source
- New York Times/Wall Street Journal can be current sources (need for caution?)
- Other sources:
- short films and other audiovisual materials need to be produced
- people who embody the dilemma are excellent resources
- CPSR has significant collections of material, some of which is chapter-based
- IEEE Annals of the History of Computing
- next Journal of Systems and Software devoted to computer ethics
- we should make more use of SIGCSE and its newsletter
3. Integration Throughout Curriculum vs. Capstone Courses
- Where should this teaching be done in the curriculum?
- ideal is integration
- practical considerations may force a separate course in some institutions
- evaluation is often missing in integrated approach
- need to convince students that values are universal
- case study among peers seems to be most effective method
- exposure does increase sensitivity
- recommendation: the Research Center on Computing & Society can help distribute test instruments and other evaluative tools
- need to establish objectives for student achievement
- Should such a course be the responsibility of Computer Science?
- consensus: CS should have control, although others may be involved
- students are sometimes dissatisfied with a more general ethics course
- need more empirical data
- Exxon studies mentioned as plausibility argument
- Should this be required or elective?
- CSAB and ACM/IEEE guidelines insist that it be required at some level
- counterpoint: some opposition was expressed to general idea of requirements
- Other notes:
- students don’t come in a vacuum; there is an ethical context
- students will have several careers; danger of overspecialization
- we ourselves need to take an honest approach to ethics; can’t sugarcoat
Home > Teaching Resources > Teaching Computer Ethics > Appendix
HOME | IN
THE NEWS | RESEARCH RESOURCES
TEACHING
RESOURCES | STUDENT
RESOURCES
LINKS | THE
GALLERY | STAFF
The Research Center on Computing & Society
at Southern Connecticut
State University
501 Crescent Street • New Haven, CT 06515
Director: (203) 392-6790 •
e-mail: webmaster@computerethics.org
© 2000 – 2007 – Research Center on Computing & Society