Track Report:
Teaching Computer Ethics

Keith Miller

1. Overview
2. Track Pack
3. Track Meeting Organization
4. Highlights of Group Discussion
   Group 1
   Group 2
   Group 3
   Group 4
5. Joint Presentation to the Conference
6. Coordinator’s Summary

Group 4

Members: Karl Klee (CS), Ellen M. Lee (Business Admin., University of New Orleans), Peter Limper (Philosophy & Religion, Christian Brothers University), Illona Maruszak (Nursing, Southern Connecticut State University), Keith Miller (CS, William & Mary), W. Waldo Roth (CS, Taylor University), Roy (Philosophy).

Illona Mauszak moderated group 4, and her notes form the basis of this part of the report. The group produced a document based on the three questions “What?” “So what?” and “Now what?” The group’s discussion had as a theme the development of a computer system for the use of nurses at a large hospital. This theme gave concrete examples of the computer ethics issues described.

WHAT?

• The meaning of a “success” in this implementation:
• nursing staff insisted on the power necessary to influence the choice of the system they would be using – the system developed met many of the users’ specific needs – the system “empowers” users (the nurses) and not others more traditionally associated with power at a hospital (doctors and administrators)
• Problems:
• the system required changes in the way nurses worked – unexpected limitations and difficulties arose when the system was first used – there arose the need to “sell” the system to some nurses; they resisted the conversion
• Conclusions:
• the ethical application of computing techniques in all fields should include awareness of and responsiveness to the needs, problems, concerns, and values of the ultimate users
• ideally, this should entail user participation in the design process
• in many cases, the concept of “informed consent” is helpful: users should “consent to” the technology; the technology should not be imposed on users in a paternalistic fashion
• user participation often raises power issues similar to other power issues discussed at the NCCV; existing institutional power structures (within the user organization, between users and vendors, etc.) may make user participation difficult or impossible. However (as Judith Perrolle suggested in another context), the development of a computer system may be (and should be) “empowering” for the users.

SO WHAT?

• If (as Deborah Johnson argues) computer systems “embody values,” it is important that those values reflect the real needs and concerns of the ultimate users. An awareness of this should be one outcome of the teaching of computing and values.
  
  
• Although much lip service is paid to user participation (or “joint application development”?, students may not have a clear sense of the ethical issues this raises.
  
  
• Design problems typically begin with rather abstract, high-level goals. Students should be more aware of the need to focus on the more concrete experience of the end users.
  
  
• Users tend to be non-technical people. Students need to learn patience and sensitivity to the concerns of non-specialists. Know when to answer questions that users may not know enough to ask!
  
  
• Students need to be more aware of institutional power issues in design of computer systems. Computer professionals must be prepared to work within organizational constraints, but in some cases they must try to overcome these constraints to help empower the end users.
  
  
• Many computer science students will become “organizational decision makers”? (see new ACM ethics code proposal, section 3). It’s important that they be prepared to exercise their decision making power with a concern for the needs and values of those using computers within their organizations.

NOW WHAT?

Some specific ideas for teaching computing and values:

• Include discussion of such topics as concern for end-users, user participation in design, systems embodying values, and organizational power issues in system design.
  
  
• Try to make use of case studies in considering the issues above.
  
  
• Invite actual users to class to tell their stories.
  
  
• Model a design situation in class with students playing the roles of users, administrators, and designers.
  
  
• Beware of power issues in the classroom; be prepared to share some power with the students.
  
  
• Encourage the development of students’ “people skills,” their ability to deal with non-specialists and with non-technical issues.

Go to: Joint Presentation to the Conference

Home > Teaching Resources > Teaching Computer Ethics > Appendix

Back to the Main Site

HOME | IN THE NEWS | RESEARCH RESOURCES
TEACHING RESOURCES | STUDENT RESOURCES | LINKS

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 – 2004 – Research Center on Computing & Society