Science and Engineering Ethics 11 (4):617-630 (2005)
AbstractThis study presents the results of a survey of student satisfaction with electronic discussion boards in a course on the responsible conduct of research (RCR). On a 1–5 scale, the respondents stated that the use of the electronic discussion board was an effective teaching tool (4.71), that it enabled them to get feedback from their peers (4.43), that it helped promote discussion and debate (4.36), that it helped them learn how to analyze ethical dilemmas in research (4.36), and that they would consider using an electronic discussion board, if they ever taught a course themselves (4.76). In their written comments, the respondents indicated that electronic discussion boards are a convenient way of promoting debate and in-depth discussion. These results suggest, but do not prove, that discussion boards can promote debate and discussion in courses on research ethics. Instructors who teach RCR should consider using electronic discussion boards in regular or online courses, and they should consider studying the effectiveness of electronic discussion boards in research ethics education. Although electronic discussion boards cannot replace the face-to-face interaction that occurs in a classroom setting, they may provide a useful medium for the exchange of ideas and opinions online.
Similar books and articles
Corporate Governance and Board Effectiveness 2.Richard Leblanc - 2007 - International Journal of Business Governance and Ethics 3 (2):106-112.
Truth and Trustworthiness in Research.C. Whitbeck - 1995 - Science and Engineering Ethics 1 (4):403-416.
Student Perceptions of the Effectiveness of Education in the Responsible Conduct of Research.Dena K. Plemmons, Suzanne A. Brody & Michael W. Kalichman - 2006 - Science and Engineering Ethics 12 (3):571-582.
Preliminary Discussion of the Logical Design of an Electronic Computer Instrument.Arthur W. Burks, Herman Heine Goldstine & John Von Neumann - unknown
Measures of Mentoring, Department Climate, and Graduate Student Preparedness in the Responsible Conduct of Psychological Research.Sabrina J. Goodman, Kaori Kubo Germano, Adam L. Fried & Celia B. Fisher - 2009 - Ethics and Behavior 19 (3):227-252.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
Citations of this work
A Meta-Analytic Comparison of Face-to-Face and Online Delivery in Ethics Instruction: The Case for a Hybrid Approach.E. Michelle Todd, Logan L. Watts, Tyler J. Mulhearn, Brett S. Torrence, Megan R. Turner, Shane Connelly & Michael D. Mumford - 2017 - Science and Engineering Ethics 23 (6):1719-1754.
Review of Instructional Approaches in Ethics Education. [REVIEW]Tyler J. Mulhearn, Logan M. Steele, Logan L. Watts, Kelsey E. Medeiros, Michael D. Mumford & Shane Connelly - 2017 - Science and Engineering Ethics 23 (3):883-912.
The Engineering and Science Issues Test (ESIT): A Discipline-Specific Approach to Assessing Moral Judgment. [REVIEW]Jason Borenstein, Matthew J. Drake, Robert Kirkman & Julie L. Swann - 2010 - Science and Engineering Ethics 16 (2):387-407.
The Engineering and Science Issues Test : A Discipline-Specific Approach to Assessing Moral Judgment.Matthew Jason Borenstein, Robert Kirkman J. Drake & L. Swann Julie - 2010 - Science and Engineering Ethics 16 (2):387-407.
References found in this work
Educational Technologies and the Teaching of Ethics in Science and Engineering.Michael C. Loui - 2005 - Science and Engineering Ethics 11 (3):435-446.
Seven Ways to Plagiarize: Handling Real Allegations of Research Misconduct.Michael C. Loui - 2002 - Science and Engineering Ethics 8 (4):529-539.
Misconceptions and Realities About Teaching Online.Joan E. Sieber - 2005 - Science and Engineering Ethics 11 (3):329-340.