Responsible Conduct of Research Training for Engineers: Adopting Research Ethics Training for Engineering Graduate Students

1Citations
Citations of this article
3Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Two key challenges haunt ethics teaching: relevance and universalism. Demands for relevance, whether relevance is judged based upon association to a local standard (e.g., national professional association code) or to the specific demands of a professional workplace, pull the teaching and study of ethics towards the particular. Calls for a global standard pull ethics teaching and scholarship toward high level principles that can be difficult to justify at a level students and grants funding agencies find applicable. Particularity and specificity complicate demands for global standards or universal norms, while exposition at a universalized level frustrate application in a relevant context. This chapter investigates the structure of research ethics as exemplified in the Singapore Statement, then turns to a case study of RCR students in Hong Kong to provide an example of RCR receptivity among students in engineering and other fields.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Jordan, S. R., & Gray, P. W. (2015). Responsible Conduct of Research Training for Engineers: Adopting Research Ethics Training for Engineering Graduate Students. In Philosophy of Engineering and Technology (Vol. 22, pp. 213–228). Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-18260-5_13

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free