TCC401, Section 1
Michael E. Gorman, 2-2905, Thornton A217 meg3c@virginia.edu
Note on Professionalism: All professionals have to re-schedule deadlines and must occasionally miss meetings. But professionals provide advance notice, when possible, or--in the event of illness, accident, or other crisis--make an effort to contact colleagues and/or supervisors as soon as possible. In the event you must re-schedule a deadline, provide me with a memo before the due date, explaining the reasons for the delay and indicating when the assignment will be completed. I will initial if I approve the request.
Note on Discussion: Class participation is an important component of your grade. You are allowed to have two unexcused absences from class. (Job interviews count as excused absences--please alert me in advance). Beyond that, I take-off for every class you miss. Why? Because this is a seminar, and you owe it to your peers to be there to carry your load in discussion, listen to presentations, etc.--in other words, this is a matter of professional courtesy.
But you are expected to do more than warm a chair. I keep a record of the sorts of contributions students are making. Don't speak up merely for the sake of it; speak only when you have something to contribute. Those who contribute steadily and well will have their grades raised at the end of the course; those who fail to contribute will have their grades reduced.
As part of your class participation, each student will be required to lead at least one discussion. You should pick one of the readings below, and come to class prepared to guide an intelligent, informed discussion of it, directing and focusing when necessary. While I have provided some questions for discussion in the schedule below, discussion leaders should bring in their own questions--it is my impression that student-generated questions are more effective at provoking discussion than mine. There should be at least two facilitators for each reading.
To get your discussion-leader grade, provide me with a summary of the discussion, in lieu of your usual written response to the reading (see below). Tell me how the discussion went, in your opinion-- what worked, what didn't work, what suggestions you would make to future discussion leaders.
Written Responses to Readings: Keep a journal containing responses to the readings--this folder can be collected at any time and counts 20% of your grade. Bring it to class with you. Use the questions associated with each reading as a focus. The point of your reading notes is to prepare you for discussion. After discussion, add a paragraph reflecting on whether you learned anything from your peers.
Hints on how to write.
Hints on building a literature review:
The dates below indicate when each reading or assignment is to be started. If no other date follows, the assignment is due by the next class.
HPR refers to the text by Harris, Pritchard & Rabins entitled Engineering Ethics, available at the bookstore--you will use it also in many sections of 402, and if you get into a section that doesn't use it, you can sell your copy back to the bookstore because other incoming students will need it.
Readings will either be on the Web, in which case they will be highlighted below, or on reserve in the library.
You are responsible for keeping track of changes in the schedule. I will announce them on e-mail and post them on this syllabus.
1/16--Introduction to class, syllabus.
Read Chapters 1 & 6 in HPR.
1/21--Discuss preventive ethics, moral imagination and how they might relate to choosing a thesis topic. Did moral reasoning of the sort outlined in Chapter 6 play any role in your decision process?
Read Sections 1-3 of Chapter 4 of Invention and Discovery: A Cognitive Quest
1/23--Discuss the role of moral imagination and moral reasoning in the decision to create an atomic bomb.
Read section 4 of Chapter 4--"Towards a Sustainable Tomorrow."
Extra credit: Read articles by Friedman and Hawken & McDonough, on reserve.
1/28--Discuss what it means to create sustainable technologies, and whether this violates Friedman's maxim that corporations should try to make money, not aim for social responsibility.
Read Gorman's pre-proposal, on reserve at Clark.
Write statement of topic, and at least a one-page outline or summary of your pre-proposal.
1/30--Discussion of pre-proposal.
Write draft of pre-proposal.
2/4--Bring draft of pre-proposal to class.
Finish pre-proposal
2/6--Pre-proposal due
Read DesignTex (A)
Be prepared to answer the following questions before coming to class.
2/11--Discuss DesignTex. Is this project a model for sustainable design? What do you think of the McDonough framework--does it go too far?
Read HPR, Chs. 2 & 3. [Skim material related to the Challenger--we will discuss this case in greater detail in TCC402].
2/13--Discuss codes of ethics and responsible behavior. Should we rely primarily on codes to motivate ethical designs like DesignTex, or should we try to train virtuous engineers? Do engineers really have to know anything about ethics?
Read Rohner Textil (A)
2/18--Discuss Rohner Textil and the role of social networks in technology. Is Kaelin a heterogeneous engineer?
Read Rohner Textil (B) and
Read Rohner Textil (C)
2/20-Discuss Rohner Textil (B) and Rohner Textil (C). (Focusing questions will follow).
Read HPR, Ch. 10
Read Rohner Textil (D)
Please come prepared to defend one of the four alternatives in the D case
1) from Kaelin's perspective. Which one should he choose, given what you know about his moral perspective? Which of the five perspectives on pp. 325-8 of HPR does he come closest to?
2) from your own perspective. Which of the five positions comes closest to your basis for deciding?
What do you think of the criterion for clean on p. 333 of HPR and the provision for the rights of engineers on p. 341?
2/25--Continued discussion of Rohner Textil in the light of material in Chapter 10.
Read SELF case
2/27--Discuss SELF
Read Gorman's proposal, on reserve in the library, and relevant sections of the undergraduate thesis manual.
Write draft of Rationale and Objectives section of the proposal, and outline indicating how you will approach other sections. Put outline on a transparency.
Note: In the best proposals, the literature review (section III) is thoroughly integrated into the other sections, every one of which cites relevant literature. Keep this in mind when you create your outlines.
3/4--Go over Rationale and Objectives, outlines. Typical class format will involve peer critique in groups of three for about the first half-hour, then each group will provide a summary of the different approaches taken and select one outline for me to go over. I will finish by answering questions.
Write drafts of Section II: Impacts. Use materials from class, where possible.
3/6--Go over Impacts.
Write Sections III (if necessary), IV and V of proposal, bring to class. Put schedules on a transparency.
3/18--Go over end results and schedules.
Continue working on proposal
3/20--Schedule presentations: 10 minutes per student. Team presentations for those working on group projects are encouraged. Those who go on 3/27 or 4/1 get an extension until 4/8 on handing in their proposals.
3/25--Proposal due.
Bob Moore, Halsey Professor of Chemical Engineering, will discuss ethical dilemmas that he has faced in his experience as an engineer and manager.
3/27-4/22--Presentation of proposals and films.(For a spring 1997 schedule click here).
Read Gorman, revised proposal.
Read Daniel Quinn's Ishmael.
Proposal revisions (if any) are due within two weeks of the time the proposal is returned to the student, and in any case no later than 4/22
4/24-Discuss Ishmael
4/29--Class wrap-up. Journals will be collected, including an entry on Ishmael. What dio you think Ishmail would say about technology and progress? Do you agree with this view?
Possible Topics for Final Essay:
Due on Friday May 9th no later than 5 PM.
Worth 20% of our grade.
Final portfolio: include all of your graded work for the semester--due on Friday May 9th no later than 5 PM.
Worth 5%