Author / Contributor
Nanosilver Linings Case and Workshop Materials

Added06/21/2016

Updated06/29/2016

Author(s) Kathleen Eggleson Joshua Dempsey
Authoring Institution University of Notre Dame
(CC BY-NC-SA 2.5).  ">
Contributor(s) Kathleen Eggleson
Share with EEL Yes
Funder NSF
Rights This activity is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 2.5  (CC BY-NC-SA 2.5).  
Year 2016

Search this Publication

Workshop Assessment

(Download a Word document of the Assessment Instrument)

Your feedback is very important to us, and we thank you for taking the time to complete this questionnaire. 

We would like to know whether you think this learning experience achieved the stated learning objectives.  On a scale of one to five, where one is strongly disagree and five is strongly agree, please indicate your level of agreement with the following items.

My participation in this workshop increased my ability to:

 

1=strongly disagree

2=disagree

3=neither agree nor disagree

4=agree

5=strongly agree

Identify stakeholders in a complex decisions pertaining to science and technology.

1

2

3

4

5

Understand how the perspectives of different stakeholders are informed and communicated.

1

2

3

4

5

Name indirect obligations and responsibilities associated with designing, making, and marketing products.

1

2

3

4

5

Appreciate the human factors, conflicts of interest, struggles, and tradeoffs in a participatory governance scenario pertaining to science and technology.

1

2

3

4

5

Comprehend the role of governance in how science and engineering are applied in the world.

1

2

3

4

5

 

My participation in this workshop increased my ability to:

 

1=strongly disagree

2=disagree

3=neither agree nor disagree

4=agree

5=strongly agree

Identify value-based decisions made in the practice of evaluating emerging technologies around the product life cycle.

1

2

3

4

5

Explain some ethical principles and frameworks applicable to these value-based decisions.

1

2

3

4

5

List ethical dilemmas involved in public communications about science and technology.

1

2

3

4

5

Understand the inherent limits of quantitative, technical methods of assessment in incorporating values.

1

2

3

4

5

Relate values to the way practice, business, and policy decisions about science and technology should be made.

1

2

3

4

5

Articulate an understanding of a scientist or engineer’s professional rights and responsibilities relative to those of consumers and other stakeholders.

1

2

3

4

5

Operate professionally as a scientist or engineer even in ‘grey areas’ of practice where there is no possibility of a single correct answer.

1

2

3

4

5

 

Of all the individual learning objectives, we would like to know which were most addressed through your participation in the workshop.  Please mark the box beside the objectives (up to 3) you think were most addressed:

Learning objective

[X] for most addressed (select up to 3)

Identify stakeholders in a complex decisions pertaining to science and technology.

 

Understand how the perspectives of different stakeholders are informed and communicated.

 

Name indirect obligations and responsibilities associated with designing, making, and marketing products.

 

Appreciate the human factors, conflicts of interest, struggles, and tradeoffs in a participatory governance scenario pertaining to science and technology.

 

Comprehend the role of governance in how science and engineering are applied in the world.

 

Identify value-based decisions made in the practice of evaluating emerging technologies around the product life cycle.

 

Explain some ethical principles and frameworks applicable to these value-based decisions.

 

List ethical dilemmas involved in public communications about science and technology.

 

Understand the inherent limits of quantitative, technical methods of assessment in incorporating values.

 

Relate values to the way practice, business, and policy decisions about science and technology should be made.

 

Articulate an understanding of a scientist or engineer’s professional rights and responsibilities relative to those of consumers and other stakeholders.

 

Operate professionally as a scientist or engineer even in ‘grey areas’ of practice where there is no possibility of a single correct answer.

 

 

Now, we would like to learn more about your experience of the workshop.  On a scale of one to five, where one is strongly disagree and five is strongly agree, please indicate your level of agreement with the following items.

 

1=strongly disagree

2=disagree

3=neither agree nor disagree

4=agree

5=strongly agree

This experience was a good use of my time.

1

2

3

4

5

This experience made me more prepared for ‘real world’ practice of science or engineering.

1

2

3

4

5

This experience was a challenge for me.

1

2

3

4

5

I will probably remember this experience for a long time.

1

2

3

4

5

I will probably recall this experience when I engage with stakeholders in the future.

1

2

3

4

5

This experience makes me more aware of my own values as they pertain to science and engineering applications.

1

2

3

4

5

This experience makes me more aware of the values of other people as they pertain to science and engineering applications.

1

2

3

4

5

I would recommend this experience to other STEM graduate students.

1

2

3

4

5

 

 

Now, we would like to ask about your satisfaction with different aspects of the workshop.  On a scale of one to five, where one is highly dissatisfied and five is highly satisfied, please indicate your level of satisfaction with the following items.

 

1=highly dissatisfied

2=dissatisfied

3=neither satisfied nor dissatisfied

4=satisfied

5=highly satisfied

Quality of readings

1

2

3

4

5

Appropriateness of readings for character

1

2

3

4

5

Quality of discussion

1

2

3

4

5

Length of discussion

1

2

3

4

5

The level of detail in the hypothetical case

1

2

3

4

5

The realism of the hypothetical case

1

2

3

4

5

The workshop leader’s performance

1

2

3

4

5

The way I performed in this situation

1

2

3

4

5

The way the other students performed in this situation

1

2

3

4

5

 

 

What was the most surprising thing you learned from the workshop?

 

What event during the workshop changed your thinking?  In what way did your thinking change?

 

To what extent did your own character seem to you like a real, complex person rather than a caricature or archetype?  To what extent did the other characters seem to you like a real, complex person rather than a caricature or archetype?

 

What do you want to learn more about?

 

Do you have any suggestions for how this workshop could be improved?

 

Does your thesis mentor or another faculty member in your program know you participated in this workshop?    Yes    /     No

               If yes, how would you characterize the level of encouragement you received?

 

Are there any other thoughts you would like to share?

 

Finally, please provide the following information.

Today’s date: ___________________________

Before today, how well did you know at least one other participant? 

  • Very well (friends, labmates)       
  • A little (someone I’ve seen or know the name of)              
  • Not at all

 

The character I played was:         

  • Brown
  • Carlson
  • Green
  • Hansen 
  • Jones
  • Thompson
  • Reed

 

I consider myself:   an engineer   /   a scientist

The degree I am pursuing is:  Masters (M.S.)  /  Doctoral (Ph.D.)

The name of my program of study is:_____________________

The name of my academic department is:________________________

What is your gender?  Male   /   Female

What is your age in years? _______

What is your country of origin? __________________________

With which racial or ethnic group(s) do you identify? _________________________________

 

Cite this page: "Workshop Assessment " Online Ethics Center for Engineering 6/22/2016 OEC Accessed: Monday, November 20, 2017 <www.onlineethics.org/Resources/InfusingExemplars/35742/36255/36310.aspx>