Although research integrity practices in institutional settings is not a new area of study, because of its foundational importance in university settings it remains a topic worthy of study. In addition, rarely are all members of the university community included as participants in studies focused upon research integrity and ethics. Thus, to add to the existent literature, the authors investigated research integrity practices in a medium-sized Midwestern polytechnic university setting, including 467 participants from across all divisions of the university community. This mixed data survey study was comprised of six sections; presented is information for two sections—sample demographics and research integrity. The demographics appear reflective of those of the larger survey, as well as the university setting of study. In the research integrity section there were two parts—one qualitative and one quantitative. Implications with regard to research integrity and ethics in the institutional setting of study are presented.

Ethics instruction within an interdisciplinary core program involving a diverse student community representing many major fields of study presents unique challenges. Those challenges are in some ways compounded in the context of a religiously affiliated university whose spiritual and ethical commitments are grounded in the Judeo-Christian tradition even as its student population reflects increasing religious diversity. The authors present one method of addressing these challenges in hopes of inspiring broader discussions of how to teach ethics across the curriculum to students from many backgrounds and with myriad academic and professional goals.

The primary problem we face when educating for social justice involves making problems and issues ‘real’ in ways that enable deep comprehension of the nature of injustice, the effects of systemic and dynamic causes, and the interaction of structures and policies on the lives of individuals. To address this problem, I examine work from behavioral economics and moral psychology as theoretical resources. I argue that we can glean insights from the notions of behavioral nudges and virtue labeling and propose a new account of nudges, which I call experiential nudges. Experiential nudges provide an important mechanism in educating for social justice, in particular, and can be extended within moral education more broadly.

Surgery is the most invasive intervention taken on behalf of health, but significant discrepancies exist between patient expectations and standard operating room practices, especially in teaching institutions. These discrepancies arise from the dual obligations of surgical faculty to present and future patients. On the one hand, in line with a patient’s autonomous election of a procedure and choice of a doctor, faculty are charged with treating patients to the utmost capacity of their knowledge and skill; on the other, in support of a critical community good, they must prepare novice physicians to treat those who will require at least this level of knowledge and skill in the future. Within a broad, contrasting framework of approaches to knowledge, judgment, experience, and nature as described by Hume and Kant, this article explores the complicated concepts of trust, loyalty, assessment, and communications that presently exist between surgical patients, faculty surgeons, and surgical trainees within academic medical centers.

Responding to research indicating unsettling results with regard to the ability of University students to recognize and reflect on questions of morality, this paper aims to discuss these issues and to introduce a promising mode of ethics instruction for overcoming such challenges. The Curricular Ethics Bowl (CEB) is a method of ethics education and assessment for a wide range of students and is a descendent of the Medical Ethics Bowl (MEB) (Merrick et al., “Introducing the Medical Ethics Bowl”). We seek in this article to show the similarities of CEB to MEB and to distinguish this model from the Intercollegiate Ethics Bowl (ICEB) sponsored by the Association for Professional and Practical Ethics (Landenson 2001). The CEB institutionalizes this mode of ethics education at the program, rather than at the individual course level, and shows advantages over other ethics curricula.

Bernard Gert’s account of morality is straightforward, clear and, in its essentials, easily grasped. As such, it offers rich pedagogical resources for teaching morality, not just in undergraduate courses but also in pre-college philosophy classes or workshops, including those offered during the elementary school years. Gert’s account, properly calibrated to the age group in question, can provide a unified framework for students to think about morality, clarify their understanding of it, and engage in discussions with each other about it. After summarizing Gert’s account, I illustrate several ways in which it can be applied in the classroom, beginning with applications at the elementary school level and working up to pedagogy appropriate to high school and college. I conclude by considering and responding to some possible objections to this approach.

The international relations (IR) curriculum has long presented a dichotomy between the so-called “realist” and “idealist” positions. Idealists seek to embody universal norms of justice in foreign policy. Realists, by contrast, see competition between states, the balance of power, and relative advantage as basic to international politics. Though considered polar opposites, both the realist and idealist affirm the primacy of the nation state as a sovereign political unit, and so neither embraces cosmopolitanism in the strongest sense, i.e., the transcendence of national divisions as such. Opening up the IR curriculum to such a radical possibility requires its reframing in terms of underlying, ethical worldviews. Under this lens, it becomes evident that the realist and idealist share far more in common than contemporary policy debates would suggest. It also points us toward the space for an alternate ethical worldview, provided by Stoic rationalism, which is more viable for grounding cosmopolitan thought.

In his 2004 article “Hannah Arendt and Jean Baudrillard: Pedagogy in the Consumer Society,” Trevor Norris bemoans the degree to which contemporary education’s focus can increasingly be described as primarily nurturing “consumers in training.” He goes on to add that the consequences of such “mindless” consumerism is that it “erodes democratic life, reduces education to the reproduction of private accumulation, prevents social resistance from expressing itself as anything other than political apathy, and transforms all human relations into commercial transactions of calculated exchange.” This, then, is the challenge of the age: to articulate the sort of education that might prompt our youngsters to imagine a genuine alternative to this consumer madness—a challenge that the authors of this paper attempt to tackle.

Though public schools are charged with promoting democratic values, they rarely explicitly teach students how to analyze issues from ethical perspectives. Lack of teacher training, competition for time and overestimation of students’ abilities to independently discern the ethical considerations of complex situations may explain its absence from many social sciences curricula. While the ability to consider actions from an ethical lens is critical to the democratic process, class discussions about controversial issues can unravel quickly when self-serving or emotional dynamics dominate an activity. To plan for a more constructive outcome, teachers must first instruct students in the use of universal ethical criteria as the basis for healthy and productive argumentation and provide ongoing opportunities for practicing ethical argumentation. This article describes how such a framework was successfully introduced into a high school health course to encourage deeper and more respectful group analysis of complex issues from various ethical viewpoints.

Recent events around the world point to the dire need to counter harmful unconscious bias. Reams of evidence now exists that literal pre-judgement in regards to race, sex, ethnicity, age and religion among other categories strongly affects our behaviour in ways that when we consciously contemplate it, we would condemn. Using Community of Inquiry methods in developing critical reasoning and empathy offer some possible remedies but also hold pitfalls. The dilemma concerns the fact that if harmful unconscious connotative representations are unconscious, then it’s terribly hard to spot and correct them. We need a better way of exploring our own poorly-arrived at beliefs: we need other people. Mikhail Bakhtin’s notion of dialogic understanding allows meaning to be created through the process of discussion. It gets particularly interesting when this idea combines with the notion of a “floating signifier.” This suggests that a discussion could then also alter the connotative value of words, signs and concepts through making what had been hidden overt. This paper explores the ways that the dilemma of damaging discourse could be altered and strategies for interrupting this, including the format of a Community of Inquiry. The promise offered by a Community of Inquiry is that connotative meanings can be made explicit. It also points to the challenge: unveiling hidden bias only becomes possible in a setting of great diversity. In the end, while a Community of Inquiry may not be able to solve the problem of unconscious bias, it may help combat the consequences.

In professional ethics, focus on ethical theory fails to offer practical advice and focus on individual cases fails to develop adequate ethical understanding. There is a wide gap between abstract moral theories and concrete professional cases. To understand professional ethics, we must pay more attention to this gap and the middle level of theory that we find there. This middle theory brings abstract principles closer to practical cases by considering and incorporating the goals, circumstances, customs and other established social practices and compromises of particular professions. Understanding the complex systems of individual professions is quite important morally as such systems can alter our ethical duties dramatically. Therefore, adequate consideration of professional ethics requires a thorough understanding of philosophical ethics and of the nature of the specific profession concerned. However, recognizing the importance of this middle area will require us to reconsider how we teach, and who teaches, professional ethics.

I develop a taxonomy of various approaches to leadership which I label the ethical decision-making, managerial obligation, role typology, and creativity conceptions of leadership. Each approach makes distinctive assumptions about the task and educational responsibilities in educating for ethical leadership. Although each of these approaches are extremely valuable, I find them limited in that they all rely on what I call an agentic model. Using the concepts of choice architects and choice architecture from nudge theory, I argue for a new metaphysical model—a systems-design model—that captures the complex and interactive dynamic of a host of metaphysical entities and contextual factors. This new metaphysical model of the context of leadership and the function of leaders within it yields a theory of leadership, which I dub the ethical systems-design conception of leadership.

It seems commonly assumed that presenting data is value-neutral. The data is what it is, and it is for those assessing it to make judgments of value. So a chart of earnings just tells us what a company has earned. The chart does not tell us whether the earnings are a good or bad sign. That valuation is to be made by those looking at the chart and is independent of the chart itself. This view of the relation between presentations of data and value judgments is mistaken. Presentations are value-laden in at least two ways. How we choose to represent data is itself an ethically loaded value-judgment, and, second, presentations cause responses, including value-laden judgments. We shall first look at how hard it can be to get inside a profession to be able to understand the problems those in that profession face so we can represent it properly. We shall then examine a case where a failure to understand the problem led to a mistaken moral judgment that has taken on a life of its own because of the power of how the problem is mistakenly presented.

Since the 1990s, educators and social commentators have raised alarms regarding the moral character of successive generations of Americans. A consistent concern within those calls for alarm directs attention to teaching ethics in secondary education. A pedagogy of accompaniment recognizes the timeliness (when it is the right instructional time) for objective and subjective approaches to learning social ethics, transcending the either/or of subject-object, content-skill educational conflicts as well as the disordered distractions of a performance-merit based assessment of learning. In secondary education, the praxis of accompaniment through social ethical discernment creates an occasion wherein students hear and take seriously for the first time their moral voices and imagine their social ethical horizons.

The purpose of this paper is to outline an ethics development activity that uses scenarios in university classes to further the knowledge, engagement, and enhancement of the ethical actions of the students. By starting with a brief review of the objective and use of scenarios in ethics research, the paper progresses to explain the activity, debrief the activity, and finally to provide an analysis of the activity with examples. Included in this activity are ways to incorporate a discussion of Kant’s Categorical Imperative Theories, NCA Credo of Ethical Communication (or any professional codes of ethics), and the use of videos for Milgram’s Blind Obedience and Stanford’s Prison studies—thus making this activity useful across all disciplines.

Science fiction is gaining academic recognition as a tool for teaching ethics and engaging potentially resistant students in communication and critical thinking, but there are not many lesson plans available for how to implement science fiction in the classroom. I hope to address that gap by sharing a successful lesson plan I developed while teaching a first-year composition and ethics course at the Colorado School of Mines. “Stand Where You Stand on Omelas” combines writing, communication, and ethical decision making by asking students to defend what they would do as a citizen in Ursula K. Le Guin’s short story, “The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas,” where a young child’s torment ensures the prosperity and happiness of society as a whole.

In this paper, we propose some ways in which teaching thought experiments in an ethics classroom may result in marginalizing or excluding students underrepresented in philosophy. Although thought experiments are designed to strip away details and pump intuitions, we argue that they may reinforce assumptions and stereotypes. As examples, we discuss several well-known thought experiments that may typically be included in undergraduate ethics courses, such as Bernard Williams’s Gauguin and Derek Parfit’s The Young Girl’s Child. We analyze the potential value and dangers or teaching these thought experiments. We conclude with some practical suggestions for how to teach thought experiments in ways that encourage students to expand their moral imaginations and think critically about their own assumptions and the assumptions built into thought experiments.

Over the past two years, the College of Business (COB) profiled in this article spent time reflecting on where it had been, what it was doing, and where it needed to go in terms of teaching ethics. Based on this analysis, the COB developed an initiative to teach ethics to students, faculty, business people, government employees and officials, and others across its state so all of key stakeholder groups would have a greater appreciation for the benefits of ethical decision-making, the need to exhibit ethical leadership, and the role that business and the free enterprise system can play in promoting the need to earn one’s reputation by doing the right thing. The current article discusses the process the COB followed to implement their ethics initiative.

Many introductory ethics courses focus narrowly on the cultivation of moral reasoning. A review of introductory ethics textbooks, for example, finds that most focus either on exploring moral theories and approaches in detail or on describing moral theories and then applying them to contemporary issues. I argue that these approaches fail to recognize humans as biologically driven, psychologically shaped, and sociologically constrained beings. I examine the factors influencing thinking and action in each of three areas—the role of emotion in moral decision-making, the problem of unconscious bias, and the influence of social structures—and argue for a broader approach to teaching introductory ethics that takes these factors into consideration. The article describes some classroom approaches for fostering understanding of these factors, as well as strategies students can use to act more effectively.

I argue that helping college students to hone their faculty for regret is key to at least three interrelated functions of critical engagement in moral education: 1) empathic unsettlement; 2) counterfactual thinking; and 3) anagnorisis, Aristotle’s term for a tragic and too-late turn in self-awareness. All three functions support an attitude of humility and self-reflection germane to rigorous moral reflection. Though it can be difficult to confront and assume, I argue that claiming regret can help students to catalyze thinking, curiosity, and responsiveness in ways that bear under-explored potential in moral learning. In what follows, I defend regret as a vital structure of moral life, and give several examples of how regret might work to advance moral imagination in the classroom.