SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 2305.18561

Learning Outcomes supporting the integration of Ethical Reasoning into quantitative courses: Three tasks for use in three general contexts

Abstract

This 2024 chapter gives a brief overview of cognitive and educational sciences' perspectives on learning outcomes (LOs) to facilitate the integration of LOs specific to ethical reasoning into any mathematics or quantitative course. The target is undergraduate (adult) learners but these LOs can be adapted for earlier and later stages of learning. Core contents of Ethical Reasoning are: 1. its six constituent knowledge, skills, and abilities; 2. a stakeholder analysis; and 3. ethical practice standards or guidelines. These are briefly summarized. Five LOs are articulated at each of three levels of cognitive complexity (low/med/high), and a set of assignment features that can be adapted repeatedly over a term are given supporting these LOs. These features can support authentic development of the knowledge, skills, and abilities that are the target of ethical reasoning instruction in math and quantitative courses at the tertiary level. Three contexts by which these can be integrated are Assumption (what if the assumption fails?), Approximation (what if the approximation does not hold?), and Application (is the application appropriate? what if it is not?). One or more of the three core contents of Ethical Reasoning can be added to any problem already utilized in a course (or new ones) by asking learners to apply the core to the context. Engagement with ethical reasoning can prepare students to assume their responsibilities to promote and perpetuate the integrity of their profession across their careers using mathematics, statistics, data science, and other quantitative methods and technologies.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Rochelle E. Tractenberg. 2023-05-29. Learning Outcomes supporting the integration of Ethical Reasoning into quantitative courses: Three tasks for use in three general contexts. https://arxiv.org/abs/2305.18561

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Perspectives on the unit distance problem

This is a survey on an old open problem in combinatorics called the unit distance problem, and the field of mathematics around it, called incidence geometry. What do we know about the problem? Why is it difficult? How does it connect with other parts of math?

math.HO

A Categorical Approach to Euclidean Ratios and Proportions

A categorial approach to the non-metric geometry in Books V and VI of Euclid's \textit{Elements} is presented. Specifically, we introduce a diagrammatic syntax that can be overlaid immediately on his diagrams, thus bridging intuitive presentation with fidelity to Euclid's arguments. This syntax makes complicated definitions like V.5, and indeed the arguments throughout books V and VI, including arguments about similar figures, intuitively clear. We show in an appendix that this syntax can be used to solve a puzzle regarding ancient mathematics. Finally, we offer evidence that this approach to Euclidean diagrams is rooted in the Aristotelian tradition itself, and that a similar syntax was utilized, in antiquity, for related questions of numeric and proportions. Thus the syntax is plausibly faithful to Euclid's own thought-world, and not an outside-imposition.

math.HO

Some Early Results by Tutte Regarding the Cycle Double Cover Conjecture in 1948

OpenAI recently announced a proof of the Cycle Double Cover (CDC) Conjecture. Most media reports have characterized it as a 50-year-old open problem. In reality, according to a 1987 letter from Tutte to Fleischner, the Cycle Double Cover Problem has been open for at least 80 years. Two early results regarding the CDC conjecture were established in one of Tutte's 1949 publications.

math.HO