Science and Engineering Ethics (2006) 12, 399-406

Promoting Peace in Engineering Education: Modifying the ABET Criteria

George D. Catalano
The State University of New York at Binghamton

Keywords: peace, integral model, ABET criteria

ABSTRACT: Modifications to the ABET Criterion 3 are suggested in support of the effort to promote the pursuit of peace in engineering education. The proposed modifications are the result of integrating the United Nations sponsored Integral Model of Education for Peace, Democracy and Sustainable Development into the modern engineering curriculum. The key elements of the model are being at peace with oneself, being at peace with others, and being at peace with the planet. In addition to proposing modifications, specific classroom activities are described and implemented, and students reactions and the effectiveness of the various exercises are discussed.

Introduction
Not long after the outbreak of the second Gulf War, the American Society of Engineering Education (ASEE) released an issue of Prism, its general information publication, with a cover story entitled The Winning Edge.1 In this issue, the advanced technologies developed by countless engineers, the products of engineering education, in support of the war effort were described with immense pride. The article declared that engineering researchers helped the U.S. triumph on the battlefield of Iraq and will play a crucial role in transforming the military of the future. The authors wrote, Technology developed by engineers in university research labs across the nation helped make the difference. Also discussed was the fact that satellite, sensor, and communication technologies that helped the United States defeat Iraq quickly and with relatively few casualties evolved from research conducted over the years at many American schools, including Johns Hopkins University, the Massachusetts Institute of
An earlier version of this paper was presented at the 2005 conference, Ethics and Social Responsibility in Engineering and Technology, Linking Workplace Ethics and Education, Los Angeles, California, USA, 9-10 June 2005. Address for correspondence: Dr. George D. Catalano, Professor of Mechanical and Bioengineering, Director, University Honors Program, The State University of New York at Binghamton, Binghamton, New York 13902-6000, USA; Email: catalano@binghamton.edu. Paper received, 28 November 2005 : revised, 10 January 2006: accepted, 12 January 2006.
1353-3452 2006 Opragen Publications, POB 54, Guildford GU1 2YF, UK. http://www.opragen.co.uk

Science and Engineering Ethics, Volume 12, Issue 2, 2006

399

G. D. Catalano

Technology, Stanford University, and Berkeley. There was much discussion on the accuracy and control of laser-guided weapons, precision attacks, and minimum collateral damage, yet no mention of the details of death and destruction that inevitably accompany any armed conflict. As the guidance and control as well as explosive power of modern weaponry, the product of engineering has increased, so too has the ease and emotional impunity of killing. Lorenz argues that the distance at which all shooting weapons take effect screens the killer against the stimulus situation which would otherwise activate his/her killing inhibitions. At the rifle or hand gun level, the deep, emotional layers of our personality simply do not register the fact that the crooking of a forefinger to release a shot tears the entrails of another person.2 According to Lorenz, this phenomenon is exacerbated by the use of modern remote controlled weapons, since the person who presses the release button is so far removed and completely screened from seeing, hearing or otherwise emotionally realizing the consequences of the action that such actions can be committed with complete impunity. Lorenz adds, This impunity is in fact a prerequisite for modern war as how else can it be explained that people who would not spank a naughty child would be able to release cruise missiles or lay carpets of incendiary bombs on sleeping cities, thereby committing hundred and thousands of children to a horrible death in flames. The one-sided treatment of the war in Prism and in other engineering society journals and magazines suggests that it might be appropriate to examine attitudes in modern engineering education towards armed conflict. One source of such information is the latest revision of the Accreditation Board of Engineering and Technology (ABET) Criteria for Accrediting Engineering Programs (2005-2006), of which Criterion 3 focused specifically on program outcomes.3 In Criterion 3, institutions are asked to describe what students are expected to know and be able to do at the time of their graduation. These program outcomes relate to skills, knowledge and behaviors that students acquire, and they include: a) an ability to apply knowledge of math, sciences and engineering, b) an ability to design and conduct experiments, analyze and interpret data, c) an ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs within realistic restraints such as economic, environmental, social, political, ethical, health, safety, manufacturability , and sustainability, d) an ability to function on multi-disciplinary teams, e) an ability to identify, formulate and solve engineering problems, f) an understanding of professional and ethical responsibility, g) an ability to communicate effectively, h) the broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a global, economic, environmental, and societal framework, i) a recognition of the need for, and an ability to engage in, life-long learning, j) a knowledge of contemporary issues, and k) an ability to use techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools necessary for engineering practice.
400 Science and Engineering Ethics, Volume 12, Issue 2, 2006

Promoting Peace in Engineering Education: Modifying the ABET Criteria

While Criterion 3 sets forth an important, specific set of skills, knowledge and behaviors, unfortunately there is no mention of promoting peace. Some further discussion about what is meant by promoting peace seems warranted. Promoting peace reflects the assumption, which is characteristic of the field of peace studies, that peace can and must include not only the absence of war (negative peace) but also the establishment of life-affirming and life-enhancing values and structures (positive peace).4 Some might find the concept of peace studies redundant, as most of its subject matter can be covered in other academic disciplines including history, psychology, anthropology, sociology, literature, political science, etc. The reality for todays students in the highly controlled engineering curricula is that they are unable to take enough suitable courses in these fields, if they can take any at all. There is a rapidly growing peace studies movement outside of engineering. During the past twenty years the number of college and university peace studies programs has grown from a small handful to over 200. This unprecedented growth of programs in one field represents a phenomenal increase in the number of faculty, students, and academic institutions with interests in the study of peace, conflict, justice, and global security. Unfortunately for most engineering students, such programs are typically at small, private colleges, most without engineering studies. Thus, it has become necessary to develop and implement an education model which promotes positive peace within the context of the existing disciplines. Such an educational model, termed the Integral Model for Peace, Democracy and Sustainable Development, has already been developed and will be considered for implementation in an engineering curriculum.5 The present work has the following main objectives: (1) to suggest possible changes to the ABET criteria which will promote the cause of peace using the Integral Model; (2) to offer specific activities for the classroom which will meet the objectives described in the proposed modified criteria; and (3) to assess, at least in a preliminary way, the effectiveness of the proposed classroom activities.

The Integral Model of Education for Peace, Democracy and Sustainable Development
The Integral Model of Education for Peace, Democracy and Sustainable Development emphasizes conflict prevention through a broad educational framework that links peace, human rights and duties, democracy and sustainable human development for the sake of developing of a culture of peace.5 The model starts from the assumption that there are specific orientations that can guide life practices for building a culture of peace. Each person is assumed to be living in three contexts of interrelationship, which therefore constitute three dimensions of expression of either violent or peaceful relationships: with oneself, with others and with nature. The model posits that we have internal representations of these three spheres of interrelationship and, moreover, that a culture of peace should be founded on an integrated consciousness that goes beyond dualisms such as inner/outer and mind/body. This implies a view of personhood as fully integrated in the world.
Science and Engineering Ethics, Volume 12, Issue 2, 2006 401

G. D. Catalano

Living in peace with oneself includes the mind (i.e. self-realization based upon ethical consciousness of universal realizability, an appreciation of ones place in natural and human history and an understanding of the interdependence of all beings), the body (i.e. an awareness of physical needs and a wise use of any/all satisfiers), and the heart (i.e. meeting needs that generate a sense of basic security and trust, and developing compassion, love and trust). Living in peace with others requires a truly democratic culture with meaningful participation in societal affairs, a sense of responsibility, and a sense of solidarity among all citizens. It also requires a fully engaged and participating citizenship, an identification of the common good, an understanding of peaceful conflict resolution, an understanding and practice of generosity, an understanding of being as a guide for doing and having, and a sense of economic security for all with an absence of a fear of scarcity. Lastly, living in peace with the planet is composed of an ecological consciousness (i.e. identifying oneself with the cosmos, having respect for evolutionary forces, and understanding nature as ever-changing), an understanding of and commitment to biodiversity (i.e. an appreciation of the roles of the various plants and animals, a commitment to the protection of species and a commitment to conservation in concert with the dynamic nature of ecosystems), and an understanding and commitment to the maintenance of a natural balance (i.e. an appreciation of the integrity of natural systems, an emphasis on sustainable resource use and an emphasis on the importance of ecological security). A schematic of the integral model is provided in Figure 1.
Political and Social Participation

Health for All

A Democratic Culture Peace with Others

Peace with Our Body Peace Peace with Ourselves

An Understanding of and Commitment to the Natural Balance

Peace with the Planet

Peace with Our Heart

Peace with Our Mind

An Ecological Consciousness

An Understanding and Commitment to Biodiversity

Figure 1. Schematic of the Integral Model of Education for Peace, Democracy and Sustainable Development
402 Science and Engineering Ethics, Volume 12, Issue 2, 2006

Promoting Peace in Engineering Education: Modifying the ABET Criteria

Proposed Modifications to ABET Criterion 3

In this section, I propose a set of modifications to the ABET Criterion 3 and describe a number of students activities that I have used in support of the modifications. I also assess the students reactions and the effectiveness of the activities. Modification 1: Promote peace through the development of an individual plan for the lifelong cultivation of an awareness of the interdependence of all and of the qualities of compassion, caution, and reflection. The activity developed in support of the proposed modification is described as a compassion practicum. The term, compassion practicum, was first described by Fox6 and has been used by me in a range of settings and courses.7 The practicum challenges students individually to use a formal engineering design methodology to solve an openended design problem, as is routinely done throughout the engineering curriculum. The difference, though, is in the problem statement. Students are asked to do something for someone or some entity (i.e. person, cause, organization, ecosystem, etc.) outside of themselves and that something must demonstrate compassion and promote the cause of peace. Students have to develop their own, specific formal statement of work. In addition, they make a 3-5 minute oral presentation near the end of the term outlining what they did, why they did it, their reactions and the reactions of any other people involved. Also, at the end of the project, students are required to document the entire project again, using a formal design report format with appropriate drawings, costs, timelines, etc. Students are also asked to include their reflections on the entire experience in the final document. Uniformly, the assignment of the compassion practicum is met with disbelief, followed by shock, eventually transformed into hostility. The rejoinder, What does this have to do with engineering? is commonly uttered. This negative attitude often persists through to the actual completion of the project, at which point a total transformation seems to have occurred. Student feedback consistently indicates that the compassion practicum was both the most challenging and the most rewarding part of the class. The projects chosen by students vary widely, though not as a strong function of the grading credit (i.e. points) associated with it. A list of some of the projects is provided in Table 1 (below and overleaf). Table 1. Examples of the Compassion Practicum in Various Engineering Courses
Project Developed a recycling effort in student-occupied apartments Project Elements Monitored waste for a typical week Devised a strategy for reduction, reuse, and recycling of waste Monitored output Developed a brochure for neighborhood to promote similar efforts.
403

Science and Engineering Ethics, Volume 12, Issue 2, 2006

G. D. Catalano Designed and fabricated a portable flower garden for house-bound elderly woman After suffering a major stroke, the elderly woman was not able to grow or care for her flower garden. A flower garden suitable for indoor use and accessible to bed-bound patient was researched, designed and built. The woman was then able to enjoy her flowers and take care of some of their daily needs. Contacted local school districts for possibility of doing Earth-friendly seminars. Taught seminar on saving water and recycling to students at five local elementary schools. Seminar was often made part of the various schools science club activities. Developed and implemented solid waste reduction schemes Developed and implemented energy conservation schemes. Documented and published a newsletter on the effectiveness of the approaches. Adapted aquarium for inclusion of various automatic feeding and cleaning devices. Fully automated the system for roommates use. Performed appropriate fatigue and safety tests. Abandoned pets are often stolen by previous owners. Humane society had extremely limited funds and was located in a previously abandoned warehouse.

Developed and taught a course on Earth-friendly habits to local schoolchildren

One Person Can Make A Difference

Designed and built an aquarium suitable for quadriplegic room-mate Designed and built a security system for local humane society

Modification 2: Promote peace through an improved understanding of other cultures. To promote peace through an understanding of others, students have been challenged to participate in a university-wide languages-across-the-curriculum program. Languages-across-the-Curriculum (LxC) at Binghamton University is a curricular enrichment program that provides students with the opportunity to apply their existing languages skills in courses outside of languages departments in languages other than English. Students thereby obtain intercultural information and international perspectives on course subject matter. It is important to note that LxC is not a language instruction program but rather a language-use program. In this program, students meet in groups of five or six for one contact hour per week for eight weeks with a language specialist, typically a graduate student who was born in a country in which the specific language of interest is used. Students decide on a foreign language, and then are assigned a language resource specialist. During the weekly meetings, articles from a wide range of sources, including foreign newspapers and internet sites, are discussed in both English and a foreign language. Over the course of the programs four years, groups have focused on a wide array of cultures and languages from Western Europe to the African and Asian continents. Considerable data on the effectiveness of LxC participation in providing students insight into has been collected. Approximately 65%
404 Science and Engineering Ethics, Volume 12, Issue 2, 2006

Promoting Peace in Engineering Education: Modifying the ABET Criteria

of the students have judged the experience to worth repeating, with 30% indicating they might repeat their participation and the remaining 5% indicating their disappointment. LxC has received similarly strong endorsements from faculty and language resource specialists in every semester of its existence. Examples of LxC projects undertaken by students in various engineering courses include the following: (1) a comparison and contrast of attitudes concerning nuclear power in Italy and the United States, (2) a comparison and contrast of attitudes concerning environmental stewardship in Latin America and the United States, (3) a comparison and contrast of attitudes concerning the war in Iraq in countries in the Arab world and the United States, and (4) a comparison and contrast of attitudes concerning child labor practices in India and the United States. Modification 3: Promote peace through employing the principles of peaceful conflict resolution. In support of this proposed modification, the assistance of a conflict management specialist has been enlisted. This individual, who also serves as the university ombudsperson, is a lawyer specializing in labor-management relations. During the approximately one weeks time set aside for the workshop, students are introduced to the principles of peaceful conflict resolution with a methodology similar to that used in engineering design. The specific approach used includes the following steps: (1) creation of a safe environment, (2) clarification of all perceptions, (3) identification of both individual and shared needs, (4) introduction to the notion of shared power, (5) reflection on past practices and projection into the future, (6) brainstorming alternatives, (7) development of viable options, and (8) construction of mutually beneficial agreements.8 After the introduction, students are given real-world, and if possible, historically accurate conflict scenarios and asked to prepare a proposed solution which in their collective judgment has the greatest possibility for promoting peace. Comparing the students plan to what actually transpired serves as an effective mechanism for reflecting on the various elements in peaceful resolution of differences. Examples of such scenarios that have been used in the various engineering courses offered include the construction of the Aswan Dam in Egypt, the electrification of rural South Africa, the regulation of international whaling, and the opening of the Arctic Wildlife Refuge in the United States for oil exploration and drilling. After the case study is completed, students are then exposed to important historical figures in peaceful conflict resolution, including Gandhi, the Dalai Lama and Martin Luther King, Jr., through the use of documentaries with in-class discussions afterwards. Students find this introduction to conflict resolution quite useful and relevant, as they all are or have been involved in group activities in many classes, not only in engineering but frequently in the pure sciences as well. They react favorably to the idea that approaches have been developed to deal effectively with conflict among team members.

Science and Engineering Ethics, Volume 12, Issue 2, 2006

405

G. D. Catalano

Final Thoughts
As I have been increasingly troubled by the tone that engineering education has taken in recent years, I have been searching for a mechanism whereby I can examine the courses, which I develop and teach in light of my concerns. An adaptation and implementation of the Integral Model has provided me with such a mechanism and has forced me into action. I now carefully examine all the courses I teach and insure that my syllabi are consistent with the modifications I have suggested for the ABET criteria. My plan is to carefully assess the long-term effectiveness of the changes which I have put in place. During this past academic year, a group of students who have taken several of my classes asked my help in establishing a student chapter of Engineers without Borders on our campus. Remarkably, this new student organization, though in existence on our campus for less than a term, has already grown in membership to surpass the longstanding student honor and discipline-specific professional societies. In addition, they have already begun their first major projecta major renovation of playgrounds in a local urban community. Whether or not the tide is turningrecalling the words of Roger Watersthe initiative and sincerity of the EWB students is most refreshing.8 A legitimate question that may be raised is whether or not explicitly indicating the pursuit of peace within the context of ABET criteria is appropriate. Alternatively, promoting peace could be integrated into already existing outcomes. In my opinion at this crucial time in the rapid advancement of technology, the pursuit of peace must be explicitly stated. It is far too easy to either dismiss or ignore such an outcome when it is incorporated into already existing words and phrases. We have tried the implicit approach which I do not think has worked very well. I submit the time for making the pursuit of peace explicit is at hand. REFERENCES
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Auster, B. (2003) The Winning Edge. Prism, American Society of Engineering Education,Vol. 13 (1). http://www.prism-magazine.org/sept03/winningedge.cfm. Lorenz, K. (1963) On Aggression, Dr. G. Bortha-Scholer Verlag, Wein, English translation by Marjorie Kerr Wilson (1966) Harcourt Brace & Company, New York. ABET Board of Directors (2004) Criteria for Accrediting Engineering Programs. http://www.abet.org/forms.shtml Brash, D. (2000) Approaches to Peace: A Reader in Peace Studies. New York: Oxford University Press. Brenes, A. (2000). The Program on Culture of Peace and Democracy in Central America, University for Peace, Expert Seminar on Human Rights and Peace, Palais Wilson, Geneva. Fox, M. (1999) A Spirituality Named Compassion: Uniting Mystical Awareness with Social Justice. Inner Traditions: Rochester, Vermont. Catalano, G. D. (2001) Compassion Practicum: A Capstone Design experience at the United States Military Academy. Journal of Engineering Education, American Society of Engineering Education. United States Institute of Peace (2005) Guide to Using Simulations. http://www.usip.org/class/simulations/instructions.pdf. Waters, R. (1989) The WallLive in Berlin. Universal Music & VI.

406

Science and Engineering Ethics, Volume 12, Issue 2, 2006