Group 5 Ethical Project Peer Evaluation

               The project that was proposed was unique and interesting. The idea of a debate tournament certainly encompasses many of the other aspects of engineering, aside from science and math, which are required for many engineers. The ability to effectively communicate ideas with others and present them in a structured order is an essential skill for engineers in the professional field.

              However, there are several suggestions that we would like to make concerning this project. Group 5 proposed a one-on-one debate that allotted speakers 5 min speaking time and 2 min rebuttal. We believe that in order to make the activity more efficient and fun for people, a specific debate style should be utilized. For example, public forum, which consists of a team of two, is an easy style that many high school students are accustomed to. Another option is an international debate style known as Karl Popper, consisting of a team of 3, which would prove to be easier for international students competing against other native speakers. The Lincoln-Douglas debate format (one –on-one), which places a heavy emphasis on logic, ethical values, and philosophy, is another style worth considering. Having a more structured debate format will be more efficient in helping to improve communication style and grasp how to approach ethical issues as these styles give speakers more time to speak and organize their thoughts. With more cross examination and rebuttals, the debate has the opportunity to intensify as debaters will be prompted to consider both sides of the topic rather than just one. Engineering ethics consist of more than just one side. There are multiple aspects to ethics and using these debate formats will allow debaters to contemplate the numerous aspects of engineering ethics.

                Additionally, we also believe that holding one tournament is impractical with 400+ students. Even if Group 5 were to implement the Karl Popper debate format (3 person group), there would be 100+ teams meaning that there would need to be more than 50 rounds. This would be logistically impossible as there would not be enough rooms to host all the rounds. Therefore, we propose that there should be more than one tournament, each with its own different emphasis. For example, one tournament could focus on the theme of safety and the other tournaments could address different topics such as different ethical views, etc. Also, rather than having the top 64 teams go into the elimination round, we believe that the number should be lowered to make the whole tournament run efficiently.

                 We applaud the idea of hosting a debate tournament as such an opportunity would encourage many of the new students to see aspects of engineering that they probably never have heard of before. In debating with and against other peers about engineering ethics, students will be able to confront their own questions concerning ethical dilemmas. Additionally, debating both sides of a topic facilitates consideration of both sides and students will ultimately be able to choose which position they favor, reflecting their personal preference regarding an ethical issue.