Engineer education as citizenship education

In Ogawa Taiji, Murase Tomoyuki & Kei Nishiyama (eds.), Proceedings of InInternational Symposium on Advances in Technology Education Conference. International Symposium on Advances in Technology Education. pp. 326-331 (2020)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Engineering and technology aim to lead a better life for people. But the meaning of “better” is highly contested in modern democratic societies where different citizens have different cultures and values. Engineers, as one of the citizens in such societies, are also living in multicultural and multi-value settings, and therefore they need to be responsible for such diversity when they engage in technological developments. Therefore, in engineering education, it is necessary to aim at not only acquiring the specialized technological knowledge but also cultivating citizenship. By citizenship, it refers to a set of abilities to communicate and care for people with respect by taking into account different opinions and expertise of others. Nevertheless, this has not been emphasized much in engineering education in Japan. For example, even in the class of engineering ethics, emphasis is placed more on the acquisition of textbook-based knowledge and virtue of problem cases, and less on abilities to discuss freely and gently. Then, in general education of NIT we have conducted a dialogue-based educational program where learners/students ask questions, listen together and discuss with others. This program is designed based upon so-called Philosophy for/with Children (P4C). Matthew Lipman, one of the founders of P4C, defined the primary aim of P4C as multidimensional- thinking: critical thinking, creative thinking, and caring thinking. In addition, this multidimensional- thinking may, according to many P4C scholars, have a potential of creating active citizenry. The discussion by P4C has three characteristics as follows: 1) People make a circle in the classroom and create a space where students can feel an emotional and intellectual “safety”. 2)Questions being discussed is proposed by students themselves based on their interests, not by teachers 3) Rather than rushing to reach a conclusion, students are asked to concentrate on listening to the differences between each other. This paper begins by explaining what P4C is and why/how P4C is suitable for citizenship education, and then the following sections show our P4C classes in NIT (Tokyo and Ube) and learner's responses. Finally, we claim that the “community of inquiry” created through P4C can prevent the “self- righteousness” of engineers.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive

External links

  • This entry has no external links. Add one.
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Applying Philosophy for Children to Workshop-Style Environmental Education.Mitsuyo Toyoda - 2008 - Proceedings of the Xxii World Congress of Philosophy 27:101-109.
Strengthening the Thinking in Korean Secondary Education.Sang-Jun Ryu - 2008 - Proceedings of the Xxii World Congress of Philosophy 37:241-250.
Philosophy for children: theories and praxis in teacher education.Babs Anderson (ed.) - 2017 - New York, NY: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.

Analytics

Added to PP
2020-03-13

Downloads
1,212 (#14,561)

6 months
146 (#27,988)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author Profiles

Kei Nishiyama
Kaichi International University
Tomoyuki Murase
National Institute of Technology, Tokyo College

References found in this work

Thinking in Education.Matthew Lipman - 2003 - British Journal of Educational Studies 51 (3):303-305.
Philosophy goes to school.Matthew Lipman - 1988 - Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Philosophy in the Classroom.Matthew Lipman, Ann Margaret Sharp & Frederick S. Oscanyan - 1977 - Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association 51 (2):213-214.

Add more references