**3. Theoretical and practical background**

### **3.1 Ethics**

According to [34, 35], ethics is a systematic approach to understand, analyze and distinguish issues of right and wrong, good and bad, admirable and deplorable in their relation to well-being and relationships between sentient beings. Ethics is an active process rather than a static one, which is why some ethicists use the expression 'doing ethics'. When people 'do ethics', they need to support their beliefs and claims with sound reasoning. In other words, even if people believe that ethics is totally subjective, they must be able to justify their positions before others through insights, reflections and arguments based on theory, context, rules, and rationality. In addition, feelings and emotions are a normal part of everyday life and can also play a legitimate role in ethics. However, people sometimes allow their emotions to outweigh good decisions related to ethics. Evaluations generated through the practice of ethics require a balance of emotion and reason. In contrast to ethics, morality is the set of beliefs, behaviors and specific ways of deriving from ethics. Morality can vary in a given population, depending on people's education, beliefs, social situation and culture. A person's morals are considered good or bad through systematic ethical discernment and reflection. The converse of morality is immorality, which means that a person's behavior is contrary to accepted social, religious, cultural or professional ethical standards and principles. Examples of immorality include dishonesty, fraud, murder, and acts of sexual abuse. Amoral is a term used to refer to actions that can normally be judged as moral or immoral, but which are performed with a lack of concern for good behavior. For example, murder is immoral, but if a person commits it without any feeling of remorse, or perhaps even a sense of pleasure, they act amorally.

According to [13, 35], ethics is a set of concerns, rules, principles, virtues, values and decision processes that allow people to live together and pursue their common and individual interests. As already made clear above, in the news everyday situations are seen that violate ethical principles in general, with a wide range of consequences for companies and citizens. Therefore, pedagogical artifacts and practices must be provided, which meet usability criteria [36], designed to help students from a wide variety of professionals, to be more ethical when making decisions in their future work fields. Ethical decision-making and moral reasoning are fundamental for future professional success and can be achieved by developing the skills of reflection, argumentation, discernments and moral reasoning, while students participate and communicate among them with equal opportunities [12, 37, 38].

#### **3.2 Ethical discernment, reflection and argumentation**

Ethical discernment is a characteristic of people that allows them to recognize the existence of an ethical dilemma, [20, 39]. The recognition of an ethical dilemma implies perceiving a problem or conflict in some situation or decision, whose dilemma becomes an ethical problem. It is considered that, if the ethical problem is not perceived, the process required to argue and reflect on ethical judgments will not happen [20, 39]. Therefore, it is necessary to distinguish both concepts: ethical dilemma and problem. An ethical dilemma exists when there is a situation where someone will consider one or more alternatives of action, including not acting at all, that are different consistent or inconsistent with some formal or informal rule, code or ethical norm [20]. An ethical problem does not exist until it is perceived as such, and then it happens that an attempt is made to resolve ethical dilemmas; that is, it occurs when a person perceives that their duties and responsibilities towards one

#### *A Social Platform for Fostering Ethical Education through Role-Playing DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.96602*

group are inconsistent with their duties towards another group, including themselves. For the model developed by [20], only important ethical dilemmas will have an intense ethical conflict, provided that these are perceived as a type of problem. People often approach ethics with an initial expectation that there will be a correct answer to every question posed. It is important to help them accept the fact that there will not always be a correct answer, but one that requires personal judgment [40]. According to Kohlberg [29], ethical training should be encouraged, without limiting students to the role of mere spectators who only seek to apply the most appropriate ethical standard to each situation; but rather to carry out activities in which they participate, express, and make it easier for them to carry out their ethical evaluations, argued in an honest and authentic way, without feeling inhibited by their peers.

In [37, 40, 41], it is indicated that the key skills of ethical discernment are the following: a) **analytical skills** [41]: develop an aptitude for clear and logical thinking, where students learn to think reflectively, critically and solve complex problems supported by arguments that prove or refute the positions taken; b) **flexibility and independence of mind**: considering issues from multiple perspectives or points of view, encouraging a willingness to challenge orthodoxies, as well as the courage to set aside one's personal convictions to pursue a discussion wherever it leads; c) **making reasoned decisions** [41]: exercising coherent principles of thought and action, to learn to determine what types of evidence are needed to support their views and choices and that are justified by means of arguments that support the positions adopted; d) **communication skills**: learning to express points of view verbally and in writing, emphasizing group discussion and the articulation of arguments in direct response to verbal; and e) **group and collaborative work skills**, [37, 41]: create a supportive environment for the development of ethical discernment that is group and collaborative, where students feel safe, there is a climate of mutual respect and confidentiality is ensured. According to [40], the group and collaborative work skills required by a person who is dealing with an ethical dilemma are: a) share their ideas, either verbally or in writing; b) express their opinions without interruption; c) express their criticism, directed at arguments and not at individuals; d) be able to handle conflictive situations; e) encourage others to generate constructive criticism of their beliefs; f) encourage the search for commonalities between opposing points of view; and g) be open to considering different points of view.

### **3.3 Ethics in higher education**

According to [35], there is a growing need for well-established ethical frameworks and practices in ethical training in business schools [13, 28, 42–44], and in engineering education [14, 15, 45, 46]; who have the responsibility of providing their students with training in their ethical discernment, argumentation and reflections [30]. According to [40], if a business or engineering schools provides what we call 'reactive' ethics education, which only serves to inform the practice of statutory and regulatory requirements and responsibility to shareholders, it is most likely that the organizations introduce procedures that merely comply with legal ethical business practice. However, for organizations to adopt an ethical stance and socially responsible thinking, they also need to be 'proactive', with fundamental ethics programs taught by business and engineering schools. A 'proactive' ethics education implies the development of flexible but ethical managerial thinking and practice, that can be applicable to different contexts. For this, it is necessary that business and engineering schools establish the importance of contributions that increase moral reasoning, the improvement of ethical training and the development of decision-making skills with an ethical approach and leadership. Boo and Koh's research [47] identifies that top management support, with links between ethical

behavior, professional success, and ethical organizational climate are all that is necessary for effective ethical codes. It could be argued that corporate malfeasance, as in Enron and Parmalat [48], would have been prevented by properly employing and monitoring 'reactive' and 'proactive' business ethics practices and procedures. Clearly more profound changes in culture are necessary, and values are needed in organizations to deal with these types of problems.

According to Holsapple et al. [15], teachers in engineering schools often describe ethics education as a balance between knowledge of ethical codes of conduct and understanding of ethical rights and errors. However, graduates often report that their ethical training relied almost entirely on the application of codes, implying less depth and complexity in the analysis of ethical dilemmas. While ethics is intended to be a central component of today's engineering curriculum, it is often perceived as a marginal requirement that must be met [14]. According to [45], the pedagogy of ethics for engineers must consider the characteristics of thought inherent in the scientific training of students and their future professional approach. The authors characterize the mentality of engineers with the following description: the real world is what can be touched and measured, the prototype of rational thinking is mathematical-deductive reasoning, and the best results are obtained by following standard procedures. Therefore, it is a priority to recognize the difficulties of engineering students to recognize the value of ethics, along with moral discernment and reflection. In a systematic review of the literature on interventions for teaching engineering ethics in the USA, Hess and Fore [49] report that the most common methods involved exposing students to codes or standards, using case studies (cased-based learning) and discussions. They emphasize the need to develop learning experiences where students reflect on their own emotions and those of others, with greater empathy with the actors involved and the situations.

#### **3.4 Instructional approaches in higher ethics education**

In [37], a quantitative grouping procedure was carried out to derive a typology of instruction in ethics education with respect to four categories of instruction. These include content, processes, methods of delivery, and instructional activities. Eight instructional approaches were identified through this grouping procedure, each with different levels of effectiveness based on one of nine commonly used ethical criteria. Viable approaches to ethics training, of which effect size estimates (i.e., Cohen's *d*) are known, include 'professional decision processes training' (*d* = 0.50) and 'field-specific compliance training' (*d* = 0.46). Professional decision processes training uses a variety of techniques, including case-based learning, roleplaying learning, problem-based learning, team-based learning and discussion. Next, articles that report on methods for developing ethical discernment and reflection in higher education contexts are described, comprising case-based learning, and role-playing activities.

**Case-based learning (CBL)** consists of the use of fictitious or real cases associated with specific curricular disciplines, in which ethical dilemmas are presented, and pedagogical activities of ethical discernment are instantiated. Students read and analyze a 'case' described in detail, usually adopting the role of decision makers [50]. Some examples of the use of this methodology are described below.

In the Faculty of Economics and Business at University of Chile, based on the contents of the cases described in [51], a methodology is applied based on a) case reading, b) identification of relevant actors, c) identification of premises in conflict, d) evaluation of alternatives and decision-making, and e) plenary discussion and conclusion in teams of 5 to 7 members, with the support of the socrative. com application to collect opinions. This methodology is applied in various courses

#### *A Social Platform for Fostering Ethical Education through Role-Playing DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.96602*

requiring ethical education, such as Management and Business, Costs and Budgets, Business Income, Tax Economics, and Introduction to Economics, among others. Several advantages have been observed, including that the group discussion permits listening and analyzing diverse perspectives, improving the depth of analysis and discussion of the case and the ethical dilemmas identified. The moderator facilitates aspects to be debated and opens instances to spur students' critical reasoning. The use of socrative.com allows to have a record of the conclusions of the groups, thus facilitating the teacher's review after the session is finished. Among the cons, not all students' opinions can be effectively captured, because some students are apprehensive about openly exposing their comments. Moreover, limitations on the quantity and quality of the interactions arise due to time restrictions, and that the activity is done in a single class session.

In [52], to establish the case, face-to-face interviews with people directly or indirectly involved with business ethical dilemmas in real life are organized in class, so the experience of the actors involved is counted on. Then a discussion is held among the participants based on a specific ethical dilemma. The advantage of this variant is that, by being in contact with the person interviewed, it is possible to have a more direct contact with the various ethical dilemmas that are experienced in the professional field. It is expected that this level of proximity to the problem will allow the generation of greater affective empathy in the students and thereby improve their decision-making in real situations, taking advantage of the 'sensitization' of the students as a benefit of the process. In addition, while discussing during class, students learn from each other by presenting their own arguments that support the decision made. As for the disadvantages, it requires great preparation to be carried out, since it implies counting on a person involved in a real case. A record of what was discussed with the interviewee is not generated, but only what was noted by the interviewers, so the teacher does not know the points discussed by the group at the time of generating the discussions. This methodology was applied to ethics courses at Kenan-Flagler Business School of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

The CBL is a useful method to bring students closer to real ethical and professional decisions, without the consequences that decision making entails for case roles and stakeholders in real situations. The method manages to generate both the capacity for critical analysis and cognitive empathy. Despite being a method with many advantages, its main disadvantage is its structuredness. Preparation of structured cases is required, with sufficient contextualization and depth to understand the problem and achieve a connection between the students and the roles. In contrast, real life scenarios are often ill-structured and decision making relies on limited information.

**Role-playing Learning (RPL)** Role-playing is the exercise of changing one's behavior to take on a particular role. For this purpose, it is a conscious change to represent an adopted role, extracted from a context or problematic in analysis. It is a method that is regularly combined with the roles of people who are described in a case. Some examples of the use of this methodology are described below.

The method used in the York University School of Engineering [46] applies roleplaying with theatrical elements to teach decision making on controversial ethical issues. The activity encompasses the following phases: a) role assignment: each student receives information on their role based on a script prepared by the teacher; b) discussion: the teacher presents questions about the case, and each student exposes and discusses their points of view, based on their role, in relation to these questions with their classmates; c) deepening: at some point in the discussion, the students can elaborate more detail about their positions, and expect their classmates to do so as well. With additional details provided by each role, the students can complete their analysis of the situation; d) plenary: after the discussions, the teacher begins

a closing phase, in which the analyses achieved previously for each question are synthesized. Theatrical elements are used through the role-playing process, including costumes, music and other recorded media, which allow to further increase the credibility of the recreation. The authors who propose this activity [46] indicate advantages compared to other traditional methods, similar to those found other RPL designs, such as greater student involvement, engagement and dynamism in interactions. Among the disadvantages, it is indicated that a high degree of preparation is required, including the activity script, the description of the roles involved, as well as the theatrical resources that complement the exercise.

According to [43], who proposed an RPL activity that was incorporated into a financial management course for undergraduate and graduate students, RPL has the advantage of creating low-risk conditions so that students can express their opinions and perceptions with minimal teacher intervention. For RPL to be successful, the activity needs to be potentially conflictive, and ideally allow the majority of students to identify with some role, in order to encourage participation. The roles should result in personifications by which students can feel comfortable and immersed. Otherwise, the students will unlikely be able to imagine the actions the role would likely perform, nor relate their own experiences emphatically with the situation as experienced by the role.

The RPL is a dynamic and simple method to understand, and it allows to keep students more involved in the case or problem, since they internalize themselves from their role to defend their positions, and from where it is attractive to keep participating. As a general disadvantage, it is observed that identifying with a unique role in the game and defending their position from the perspective of that role, can cause students to then focus the solutions on the character they had to interpret, closing the possibility to the other characters or, sometimes, reducing the role of the decision-maker in the case.

### **4. Design of EthicApp-RP**

#### **4.1 Design principles**

Based on the analysis of literature in the field of ethics education already exposed in [32, 33], this section present the design principles for EthicApp-RP, comprising relevant functions for supporting case-based learning in ethics [31, 53, 54] and role-playing [43, 44, 46]. Its design principles are as: 1) embeddable in traditional courses, 2) easy to use, 3) implicit interactions to support student and teacher roles, 4) multidimensional judgements, 5) anonymity, 6) support for reflection, discussion and argumentation, 7) domain independency, 8) efficient information management, 9) combine individual work and group work, 10) Flexibility, and 11) device independence.

All these principles are explained in detail in section 5.1 of a previous research which instructional design were based entirely on a cased-based learning methodology, and applying differentials to the selection of statements [32]. Regarding to requirement 2) a desirable level of technical usability is given by mean score equal or above 75 in the System Usability Scale (SUS) [36]. For requirement 4) applied to EthicApp-RP, the students must express their ethical judgement on the given case by ordering (i.e., prioritizing) a set of actions, according to a prescribed criterion, and by providing justification on the ordering of one or more of the actions. The criterion prompts the student to reason according to their assigned role, and based on that specific perspective, prioritize decisions considering their effect on different stakeholders, with the intent to reach the most beneficial (or least

#### *A Social Platform for Fostering Ethical Education through Role-Playing DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.96602*

detrimental) solution pathway to the ethical problem. In order to attest the qualities of requirement 6), mean scores in the range of 4 to 5 points in the constructs of the Pedagogically Meaningful Learning Questionnaire (PMLQ ) [55], are considered a desirable objective. Regarding 19), EthicApp-RP supports flexibility in its pedagogical flow; that is, while the activity must always begin with a mandatory individual phase to collect students' initial appraisal of the case, the successive phases, i.e., individual or collaborative, shall be optional and configured on-the-fly, thus allowing different phase configurations depending on timing constraints and pedagogical goals in which the activity is enacted, [37, 41].
