The goals of this project are (1) to deliver a set of "walk-through" case-based ethics modules ready for online use by graduate students of software engineering, and (2) to deliver and document a set of improved module-construction tools that others can use to build their own similar case studies. The project starts with well-documented cases of real-world software engineering failure, because research shows that many such failures can be traced to deviations from accepted professional and ethical norms. A case study, presented as a sterile document, may not provoke the level of ethical engagement needed to make a pedagogic impression, so this project will convert a carefully selected set of cases into active, branching "decision spaces" that can be navigated online by graduate students. As they "walk" the decision space, they participate vicariously in the case study, make and undo decisions, and experience the good and bad consequences of their actions (or inaction), including their effect on stakeholders. The project creates four different types of "decision spaces" using four different types of tools. Here the goal is to determine which combinations produce the better balance of production effort and pedagogic value. To determine whether this balance has been achieved, investigators will perform a meticulous time-and-task accounting that will allow them to state the approximate cost, in staff-hours, to deliver one hour of interactive content under each of four models. This cost can then be balanced against judgments of pedagogic value developed within the project's assessment procedures. The finished "decision-space navigation modules" receive multiple objectives-based heuristic evaluations from three different perspectives: by the pedagogic team, from an instructional standpoint; by content consultants, from a subject-matter standpoint; and by Delphi panelists, from the standpoint of web-based delivery.
The project is interesting, both from a computer science standpoint and from an ethical standpoint. The project maps fractally complex decision spaces, where each decision point is a complex tuple consisting of the current world-state, a set of options constrained by that state, a set of possible actions afforded by those options and, for each action, a set of new world-states that would likely follow as a result of that action. Because of the project's ethics focus, however, paths through this decision space are restricted to those that are defined by adherence to, or by deviations from, the ACM/IEEE-CS "Software Engineering Code of Ethics and Professional Practice."
Broader Impacts: According to a study released in 2002 by the National Institute of Standards and Technology, software failures cost the U.S. economy an estimated $59.5 billion annually. Many failures can be traced to software engineers' neglect of specific professional and ethical standards. But cost is not the only issue. Software engineering failures have momentous social consequences: invasions of privacy, battlefield mistakes, theft of intellectual property, transportation deaths and delays, spyware, power outages, medical misdiagnosis and mistreatment, identity theft, election fraud, false arrest and imprisonment, denials of service, loss of data, flawed credit reports and a host of other nasty consequences. As a corrective step, this project targets those most likely to enter the field in positions of influence and authority: namely, software engineering graduate students.
