Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Nanoethics and Policy Education: a Case Study of Social Science Coursework and Student Engagement with Emerging Technologies

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
NanoEthics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The article analyzes the integration of a module on nanotechnology, ethics, and policy into a required second-year social science course at a technological university. It investigates not simply the effectiveness of student learning about the technical aspects of nanotechnology but about how issues explored in an interdisciplinary social science course might influence student opinions about the potential of nanotechnology to benefit the developing world. The authors find a correlation between student opinions about the risks and benefits of nanotechnology for the developing world with their judgment of whether nanotechnology fits comparative, historical models for development.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. For a more detailed analysis of this phase of the research and its results, see Mitcham et al. [7].

  2. This timing was used to assess how the course as a whole, rather than simply the nanotechnology lecture, affected student thinking about nanotechnology.

  3. In both cases, the statistical test used was a z test for the difference between two proportions. The null hypothesis—that there is no difference between the pre-module and post-module proportions—is implausible, since the calculated p values (1.62 × 10−6 and 1.84 × 10−2, respectively) were small.

  4. The essay was a required assignment for the course, and the points assigned to its completion were included in the students’ final scores. Like other class assignments, however, not all students completed it. Therefore, since participation in the response exercise was in a sense voluntary, it is likely that these samples, as well as the samples collected in subsequent analyses, are not truly random.

  5. The statistical test used was a z-test for the difference between two proportions. The null hypothesis—that there is no difference between the pre-module and post-module support for building the plant—is implausible, since the calculated p value (1.87 × 10−3) was small.

  6. To assess the correlation between these variables, the phi coefficient was calculated. The phi coefficient measures the strength of the correlation between two binary variables and, in this case, has a range from 0 to 1. Since the value for this data, 0.68, was close to one, these variables are correlated.

  7. The statistical test used was Welch’s t test for the difference between two means. The null hypothesis—that there is no difference between the pre-module and post-module mean number of codes—is implausible, since the calculated p value (5.74 × 10−10) was small.

  8. The statistical test used was a two-sample chi-squared test. For this test, the null hypothesis was that the pre-module relative frequencies are the same (and differ in the collected data because of random sampling error). The p value for this test was 0.89.

References

  1. Besley J, Kramer V, Priest S (2008) Expert opinion on nanotechnology: risks, benefits, and regulation. J Nanoparticle Res. 10(4):549–558

  2. Cobb MD, Macoubrie J (2004) Public perceptions about nanotechnology: risks, benefits and trust. J Nanoparticle Res 6(4):395–405

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Hassan M (2005) Small things and big changes in the developing world. Science 309:65–66

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Invernizzi N, Foladori G (2009) Nanotechnology and the developing world: will nanotechnology overcome poverty or widen disparities?”. In: Johnson DG, Wetmore JM (eds) Technology and society: building our sociotechnical future. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 485–498

    Google Scholar 

  5. Kingdon JW (2003) Agendas, alternatives, and public policies, 2nd edn. Longmann, New York

    Google Scholar 

  6. Kuzma J (2010) “Nanotechnology: piecing together the puzzle of risk.”. In: Daniel Lee Kleinman D, Jason C-H, Karen A, Handelsman J (eds) Controversies in science and technology, vol. 3: from evolution to energy. Liebert, New Rochelle, pp 243–262

    Google Scholar 

  7. Mitcham C, Heller L, Nan W, Packard C, Holles C, Hudson D, Rolston J (2013) Nanotechnology, ethics and policy education: learning and sharing across boundaries. J Nano Educ 5(2):180–187

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. National Academy of Engineering (2004) The engineer of 2020: visions of engineering in the new century. National Academies Press, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  9. National Academy of Engineering (2005) Educating the engineer of 2020: adapting engineering education to the new century. National Academies Press, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  10. Salamanca-Buentello F, Persad DL, Court EB, Martin DK, Daar AS, Singer PA (2009) Nanotechnology and the developing world. In: Johnson DG, Wetmore JM (eds) Technology and society: building our sociotechnical future. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 475–484

    Google Scholar 

  11. Sandler R (2012) Value-sensitive design and nanotechnology. In: Scott D, Francis B (eds) Debating science: deliberation, values, and the common good. Prometheus Books, Amherst, pp 205–226

    Google Scholar 

  12. Satterfield T, Kandlikar M, Beaudrie CEH, Conti J, Herr Harthorn B (2009) Anticipating the perceived risk of nanotechnologies. Nat Nanotechnol 4(11):752–758

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Scheufele DA, Corley EA, Dunwoody S, Shih T, Hillback E, Guston DH (2007) Scientists worry about some risks more than the public. Nat Nanotechnol 2(12):732–734

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Scheufele DA, Lewenstein BV (2005) The public and nanotechnology: how citizens make sense of emerging technologies. J Nanoparticle Res 7(6):659–667

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Schummer J (2007) Impact of nanotechnologies on developing countries. In: Allhoff F, Lin P, Moor J, Weckert J (eds) Nanoethics: the ethical and social implications of nanotechnology. Wiley, New York, pp 291–307

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was funded by the National Science Foundation grant 1138257 and two Colorado School of Mines Research Council Undergraduate Research Fellowships. The authors also gratefully acknowledge the support of the CSM Renewable Energy Materials Research Science and Engineering Center Research Experience for Undergraduates and the faculty teaching Human Systems and Nature and Human Values.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Liberal Arts and International Studies, Colorado School of Mines, 1500 Illinois Street, Golden, CO, 80401, USA

    Jessica Smith Rolston, Skylar Huzyk Zilliox, Corinne Packard, Carl Mitcham & Brian Zaharatos

Authors
  1. Jessica Smith Rolston
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Skylar Huzyk Zilliox
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Corinne Packard
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Carl Mitcham
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Brian Zaharatos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jessica Smith Rolston.

Appendix: Essay Prompt

Appendix: Essay Prompt

NanoCoat is a US-based corporation that is becoming a leader in the manufacture of specialized paints and other surface coatings. These paints and coatings, developed from techniques utilizing nanoscience and nanotechnology, exhibit distinctive features (e.g., self-cleaning and highly water resistant). But many products have not yet been fully approved for manufacture and sale in several European countries. Furthermore, the company projects the emergence of a vast market in the developing worlds of Latin America, Asia, and Africa. After surveying investment opportunities in all three regions, Nano-Coat has chosen to site a new industrial plant in the Republic of Mchana, a gold-exporting African country with below-average life expectancy and a high proportion of poor people. The leader of the Republic of Mchana, President Akili, is excited about the NanoCoat decision, which he thinks will put his country on the technological map and uplift his people economically. He finds it puzzling that some Western and Asian countries have rejected investment approaches from NanoCoat.

  1. 1.

    What economic, political, social, and cultural factors might be encouraging NanoCoat executives to consider constructing a plant in the Republic of Mchana?

  2. 2.

    What calculations or considerations might have led President Akili to welcome NanoCoat despite resistance elsewhere?

  3. 3.

    What kinds of responses or reactions might be expected from worker organizations, human rights advocates, and economic planners in Western countries regarding the NanoCoat decision?

  4. 4.

    Does this investment fit with historical scenarios of how countries become economically and technologically capable? Do you share President Akili’s enthusiasm?

  5. 5.

    If you were a concerned citizen of the Republic of Mchana who had also taken NHV and/or Human Systems, what information might you want to collect in order to be assured that President Akili has made a reasonable decision?

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Rolston, J.S., Zilliox, S.H., Packard, C. et al. Nanoethics and Policy Education: a Case Study of Social Science Coursework and Student Engagement with Emerging Technologies. Nanoethics 8, 217–225 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11569-014-0210-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11569-014-0210-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation