Willey, L; Burke, D D --- "A constructivist approach to business ethics: developing a student code of professional conduct" [2011] LegEdDig 33; (2011) 19(3) Legal Education Digest 5

• A constructivist approach to business ethics: developing a student code of professional conduct

---

A constructivist approach to business ethics: developing a student code of professional conduct

L Willey and D D Burke

Journal of Legal Studies Education, Vol. 28, No. 1, 2011, pp 1-38

Business ethics may be defined as ‘the principles, values and standards that guide behaviour in the world of business’. The importance of ethical awareness in business transactions and education is widely recognised, and evidence shows that ethics education can influence decision making in the workplace. As a result, colleges of business often integrate ethics into the content of courses. Notably, ethics is often emphasised in business law and legal environment courses. This study of ethics may be lecture based, focusing on ethical principles, or may centre upon ethical decision making, examining cases in order to elicit an ethical sensitivity to outcomes.

Activities that support learning, like role plays, are also an effective approach to incorporating ethics into course content.

Whatever approach to teaching ethics is utilised, appropriate learning goals for an ethics course would be to raise student awareness of ethics, assist students in recognising that all decisions have ethical aspects, and provide a framework for ethical analysis. To that end, this article considers a constructivist approach to teaching ethics to undergraduate students that emphasises active student involvement and allows for the application of ethical concepts and decision making to matters of concern to students.

Constructivism’ is a term that covers a broad array of complex philosophical theories that address the way knowledge is acquired. For the past 30 years, philosopher and scholar Ernst von Glaserfeld has been considered a preeminent scholar of constructivism, and his published work includes numerous books and articles. According to von Glaserfeld, a learner processes new information in an active manner, with the learner ‘sensing, acting, and thinking’. As such, constructivism reflects a way of knowing that is active, not passive. Words alone cannot transfer knowledge; rather, the transfer requires that the learner be engaged in active sensory modes of acquiring knowledge.

Cognitive development occurs when the learner is compelled to use prior experiences and knowledge to comprehend and digest the new information resulting in the acquisition of new knowledge. This method of processing new information forces the learner to think through the new information, resulting in a deeper understanding of that information. While the active construction of knowledge is personal, the developmental process can be triggered by personal or from shared experiences. While philosophers may sometimes attribute divergent meanings to these two philosophies of constructivism, in an educational setting social and cognitive constructivism serve to identify two roles for learners and together contribute to the constructivist learning environment.

In the classroom, constructivist learning is a dynamic process where learners are constructing their own knowledge by interacting with real-world experiences, their peers, and their instructor. Educators who embrace this approach, known as constructivists, consider learning to be an active process in which learners individually construct an interpretation of meaning based upon their experiences. Moreover, the social aspect to learning in the constructivist classroom is supported by group work and interaction with the instructor.

Recognising that the students’ backgrounds will affect how the students interpret the new information, constructivist educational practice includes encouraging students to apply existing knowledge to authentic problems and to engage in dialogue with peers to help them make sense of information. According to proponents of constructivism, the proposed benefits of a constructivist classroom are increased student involvement, student motivation, and satisfaction with learning.

To constructivist educators, lectures alone are insufficient to convey knowledge. The passive act of listening does not engage the learner in building new knowledge. Rather, the classroom should provide experiential activities that increase knowledge and support deeper understanding. An array of activities may promote knowledge construction and individual learning, such as role plays, journals, reflective essays, question-and-answer sessions, and cooperative learning.

The other important component of the constructivist classroom concerns group work that supports the concept that interaction with peers deepens the learning process and understanding. In a group setting, the members of the group, along with the problems addressed by the group, often create the cognitive challenges that compel the learner to consider the exchange of new information within the group, to process this information and ultimately to create new knowledge. Groups also provide exposure to diverse opinions and experiences that enable the student to consider how other learners think and process knowledge and to recognise alternative perspectives. In addition, learners are exposed to the concept that peers are resources, de-emphasising the traditional view that the professor is the only resource. In a supervised group setting, peers and professors support the learner and enhance the knowledge-building process.

Both student and professor take on new roles in the constructivist classroom. Rather than being the source of knowledge, the professor participates in the student’s construction of knowledge. In theory, altering the professor’s role in this way eliminates power struggles that can inhibit a student’s learning.

The primary goals of a constructivist classroom are providing for experiences that expose students to varied perspectives, stimulating multiple ways to think about and resolve problems, allowing for the evaluation of alternatives, making learning realistic and relevant, encouraging ownership in the learning process, and encouraging self-awareness of the learning process.

The control over learning shifts to students within the parameters set in the classroom. Students learn to think for themselves rather than absorbing the thinking dictated by the professor. With minimum direction from the professor, students are compelled to set their own course for learning and to express ideas in their own way and in their own words. Ultimately, the objectives of the constructivist classroom are student acquisition of learning skills that promote independent thought, the development of the ability to work through problems collaboratively, the enhancement of respect for diversity, the development of skills needed to evaluate choices, increased self-awareness, and the ability to engage in lifelong learning.

The application of constructivism theories to education practice is not without criticisms. Foremost, the translation of constructivism as philosophical epistemology to educational practice is not clearly defined. Constructivist theory does not necessarily refute the concept that someone can learn from just being told. Nor is the individual construction of knowledge the only means for learning in every learning environment. While the construction of knowledge may provide learning opportunities, the nature and accuracy of the knowledge that is actually constructed is also an important factor that extends beyond the knowledge-construction process. Moreover, some students may be reluctant to participate in constructed learning activities, especially those who are less vocal because this approach may favour the more vocal student.

Furthermore, developing constructivist learning environments is time consuming and limits both the course content and the professor’s involvement in the learning process. For the course developer, the traditional 50 minute class period may be insufficient for providing the time needed to apply constructivist techniques, and large classes may exaggerate the difficulties associated with applying appropriate learning activities. The establishment of standards and methods of assessment is also problematic when learning is premised on the individual construction of knowledge.

Despite the criticisms, the constructivist approach has particular application to the study of ethics in that ethics education is designed, in part, to instil personal responsibility and to inspire the practice of evaluating choices with an internal moral compass. Although graduate business students often have experienced perplexing ethical dilemmas in a professional or corporate setting, the experiences of undergraduate students are usually more limited, and they may lack a meaningful reference to ethical issues associated with the workplace. While evaluating the actions of others from a historical and critical perspective no doubt causes students to reflect on responsibility and the consequences of choices, involving them in a personal ethical analysis of their present situation provides a contextual paradigm that is both internalised and portable. Certainly, incorporating an ethical evaluation of academic integrity issues is an excellent method of making ethical decision making real and personal to students. Likewise, having students pen their own Code of Professional Responsibility as an active-learning exercise that will prompt them to think about many of the same ethical issues presented in case studies, but in the context of their world, serves a similar goal.

During a senior-level liberal arts course on Business Ethics and Corporate Responsibility, in addition to examining traditional content (e.g., whistle-blowing, workplace monitoring, diversity, environmental sustainability) in the traditional context (class discussion of text and cases, supplemental readings, quizzes), students worked throughout the semester on the development of a Student Code of Professional Conduct (SCPC). The 40-student undergraduate class had majors from various programs of study, including business administration, communications, and accounting.

The focus of the project was to enable students to create a set of guidelines for classroom etiquette, professionalism, and responsibility to foster a more professional learning environment based on their perspectives and ideas. Ethical conduct is not a distant concept that students must deal with in the future; it is part of their contemporary lives as well. While discussions on ethics often focus on philosophy and decision making, this project focuses on ethics and behaviour in a personally relevant and contemporary manner.

The exercise challenges students to consider how a professional should behave in certain settings and how that behaviour would translate to other settings. For the purposes of this exercise, being ethical is considered to be not only a state of mind and process for making a decision when faced with a dilemma; it is also a way of comporting oneself in daily activities. It is important to impress upon students that ethics is an integral part of conducting business and that most decisions have ethical implications. Following such reasoning then, ethical conduct and ethical decision making should be an important part of their actions and decisions while students.

Students were given minimal instruction regarding the development of the SCPC to encourage independent thought and to encourage the identification of issues relevant to them.

The use of a textbook that considered both law and ethics assisted in organising class content, including the stages to be addressed in the development of the SCPC. Content from the text was paired with ideas for possible topics to be included in the SCPC. A chapter on sustainability, for example, was paired with research on environmental concerns, such as the concept of a carbon footprint and recycling. A chapter on employee privacy was paired with discussions on student privacy and confidentiality. As the class read particular chapters of the text, students also considered relevant topics for the SCPC project. While the class was flexible enough to allow students to discuss other concerns, this method provided structure and a jumping-off point for matters associated with the SCPC and served to connect readings with student behaviours.

Assignments, referred to as projects, kept students on task and focused on course work and the SCPC and identified individual and group responsibilities for a particular week. Potential SCPC topics were assigned individually to students each week and included student research on a particular aspect of student or professional conduct associated with the chapter content. Projects included reading particular textbook chapters and/or other articles, Internet research associated with matters related to the SCPC, business and professional codes of ethics and online work, quizzes, or discussion postings. Later in the semester, projects focused on editorial issues and the development of an oral presentation of the completed SCPC.

Initial class work on the SCPC project involved randomly assigning students to work groups. During an early class discussion, the students developed simple rules about work-group responsibility (punctuality, participation, respectfulness) and identified the strengths that each could bring to the group (skills such as written or oral communications, research, organisation). A simple Work Group Evaluation was used each week to allow the students in the group to assess the work of the other group members. The number of points a student received for the week for group participation was determined by the group.

The groups then brainstormed to cull diverse opinions from all the members about general topics that could be included in a SCPC. The group members voiced their aversions and personal peeves and examined how these issues should be addressed and shared with the class. The class determined that the SCPC would be a guide to behaviour that is expected of professionals beyond the basic functions of university codes: discipline for academic violations and criminal conduct. Rather, the SCPC serve to complement a university code. The issue of sanctions was also a topic of class discussion. Understanding that the class did not have the authority to sanction, the decision was made to partner with a college student group that represented the college’s business students, the Student Leadership Council (SLC). Class members presented the concept of the SCPC to that organisation, and the SLC will be pursuing the implementation of a SCPC for the college, including appropriate sanctions permitted by the administration.

While, throughout the term, students were prompted to review business codes of ethics and professional codes of ethics and to identify professional and workplace behaviours that could be integrated into the SCPC, what eventually made its way to the SCPC was determined by students.

Each work group was assigned sections of the code to develop further. The development process involved discussing content within the group and with the other groups, writing and editing the sections, and adding to sections as more relevant information was acquired during the course of study. Drafts developed by work groups were posted online and available to the class. Students were required to review and comment on the work of other groups. The groups then came together to combine the sections, edit the ideas and content, and polish the grammar. The class developed one outline and created three drafts. Editorial work was initially the responsibility of the class, but before the final draft was released, outside volunteers were asked to review and proof the draft. Suggestions of these outside reviewers were also incorporated into the SCPC. These activities exposed students to a process of writing and development over the long term and with numerous drafts and revisions.

An online companion site provided a means to enhance class organisation and activities. Students posted work completed individually or in groups and could comment on the work of other groups. The class site served as a repository for the various drafts of the SCPC. As the term progressed, drafts of the SCPC and other materials, such as class photographs, were added to the homepage to expand the availability of relevant documents and files to the students.

After completing the SCPC, the students prepared a final oral presentation on it. Each group was responsible for developing slides and narration for its portion of the SCPC. Slide design, including graphics and font, were also decided by class votes after each student posted options.

Students’ work was assessed individually based on a combination of factors. Each week of the term, a student could earn up to 100 points. The individually completed weekly projects had a 30-point value, group participation had a 20-point value, and work and development in the SCPC along with quizzes and postings had a 50-point value. An average of weekly grades, along with a grade for final presentation, constituted the final grade for each student.

In class evaluations, students reported that working on the project enhanced their familiarity with ethical guidelines and increased ethical awareness. The exercise compelled students to reflect on their responsibilities as citizens of their university community, as well as of the larger community to which they belong. Many of the topics they explored in the current context of their lives (honesty, confidentiality, diversity, a respect for the environment) will translate well into their professional lives as decision makers. Moreover, the exercise reinforced the reality that business is about people and the ability of people to work together with shared objectives.

Students also asserted that the process increased their knowledge about professional expectations, because some aspects of the SCPC centred upon proper professional comportment. Considering the complaints that abound concerning the absence of decorum in society today, the students addressed such concerns in their microcosm by reflecting on the behaviours and attitudes of students in the educational environment. The ethics exercise was focused on the individual consideration of the ramifications of conduct and decisions; it is expedient for students to understand the importance of personal introspection as they transition to a professional setting in which such attitudes and behaviours can impact an individual’s ability to succeed. The mastery of skills and knowledge is an important indicator of success, yet it may not be sufficient. The preparation of business students for the business world involves the ability to craft suitable interpersonal relationships, to understand professional standards of behaviour, and to adhere to societal expectations of integrity as well.

The emphasis on problem solving and internal discovery of knowledge is compatible with current demand for problem solvers in the workplace and the goal of educating lifelong learners. While it is not known whether students in the Business Ethics and Corporate Responsibility course will comport themselves in accordance with the SCPC they developed, the use of constructivist approaches did provide for a high degree of student involvement in the learning process. Students worked cooperatively, not only within their own work groups, but also as a component of the larger class. Providing parameters in which students could research and consider ethical behaviour individually and as members of groups provided increased opportunities for the students to discover knowledge in the area of ethics. The development of the SCPC created a student-centred approach to the study of ethics that supported the individual as well as the whole.