How to write your essay?

Important teaching goals for the course Ethics and engineering for Aerospace Engineering include the critical reflection on technology and its place in society, recognizing ethical problems in engineering and dealing with them in the context of corporate organizations, juridical rules and regulations and democratic decision-making One of the best ways of showing your ability with respect to these teaching goals is writing an essay on a topic of choice, in which you discusses an ethical question with respect to (aerospace) engineering. It is essential that you give arguments for your opinion in your essay. In your essay, you have to show your ability to think critically about ethical problems and your ability to come to a judgment on the basis of arguments. In fact, this course is only a start that is meant to provide you with the necessary attitude and skills to deal with ethical problems in your later professional practice; not only because it is necessary but also because it is challenging. The essay: balancing between facts and opinions Writing an essay is not something engineering students do on a daily basis. Most texts that have to write are practical or other technical reports; in such reports the opinion of the writer only plays a minor role. Scientific work is to be objective and reproducible. Facts are central; opinions are to be avoided as much as possible. On the other end of the specter, we find documents in which the opinion of the writer is central and in which the role of facts is less important; think of sensation journalism, advertisements, but also poetry or political pamphlets. An essay is to be found somewhere between those two extremes. In your essay, you present your opinion, but you do so on the basis of relevant arguments and facts. Your essay will be judged on how good you ground your opinion, not on your opinion itself.

STEPS IN WRITING YOUR ESSAY 1) Choose a topic Choice of your topic is free, as long as it is concerned with ethics and engineering. You can choose a specific case as well as a more general theme. In the first case, you can think of for example the Bijlmer disaster and discuss a number of relevant ethical questions pertaining to this case. In the second case, you can think of a theme like whistle-blowing. In the latter case, it is often advisable to discuss one or two smaller cases. During the course a number of cases have been dealt with like the Challenger, and the International Space Station. Do not choose a case that has been discussed extensively at the tutorials or in the syllabus. Be as precise as possible in circumscribing your topic. It makes quite a difference whether your discuss biotechnology in general, the cloning of people or the cloning of animals. The more circumscribed your topic, the better. A topic like the safety of local residents in the neighborhood of Schiphol is to be preferred over a topic like safety in aerospace engineering. 2) Collect the relevant literature You have to collect the relevant literature yourself. Start with this task before the definitive formulation of your question. On the basis of the literature it is often possible to improve the central question of the essay, or you can find out that it is impossible to answer the question you first had in mind. Literature can be gathered via the library or the Internet. It may also be useful to get into contact with certain organizations (companies, government agencies, environmental groups etc.). Try to search for information at first rather broadly in order to get an overview of the available information. Afterwards you can select what you actually want to use for your essay (and for which you have enough time to read it in the time available). Be aware of the sources of your information. Keep in mind that it can make a difference whether certain information is provided by Schiphol Airport, the government or an environmental group. Always try to use a number of different, potentially conflicting, sources. It is essential to mention all the sources you have used in your essay with all the bibliographic information. Do not only mention your sources at the end of the text, but also mention the sources for specific bits of information in your text (e.g. by using footnotes).

3) Read the relevant literature and make an overview of the relevant moral and factual issues In order to carry out this step, it is not necessary to read all the literature thoroughly; you can limit yourself to the main themes. On the basis of this reading make an overview for yourself of the most relevant issues. In the following step, you will use this overview to limit your question. In making your overview of relevant issues, you can use the following checklist: 1) Mention the relevant ethical issues and questions What are the relevant moral norms and values that are at stake? Do these norms and values contradict each other in anyway in the given situation? If so, how exactly? What are relevant moral concerns in this situation? How are these concerns related to each other? What are relevant moral terms and concepts (like e.g. honesty) in this case? Are these terms and concepts clear? Can they be applied to the case at hand? 2) Mention the relevant facts and factual issues What facts are relevant (in the light of the moral considerations, norms and values mentioned above)? Do you have enough information with respect to the relevant facts? Is it possible to collect the missing relevant factual information, i.e. is it available and do you have enough time to gather and read it? Is any lack of relevant factual information an impediment to discussing the relevant moral issues in this case? 3) Identify the relevant actors (groups) and their point of view Make an overview of the relevant actors involved Give their point of view with respect to the relevant moral and factual issues (You do not need to work this out in all details in this phase). 4) Identify which chapters in the syllabus are relevant for your topic and research question and how you would be able to use these chapters. How are the identified moral issues and questions related to topics discussed in the syllabus? How could you use syllabus to analyze and discuss these moral issues and to come to a moral judgment? If the materials in the syllabus are not enough to discuss the relevant moral (and factual) issues, what (ethical) background do you further need? Is it possible in the time available to acquire this background (information)? 4) Formulate a (limited) question A good question for your essay is absolutely essential in order to be able to write a good essay. So take enough time for formulating a question that is clear and that can be answered in the time available. Think beforehand about how you want to answer your question and what type of answer you expect. You can use the overview made in the previous step for thinking about this. It is very important that you question focuses on the ethical aspects of your topic. Your question therefore will not (only) be factual but (also) normative. Dont formulate as your central question, How is the liability for design mistakes regulated by law? but, for example, How should the liability for design mistakes be regulated? 5) Make a first outline for your essay It is important to clearly structure your essay. Do not start writing without first thinking about what you want to say and in what way you want to say it. Devise a clear and consistent structure for your essay; think beforehand about what the main line of argumentation is that you want to follow and try to present this as clearly as possible to the reader. What the best way is to structure your essay will depend on your exact topic. You can ask your tutorial teacher for help. An example of a possible way to structure your essay is given below, but feel free to choose your own structure as long as you take care to structure your essay in a clear and coherent way. Start with an exposition of your topic and the ethical dilemma. Explain why this topic is relevant and what exactly your question is (0,5-1 page). Present an analysis of the topic with the main issues that are relevant and the essence of the case. Also discuss the relevant technical and factual issues clearly (1-1,5 page.). Next discuss the relevant actors, their point of view and their arguments (1-2 page.). Present your own deliberation of the main arguments. Present your opinion in a well-argued way (1-1,5 page.)

 Present your conclusions and recommendations (0,5-0,75 page.). 6) Discuss your working plan with your tutorial teacher Your working plan consists of the results of step 3 - 5. Also explain how you intend to use the relevant materials from the syllabus. Make an overview of all this on two pages A4 at maximum. Discuss these with your tutorial teacher. On the basis of this, you may have to reformulate your central question or to adapt the structure of your essay. 7) Reformulate your working plan and read additional literature Reformulate your working plan on basis of the feedback from your tutorial teacher. Whether you have to collect additional literature depends on your question and how much literature you have already gathered. In this phase, you have to read the literature you have available carefully and critically. In may also be useful in this phase to reread one of the relevant chapters from the syllabus. 8) Write a first (concept) version of your essay Write a concept version, i.e. a version that is in your opinion good enough as final essay, but that probably can be improved on the basis of comments by your tutorial teacher. Be aware: a concept version is thus not a version of the essay in which you completed only half of your argument! Your essay should be between 5 and 10 pages long (between 2500 and 5000 words). You essay should be understandable to anyway with an academic background and interest; do not presuppose detailed technical or philosophical knowledge on the part of the reader. It is advisable to have your essay read by someone else before you hand it in. Is it clear enough? Is the line of argumentation clear and convincing? 9) Discuss the concept version of your essay with your tutorial teacher 10) Improve your concept version on the basis of the feedback of your tutorial teacher and hand it over to your tutorial teacher and to a colleague student 11) Read the essay of your colleague student and formulate critical questions with respect to it 12) Oral exam about the essay At the final oral exam, there will be a debate about your essay and that of one colleague student. Therefore it is necessary to send each other copies of your essays; take care that your colleague student receives your essay in time. During the oral exam, you ask critical questions about each other essays and your defend your essay against the criticism of the other student. Also the tutorial teacher can ask certain questions. The teacher also leads the discussion. At the end of the oral exam, you get a grade for your essay (and your defense). This is 50% of your final grade, the other 50% being your score on the written test. Formal requirements The essay should be 5 to 10 pages, i.e. 2500 to 5000 words, long Make reference to information sources in your text. See the citation rules below Plagiarism is not allowed Provide a summary of about 250 words Provide conclusions and recommendations Grading The following aspects are taking into account in the grading of your essay: 1. Are the formal requirements for the essay fulfilled? 2. Is the structure and line of argumentation of your essay clear and coherent? (This includes formulating a clear central question) 3. Is the essay easy to read? 4. Are the relevant moral dilemmas identified and are they being discussed in a well-argued way? 5. Are the relevant materials from the syllabus used sufficiently? 6. Has enough literature been gathered and used? 7. Is the central question answered in the essay? 8. Follow the conclusions and recommendations from the rest of the text?

9. Was the student at the final exam able to defend his or her essay against criticism?

CITATION RULES If you use in your text findings, definitions, ideas or ways of thinking of others, you should always mention that at the relevant places in your essay. You can do this by using a footnote or by making an unambiguous reference to a literature list at the end of your essay. This rule also applies to information, ideas etc. you gathered on the Internet or information given to you orally. Sometimes you may want to quote passages from others literally. This is only allowed in one of the following cases: You want to support your own argument with the help of a quote from someone else You want to discuss or interpret a specific passage from a text You want to use a concise idea of a specific author and any reformulation of the idea would not do justice to the original idea In all of these cases, do not quote more than about 5-10 lines. In cases of a literal quotation, it should be clear to the reader that it is a quotation. Therefore, in such cases you should make a clear typographical distinction between your own text and the quotation. You can do this by using quotation marks or by using another font or font size for he quotation. In cases of quotation, a clear reference to the source, including the page number from where the quotation comes, is essential. You are free to use the ideas of others or to quote others, but this can never be a license not to write your own essay or for not developing your own line of argumentation. This means that each of the following is forbidden: Literally citing passages longer than 10 lines from the work of others (even if the source is mentioned). It is also not allowed to use a more or less literal translation or paraphrasing of the words of others. Entirely, or to a large measure, following the line of thought or ideas of another author. This is certainly not allowed without a reference to this author. With a reference, it is only allowed if you discusses the ideas of another author in order to (critically) comment later in your essay on these ideas, or to do something new with them in another way (e.g. applying the ideas to a new situation or case) Handing in an essay that is literally identical or with respect to the line of argumentation nearly identical to an essay handed in by another student. It is not forbidden to cooperate with other students, but you should mention your cooperation with others in your essay and make sure to hand in an essay that is distinctively your own work and is clearly different from the work of others. Handing in an essay that is literally identical or with respect to the line of argumentation nearly identical to an essay handed in for another course. In principle, it is not allowed to copy parts from other essay or reports written for other courses. An exception is possible if you have beforehand explicit approval to do so from your tutorial teacher. Even in that case, you should mention explicitly in your essay which passages you have copied from an earlier essay or report. Plagiarism (fraud, deception) Plagiarism is the literal citation of the words of others with the pretension that these are your own words. Plagiarism also includes the paraphrasing of the words of others or exactly following the line of thought of another author in your own words without mentioning your source. You are at least liable of plagiarism, fraud or deception if you do not follow the citation rules given above. Plagiarism, fraud and deception are serious offences that can eventually result in punishment by the exam committee of your academic studies. All cases of plagiarism, fraud or deception we encounter during this course will be handed over to the exam committee of Aerospace Engineering.

Example of a working plan The following is an example of what the working plan for your essay might look like. Topic: Health risks of genetically modified food Some relevant moral issues: - Acceptability of the risks of genetically modified food - Honest information providing to customers - Informed consent - Are the effects on nature and the environmental and the related (long-term) risks and consequences acceptable? - Do the costs (disadvantages) of genetically modified food outweigh the benefits (advantages)? - Are the costs, benefits and risk fairly divided? (And what is fair in this respect?) Some relevant factual issues: - What are the health risks of genetically modified food? - To what extent is there uncertainty or ignorance with respect to these risks? - To what extent are consumers at the moment being informed on (possible) health risks? - Do consumers at the moment have a choice between genetically modified and non-modified food? - What are at the moment the requirements for genetically modified food to be allowed on the market? Which ethical considerations are actually taken into account in the procedure for allowing genetically modified food to be sold on the market? Actors: - Governments - International organizations (like WHO) - Farmers and agricultural companies - Producers of genetically modified crops, seed improvers etc. - Consumers and consumer organizations - Environmental organizations - Scientific research institutes - Supermarkets and other food shops (PM Viewpoints of the actors) Relevant material from the syllabus: - Chapter on philosophical ethics - Chapter on ethical aspects of risks Question: Is it ethically desirable and practically feasible to base the ethical acceptability of the health risks of genetically modified foods on the principle of informed consent? First outline: 1) Introduction and question 2) Health risks of genetically modified food [Which health risks are known at the moment? Which risks are suspected or feared? To what extent is reliable knowledge on health risks available?] 3) Informed Consent and health risks of genetically modified food [What is informed consent? What does it imply if it is applied to case of health risks of genetically modified food?] 4) Is "informed consent" an ethically justifiable or desirable criterion for the acceptability of health risks of genetically modified food? 4.1 Ethical background: right of free choice and autonomy principle 4.2 Does informed consent in practice lead to free consent? [Do consumers have enough freedom of choice? Are they against their will confronted with the consequences of choices of others? To what extent do choices have an impact on future generations and their possibilities and freedom? Are we dealing with a personal or collective risk?] 4.3 Does it lead to informed consent?

[Which information do consumers need (at least) to be able to give informed consent? Is this information available? Is it practicable to provide customers with this information? Are customers able to understand the relevant information?] 4.4 Are there any other relevant ethical considerations that are not taking into account if the acceptability of health risks of genetically modified food is based on informed consent? [For example: is the distribution of risks, benefits and costs taken into account? If not, is this ethically problematic?] 5) Possible practical options to implement informed consent for the health risks of genetically modified food [Discuss these in the light of the ethical considerations discussed in 4] 5.1 Special stamp for non-genetically modified food 5.2 Informing the public 6) Conclusions and recommendations