공학전공 대학생의 AI 로봇에 대한 윤리적 민감성
Engineering Students’ Ethical Sensitivity on Artificial Intelligence Robots
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
This study evaluated the engineering students’ ethical sensitivity to an AI emotion recognition robot scenario and explored its characteristics. For data collection, 54 students (27 majoring in Convergence Electronic Engineering and 27 majoring in Computer Software) were asked to list five factors regarding the AI robot scenario. For the analysis of ethical sensitivity, it was checked whether the students acknowledged the AI ethical principles in the AI robot scenario, such as safety, controllability, fairness, accountability, and transparency. We also categorized students’ levels as either informed or naive based on whether or not they infer specific situations and diverse outcomes and feel a responsibility to take action as engineers. As a result, 40.0% of students’ responses contained the AI ethical principles. These include safety 57.1%, controllability 10.7%, fairness 20.5%, accountability 11.6%, and transparency 0.0%. More students demonstrated ethical sensitivity at a naive level (76.8%) rather than at the informed level (23.2%). This study has implications for presenting an ethical sensitivity evaluation tool that can be utilized professionally in educational fields and applying it to engineering students to illustrate specific cases with varying levels of ethical sensitivity.
Abstract
This study evaluated the engineering students’ ethical sensitivity to an AI emotion recognition robot scenario and explored its characteristics. For data collection, 54 students (27 majoring in Convergence Electronic Engineering and 27 majoring in Computer Software) were asked to list five factors regarding the AI robot scenario. For the analysis of ethical sensitivity, it was checked whether the students acknowledged the AI ethical principles in the AI robot scenario, such as safety, controllability, fairness, accountability, and transparency. We also categorized students’ levels as either informed or naive based on whether or not they infer specific situations and diverse outcomes and feel a responsibility to take action as engineers. As a result, 40.0% of students’ responses contained the AI ethical principles. These include safety 57.1%, controllability 10.7%, fairness 20.5%, accountability 11.6%, and transparency 0.0%. More students demonstrated ethical sensitivity at a naive level (76.8%) rather than at the informed level (23.2%). This study has implications for presenting an ethical sensitivity evaluation tool that can be utilized professionally in educational fields and applying it to engineering students to illustrate specific cases with varying levels of ethical sensitivity.
참고문헌 (39)
- 고인석, "공학윤리교육의 지향점과 방법: 특히 ABEEK와 관련하여", 철학논총, 59(1), pp.3~23 (2010), 새한철학회
- "과기정통부, 사람이 중심이되는 ｢인공지능(AI) 윤리기준｣ 마련 보도자료" (2020)[URL]
- 김진하, "제4차 산업혁명 시대, 미래사회 변화에 대한 전략적 대응 방안 모색", KISTEP R&D InI, 15(47), pp.45~59 (2016)
- "대중에게 훈련 맡기자 ‘인종차별’부터 배운 AI" (2021)[URL]
- 소순주, "인공지능 윤리원칙 분류 모형 및 구성요소에 관한 연구", 컴퓨터교육학회 논문지, 24(6), pp.119~132 (2021), 한국컴퓨터교육학회[DOI]
- 송성수, "과학연구윤리", pp.173~204 (2001), 당대
- 이소이, "공과대학의 공학윤리 교육과정 운영 실태조사", 공학교육연구, 8(2), pp.35~51 (2005)
- 이영남, "공학윤리 교육모듈 컨텐츠를 이용한 전공교과목에서의 공학윤리 교육", 공학교육연구, 10(4), pp.78~92 (2007), 한국공학교육학회[DOI]
- 이재숭, "공학인증과 공학윤리", 윤리교육연구, (26), pp.277~296 (2011), 한국윤리교육학회
- 이태식, "공학윤리 교육과목 실태분성을 통한 개선방안 도출 : 수요자를 중심으로", 공학교육연구, 11(3), pp.96~107 (2008), 한국공학교육학회[DOI]
- 청소년 도덕성 진단 검사도구 표준화 연구 Ⅱ:청소년 도덕적 감수성 및 도덕적 판단력 검사도구 개발, "임영식", 한국청소년정책연구원, ~, pp.Report no. 12-R12-1 (2012)
- "2019년 기술영향평가 보고서: 소셜로봇 기술 보고서(Report no. 기관2019-017)" (2020)[URL]
- 한경희, "공학 윤리 교육: 현황과 쟁점, 그리고 전략", 공학교육연구, 12(1), pp.31~41 (2009), 한국공학교육학회[DOI]
- AI HLEG, "Ethics guidelines for trustworthy AI", European Commission, ~ (2019)
- Baab, D. A., "The effect of instruction on ethical sensitivity", Journal of Dental Education, 54(1), pp.44~ (1990)
- Barry, B. E., "Cambridge Handbook of Engineering Education Research", pp.673~692 (2014), Cambridge University Press
- Bebeau, M. J., "Measuring dental students’ ethical sensitivity", Journal of Dental Education, 49(4), pp.225~235 (1985)
- Bielefeldt, A. R., "Efficacy of macroethics education in engineering", Paper presented at the 2016 ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition (2016)
- Clarkeburn, H., "A test for ethical sensitivity in science", Journal of Moral Education, 31(4), pp.439~453 (2002)
- Davis, M., "Assessing graduate student progress in engineering ethics", Science and Engineering Ethics, 18(2), pp.351~367 (2012)
- Fowler, S. R., "Moral sensitivity in the context of socioscientific issues in high school science students", International Journal of Science Education, 31(2), pp.279~296 (2009)
- "아실로마 AI 원칙" (2022)[URL]
- Harris, C. E., "Engineering Ethics : What? Why? How?", Journal of Engineering Education, 85(2), pp.93~96 (1996)
- "Ethically aligned design first edition: A vision for prioritizing human well-being with autonomous and intelligent systems" (2019)[URL]
- Keefer, M. W, "The importance of formative assessment in science and engineering ethics education : Some evidence and practical advice", Science and Engineering Ethics, 20(1), pp.249~260 (2014)
- Lincoln, Y. S., "Naturalistic inquiry" (1985), Sage
- Martin, D. A., "Using case studies in engineering ethics education : The case for immersive scenarios through stakeholder engagement and real life data", Australasian Journal of Engineering Education, 26(1), pp.47~63 (2021)
- Martin, M. W., "Ethics in engineering" (2013), Mcgraw-Hill Book
- Prisecaru, P., "Challenges of the fourth industrial revolution", Knowledge horizons. Economics, 8(1), pp.57~62 (2016)
- Pritchard, M. S., "Perception and imagination in engineering ethics", International Journal of Engineering Education, 21(3), pp.415~423 (2005)
- Rest, J. R., "Handbook of child psychology (Vol. 3): Cognitive development", pp.556~629 (1983), Wiley
- Rest, J. R., "Moral development : Advances in research and theory" (1986), Praeger
- Romkey, L., "Engineering, society, and the environment in the teaching goals and practices of engineering instructors", Paper presented at the 2015 ASEE Annual Conference &Exposition (2015)
- Schwab, K., "The fourth industrial revolution" (2017), Crown Business
- Strauss, A., "Basics of qualitative research techniques" (1998), Sage
- Van de Poel, I., "Ethics, technology and engineering : An introduction" (2011), John Wiley & Sons
- van de Poel, I., "The need for ethical reflection in engineering design: The relevance of type of design and design hierarchy", Science, Technology, & Human Values, 31(3), pp.333~360 (2006)
- Vesilind, P. A., "Evolution of the American society of civil engineers code of ethics", Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice, 121(1), pp.4~10 (1995)
- Vincenti, W. G., "Technological development and science in the industrial age: New perspectives on the science-technology relationship", pp.17~34 (1992), Springer