Paper ID #32692

The Virtues of Teamwork: A Course Module to Cultivate the Virtuous TeamWorker

Dr. Michael D. Gross, Wake Forest University

Dr. Michael Gross is a Founding Faculty and Associate Professor of Engineering and the David andLeila Farr Faculty Director of the Center for Entrepreneurship at Wake Forest University. He is part ofthe team that is planning, developing, and delivering the brand new Engineering program, a programviewed as an opportunity to break down silos across campus and creatively think about reimagining theundergraduate engineering educational experience, integration and collaboration across departments andprograms, and how to achieve the motto of Wake Forest University: Pro Humanitate (”For Humanity”).Michael received his B.S. in Chemical Engineering at Bucknell University, and his Masters and PhDin Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering at the University of Pennsylvania. He has broad researchinterests in materials and composite processing and design, primarily for solid oxide cells, but also forbatteries, solar absorbers, and gas adsorption. He also has a passion for designing educational experiencesthat support student intrinsic motivation and character.

Dr. Joseph Wiinikka-Lydon, Wake Forest University

Dr. Joseph Wiinikka-Lydon is a Post-Doctoral Fellow at Wake Forest University, working with the De-partment of Engineering and the Program on Leadership and Character to integrate character educationinto the Engineering Department’s core curriculum. He has lectured widely in North America and Eu-rope, including giving the Goodspeed Lecture last spring at Denison University. Prior to Wake Forest,he was a founding Fellow and Lecturer at the E.U.-funded Center for Ethics outside of Prague, formedto expand ethics research and education in Central Europe, and has held teaching positions at Sewanee:The University of the South, Denison University, and Birmingham-Southern College. Trained in reli-gious studies and moral philosophy, his research has focused on moral injury and trauma. He is author ofMoral Injury and the Promise of Virtue, the subject of an upcoming symposium on Syndicate. Commit-ted to interdisciplinary collaborations that translate academic research for larger, professional audiences,he has contributed to Uppsala University’s Engaging Vulnerability Project and, most recently, collabo-rated with Dr. Shelly Rambo at Boston University developing an ebook, Trauma and Moral Injury: AGuiding Framework for Chaplains. He holds a BA from Georgetown University, an MDiv from HarvardUniversity, and PhD in religion, ethics, and society from Emory University.

Dr. Michael Lamb, Wake Forest University

Michael Lamb is Executive Director of the Program for Leadership and Characterand Assistant Professorof Politics, Ethics, and Interdisciplinary Humanities at Wake Forest University. He is also a ResearchFellow with the Oxford Character Project. He holds a Ph.D. from Princeton University, a B.A. fromRhodes College, and a second B.A. from the University of Oxford, where he studied as a Rhodes Scholar.His research focuses on the role of virtues in public life and the education of character in the university. Heis a co-principal investigator on character-related grants funded by the John Templeton Foundation, KernFamily Foundation, and Lilly Endowment. Prior to joining Wake Forest, he helped to launch the OxfordCharacter Project to help graduate students in business, engineering, government, law, medicine, and otherfields think about the role of ethics in their professions. He also served as Dean of Leadership, Service, andCharacter Development for Rhodes Scholars. He is currently working with the Wake Forest Departmentof Engineering to integrate character into the undergraduate curriculum and leading a university-wideprogram to educate ethical leaders.

Dr. Olga Pierrakos, Wake Forest University

Dr. Olga Pierrakos is Founding Chair and Professor of the new Department of Engineering at Wake For-est University - a private, liberal arts, research institution. As one of the newest engineering programs inthe nation, she is facilitating the realization of building an innovative program aligned with the universitymission of Pro Humanitate (For Humanity) and well-integrated within the liberal arts tradition. Her vision

c©American Society for Engineering Education, 2021

Paper ID #32692

is to educate the whole person and the whole engineer with fearlessness and virtuous character. She is thePI on the Kern Family Foundation award to infuse character education across the WFU Engineering cur-riculum in partnership with the WFU Program for Leadership and Character and many colleagues acrossthe university. With inclusion being a core value, she is proud that the WFU Engineering team represents60% female engineering faculty and 40% female students, plus 20% of students from ethnic minoritygroups. Her areas of expertise include engineering identity, complex problem solving across cognitiveand non-cognitive domains, recruitment and retention, PBL, engineering design, learning through ser-vice, character education in engineering contexts, etc. She also conducts research in cardiovascular fluidmechanics and sustainable energy technologies. Prior to joining Wake Forest University, Olga served asa Program Director at the National Science Foundation in the Division of Undergraduate Education andfounding faculty of the Department of Engineering at James Madison University. She holds a BS andMS in Engineering Mechanics from Virginia Tech, and a PhD in Biomedical Engineering from the jointprogram between Virginia Tech and Wake Forest University.

Dr. Adetoun Yeaman, Wake Forest University

Adetoun Yeaman is an engineering education postdoctoral fellow at Wake Forest University. She holdsa PhD in Engineering Education from Virginia Tech where the studied the role of empathy in the ex-periences of undergraduate engineering students in service learning programs. She is passionate aboutexploring the ways that engineering work intersect with the social and ethical dimensions of human life.She also loves to empower youth to see their role as problem solvers and change makers in society. Shereceived her MS degree in 2013 in Mechanical and Nuclear Engineering and her BS degree in Biomed-ical Engineering in 2011, both from Virginia Commonwealth University. Her research interests includeempathy in engineering, character education, design education and multimedia learning.

Address: 455 Vine Street Wake Downtown, Suite 1601 Winston Salem, North Carolina 27101.

c©American Society for Engineering Education, 2021

1

The Virtues of Teamwork: A Course Module to Cultivate the Virtuous Engineer as a Team Contributor

Teamwork is an integral component of engineering education—one of the common and important attributes taught to aspiring engineers. Yet teamwork is often taught primarily as a skill, one that is not necessarily connected to morally good ends or supported by other virtues. This paper suggests that teamwork is better approached as a virtue and provides evidence for how the virtue of teamwork might be intentionally cultivated through the use of seven research-based strategies of character development. Approaching teamwork as a virtue that can help students develop into engineers that support the flourishing of their team and collectively work toward good ends, we developed a module deployed in a project-based, first-year engineering course to cultivate such virtuous teamwork. The course comprised two six-week projects, and the module intervention began between the end of Project 1 and the beginning of Project 2. Central to the module was providing definitions of virtue and of teamwork as a virtue and implementing strategies from an empirically-grounded framework to develop students as virtuous team workers. Drawing from Lamb et al. (2021), strategies included “(1) habituation through practice, (2) reflection on personal experience, (3) engagement with virtuous exemplars, (4) dialogue to increase virtue literacy, (5) awareness of situational variables, (6) moral reminders, and (7) friendships of mutual accountability.”

Teamwork-relevant outcomes were assessed using two approaches: self-report and peer-assessment. Students reported perceived embodiment of fifteen teamwork attributes for themselves and for each of their teammates pre- and post-Project 2. The most commonly perceived attributes at the beginning of the intervention included “responsible,” “collaborative,” “nice,” and “good listener.” During Project 2, students committed to developing two teamwork attributes they were not perceived to have embodied during Project 1. Most students chose to develop “creativity,” “understanding of teammates’ different skills,” “being a good facilitator,” and “having patience.” The majority of students were perceived to embody at least one of the two attributes they chose to develop during Project 2, and students processed the results through discussion and reflection. Through observing students engaging in the module, we realized that other character virtues support completing the activities and enacting virtuous teamwork, demonstrating the interconnectedness of virtues. Students needed courage to provide and receive feedback from their peers; honesty to supply feedback and engage in dialogue, particularly in discussions of situational variables and biases in self- and peer-perceptions; empathy to see from others’ point of view; humility to grow and learn from the activity; and practical wisdom to determine how to act and improve in the future. In response to this observation, thematic analysis of student reflections was conducted to identify the enactment of other virtues that support virtuous teamwork. This paper shows that teamwork—a common concept in engineering education—is better taught through a virtue framework that recognizes the way virtuous teamwork depends on other virtues.

2

Introduction

Teamwork is an integral component of engineering education. This significance is reflected in ABET Student Outcome 5, which guides programs to graduate students that have “an ability to function effectively on a team whose members together provide leadership, create a collaborative and inclusive environment, establish goals, plan tasks, and meet objectives” [1]. Employers, engineering graduates, and faculty recognize teamwork as an important professional skill [2], [3]. In fact, one study showed that engineering alumni rated teamwork as the most important of all ABET outcomes [4]. Other recent studies report that teamwork is one of the top five characteristics hiring managers are looking for in new hires [5], [6]. Teamwork has also been cited as a critical professional skill for the 21st century [7] and The Engineer of 2020 report discussed the need for “engineers to work in teams to be effective” [8]. Finally, teamwork is expected to become even more important as increasing numbers of engineering workplaces shift to the most recent industrial revolution, Industry 4.0 (4IR), requiring “complex collaboration and effective teamwork” [9], [10].

Most faculty teaching or supporting the development of teamwork in the undergraduate engineering classroom often focus on the effectiveness of being a team member [11]. The Comprehensive Assessment of Team Member Effectiveness (CATME), one of the most widely used assessments to measure team effectiveness in engineering courses, includes five categories: (1) “contributing to the team’s work”; (2) “interacting with teammates”; (3) “keeping the team on track”; (4) “expecting quality”; and (5) “having relevant knowledge, skills, and abilities” [12]. Others argue that sharing a common goal or purpose is also important for team members [13], [14]. These approaches align with describing teamwork as a performance skill, often referred to as a soft skill or a social skill [15], [16], [17], [18]. Regardless of the modifier, teamwork is approached as a skill.

At Wake Forest University, the Department of Engineering has partnered with the Program on Leadership and Character to infuse character education and virtue development throughout the entire undergraduate engineering curriculum with the goal of providing a more comprehensive approach to educating the whole engineer. Our work is guided by the framework of the Jubilee Centre for Character and Virtues, a leading research and educational center on character education based at the University of Birmingham (UK) [19], [20], [21]. Our design, creation, and deployment of modular educational experiences in character education span numerous virtues, such as courage, practical wisdom, intellectual humility, creativity, and teamwork. This paper focuses on a module we have created to support the development of teamwork as a virtue.

In this paper, we first introduce the definitions of character and virtue and the seven pedagogical strategies we use to support students in developing virtues. Then we describe the module on teamwork and present quantitative data demonstrating its effectiveness. We also provide qualitative analysis of student reflection assignments that show how five other virtues—courage, honesty, empathy, humility, and practical wisdom—support virtuous teamwork. These results demonstrate the interconnectedness of the virtues and the value of approaching teamwork—a common knowledge area in engineering education—through a virtue framework that recognizes how virtuous teamwork depends on other virtues.

3

Character and Virtue: Definitions

Character consists of the “dispositions that define who we are and shape how we characteristically think, feel, and act” [22]. Character is a central aspect of one’s personality and identity [23]. A good character disposes one to act in ways that help oneself and others flourish and positions one to be a role model or exemplar of how one should be and act in the world.

The goal of character education is to help students develop traits that constitute good character and grow into responsible, trustworthy, empathetic, wise, and just persons who lead lives that benefit others. These traits are called virtues, “consistent and reliable dispositions that lead to particular behaviors, thoughts, or feelings over time and across situations” and that are oriented toward good ends [19]. Virtues empower individuals to flourish and live purposeful lives and to help others do so as well [24]. When one enacts a virtue, such as courage, it disposes them to act in a specific situation in the best way possible, allowing them to orient their whole selves—their desires, emotions, and thoughts—toward achieving morally good ends not only for oneself but for others as well. If one strives toward being a morally “good” person, virtues are the dispositions that empower one to do so [25].

Vices, in contrast, are character traits that dispose one to think, feel, and act inappropriately and dispose one to live and act in ways that do not orient one toward achieving morally good ends [22]. Vices oppose the cultivation and exercise of particular virtues. Indeed, one function of a virtue is to resist the vices that might cause one to respond inappropriately to a situation. Often, vices consist of an excessive or deficient response to a particular situation. For example, vices traditionally associated with courage include both rashness (an excessive response to fear that takes no heed of risk or danger and causes us to act unwisely in a given situation), and cowardice (a deficiency of courage that gives into fear inappropriately or in ways that prevent the realization of important ends). The virtue of courage, by contrast, avoids both the vices of rashness and cowardice [26]. It is the disposition to acknowledge one’s fears, discern relevant risks, and make wise choices about how to act toward good ends without being overcome by inappropriate fear. To avoid vices of rashness and cowardice, the virtue of courage requires other virtues, such as practical wisdom, which enables one to perceive morally relevant features of situations and make good decisions in response to them [26], [27].

Teamwork as a Virtue

Viewing teamwork as a virtue enables educators to move beyond skill development and to direct the value of teamwork towards morally good ends of human flourishing. At Wake Forest University, we are working to present teamwork as a character virtue rather than simply as a skill [19]. Even though research into teamwork by and large does not approach it as a virtue, such research argues persuasively that when teamwork is present in groups, those participating exhibit increased empathy not only between teammates but even beyond the team toward others [19], [28], [29], [30], [31], [32]. This suggests that teamwork is not just a learned skill but, when optimally practiced and learned, can change the way individuals are disposed to see the world, evaluate situations, and relate and act toward and with others. Teamwork is a transformative

4

moral trait—a virtue—and approaching teamwork as such can help us better speak of teamwork not just as a set of skills but as an orientation toward self and others.

Approaching teamwork as a virtue as opposed to a skill can also be helpful in several other ways.1 First, a skill is directed toward the realization of a specific goal that need not be morally good, as “skill” is a neutral term that can reflect the abilities necessary to achieve all manner of ends. Skills can be ordered not only toward good ends but toward morally bad and unjust ends. Virtues, by contrast, are character traits that, by definition, enable one to endeavor toward morally good ends in their work, and quite often, toward the flourishing of oneself and others. Virtuous teamwork, then, is not just a skill that allows one to accomplish tasks in a group setting but the disposition to help make that goal, and the experience of the team, a morally good one that can contribute toward the flourishing of team members and even the stakeholders and wider community affected by one’s work. Further, someone who is said to have teamwork as a virtue is disposed toward helping their group realize morally good ends. This motivational disposition is not necessary to the definition of a skill. An engineer uses a skill but is not necessarily motivated by it.2 Defining teamwork as a virtue, then, assumes that teamwork must be developed so that the members of the team working in concert not only aim at completing a project or delivering a product successfully and efficiently but that they do so in a way that is good and just [19]. The virtuous team worker acts towards morally good ends.

Second, approaching teamwork as a virtue can help students expand their notions of value [19]. If teamwork is just a skill, what is of value in a particular project may remain narrow. For example, they may only focus on the economic utility of a specific design or approach. Teamwork as a virtue disposes the engineer to take a more capacious and nuanced view of value, which could include the social, civic, and moral issues involved in a project, as well as how different values can conflict, such as the needs of a community that can conflict with commitments to environmental protection. A virtue framework provides a vocabulary that can make this broader range of values more explicit and help students and teams who share such a vocabulary raise these issues in a way that allows more nuanced and effective ethical deliberation [19].

This approach has a direct bearing on professional codes that do so much of the ethical work of professional engineering guilds and organizations. Teaching only toward specific behaviors, specific rules, or even a code of ethics does not provide students and engineers with enough tools to be able to discern what to do in a given situation or with the motivation to do the right thing for the right reasons. Life is too complex for codes or a set of rules to cover every ethical situation or contingency, and codes, on their own, do not provide moral motivation to act. Focusing on character, on the other hand, shapes a person’s desires, how they see others and the world, and how they act and make judgments, so they are better prepared and motivated to meet the concrete challenges that both life and engineering practice present [20].

1 For more on the similarities of virtues and skills see [25] and [33]. 2 For a broader discussion of the differences between teamwork seen as a skill and teamwork seen as a virtue, see [19].

5

While some may worry that it is impossible to teach character, particularly to adults who have already been formed before entering college, a growing number of researchers have identified “emerging adulthood” as an important stage of ethical development and identity formation [34], [35], [36]. Research over the last few decades has demonstrated that virtue and character can be successfully educated into curricular and co-curricular settings [19], [37].

In an effort to build a common vocabulary that our teams, instructors, and classrooms can use, we have found utility in the virtue typology developed by the Jubilee Centre for Character and Virtues [21]. This typology, which aligns with a similar one put forward by D.L. Shields [38], divides the virtues into four categories: intellectual, moral, civic, and performance.

Table 1. The four categories of virtue [21].

Virtue Category Description Examples

Intellectual “Character traits necessary for discernment, right action, and the pursuit of knowledge, truth, and understanding.”

“Critical thinking” “Curiosity”

Moral “Character traits that enable us to act well in situations that require an ethical response.”

“Courage” “Justice”

Civic “Character traits that are necessary for engaged responsible citizenship, contributing to the common good.”

“Service” “Civility”

Performance “Character traits that have an instrumental value in enabling the intellectual, moral, and civic virtues.”

“Teamwork” “Perseverance”

This last category—performance virtues—is relevant here as it includes virtues such as “perseverance” and “teamwork.” On the Jubilee Centre framework, teamwork is categorized as a performance virtue as it helps members of a team not only to work toward the objectives of a shared project but to do so in a way that empowers them to work virtuously toward that goal. As stated previously, to be a virtue, the goals of the team must be directed toward morally good ends, that is, goals that are morally worthwhile, even praiseworthy, and that help those involved in and affected by the team’s work live better lives. As a performance virtue, teamwork enables one to activate intellectual, moral, and civic virtues, including curiosity and creativity (intellectual), courage and justice (moral), and service and civility (civic). All of these are valuable traits that can help team members not only achieve their goals, but also help those involved do so in a way that is rewarding, promotes character, and even strengthens their own character.

In this paper, we define teamwork as a performance virtue that disposes one to work toward the goals of their respective team, which include respect and assistance toward other team members. To be counted as virtuous, the goals of the team must be directed toward morally good ends as described above. Specifically, teamwork involves 1) a respect for the members of one’s team, 2) making the team’s goals one’s own, and 3) contributing to the team’s work in appropriate ways and at appropriate times [39], [40]. It is worth noting that the value of teamwork extends beyond whether or not a team’s goals are met. Even if the team fails in its endeavor, practicing virtuous

6

teamwork allows one to become a better, more dependable, creative, and supportive team member, which will affect all areas of their life behind the task at hand [41].

Strategies to Develop Character and Virtues

How does one educate character and virtue? The Department of Engineering and Program for Leadership and Character at Wake Forest University use seven research-based strategies to develop character in undergraduate students identified and explained by Lamb et al. (2021) [22]. The teamwork module described in this paper utilizes all seven of these strategies:

1. Habituation through Practice. Practice is necessary to internalize virtues and make them part of one’s character. Just like skills used in any enterprise, such as engineering or sports, a virtue can become a disposition and habit through repeated practice.

2. Reflection on Personal Experience. Reflecting on experience can help students use their own lives as case studies to better understand moments where they acted well, so they can repeat such behavior, or times they could have acted differently, so they discern what they need to change to act better in the future.

3. Engagement with Virtuous Exemplars. Central to character education are exemplars and role models who embody the virtues in daily life. Exemplars help illustrate the virtues and inspire others to work harder to improve their character, providing concrete models to emulate and guidance on how one can act in a given situation. Exemplars do not need to be moral heroes to be effective. Indeed, some research shows that peer exemplars can even be more effective and attainable role models than distant heroes [42]. Fellow students, for example, can be exemplars to each other by modeling patience, respect, and teamwork.

4. Dialogue that Increases Virtue Literacy. Gaining a conceptual and practical understanding of what the virtue is, which vices oppose it, and how it might differ from other related concepts can help one act more appropriately in relevant circumstances. Dialogue that promotes virtue literacy can aid this conceptual understanding, which in turn can equip students to recognize when and how the exercise of specific virtues is required.

5. Awareness of Situational Variables. Given that we all have particular tendencies and biases in terms of relationships, race, class, and situational factors that affect our character in ways of which we are not aware, increasing awareness of such biases and situational pressures can help students recognize their influence, account for them in their moral lives, and choose situations and circumstances that enable them to avoid or resist them [23].

6. Moral Reminders. To practice and internalize virtues, students need reminders, both from themselves and others, to draw their attention back to the work of character education and prevent them from acting on biases or impulses that might not be virtuous. These reminders make norms and values salient and thus discourage students from acting against them [23]. They can include reminding students of the commitments they have made (such as to obey the honor code on an assignment) or prompting them to remember the importance of particular virtues in their academic work or daily lives.

7. Friendships of Mutual Accountability. Lastly, moral development is not something people can do alone. Good friendships are also important in cultivating virtue. Friends can embody specific values and virtues and help model good character. They can help

7

each other develop wisdom and determine which choices are better than others. They can also help each other see themselves differently, hold each other accountable to their deepest values and commitments, and present opportunities to practice virtues, such as generosity, empathy, and kindness, to another in a supportive context. Friendships provide valuable support and accountability in a moral life.3

Teamwork as a Virtue Module in a First-Year Engineering Course The teamwork module was implemented in a first-year, project-based, core engineering course at Wake Forest University with an enrollment of 26 students. The course comprised two projects, both approximately six weeks. One project used inertial measurement unit (IMU) sensors to collect and analyze data, with the goal of determining which method of transfer is recommended for transferring patients with potential spinal injuries. The goal of the other project was to design and test a filter for cleaning water in a particular area of the world, taking into account the specific water challenges and resources readily available in that part of the world. Students were grouped in teams of three or four, and team membership remained constant throughout the semester. Half of the teams completed the spine immobilization project first, while the other half completed the water filter project. The two cohorts then completed the other project during the second half of the semester. A timeline of the teamwork module is shown in Fig. 1. The module began with an intervention and follow-up assignment after the conclusion of the first project and before the start of the second project. In the middle of the second project, the instructor provided a moral reminder. After the conclusion of the second project, there was another intervention and follow-up assignment. The following sections provide descriptions of each intervention activity, and Table 2 provides a summary of the module activities and character development strategies implemented during each activity.

Figure 1. Conceptual schematic of the overall intervention timeline. Project 2 was six weeks in duration. 1st In-Class Intervention A schematic of the first in-class intervention is shown in Fig. 2. The intervention took place in class with both cohorts of students together. The intervention began by asking students to reflect on their experiences during the first project both as individual team members and as a team.

3 For research supporting each of these strategies, see [21].

End of Project 1

1st In-Class Intervention

Assignment: Reflection on in-class intervention and choose

2 attributes to develop

Start of Project 2

Moral Reminder

End of Project 2

2nd In-Class Intervention

Assignment: Reflection on intervention and changes

in embodied attributes during Project 2

8

They were then encouraged to think about experiences they had working in teams in other situations and contexts. With these experiences in mind, students were asked to individually brainstorm attributes of an ideal team member by writing down as many attributes as they could, with each attribute written on a separate sticky note. The brainstorming session lasted approximately five minutes.

Figure 2. Schematic of the in-class intervention between the end of Project 1 and the beginning of Project 2. After the brainstorming session, the instructor introduced the definitions of character, virtue, and then teamwork as a performance virtue. These activities map to the “Dialogue that Increases Virtue Literacy” strategy of character development. Teamwork was defined accordingly:

Teamwork is a performance virtue that involves • respecting all team members, • integrating the team’s goals into one’s own, and • appropriately contributing [40].

To be a virtue, the team’s goals must be oriented towards good ends.

A Venn diagram comprised of the three elements of teamwork, i.e. the three bullet points of the above definition, were then projected onto a screen, and all students placed their sticky notes onto the Venn diagram as they saw fit. For attributes that did not map to any of the three elements, a parking lot was created off to the side. After the sticky notes were placed, students were asked to consolidate the sticky notes by placing duplicate or similar attributes on top of each other. Students were also asked to review the parking lot to decide if they agreed that those attributes did not belong on the Venn diagram. Next, students were asked to identify, as a class, the top fifteen attributes on the Venn diagram. At this point, a two-column table was projected onto the screen with the first column labeled “Top 15 Attributes” and the second column labeled “Not Top 15 Attributes.” At first, students moved sticky notes as individuals, which achieved most of the sorting. Then the instructor asked for one or two student volunteers to help facilitate the process of finalizing the list of top fifteen attributes, and the class was able to come to a reasonable consensus. Students were then given a worksheet to indicate which of the fifteen attributes they perceived themselves to have embodied during the first project. To check a given attribute, they were required to provide a tangible example of how they embodied that attribute. If they could not

Reflection

Brainstorm attributes of an

ideal team member

Introduce the definition of

teamwork as a virtue

Map attributes to three elements of virtuous teamwork

Identify top 15

attributes

Identify attributes self and peers

embodied during Project 1

Share identified attributes with

peers, reflect and discuss

9

articulate a tangible example, they were to leave that attribute unchecked. After completing the worksheet for themselves, they were asked to complete the same worksheet for each member of their team. Again, they were to only check an attribute if they perceived that team member as embodying the attribute during the first project and they could provide a tangible example of how that attribute was embodied. Some students felt biased completing these sheets sitting by team members, so they were given the option to disperse. Completion of these worksheets maps to the “Reflection on Personal Experience,” “Engagement with Virtuous Exemplars,” and “Friendships of Mutual Accountability” strategies of character development. After completing the worksheets, students gave the worksheets they completed for each team member to that team member. Each student then compared how many and which attributes they self-perceived they embodied in the first project to the attributes their team members perceived them embodying. This activity also drew on “Reflection on Personal Experience” and “Friendships of Mutual Accountability.” Students then reported out the difference in number of attributes they self-perceived embodying to the number their team members perceived them embodying. Finally, the instructor led a discussion on differences between what we self-perceive and what others perceive. The instructor asked questions such as: What might be some reasons for the observed discrepancies? Is it valuable to close the gap between these discrepancies? What might we do to better align our self-perceptions with those of our team members? This concluded the first in-class intervention. The class discussion maps to the “Awareness of Situational Variables” and “Dialogue that Increases Virtue Literacy” character development strategies. 1st Reflection Assignment Following the first in-class intervention, a reflection was assigned for homework and due prior to the start of the second project. The assignment asked students to identify two attributes they wanted to be perceived as embodying by their team members that they were not perceived as embodying during the first project. Students were also asked to identify one tangible action for each attribute that they would commit to practicing on a regular basis during the second project. Finally, students were asked to write one paragraph reflecting on what they learned or gained from the in-class intervention. As part of their submission, students were to include all attribute worksheets completed during the in-class intervention. This assignment maps to the “Reflection on Personal Experience” and “Habituation through Practice” character development strategies. Moral Reminder In the middle of the second project, the instructor created individual sticky notes for each attribute each student had committed to developing during the second project. The sticky notes were handed out to the students at the beginning of class. The instructor said that this was a moral reminder about the attributes they committed to developing and asked them to take a few minutes to quietly reflect on what they have done and what they plan to do for the remainder of the project towards this goal. This activity maps to the “Moral Reminders” and “Reflection on Personal Experience” character development strategies.

10

2nd In-Class Intervention After the conclusion of the second project, students were asked to complete an attribute worksheet for themselves and then for each of their team members in the context of the second project. Using the completed worksheets, students determined if peer-perceptions changed for the two attributes they committed to developing during the second project. They also compared self- and peer-perceptions of attribute embodiment more generally. The instructor then led a discussion on how perceptions changed for the attributes students worked to develop, how perceptions changed more generally compared to the first in-class intervention, how the degree of alignment between self- and peer-perceptions changed after the second project compared to after the first project, and why the perceptions might have played out the way they did. These activities map to the “Awareness of Situational Variables,” “Dialogue that Increases Virtue,” “Friendships of Mutual Accountability,” and “Habituation Through Practice” character development strategies. Table 2. The character development strategies implemented in the teamwork module activities.

Module Activities Character Development Strategies

1st In-Class Intervention

Introduce definitions of character, virtues, and teamwork as a

performance virtue Dialogue that Increases Virtue Literacy

Identify attributes self and peers embodied Reflection on Personal Experience

Friendships of Mutual Accountability Engagement with Virtuous Exemplars Compare self and peer perceptions of

attributes embodied Discuss differences in self and peer

perceptions Awareness of Situational Variables

Dialogue that Increases Virtue Literacy 1st

Reflection Assignment

Identify attributes to cultivate and reflect

Reflection on Personal Experience Habituation through Practice

Moral Reminder Reminder of attributes to cultivate Moral Reminders

Reflection on Personal Experience

2nd In-Class Intervention

Identify attributes self and peers embodied

Reflection on Personal Experience Friendships of Mutual Accountability Engagement with Virtuous Exemplars

Habituation through Practice Compare self and peer perceptions of

attributes embodied Discuss differences in self and peer perceptions and changes between

Projects 1 and 2

Awareness of Situational Variables Dialogue that Increases Virtue Literacy

Habituation through Practice 2nd

Reflection Assignment

Reflect on changes in self and peer perceptions during Project 2

Reflection on Personal Experience Habituation through Practice

11

2nd Reflection Assignment Following the second in-class intervention, a reflection was assigned for homework. Students were asked to reflect on how effectively they addressed the attributes they chose to develop during the second project. Did the perceptions change? Why or why not? What other attribute perceptions changed? What are some possible explanations for these changes? Finally, they were asked to write one paragraph that reflects on what they learned or gained from the teamwork module. This activity maps to the “Reflection on Personal Experience” and “Habituation through Practice” character development strategies. Results and Discussion In this section, quantitative results of students’ self- and peer-perceptions of teamwork attribute embodiment, qualitative results of virtues emerging from student reflections, and the ways in which other virtues support virtuous teamwork are presented and discussed. Quantitative Results – Students’ Self-Assessments of Virtuous Teamwork The top fifteen attributes identified by the class during the first in-class intervention are shown in Table 3. It should be noted that the attributes are not listed by order of importance. The students were never asked to prioritize or place relative value of attributes among the list of fifteen. Table 3 also shows how the students mapped each attribute to the three elements of teamwork as a virtue. Table 3. Top fifteen attributes of an ideal team member determined by students as a class, and how they mapped each attribute to the three elements of teamwork as a virtue. Respect: respecting all team members; Integrate: integrating the team’s goals into one’s own; Contribute: appropriately contributing.

Teamwork Attribute Definition Mapping Responsible Contribute

Collaborative Respect, Integrate Nice Respect

Listens Respect, Integrate Determined Integrate

Gives Good Input Contribute Productive Contribute

High Work Standards Contribute Focused Contribute

Facilitator Integrate, Contribute Patient Respect

Problem Solver Integrate, Contribute Understanding of Different Skills Integrate

Great Writer Contribute Creative Respect, Contribute

12

Fig. 3 shows the percent of student responses that indicated embodiment of each attribute during the first project. The percentages include both self- and peer-perceptions. The three most perceived attributes were responsible (98%), collaborative (89%), and nice (88%). On the other hand, the three least perceived attributes were creativity (38%), great writer (40%), and understanding different skills (48%). Fig. 4 compares the frequency of each attribute being self-perceived versus peer-perceived. For example, students were 23% more likely to perceive others as a great writer compared to themselves and 19% more likely to perceive others as giving good input. On the other hand, students were 9% more likely to perceive themselves as embodying an awareness of team members having different skills and 8% more likely to perceive themselves as determined compared to their peers. In general, students were more likely to perceive others as embodying ideal team member attributes compared to themselves.

Figure 3. Percent of student responses indicating they perceived either themselves or their teammates embodying each attribute during Project 1.

Figure 4. Difference in the percent of self-perceived and peer-perceived embodiment of each attribute during Project 1. For example, students perceived their peers to be collaborative 10% more often than themselves.

38%40%

48%58%

60%62%

70%73%

78%78%

80%83%

88%89%

98%

CreativeGreat Writer

Understanding Different SkillsProblem Solver

PatientFacilitator

FocusedHigh Work Standards

ProductiveGives Good Input

DeterminedListens

NiceCollaborative

Responsible

3%23%

-9%5%

14%4%

9%0.2%

1%19%

-8%1%

8%10%

-3%

CreativeGreat Writer

Understanding Different SkillsProblem Solver

PatientFacilitator

FocusedHigh Work Standards

ProductiveGives Good Input

DeterminedListens

NiceCollaborative

Responsible

Self Peer

13

The attributes that students chose to develop during the second project are shown in Fig. 5. The most chosen attributes to develop during the second project were creative, understanding different skills, and great writer. These attributes align with the least perceived attributes during the first in-class intervention, which is not surprising because a requirement of the first reflection assignment was that students had to choose attributes to develop that their peers did not perceive them as embodying during the first project. This general trend holds for all chosen attributes.

Figure 5. Distribution of attributes students chose to work on during Project 2. Of the teamwork attributes students chose to develop, Fig. 6 shows how many students were successfully perceived as embodying those attributes during the second project. Overall, 56% of attributes students chose to develop were successfully perceived as being embodied during the second project. Student responses in the second reflection assignment suggest that most students focused on one attribute more than the other or did not make an effort to develop one of the attributes at all. In some cases, students said one attribute was easier to cultivate than the other, whether because it was easier to envision how to successfully embody that attribute or easier to develop in a short period of time. For example, several students stated they believe it would take more than six weeks to develop into a great writer despite their best efforts. In other cases, students reflected that the nature of the project was not suitable to enact or develop a particular attribute. For example, several students commented that the second project was more straightforward than the first and, thus, was not a suitable activity to develop creativity. Interestingly, students said this whether they completed the spine project or the water filter project first. The main takeaway is that the number of attributes students successfully developed, as measured by peer-perceptions, corresponds to about half of the attributes they chose to develop, and this aligns with students stating that they made more effort to develop one attribute over the other. Fig. 7 shows the difference between how often each attribute was perceived after the first project versus after the second project. Of the fifteen attributes, eleven attributes were perceived during the second project more often than during the first project. The largest gains were in patience (+9%), high work standards (+7%), and focused (+6%). The largest loss in perceived attributes during the second project was facilitator (-5%). This is consistent with Fig. 6, which shows that “good facilitator” had the lowest success rate of being embodied (33%) of all attributes students committed to developing during the second project. Although we do not have data to support an explanation at this time, we hypothesize that students may interpret good facilitator to mean

11

233

55

688

10

Gives Good InputNice

High Work StandardsDetermined

FocusedProblem Solver

PatientGood Facilitator

Great WriterUnderstanding of Different Skills

Creative

14

someone who leads the team or takes charge, and that gains in other attributes, such as patience or collaborative, may have been counter to embodying that attribute.

Figure 6. Comparison of the attribute distribution students chose to work on during Project 2 (solid) and how many students succeeded in being perceived as embodying that attribute by their peers during Project 2 (striped).

Figure 7. Difference in the percent of perceived attribute embodiment in Projects 1 and 2. For example, students perceived themselves and their peers to be patient 9% more often in Project 2 compared to Project 1. It should be noted that, although these attributes can help make for a good team member and serve as conduits through which one can practice and express teamwork as a virtue, the attributes themselves are not necessarily virtues. For example, there is nothing inherently virtuous about being a “great writer” or even being “nice.” Writing can and has been used toward morally bad or unjust ends, such as an aid to lying and manipulation. One can also be nice in order to serve their own purposes or conceal selfish motives with a seemingly kind veneer. These attributes are only virtuous when defined through a conceptual linkage to a virtue, such as teamwork. The class made this linkage through the series of activities presented in this paper. The students

11

233

55

688

10

Gives Good InputNice

High Work StandardsDetermined

FocusedProblem Solver

PatientGood Facilitator

Great WriterUnderstanding of Different Skills

Creative

2%2%

4%4%

9%-5%

6%7%

4%5%

-2%-1%

1%2%

-2%

CreativeGreat Writer

Understanding Different SkillsProblem Solver

PatientFacilitator

FocusedHigh Work Standards

ProductiveGives Good Input

DeterminedListens

NiceCollaborative

Responsible

Pre-Project 2 Post-Project 2

15

themselves crafted the list of attributes after they were prompted with the question, “What are attributes of an ideal team member?” Their responses were the class’s first attempt to explicate the elements of virtuous teamwork, and the process of developing the attributes allowed students as a group to explore together the idea of virtuous teamwork instead of relying on the instructor simply to supply an answer. When the students then mapped these attributes to the three specific elements of virtuous teamwork (Table 3), they were able to make connections between these attributes, activities, and skills and virtuous teamwork. Through such connections, the attributes were informed and redefined by a specific virtue. Although the attributes are not virtuous in themselves, when understood through the frame of virtuous teamwork, one can begin to see how such skills and traits can support the development of virtue and encourage students to strive for morally good ends. Qualitative Results – Additional and Related Virtues Emerging from Student Reflections Student reflection assignments suggest that students enact other virtues in reflecting on self- and peer-perceptions of teamwork and being a virtuous team worker. Anyone who has worked in a team knows that successful teamwork requires various skills and dispositions as well as the wisdom to know how to act and when. This is no less true when viewing teamwork as a virtue. Other character virtues support virtuous teamwork, demonstrating the interconnectedness of virtues—the idea that each virtue requires the cooperation of other virtues to be developed and enacted appropriately [19]. In all of these cases, virtues must be ordered toward good ends, such as advancing the good ends of the team, helping others develop and improve through feedback, and supporting the success of the team, assuming it is aimed at good ends itself. Analysis of student responses in both reflection assignments suggest that five virtues in particular are central to teamwork: courage, honesty, empathy, humility, and practical wisdom, Table 4. The process for identifying the five virtues followed a grounded theory approach to systematically discover the emergent virtues in students’ responses. The Jubilee Centre for Character and Virtues framework laid the foundation for the virtues the research team sought to discover in student responses and assignment reflections. More specifically, three researchers were involved, one being an engineering domain content expert and two being character education content experts. The process was as follows: 1) one engineering education domain content expert and one character education domain expert independently reviewed the qualitative student responses and independently identified virtues in specific student responses and reflections, 2) these two researchers came to a consensus on the five virtues that emerged, and 3) a third researcher, the second character education content expert concurred. Below we offer a discussion of their conceptual relationships before turning to student reflection responses that illuminate the connections.

16

Table 4. Virtues that emerged to be associated with Virtuous Teamwork based on student reflections.

Virtue Description

Courage The virtue that disposes us to respond properly to fear and is necessary for students to voice an opinion that is unpopular with other team members or overcome apprehension when openly providing feedback to peers [43].

Honesty The virtue that disposes us to be truthful in conversations and relationships with peers, to provide accurate and open feedback, and to admit mistakes rather than hide errors or avoid responsibility [44], [45].

Empathy

The virtue that enables us to “think and feel oneself into the inner life of another person” [46]. A virtuous team worker would need empathy to understand the perspectives and experiences of other team members and stakeholders, to imagine how others might respond to particular actions or behaviors, and to act in light of that empathetic understanding and imagination.

Humility The virtue that enables us to recognize the limits of our knowledge, perspective, or ability, to seek to learn from others, and to recognize our own weaknesses and need to improve as a member of the team [47].

Practical Wisdom The virtue that involves the ability to perceive the morally salient features of situations, deliberate well between competing options, and make good decisions in light of specific circumstances [27], [48].

Student Feedback in Support of Learned Virtue The instructor observed each of these virtues during the teamwork module activities, but they are also evident in quotes from student reflection assignments from the teamwork module. Below we map these quotations to the virtues of courage, honesty, empathy, humility, and practical wisdom. Consider this student reflection:

When they gave me their sheets and I looked at what they said, I noticed that they did not believe I embodied some attributes that I thought I did. At first, I was in denial of their beliefs. But, after allowing them to defend their responses, I understood where they were coming from. From this it was evident to me that listening to my group members’ views is vital. I will remember this lesson when working with them on the second project.

17

This student, for example, enacts courage in facing something they did not want to face, namely, that there was misalignment between self- and peer-perceptions of their embodied teamwork attributes. The student demonstrates empathy by learning to see from others’ points of view and honesty with themselves and their team members in recognizing (and then expressing) that there was a divergence between self- and peer-perceptions. This empathy and honesty also reflects a degree of humility, or at least its beginning, as the student begins to recognize the limits of their own perspective and the need to listen to others and be open to growth and improvement. Finally, practical wisdom is demonstrated in gaining facility in how to learn from experience, accept criticism, and apply that learning to their future work on the team. Another student reflected:

This activity taught me that communication/criticism/requests from another person within our group is beneficial and even necessary. For example, if one of my teammates consistently finished his or her assignments later than the group expected then it is reasonable to respectfully say something to that person about being more respectful of the team and responsible by finishing his or her work around when others do if possible.

This student demonstrates the need for courage and honesty in doing something that is difficult, namely, giving honest and critical feedback to peers. For college-aged adults, such critical feedback can be very scary not only to receive but to give, threatening social isolation by peers because of hurt feelings. Importantly, the student recognized the importance of giving the feedback in a way that aims towards good ends and supports virtuous teamwork. The student also exhibits empathy in understanding what the team needs, not just what they want, and humility in recognizing that they had something to learn from this experience, including that they could approach that team member “respectfully” to address the issue and treat the other student as an equal rather than simply criticizing or judging their work as a superior. Finally, the student demonstrates practical wisdom in learning from this activity and understanding how to approach a team member in a way that will help the person and the team flourish. Another student wrote:

I learned that my opinions of myself and my teamwork traits are not always agreed with by others. I learned that it is important to listen to the views of others. Not everyone has the same views as me, and although this may be frustrating at times, it is important to consider what they have to say. By doing this, I will become a better team member and person as a whole.

Here the student demonstrates courage by acknowledging that others have different views and that others do not always agree with them, despite it being a frustrating circumstance. Indeed, the student has learned that such disagreement can actually be necessary for growth as well as personal and team success. The student also understands the value of empathy, which is illustrated by the student’s recognition of the importance of listening to and trying to understand others’ views. Honesty is enacted in that the student is being honest with themselves that others can and do perceive things differently, and humility can be seen in how the student recognizes

18

the validity of others’ perspectives and does not view themselves as above reproach but remains open to learning from others. Practical wisdom is demonstrated in that the student recognizes listening to others’ views and considering what they have to say will result in becoming a better team member and person. Difference is seen here as a strength, not a deficit, setting up the student for a wiser, more pro-social future. Another student reflection echoes these themes:

I learned that it takes time to learn how to work together. The longer we worked together the better we figured out how to relate to each other and communicate with each other. This surprised me because I thought that people would be tired of working with the same group at this point in the semester. I was encouraged that the majority of the class saw improvements in their teammates ability to collaborate. I also learned that there is still room for us to grow as teammates. Even after working together for a semester, we are not experts on communicating with each other and functioning as a unit.

In this quote, the student demonstrates some apprehension, perhaps anxiety, about participating in a team over such a length of time. They persisted, however, which required the courage not to let their anxieties stop them from work that can help them grow. The student seemed clear about the emotional risks involved and yet still participated. As a part of this, the student also shows a degree of honesty in clearly recognizing their fears and being honest about their concerns. Empathy is demonstrated in the statement that the team figured out how to better relate and communicate with each other as they continued to work together as a team. Seemingly skeptical about the team’s ability to empathize with each other, the student was surprised, happily it seems, at how well the team could empathize and grow. Humility emerges in the student’s recognition that there is still room for all members of the team to grow and that they are “not experts” yet. Finally, practical wisdom is demonstrated by the reflection on experience and the recognition that it takes time to learn how to work together. Finally, this succinct quote implicitly reflects all five virtues:

I have learned to be more conscious of my attributes and how I am perceived by others. Additionally, I’ve learned the importance of understanding and accepting my weaknesses and not becoming defensive when my group tells me which areas I should improve.

This student demonstrates empathy in learning to be more conscious of others’ perceptions, humility in accepting their weaknesses and not becoming defensive about them, courage in facing their weaknesses and working to improve on them, honesty in acknowledging both their strengths and their weaknesses, and practical wisdom in understanding the importance of recognizing their weaknesses and identifying areas for improvement. Although we only share five quotes from the student reflection assignments here, many student reflections showed signs of courage, empathy, honesty, humility, and practical wisdom. While we would need additional evidence of these qualities over time and circumstances to determine

19

whether they are virtues or simply acts that might serve as the beginning of virtues, these quotes show the value of approaching teamwork through a virtue framework that recognizes that different virtues are highly interconnected. Cultivating one virtue often enables us to cultivate other virtues.

Conclusions and Suggestions for Future Implementation

While teamwork is an essential aspect of engineering education and practice, this paper has shown the value of approaching teamwork as a virtue. Such an approach encourages students to reflect on the morally good ends they are pursuing as a team, cultivate other virtues related to teamwork, and develop better ways to help their teams and themselves flourish. This paper has also shown that the virtue of teamwork can be developed intentionally through a module that applies research-based strategies for character development. In this module, students identified two teamwork attributes to develop during a project and, on average, were perceived to have successfully developed one of the two attributes over the course of the project by their peers.

Although character, virtues, vices, and teamwork as a virtue were defined during the first in-class intervention of this module, being more intentional with reinforcing these concepts throughout the remainder of the module could be helpful. For example, we could have prompted students in the reflection assignment to explain how the tangible actions they chose to practice during the second project were towards good ends and whom were they helping. Were they helping others, themselves, the team, etc.? We could also have introduced other virtues that support virtuous teamwork and asked students in their reflection assignments to identify and describe virtues they enacted during the intervention that supported them being a virtuous team worker. Being more intentional with the moral reminder exercise might also prove effective. In the first implementation, the instructor asked students to reflect on their own for a few minutes about what they had done and plan to do for the remainder of the project. In the future, following this reminder with a class discussion would help students by sharing and discussing their actions, successes, and difficulties with each other. This reflection would also likely expose situations like we observed with creativity, allowing students to express sooner that they do not see how cultivating or enacting creativity is suitable for a given project. Such awareness would allow the instructor to have a conversation with the class about how to, in the example of creativity, think differently about creativity as a disposition, how that disposition enables one to enact creativity in different situations, and brainstorm ways creativity could be enacted in specific situations students are experiencing.

In future implementations of the teamwork module, the instructor could introduce other virtues during the in-class interventions or point out during in-class discussions when other virtues are cultivated. Upon reviewing reflection assignments and specific attributes students chose to develop, the instructor could identify attributes that can be defined as virtues and discuss those in class, using the strategies of “Reflection on Personal Experience” and “Dialogue that Increases Virtue Literacy.” Regarding integration across the curriculum, instructors implementing other modules can also identify virtues commonly enacted and share those with other faculty to identify common threads.

20

While it was not an explicit goal of this teamwork module, as initially designed, to cultivate virtues beyond teamwork, what we discovered was that students themselves identified links with other virtues—courage, honesty, humility, empathy, and practical wisdom. The interconnectedness of the virtues presents an opportunity to educate engineering students holistically and to see the power of team-based learning experiences in facilitating virtuous engineers and cultivating multiple virtues.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge the support of the Kern Family Foundation for funding this research. We would also like to acknowledge Dr. Jesse Pappas for helpful discussions.

21

References

[1] ABET, “Criteria for accrediting engineering programs, 2019-2020 | ABET.” Accessed: Jan. 6, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://www.abet.org/accreditation/accreditation-criteria/criteria-for-accrediting-engineering-programs-2019-2020/.

[2] S. Thomas and S. Busby, “Do industry collaborative projects enhance students’ learning?,” Education + Training, vol. 45, no. 4, pp. 226-235, 2003.

[3] H. J. Passow and C. H. Passow, “What competencies should undergraduate engineering programs emphasize? A systematic review,” Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 106, no. 3, pp. 475-526, 2017.

[4] H. J. Passow, “Which ABET competencies do engineering graduates find most important in their work?,” Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 101, no. 1, pp. 95-118, 2012.

[5] R. F. Vaz and P. Quinn, “Benefits of a project-based curriculum: Engineering employers’ perspectives,” 2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition.

[6] Hart Research Associates (2015), Falling Short? College Learning and Career Success. Washington, DC: Association of American Colleges and Universities.

[7] G. W. Ellis and Y. Zhang, “The development of 21st century skills in the knowledge building environment,” International Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 32, no. 3(A), pp. 1160-1170, 2016.

[8] National Academy of Engineering (NAE) (2004), The Engineer of 2020: Visions of Engineering in the New Century. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

[9] T. Chowdhury and H. Murzi, “The evolution of teamwork in the engineering workplace from first industry revolution to industry 4.0: A literature review,” 2020 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition.

[10] C. Vila, D. Ugarte, J. Rios, and J. V. Abellan, “Project-based collaborative engineering learning to develop industry 4.0 skills within a PLM framework,” Procedia Manufacturing, vol. 12, pp. 1269-1276, 2017.

[11] T. Chowdry and H. Murzi, “Literature review: Exploring teamwork in engineering education,” 2004 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition.

[12] M. L. Loughry, M. W. Ohland, and D. D. Moore, “Development of a theory-based assessment of team member effectiveness,” Educational and Psychological Measurement, vol. 67, no. 3, pp. 505-524, 2007.

[13] P. L. Hirsch and A. F. McKenna, “Using reflection to promote teamwork understanding in engineering design education,” International Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 377-385, 2008.

[14] K. A. Smith, “Cooperative learning: Effective teamwork for engineering classrooms,” IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, vol. 1, pp. 12-18, 1995.

22

[15] M. F. Ercan and R. Khan, “Teamwork as a fundamental skill for engineering graduates,” IEEE International Conference on Teaching, Assessment, and Learning for Engineering, pp. 24-28, 2017.

[16] D. W. Johnson, R. T. Johnson, and K. Smith, “The state of cooperative learning in postsecondary and professional settings,” Educational Psychology Review, vol. 19, pp. 15-29, 2007.

[17] A. Zhang, “Peer assessment of soft skills and hard skills,” Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, vol. 11, pp. 155-168, 2012.

[18] H. M. Matusovich, M. C. Paretti, A. M. Motto, and K. J. Cross, “Understanding faculty and student beliefs about teamwork and communication skills,” 2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition.

[19] J. Koehler, O. Pierrakos, M. Lamb, A. Demaske, C. Santos, M. D. Gross, and D. F. Brown, “What can we learn from character education? A literature review of four prominent virtues in engineering education,” 2020 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition.

[20] O. Pierrakos, M. Prentice, C. Silverglate, M. Lamb, A. Demaske, and R. Smout, “Reimagining engineering ethics: From ethics education to character education,” 2019 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference.

[21] The Jubilee Centre for Character & Virtues, “A framework for character education in schools” [Online]. Available: https://www.jubileecentre.ac.uk/userfiles/jubileecentre/pdf/character-education/Framework%20for%20Character%20Education.pdf

[22] M. Lamb, J. Brant, and E. Brooks, "How is virtue cultivated?: Seven strategies for postgraduate character development," Journal of Character Education, vol. 17, no. 1, 2021.

[23] C. B. Miller, The Character Gap: How Good Are We? New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2017.

[24] H. Battaly, Virtue. Malden, MA: Polity Press, 2015.

[25] J. Annas, Intelligent Virtue. New York: Oxford University Press, 2009.

[26] Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics, T. Irwin, Trans., 2nd ed. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing Company, 1999.

[27] B. Schwartz and K. Sharpe. Practical Wisdom: The Right Way to do the Right Thing. New York, NY: Penguin, 2010.

[28] A. O. Yeaman, “Understanding empathy in the experiences of undergraduate engineering students in service learning programs,” Ph.D. dissertation, Dept. Eng. Ed., Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA, 2020.

[29] N. D. Fila and J. L. Hess, “In their shoes: Student perspectives on the connection between empathy and engineering,” 2016 ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition.

23

[30] J. L. Hess, J. Strobel, and R. Pan, “Voices from the workplace: practitioners’ perspectives on the role of empathy and care within engineering,” Engineering Studies, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 212–242, 2016.

[31] S. J. Hitt, C. E. P. Holles, and T. Lefton, “Integrating ethics in engineering education through multidisciplinary synthesis, collaboration, and reflective portfolios,” Advances in Engineering Education, pp. 1–13, 2020.

[32] E. Koppen and C. Meinel, “Knowing people: The empathetic designer,” Design Philosophy Papers, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 35–51, 2012.

[33] L. T. Zagzebski, Virtues of the Mind: An Inquiry Into the Nature of Virtue and the Ethical Foundations of Knowledge. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1996.

[34] J. J. Arnett, “Emerging adulthood: A theory of development from the late teens through the twenties,” The American Psychologist, vol. 55, no. 5, pp. 469–480, 2000.

[35] J. J. Arnett, “Presidential address: The emergence of emerging adulthood: A personal history,” Emerging Adulthood, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 155–162, 2014.

[36] E. E. Noftle, “Character across early emerging adulthood,” in Character: New Directions from Philosophy, Psychology, and Theology, C. B. Miller, R. M. Furr, A. Knobel, et al., Eds. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015, pp. 490–517.

[37] J. Brant, M. Lamb, E. Burdett, and E. Brooks, “Cultivating virtues in postgraduates: An empirical analysis of the Oxford Global Leadership Initiative,” Journal of Moral Education, vol. 49, no. 4, pp. 415-435, 2020.

[38] D. L. Shields, “Character as the aim of education,” Phi Delta Kappan, vol. 92, pp. 48-53, 2011.

[39] M. Lamb, J. Wiinikka-Lydon, O. Pierrakos, L. Lowman, M. D. Gross, A. Demaske, C. Silverglate, R. Smout, A. Yeaman, J. Koehler, J. Pappas, C. Santos, and M. Prentice, Virtue in Engineering: A Faculty Handbook. Wake Forest University. Manuscript in Preparation.

[40] T. Driskell, E. Salas, and J. E. Driskell, “Teams in extreme environments: Alterations in team development and teamwork,” Human Resource Management Review, vol. 28, no. 4, pp. 434–449, 2018.

[41] P. Gaffney, “The nature and meaning of teamwork,” Journal of the Philosophy of Sport, vol. 42, no. 1, pp. 1–22, 2015.

[42] H. Han, J. Kim, C. Jeong, and G. L. Cohen, “Attainable and relevant moral exemplars are more effective than extraordinary exemplars in promoting voluntary service engagement,” Frontiers in Psychology, 283, vol. 8, 2017.

[43] C. R. Rate, J. A. Clarke, D. R. Lindsay, and R. J. Sternberg, “Implicit theories of courage,” The Journal of Positive Psychology, 2, vol. 2, 80-98, 2007.

[44] R. Hursthouse, On Virtue Ethics. New York: Oxford University Press, p. 10, 1999.

24

[45] A. T. Wilson, “Honesty as a virtue,” Metaphilosophy, 3, vol. 49, 262-280, 2018.

[46] H. Kohut, How Does Analysis Cure? Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1984.

[47] D. Whitcomb, H. Battaly, J. Baehr, and D. Howard-Snyder, “Intellectual humility: Owning our limitations,” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 94(3), 509-539, 2017.

[48] K. Kristjánsson, Aristotle, Emotions, and Education. Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2007.