Assembling the ethical toolkit

A draft ethics guide has been welcomed by universities that are looking for case studies and practical guidance in building and implementing their own comprehensive and effective policies, says Julia Casson

Interest in the initiative to raise the profile of ethics is high across the higher education sector, to judge by the responses to a draft guide for institutions. A short questionnaire recently sent to UK higher education institutions asked how useful respondents found the draft guide, how it might be improved, what other areas might be included and how institutions could be encouraged to make use of it after its publication in autumn 2005.

Most respondents strongly welcomed the initiative and underlined the importance of maintaining high ethical standards in all institutions. Almost half the respondents rated the draft guide as “very useful”, with the majority of the remainder regarding it as “quite useful”. Several respondents from the latter group felt that the draft would be very useful with the addition of the Illustrative Framework that is now on the Council for Industry and Higher Education website at www.cihe-uk.com/ethics .

The draft guide was thought to be a timely and welcome contribution to an overdue debate that addressed many of the key issues of current concern. There were several constructive suggestions for potential improvements. Some thought that the draft was too long and that it should be “pithier”. Many felt that the case for high standards of ethics was already accepted and need not be repeated at length. There was a view that background material might usefully be separated from the guide, or put into an appendix, so that the guide itself was a shorter, more practical resource. The general feeling was that the guide should be a short, practical toolkit.

The draft guide was thought to be quite thoroughgoing, and some respondents stressed the importance of institutions having a comprehensive approach rather than one based largely on research issues. Some thought that more should be said about linking ethical values to behaviour and standards. Some thought the draft was rather too business-focused, but others welcomed the opportunity to compare practice with the business world. Indeed, some respondents felt that there could be more focus on the multiple perspectives of stakeholders, an important issue given that ethics is largely value driven. It might therefore be useful to provide contrasting ethical policies from the business sector. Some thought that guidance on how universities could take account of these differences and foster discussion without becoming hostage to multiple points of view would be helpful.

There was a strong demand for more case studies and examples of how ethical dilemmas might be resolved. It was suggested that various possible courses of action might be considered, together with the implications of each. While the teaching of ethics in the curriculum was not specifically covered, the draft rightly, in the eyes of some, stresses that students benefit from learning in an environment where ethical debate is at the forefront of thinking.

The inclusion of flowcharts and templates was suggested to help institutions implement their own guidelines. These would give obvious “how to” information, such as a step plan and responsibilities chart.

Respondents were mindful of the scarcity of time and resources and were looking for practical help, particularly on the implementation of ethics guidelines and on how to set up an ethics committee.

There was a call for practical seminars and workshops, on a regional basis, with perhaps a presentation from an institution that had successfully introduced ethical guidelines, so that its experience could benefit others. There are many examples of good practice that might usefully be shared, in particular where success had been achieved in spite of limited resources.

A website to share best practice examples and to use as a discussion forum was regarded as helpful, as was the development of a PowerPoint presentation to inform ethics committee members. There was a feeling that everyone closely involved in ethics issues should have ethics awareness training as a mandatory part of their continuing professional development.

Many respondents recognised that an institution’s approach to ethics needed to be driven from the top to be effective.

Finally, the view was expressed that there should be follow-up and evaluation of this exercise to ensure continuing progress.

The CIHE would welcome your views on these suggestions. Should the CIHE place case studies and other material on a dedicated website with links to and from organisations such as the Leadership Foundation and the Higher Education Academy?

These questions and other views received as part of the consultation process will be discussed further at the London conference.

Julia Casson advises on leadership and governance issues at the Council for Industry and Higher Education.

Back to ethics index page