Debating E-commerce: Engaging Students in Current Events

Amber SettleCTI, DePaul University

Joint work with André Berthiaume

ISECONNovember 2, 2002

2

Outline

• Approaches to integrating social, legal,and ethical issues in the curriculum

• The debates Topics Structure Format Grading

• Results– Common outcomes– Undergraduate– Graduate

• Future work

3

Social, legal, ethical issues in the curriculum

Separate course:School of CTI, DePaul University:

• Undergraduate– General education– Little technical content

• Graduate (Masters level)– Course for Ph.D. students– Elective only

Within existing courses (Cohen and Cornwall 1989):• Add lectures (passive)• Written assignments (re-enforce students’ bias)• Interactive dialog (difficult in large classes)• Debates (structure + interactive learning)

4

The debates

• Purpose– Critical thinking– Controversial, technical topics– Focus on the content, not debate format

• Courses– ECT 250: Survey of e-commerce technology– DS 420: Foundations of distributed systems– Similarities: Survey courses– Differences: Level and maturity of students

5

Debate topics

• Offensive Web content: Controlling content viewing• Copyrighting digital media: Napster case and others• The U.S. government vs. the Microsoft Corporation• Legal issues in e-commerce: Digital signatures• Sklyarov case and code breaking in general• U.S. bill draft: Government imposed software security• The French government versus Yahoo!• Virtual child pornography

6

Debate structure

• Timing: Introduced after the midterm• Positions: Pro and con

Example: Copyrighting digital mediaPro: Copyrights should be enforced on the Web

Con: Copyrights should not or cannot be enforced

• Preparation: A written research summary– Context for the debate– A summary of the position taken– A list of references with short quotes

7

In-class debate• Pro’s opening statement (5 minutes)

Gives context and states position• Con’s cross-examination (3 minutes)

Rebuttal of pro’s position• Con’s position statement (4 minutes)

Statement of position• Pro’s cross-examination (3 minutes)

Response to con’s statements• Audience comments/questions (8 minutes)

Assigned interrogators and others• Closing statements (2 minutes each)

Points of each side are recapped

8

Grading

Options for students• Debate• Extra questions about debates on final exam

Undergraduate course• Extra credit to debate• Every student produced a paper• Extra guidance (papers, grading)

Graduate course• Interrogator (questions and expected answers)

9

General results

• One to two quarters of data• Enthusiastic response• High quality papers and debates• Good participation from non-native speakers• Variation between graduate and undergraduate

10

Undergraduate course

• Spring quarter 2002 only• 14 students in the course (only 5 in CTI)• Traditional age undergraduates• Native speakers only• Four debates

– Copyrighting digital media– Skylarov case– Offensive Web content (2)

• Positives: – Well-prepared– Articulate

• Negatives– Some debates unorganized– Little integration/analysis of material

11

Graduate course

• Winter and spring quarters 2002• 36-52 students in the four classes• Mixed ages and nationalities• Debates by quarter

– Winter: All but one topic– Spring: Only three topics– Topics may have seemed stale

• Positives:– Evaluated technical aspects well– Very articulate and objective– High audience participation in spring– Better integration of material in lectures

12

Future

Continuing work in the two courses• More explicit guidance for undergraduate debaters• New topics

Conduct debates earlier to allow reflection Investigate using debates in other CTI courses

• CSC 200: Survey of computer technology Conducted in Spring 2002 by another instructor

• Capstone courses– More technical knowledge– Public speaking course

13

References• Clark, Martyn, 2000, “Getting Participation Through Discussion.”

SIGCSE Bulletin 32(1): 129-133.• Cohen, Eli, and Larry Cornwell, 1989, “A Question of Ethics:

Developing Information Systems Ethics.” Journal of Business Ethics 8: 431-437.

• Coulouris, George, Jean Dollimore, and Tim Kindberg, 2001, Distributed Systems: Concepts and Design, Third Edition, Addison Wesley.

• Laudon, Kenneth and Carol Traver, 2002, E-commerce: Business,Technology, Society. Addison Wesley.

• Siegfried, Robert, M., 2001, “What’s Wrong with Napster? A Study of Student Attitudes on Downloading Music and Pirating Software.” Proceedings of the 18th Annual Information Systems Education Conference (ISECON).

• Wahl, Nancy, 1999, “YAATCE – Yet Another Approach to Teaching Computer Ethics”, SIGCSE Bulletin 31(1): 22-26.