| NSF Org: |
DRL Division of Research on Learning in Formal and Informal Settings (DRL) |
| Recipient: |
|
| Initial Amendment Date: | June 23, 2020 |
| Latest Amendment Date: | June 23, 2020 |
| Award Number: | 2024279 |
| Award Instrument: | Standard Grant |
| Program Manager: |
Michael Steele
DRL Division of Research on Learning in Formal and Informal Settings (DRL) EDU Directorate for STEM Education |
| Start Date: | July 1, 2020 |
| End Date: | June 30, 2022 (Estimated) |
| Total Intended Award Amount: | $58,135.00 |
| Total Awarded Amount to Date: | $58,135.00 |
| Funds Obligated to Date: |
|
| History of Investigator: |
|
| Recipient Sponsored Research Office: |
MAIN CAMPUS WASHINGTON DC US 20057 (202)625-0100 |
| Sponsor Congressional District: |
|
| Primary Place of Performance: |
4000 Reservoir Road NW, Bldg D Washington DC US 20057-2197 |
| Primary Place of
Performance Congressional District: |
|
| Unique Entity Identifier (UEI): |
|
| Parent UEI: |
|
| NSF Program(s): | IUSE |
| Primary Program Source: |
|
| Program Reference Code(s): | |
| Program Element Code(s): |
|
| Award Agency Code: | 4900 |
| Fund Agency Code: | 4900 |
| Assistance Listing Number(s): | 47.076 |
ABSTRACT
Professional ethics standards for mathematicians is both a relatively novel issue and a critical one at this moment in time. The use of big data and algorithms in today's technological society has been shown to perpetuate inequalities. The design of algorithms and use of big data often involve the work of mathematicians. Professional codes of ethics for many mathematical professional societies tend to focus on academic issues and do not explicitly address these newer issues and contexts. Moreover, there is a sense within the field of mathematics that mathematics is abstract and as such free from ethical considerations. This one-year Ethical and Responsible Research incubation grant aims to gather information on what ethical guidelines mathematicians believe are relevant to mathematics and which elements of ethics are missing from current professional codes and guidelines.
The project makes use of ethics codes from mathematics-adjacent fields and professional societies such as the Association for Computing Machinery (ACM) and the American Statistical Association (ASA). These societies have recently updated their codes to better reflect contemporary issues of ethics in areas such as big data and algorithm design. Using survey and focus group methods, the project interrogates which elements from the current codes of the two major academic mathematics professional societies, the Mathematics Association of America (MAA) and the American Mathematical Society (AMS) mathematicians see as most relevant to their work. The survey and focus group work will also evaluate the extent to which mathematicians feel that the ethical guidelines from the mathematics-adjacent professional societies are relevant to their work and what additional guidelines might be necessary that are specific to the field of mathematics. The work of this study lays the groundwork for broader impacts as this foundational work will guide discussions within the field of mathematics, revisions to codes of ethics by mathematics professional organizations, and stronger ethical behavior on the part of mathematicians in university and industry contexts. This grant is intended to be followed by a three-year Ethical and Responsible Research proposal to extend the data collection and white paper work of the incubation project into the construction of informed ethical practice guidelines and educational materials for mathematicians and their professional societies.
This award reflects NSF's statutory mission and has been deemed worthy of support through evaluation using the Foundation's intellectual merit and broader impacts review criteria.
PROJECT OUTCOMES REPORT
Disclaimer
This Project Outcomes Report for the General Public is displayed verbatim as submitted by the Principal Investigator (PI) for this award. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this Report are those of the PI and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation; NSF has not approved or endorsed its content.
This was a one year collaboration between three different universities (in two states and the District of Columbia). It included examination of ethical practice standards from statistics and data science (in the American Statistical Association Ethical Guidelines for Statistical Practice (ASA)), computing (in the Association for Computing Machinery Code of Ethics (ACM)), and mathematics (in the Mathematics Association of America Code of Ethics (MAA) and American Mathematical Society Code of Ethics (AMS)). Our objectives were to create and deploy a survey to engage mathematics practitioners to comment on the relevance of ASA and ACM ethical practice standard elements for the “ethical practice of mathematics”, and to write a three-year grant. During the funding period, we obtained a national sample of respondents to our survey. We held a Town Hall meeting to engage mathematicians attending the Joint Mathematics Meeting (JMM, January 2021) in our alpha testing of the survey and identify beta testers. We deployed the survey and analyzed the results. We shared the results at JMM 2022; wrote, and published to a public archive, a white paper describing all methods and all results; and wrote a successful 3-year grant (to begin 09/01/2022). We also prepared a paper to be submitted for peer review in October 2022.
Intellectual merit:
We answered three research questions that advance knowledge within the field of Mathematics:
1. Which elements of the existing ethical codes of the AMS and MAA are perceived to be relevant to ethical practice by the mathematics community?
We determined that 100% of MAA and over 50% of AMS ethical code content was not descriptive of “ethical mathematical practice”. All of the AMS ethical code elements (14 of 29 items) included in our survey were endorsed by at least 50% of respondents as representing “an ethical obligation” for mathematics practitioners.
2. What ethical guidelines from math-adjacent professional societies (ACM, ASA) does the mathematics community believe are relevant?
We adapted 43 of the 52 items in our survey from the ACM and ASA ethical practice standards. All but one of these 43 items were endorsed by at least 50% of the sample. Items from the ACM and ASA standards in terms of both content and the use of specific items can inform the development of new guidelines for ethical mathematical practice.
3. What other guidelines are necessary that are unique to mathematics? What ethical guidance is lacking from the AMS, MAA, ACM, and ASA guidelines?
Only three items on the AMS code were unique to the mathematics community. There are important aspects of ACM and ASA missing from existing guidance for ethical mathematical practice. Responses suggested that ethical obligations about teaching and effectively preparing users of mathematics are “what is missing” from our survey.
We also advanced knowledge across fields *outside of* Mathematics:
Methodological work beyond Mathematics was informed by this 1-year grant. Four presentations and manuscripts were influenced by the writing of our successful NSF Standard Grant application.
- Tractenberg RE (2022, August). Teaching ethical reasoning in quantitative courses: stakeholder analysis, ethical practice standards, and case studies. Joint Statistics Meeting 2022. Presentation Abstract #323678
- Tractenberg RE & Thornton S. (in preparation -2022). Facilitating the integration of ethical reasoning into quantitative courses: stakeholder analysis, ethical practice standards, and case studies. For Proceedings of the 2022 Joint Statistical Meetings, Washington, DC. Alexandria, VA: American Statistical Association.
- Thornton, S & Tractenberg, RE. (2022, November). Stewardship and stakeholders: making ethical quantitative practice practical. Philosophy of Science Association (PSA) 2022 meeting. Pittsburgh, PA.
- Tractenberg RE & Thornton S. (manuscript currently in preparation for submission to Proceedings of the 2022 Philosophy of Science Association). Using stewardship and stakeholder analysis to build ethical habits of mind in quantitative classrooms. Proceedings of Philosophy of Science Association.
The challenge of facilitating teaching of what can be perceived as value- or ethics-neutral content, like formulae and proofs, was an important part of our team’s discussions about the Survey and its results (i.e., this grant) but were also critical in our writing of the Standard Grant. These four work products reflect important impacts for teaching ethics in primarily quantitative courses in all STEM domains. Current ‘responsible conduct of research’ material is inappropriate for this content, and for anyone not being trained for research.
Broader Impacts: Potential to benefit society and contribute to the achievement of specific/desired societal outcomes
- Our results encourage the development of ethical guidelines for mathematical practice, and for engaging practitioners with the idea that mathematical practice can be subjected to ethical guidance. Responses were inconsistent with a view that mathematics is “value-free” work.
- Community responses suggest that “ethical mathematical practice” is a complex set of behaviors that go beyond applied math, and apply to all practitioners.
- Our proto-guidelines have the potential to support inculcating new mathematicians to an ethical practice culture.
Last Modified: 09/29/2022
Modified by: Rochelle E Tractenberg
Please report errors in award information by writing to: awardsearch@nsf.gov.
