AIR Mode of Ethical Inquiry
The AIR Model was developed and first implemented by Perrin Cohen, Melissa McDaniels, and Donna M. Qualters. At the time, all three were members of the Northeastern University Ethics Education Center (NUCASE) (Qualters, McDaniels, and Cohen, 2013).
"The acronym AIR refers to the three elements of the reflective process: Awareness of ethical issues, Investigation of those issues, and Responding to those issues" (Cohen, McDaniels, and Qualters, 2005).
The AIR Model was designed to address two key problems that were observed at Northeastern University:
How AIR Works in Four Easy Steps:
In consultation with their students, teachers must establish "ground rules" for discussion and debate. The teachers must stress the confidential nature of the discussion and the main goal of student growth by sharing reflections, thoughts, and research in order to refine their own "ethical awareness and decision-making". This is not a "forum for self-righteous judgments, imposing thoughts, or derogatory statements." Students should also be aware that they should only bring up ethical concerns that they are comfortable discussing with others (Cohen, McDaniels, and Qualters, 2005).
In this model, the teacher also relinquishes their "teacher hat" in order to become more of a facilitator or mediator (rather than the leader of the discussion).
The teacher creates an opportunity to for students to identify ethical concerns that they have observed. This should be a concern or event that makes the student personally uncomfortable (although comfortable enough to bring it to the group). It needs to be meaningful to the student in order for them to reflectively inquire about their concern, the context in which arose, and one's belief and assumptions regarding the incident. In this step, it is also useful to construct "stakeholder maps" to illustrate an understanding of who is impacted by the ethical concern in question, rather than only focusing on their own feelings about the issue and those immediately involved.
The goal in this activity is to "befriend the ethical concern" so that students come to view it as an opportunity to grow as ethical thinkers, rather than a problem that needs to be solved (Cohen, McDaniels, and Qualters, 2005).
At this point, students should be able to approach the ethical concern with a "reflective curiosity" rather than an instinctual response of personal views and opinions. During this investigative phase, students are encouraged to continue being "reflective" and maintain an awareness that their assumptions and hypotheses may need to be changed. This will allow them to consider the broader aspects of the issue and remain open to the new ideas and perspectives that their research is likely to reveal to them.
In terms of their actual research, students should be encouraged to use critically reviewed scholarly sources, rather than the first Google-hit that gives them the answers that they are looking for.
Once they have identified the information and perspectives at their disposal, students have an almost unlimited amount of actions they can take to respond to the ethical concerns that they've observed, ranging from using their research to develop a proposal for change, to using a creative outlet such as music or art to advocate for their cause.
Applications for Teacher Inquiry
This is a very "user-friendly" approach to inquiry. It requires that teachers "bounce ideas" off of each other and hold their opinions and biases into account while they are researching and growing as thinkers. It gives educators tools and resources to approach ethical concerns as challenges and opportunities to grow rather than problems that need to be solved.
At Northeastern University, a ninety-minute AIR workshop was offered to all faculty and teaching assistants on campus and it has become a regular part of orientation for new teachers. They learn through role playing, discussing mock cases, and reflecting on personal experiences (Cohen, McDaniels, and Qualters, 2005).
Classroom Applications
While the article I used for the bulk of my research concerned undergraduates (education students in particular), I think the AIR model can also be applied in a high school setting, keeping in mind the difference in maturity in the students and that some steps might take a little more time than they would with adult students (like being self-aware enough to realize when they are ready to discuss a sensitive ethical issue).
As I mentioned above, this is a very user friendly approach to inquiry that demands that students assess the situation, consider all the stakeholders involved, and investigate the challenge using critical sources before they are allowed to respond. I think this approach is a very useful tool to use with high school students to break them of the habit of responding to difficult situations with gut impulses and knee-jerk reactions (which isn't usually the most helpful of responses).
Because this approach is so flexible, I think it can be applied in a variety of situations where students can then use it to address ethical issues that concern them. It's four-step process can also be used for problem solving, debate, and peer mediation outside of the sphere of ethical issues.
I also feel that there is enough structure in the framework that teachers can have that freedom to step back, hang up their "teacher hat" and mediate discussions as they happen. When teacher's do this, they open up the classroom as a space where students can be empowered by actively learning from each other's experiences.
Sample Activity
Lesson: Novel Study with the "AIR Method of Ethical Inquiry."
Objective: Apply the AIR Method of Ethical Inquiry to the discussion of the ethical (or unethical) decisions made by characters in Friedrich by Hans Peter Richter
Time Needed: 25 min
Materials: A copy of the text (or photocopies of the chapters in question).
Sequence of Activities:
Annotated Bibliography
Hanson, K. (1996). Between apathy and advocacy: Teaching and modeling ethical reflection. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 1996(66), 33-36. doi:10.1002/tl.37219966607
In this article, Karen Hanson argues how ethical neutrality in teachers may do more harm than good in the classroom. She claims that if students are presented with a neutral teacher, most of them will figure out that it is impossible for anyone to be completely neutral and will focus too much of their energy in figuring out just what their teacher isn't telling them (p.34).
Additionally, Hanson argues that teacher neutrality on ethical issues contributes to student cynicism when it comes to those issues. If the students decide that the issue isn't important enough for their teacher to develop an opinion then it won't grasp their attention. They will form the assumption that "moral and political controversies as merely academic debates, where form counts for much but any position is, at base, as good as any other" (p. 34)
Cohen, P., McDaniels, M., & Qualters, D. M. (2005). Air model: A teaching tool for cultivating reflective ethical inquiry. College Teaching, 53(3), 120-127.
This article is a complete, comprehensive description of AIR Ethical Inquiry and was the focus of my research. It describes in detail the reasoning behind the implementation of the method, the steps, and the multiple applications of the method in a variety of situations, ranging from teacher education to classroom applications with students (although the students in this case were university students).
The end of the article also details the actual effectiveness of the method and a detailed description of how it's effectiveness was assessed.
Qualters, D. M., McDaniels, M., & Cohen, P. (2013). Reflective ethical inquiry: Preparing students for life. The Idea Centre. Retrieved October 2, 2013, from http://theideacenter.org
"The IDEA Center is a nonprofit organization whose mission is to serve colleges and universities committed to improving learning, teaching, and leadership performance."
The main author for this article is Donna Qualters who also happens to be one of the co-authors of the AIR Model article that I referenced above. This article offers the same information around the concepts about the approach, but it also includes more examples for classroom applications. Again, this article was written in mind for college-aged students, but I think it would be easy enough to apply this method to suit a high school classroom.
"The acronym AIR refers to the three elements of the reflective process: Awareness of ethical issues, Investigation of those issues, and Responding to those issues" (Cohen, McDaniels, and Qualters, 2005).
The AIR Model was designed to address two key problems that were observed at Northeastern University:
- Faculty members have difficulty addressing ethical issues in the classroom because they are torn between being advocates while also maintaining a role as ethically neutral parties because they feel that their personal views don't have a place in the classroom (Hanson, 1996).
- Most undergraduate students lack the "vocabulary, concepts, and practical reasoning" that are required in order to reflect upon ethically-complex issues (Cohen, McDaniels, and Qualters, 2005).
How AIR Works in Four Easy Steps:
- Step 1: Creating a Safe, Reflective Context for Ethical Inquiry
In consultation with their students, teachers must establish "ground rules" for discussion and debate. The teachers must stress the confidential nature of the discussion and the main goal of student growth by sharing reflections, thoughts, and research in order to refine their own "ethical awareness and decision-making". This is not a "forum for self-righteous judgments, imposing thoughts, or derogatory statements." Students should also be aware that they should only bring up ethical concerns that they are comfortable discussing with others (Cohen, McDaniels, and Qualters, 2005).
In this model, the teacher also relinquishes their "teacher hat" in order to become more of a facilitator or mediator (rather than the leader of the discussion).
- Step 2: Building Awareness--Empowering Students to Identify and Acknowledge Ethical Concerns/Issues.
The teacher creates an opportunity to for students to identify ethical concerns that they have observed. This should be a concern or event that makes the student personally uncomfortable (although comfortable enough to bring it to the group). It needs to be meaningful to the student in order for them to reflectively inquire about their concern, the context in which arose, and one's belief and assumptions regarding the incident. In this step, it is also useful to construct "stakeholder maps" to illustrate an understanding of who is impacted by the ethical concern in question, rather than only focusing on their own feelings about the issue and those immediately involved.
The goal in this activity is to "befriend the ethical concern" so that students come to view it as an opportunity to grow as ethical thinkers, rather than a problem that needs to be solved (Cohen, McDaniels, and Qualters, 2005).
- Step 3: Investigation--Cultivating Confidence and Competence to Research Ethical Issues.
At this point, students should be able to approach the ethical concern with a "reflective curiosity" rather than an instinctual response of personal views and opinions. During this investigative phase, students are encouraged to continue being "reflective" and maintain an awareness that their assumptions and hypotheses may need to be changed. This will allow them to consider the broader aspects of the issue and remain open to the new ideas and perspectives that their research is likely to reveal to them.
In terms of their actual research, students should be encouraged to use critically reviewed scholarly sources, rather than the first Google-hit that gives them the answers that they are looking for.
- Step 4: Responding--Cultivating Confidence and Competence to Convert Decisions into Practical Action.
Once they have identified the information and perspectives at their disposal, students have an almost unlimited amount of actions they can take to respond to the ethical concerns that they've observed, ranging from using their research to develop a proposal for change, to using a creative outlet such as music or art to advocate for their cause.
Applications for Teacher Inquiry
This is a very "user-friendly" approach to inquiry. It requires that teachers "bounce ideas" off of each other and hold their opinions and biases into account while they are researching and growing as thinkers. It gives educators tools and resources to approach ethical concerns as challenges and opportunities to grow rather than problems that need to be solved.
At Northeastern University, a ninety-minute AIR workshop was offered to all faculty and teaching assistants on campus and it has become a regular part of orientation for new teachers. They learn through role playing, discussing mock cases, and reflecting on personal experiences (Cohen, McDaniels, and Qualters, 2005).
Classroom Applications
While the article I used for the bulk of my research concerned undergraduates (education students in particular), I think the AIR model can also be applied in a high school setting, keeping in mind the difference in maturity in the students and that some steps might take a little more time than they would with adult students (like being self-aware enough to realize when they are ready to discuss a sensitive ethical issue).
As I mentioned above, this is a very user friendly approach to inquiry that demands that students assess the situation, consider all the stakeholders involved, and investigate the challenge using critical sources before they are allowed to respond. I think this approach is a very useful tool to use with high school students to break them of the habit of responding to difficult situations with gut impulses and knee-jerk reactions (which isn't usually the most helpful of responses).
Because this approach is so flexible, I think it can be applied in a variety of situations where students can then use it to address ethical issues that concern them. It's four-step process can also be used for problem solving, debate, and peer mediation outside of the sphere of ethical issues.
I also feel that there is enough structure in the framework that teachers can have that freedom to step back, hang up their "teacher hat" and mediate discussions as they happen. When teacher's do this, they open up the classroom as a space where students can be empowered by actively learning from each other's experiences.
Sample Activity
Lesson: Novel Study with the "AIR Method of Ethical Inquiry."
Objective: Apply the AIR Method of Ethical Inquiry to the discussion of the ethical (or unethical) decisions made by characters in Friedrich by Hans Peter Richter
Time Needed: 25 min
Materials: A copy of the text (or photocopies of the chapters in question).
Sequence of Activities:
- Step 1: Have students read the passage (5 min).
- Step 2: Build Awareness by having the students discuss the following questions (10 min):
- Describe the dilemma you encountered.
- What was your reaction? How did you feel?
- Who was impacted?
- Who are the “stake-holders” in this situation?
- What do you see as the underlying ethical issue?
- What assumptions/beliefs were underlying your reactions/feelings to the issue?
- How will you investigate these assumptions/beliefs?
- Step 3: Investigate and Respond by having students discuss where they would find more information on the ethical issue and then what course of action they might take to respond to the issue (10 min).
Annotated Bibliography
Hanson, K. (1996). Between apathy and advocacy: Teaching and modeling ethical reflection. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 1996(66), 33-36. doi:10.1002/tl.37219966607
In this article, Karen Hanson argues how ethical neutrality in teachers may do more harm than good in the classroom. She claims that if students are presented with a neutral teacher, most of them will figure out that it is impossible for anyone to be completely neutral and will focus too much of their energy in figuring out just what their teacher isn't telling them (p.34).
Additionally, Hanson argues that teacher neutrality on ethical issues contributes to student cynicism when it comes to those issues. If the students decide that the issue isn't important enough for their teacher to develop an opinion then it won't grasp their attention. They will form the assumption that "moral and political controversies as merely academic debates, where form counts for much but any position is, at base, as good as any other" (p. 34)
Cohen, P., McDaniels, M., & Qualters, D. M. (2005). Air model: A teaching tool for cultivating reflective ethical inquiry. College Teaching, 53(3), 120-127.
This article is a complete, comprehensive description of AIR Ethical Inquiry and was the focus of my research. It describes in detail the reasoning behind the implementation of the method, the steps, and the multiple applications of the method in a variety of situations, ranging from teacher education to classroom applications with students (although the students in this case were university students).
The end of the article also details the actual effectiveness of the method and a detailed description of how it's effectiveness was assessed.
Qualters, D. M., McDaniels, M., & Cohen, P. (2013). Reflective ethical inquiry: Preparing students for life. The Idea Centre. Retrieved October 2, 2013, from http://theideacenter.org
"The IDEA Center is a nonprofit organization whose mission is to serve colleges and universities committed to improving learning, teaching, and leadership performance."
The main author for this article is Donna Qualters who also happens to be one of the co-authors of the AIR Model article that I referenced above. This article offers the same information around the concepts about the approach, but it also includes more examples for classroom applications. Again, this article was written in mind for college-aged students, but I think it would be easy enough to apply this method to suit a high school classroom.