Promoting ethical reasoning through structured learning and reflection in a biotechnology and sustainability course.

Researchers frequently navigate complex power dynamics in research environments, requiring explicit ethical reasoning skills and structured training in ethical/responsible conduct of research (E/RCR). Although federal agencies require E/RCR training for mentored research trainees, such training is often missing from course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs), limiting students' preparation for ethical challenges in STEM contexts. To address this gap, we integrated an online argument-mapping course, the Thinker Course (formerly known as How We Argue or thinkARGUMENTS), offered via student or institutional licenses, together with a free instructional module, Essays (formerly known as How We Evaluate). These resources have historically been used independently in philosophy, communication, and ethics courses, but not in combination within a STEM research setting. Our course combined these tools with ethical case studies on mentoring, collaboration, authorship, and sustainability challenges, enabling students to practice structured analysis of arguments while evaluating realistic dilemmas in biotechnology. Over the course of five semesters, qualitative reflections, rubric-scored case studies, and pre-/post-surveys showed gains in students' ability to identify ethical dilemmas, analyze competing arguments, and articulate concerns about power dynamics. Students also reported increased confidence in navigating ethically complex collaborative scenarios. This study presents a novel integration of two complementary reasoning systems-argument mapping (Thinker) and scientific evaluation (Essays)-within an undergraduate biotechnology CURE. The approach offers a portable, structured model for strengthening ethical reasoning and argumentation skills across STEM curricula.