Summary: This module outlines of how to incorporate three frameworks (software development cycle, ethics tests, and feasibility test) into Ethics Bowl case summaries and Ethics Bowl in-depth case analysis. It assumes knowledge of ethics tests, a decision procedure based on the software development cycle, familiarity with problem specification activities, and an understanding of how to carry out a stakeholder analysis. Finally, it provides students a chance to achieve closure on their participation in the Practical and Professional Ethics Bowl, a competition based on the Ethics Bowl held annually at meetings of the Association for Practical and Professional Ethics. Information on the national competition, devised by Dr. Robert Ladenson, can be found at the website of the Center for the Study of Ethics in the Professions, www.iit.edu/departments/csep. This module is being developed as a part of an NSF-funded project, "Collaborative Development of Ethics Across the Curriculum Resources and Sharing of Best Practices," NSF SES 0551779.
This module provides students with a structure for preparing an in-depth case study analysis based on feedback they have received through their participation in an Ethics Bowl competition as part of the requirements for courses in Practical and Professional Ethics taught at the University of Puerto Rico at Mayaguez. Students viewing this module will find formats for analyzing decision making cases and position cases such as the decisions published by the National Society of Professional Engineers Board of Ethical Review. They will receive information pertinent to preparing in-depth case analyses, short summaries of the case pool for the Ethics Bowl competition, and a summary of procedures for carrying out a group self-evaluation. More information on the Engineering Ethics Bowl carried out at UPRM can be found in Jose A Cruz-Cruz, William J. Frey, and Halley D. Sanchez, "The Ethics Bowl in Engineering Ethics at the University of Puerto Rico - Mayaguez" in Teaching Ethics 4(3): 15-32.
How should you choose your case?
Once you choose your case, you need to analyze it according to the following steps:
Decision-Making Cases
| Worksheets | Decision-Making Case |
| Identify and state the (ethically) relevant facts | |
| STS Table (Table + Verbal Explanation) | Prepare a Socio-Technical Analysis. Fill in the STS table (see below) and then verbally describe each component. |
| Value Table (Table + Written Problem Statement) | Fill out a Value Table (see below) Use it to identify the ethical problem or problems. Summarize this by providing a concise problem statement that is explicitly tied to the Value Table. |
| Brainstorm Lists (initial and refined lists) | 4. Brainstorm solution to the problem or problems. Be sure to discuss how list was generated and how it was refined. Describe value integration and interest negotiating strategies used. |
| Solution Evaluation Matrix (Matrix + Verbal Explanation and Justification) | 5. Compare, evaluate, and rank the solutions |
| 6. Choose the best available solution. Provide a justification summarizing ethical and feasibility considerations highlighted in Solution Evaluation Matrix. | |
| Feasibility Matrix (Matrix + Verbal Explanation) | 7. Develop a plan for implementing your solution. Discuss and justify this plan explicitly in terms of the specific feasibility considerations in the Feasibility Matrix. |
| Develop and discuss preventive measures (if applicable) |
NSPE-BER Case
| Worksheets | |
| 1. Identify and state the (ethically) relevant facts | |
| Stakeholders (Matrix + Verbal Explanation) | 2. Identify the stakeholders and their stakes. |
| Problem Classification (Matrix + Concise Verbal Problem Statement) | 3. Identify the ethical problem or problems |
| 4. State the BER decision and summarize their code-based justification (cite code provisions, summarize principles, and list relevant precedents) | |
| Solution Evaluation (Matrix + detailed verbal explanation and justification) | 5. Evaluate the BER decision using the three ethics tests, code test, and global feasibility test. |
| 6. Construct a strong counter-position and counter-argument to the BER decision | |
| Solution Evaluation (Matrix + detailed verbal explanation and justification) | 7. Evaluate counter-position and counter-argument using the 3 ethics tests, feasibility test, and code test |
| Solution Implementation (Feasibility Matrix + Verbal Explanation) | 8. Evaluate counter-position and counter-argument in terms of relevant feasibility considerations. Provide a matrix/table + verbal explanation. |
Description of In-Depth Case Analysis
Title of Assignment: "In-Depth Case Analysis”
Due Date for Written Projects:One week after the last class of the semester.
What is required?
1. Participation in at two ethics bowl competitions.
2. Each group will choose from the two cases it debated in the Ethics Bowl a case for a more extended analysis carrying out the seven-step decision making framework. They will prepare an extended analysis of this case (10 to 20 pages).
3. Each group will prepare summaries of the 15 cases assigned for the ethics bowl. These summaries (a minimum of one page for each case) will be handed in with the extended case study analysis. These summaries should include a problem statement, a solution evaluation matrix, and a feasibility matrix.
4. Each final submission will also include a group self-evaluation. This evaluation will include:
5. A group portfolio consisting of the materials prepared by your group during the group class activities:
| Hardware | Software | Physical Surroundings | People, Groups, Roles | Procedures | Laws, Statutes, Regulations | Data and Data Structures |
| Hardware | Software | Physical Surroundings | People, Groups, Roles | Procedures | Laws | Data and Data Structures | |
| Integrity | |||||||
| Justice | |||||||
| Respect | |||||||
| Responsibility for Safety | |||||||
| Free Speech | |||||||
| Privacy | |||||||
| Property |
| Solution/Test | Reversibility or Rights | Harms/Beneficence or Net Utility | Virtue | Value | Code | Global Feasibility |
| Description | Is the solution reversible with stakeholders? Does it honor basic rights? | Does the solution produce the best benefit/harm ratio? Does the solution maximize utility? | Does the solution express and integrate key virtues? | Moral values realized? Moral values frustrated? Value conflicts resolved or exacerbated? | Does the solution violate any code provisions? | What are the resource, technical, and interest constraints that could impede implementation? |
| Best solution | ||||||
| Best alternate solution | ||||||
| Worst solution |
| Feasibility Matrix | ||||||||
| Resource Constraints | Technical Constraints | Interest Constraints | ||||||
| Time | Cost | Available materials, labor, etc | Applicable technology | Manufactur-ability | Per-son-alities | Organiza-tional | Legal | Social, Political, Cultural |
1. Group, team-written projects are to be 10-20 pages in length, double spaced, with standard 1-inch margins, and typewritten. This does not include documentation, appendices, and other notes.
2. It is essential that you carefully and fully document the resources that you have consulted. The most direct way to do this is to include numbered entries in a concluding section entitled, "Works Cited". These entries should provide complete bibliographical information according to standard form (Chicago Manual of Style or the MLA Manual of Style). Then insert the number of the entry in parenthesis in the text next to the passage that is based on it. (Example: "The self is a relation that relates itself to its own self…." (4) The number "4" refers to the forth item in the "Works Cited" section at the end of your paper.)
3. Practical norm 5j of the CIAPR code of ethics sets forth the obligation of the professional engineer to give others due credit for their work. For this reason, plagiarism will not be tolerated in any form. Possible forms of plagiarism include but are not limited to the following:
4. This is not a research project but an exercise in integrating ethics into real world cases. In Chapters 2 and 3 of Engineering Ethics: Concepts and Cases, the authors present a thorough discussion of the case study analysis/problem solving method discussed in class. You also have supporting handouts in your file folders from Magic Copy Center as well as materials I have presented directly in class. Engineering Ethics: Concepts and Cases also contains several sample case studies that can help guide you in constructing your own presentation. What I am looking for is a discussion of the case in terms of the ethical approaches and decision-making frameworks we have discussed this semester. You do not need to "wow" me with research into other areas peripherally related to the case; you need to show me that you have practiced decision-making and made a serious effort to integrate ethical considerations into the practice of engineering.
5. The usual criteria concerning formal presentations apply when competing in the Ethics Bowl. Dress professionally.
6. You may write your group, team-written project in either Spanish or English.
7. All competitions will take place in the regular classroom.
These media files provide information on the ethics bowl and the follow-up activities including individual decision point summaries, in-depth case analysis, and group self-evaluation. They have been integrated into the Business Ethics course during the Spring semester, 2008 and will apply from this date on into the future.
| Team Member Evaluation Form |
|---|
| Final Project and Group Self-Evaluation Rubrics |
|---|
| Basic Moral Concepts for Ethics Bowl |
|---|
| Intermediate Moral Concepts for Ethics Bowl |
|---|
Breakdown of Project Grade:
Nota Bene:
_____Each member will turn in a filled out Team Member Evaluation Form. This form can be accessed through the media file listed above. It is suggested that you do this anonomously by turning in your Team Member Evaluation Form in a sealed envelop with the rest of these materials. You are to evaluate yourself along with your teammates on the criteria mentioned in the form. Use the scale suggested in the form.
Copy-paste this checklist, examine the assembled materials prepared by your group, and check the items your group has completed. Then read, copy-paste, and sign the following pledge.
"This course is developed around the four AACSB ethics themes. The acronym AACSB stands for the Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business which accredits business programs internationally."