Assignment #4 – Professional Ethics & the LawIndividual Assignment

CSE 4314 Professional Practices

Ethics Scenario Analysis Report

You will study and analyze the assigned ethics scenario from Baase, Chapter 9, and write a report covering the following topics.

What is (are) the ethical issue(s) that need(s) to be addressed – risks, issues, problems, consequences?

Are there legal ramifications & consequences, if so how are they different from the ethical ramifications & consequences?

Who are the stakeholders – benefits, impact?

What are the possible actions that can be taken?

What are the responsibilities of the decision maker?

What is the most appropriate action to take?

Report length – 2 to 3 pages not Including Title Page, Table of Content, References, and Academic Integrity Form

Due date – See Class Schedule (Submit through Canvas Assignment Portal)

See Syllabus for Due Date, late submissions will not be accepted without a valid and documented reason.

  Excellent (5 pts) Good (4 pts) Satisfac-tory (3 pts) Poor (2 pts) Unacceptable (1 pt)
Description of the ethical issue being studied – possible consequences Informative, insightful and accuratedescription of ethical issue stated. Related Consequences delineated fully. Identified most points related to main ethical issue, good description with sufficient consequences identified Most key points related to the description of the ethical issue identified but not all, a few key consequences noted. Partial description of ethical issue given. Consequences identified were incomplete or nebulous Severely lacking information content and accuracy. Misidentified ethical dilemma and gave no or incorrect consequences
Identification of the stakeholders – impact on them Identified all key stakeholders with convincing justification. Complete identification of impacts for primary and secondary stakeholders – well stated with convincing reasons. Identified a few key stakeholders with other peripheral stakeholders also identified, good justification given with key impacts identified and why they were key. Primary stakeholder with most to lose identified given with good justification, key impact identified. Identified peripherally involved stakeholder as primary, justification given was poor, missed critical impacts on stakeholders Failure to support choice of Stakeholders and impacts given were nebulous and not well founded
Identification of stakeholders and their responsibilities Comprehensive and accurate history with identification of critical responsibilities, given word limit constraints. Good and fairly accurate/complete history with identification of responsibilities of key stakeholders Most key stake holders and their responsibilities identified, more background information could have been given Missed a few historical points related to key stakeholders and their responsibilities causing some uncertainty related to ethical concern Missing most important milestones, severely inaccurate with mis-identification of who was affected and why
Description of the action taken and its appropriateness. Comprehensive and accurate listing and good justification. Concise & precise language used to convey critical actions. Good and accurate listing of justification. Used good language to describe actions taken that was easily followed Missed a few key justifications related to actions taken. Language used was somewhat ambiguous Hit upon 1 or 2 required actions that should be taken, however language used to describe them was ambiguous and confusing Missing almost all important impacts, severely inaccurate.
Description of alternative actions.  Comprehensive and accurate listing and good justification. Identified the reasonable critical actions with good reasoning shown as to why Missed 1 or 2 critical actions that should have been taken, but those identified were accurate. Missed all but 1 critical action that should have been taken, description lacking Missing almost all important impacts, severely inaccurate.
References  Correct use of references, supporting every claim in the text, correct formatting of references. Correct use of references. Most important claims supported by references. Not more than 2 minor mistakes with references in appendix Acceptable use of refences with some problems of in-text citation. Most claims supported. Not more than 3 to 5 minor mistakes with refences in appendix Some inconsistency in the use of references supporting textual claims. Less attention paid to formatting in the use of Reference list in appendix. Five or 6 mistakes max in the use of references Almost no references, almost all claims not supported, severely problematic format with greater than 6 mistakes.
Grammar No mistakes, correct usage of English throughout the essay. Correct use of English with less than 5 minor punctuation mistakes. Mostly proper use of English but more attention should be paid to punctuation and rules of grammar such as noun-verb matching, fewer 1/5 of all sentences contained error. Generally acceptable use of Grammar, some slang/colloquiaterms used, More focus should be used in correcting noun-verb mistakes, minor mistakes in less 1/5 to less than 1/3 sentences. Frequent mistakes, more than 1/3 sentences contain grammar mistakes.
Spelling No spelling or capitalization mistakes. 2 or less spelling errors in paper. 3 to 4 spelling errors in paper. 5 to 7 spelling errors in paper. Numerous spelling mistakes, more than 5% of the words are misspelled.
Organization Superb organization, following specified format. Superb transitioning with appropriate verbiage. Each paragraph/section logical tied to predecessor with transitioning language Good organization, with one section leading into next section with good use of transition words. Each paragraph/section logical tied together Satisfactory organization of paper. Reasoning easily followed from one section to the next. Poor organization, not well thought out, however, with some effort storyline was traceable from one section to the next. Unacceptible organization, poor adherence to the format, disjointed parts with poor connections/transitions between them.
Clarity The point(s) of each sentence, paragraph, and section is (are) clear and unambiguous, precisely and concisely stated. The point(s) of each sentence, paragraph, and section were clear and unambiguous. Could have used few words. The point(s) of each sentence, paragraph, and section were understandable but in 1 or 2 instances confusing word choice interfered with intended meaning. The point(s) of most sentences, paragraph, and section were not easily discernable. Some choice of words overly complicated intended meaning. Confusing and unclear writing, at least half the content lacks in clarity.

Assignment #4 – Ethical Scenario Rubric

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *