UCF Case Studies in Ethics

C-Content pages are "in-class".
Week Number pages are online content for in-class and online use.
 

IDH3930H Syllabus

Case Studies in Ethics, 3 credit hours

Drs. Nancy Stanlick and Michael Strawser
Fall Semester 2009
Department of Philosophy
PSY 220
Class Meets:  Thursdays, 6:00-8:50 p.m. in BHC 128
Instructor Office Hours:
  • Stanlick:  MW 2:30-3:30, Th 4:30-5:00.  If you need to send me an e-mail, please use WebCourses for this class.
  • Strawser:  TuTh 12:00-1:30, and by appointment via strawser@mail.ucf.edu

Course Description

This is an interdisciplinary, case-study approach to practical contemporary ethical issues in education, engineering, law, medicine, personal relationships, politics, etc.  Students will conduct significant research on the cases, the nature of which will be highly interdisciplinary.  Students will write position papers applying creative and critical thinking skills and theoretical ethical concepts and frameworks to the cases.  Students will present and defend their positions on the cases in the form of a team debate.  Students will be required to participate in the local UCF Ethics Bowl competition, and selected students will be encouraged to participate in the Regional Ethics Bowl competition with the possibility that this may lead to competition in the National Intercollegiate Ethics Bowl.

Course Goals

Students will:
  • Demonstrate an understanding of the ethical dimensions of personal, societal, and professional life.
  • Demonstrate knowledge of major ethical concepts and theories and use these concepts and theories where applicable to examine and interpret interdsiciplinary cases raising significant ethical issues.
  • Apply creative problem-solving strategies to specific ethical dilemmas.
  • Actively engage in ethical dialogues by critically discussing and evaluating moral issues.
  • Articulate effectively, argue persuasively, and think critically about moral judgments.
  • Demonstrate the ability to work towards a consensus in making ethical decisions and show an appreciation of the challenges and complexities of arriving at such decisions.
  • Develop research skills and written and verbal expression.
  • Take responsibility for and ownership of their own personal ethical development.

Required Reading Material

Texts:

  • James Rachels, The Elements of Moral Philosophy, 6th ed.,  McGraw-Hill, 2010.
  • Anthony Weston, Creative Problem-Solving in Ethics,  Oxford UP, 2007.
  • Anthony Weston, A Rulebook for Arguments, Hackett, 2008.
  • Online readings as noted in the schedule.

Other Material:

 

Course Requirements

WebCourse

A web component will be added to this course to contain course materials and supplements and to provide students with a convenient forum to exchange ideas.  Students will be required to log into this web course and check its contents regularly.  Students are also required to have an accurate e-mail address registered with the university and at http://ecommunity.ucf.edu.  Please not that only you can change your e-mail address at this site. Please note that if you e-mail the instructors outside of WebCourses you should include your full name at the end of your message.  The instructors will not respond to messages from unindentified students.  In addition, it is against university policy for instructors to include grades or any information about your progress in any course in e-mail messages EXCEPT in WebCourses, so please do not ask about your grades in an e-mail. Instead, you can send a message via Coursemail or see us in our offices.

Class Participation
 
In a class such as this which is focused on case studies, ethical dialogues, and team debates, class attendance and participation are essential. Consequently, each unexcused absence will result in one lower final course grade (on the +/- grading scale).  So, for example, if your final grade for the course is a B, but you have one unexcused absence, your grade will be lowered to a B-.  If you have two unexcused absences, your B becomes a C+.  Otherwise, standard A, B, C, D, F grading is used.  In addition, you will not have the opportunity to make up missed classroom exercises, which may further affect your grade adversely in the case of unexcused absences.  Students who miss class work because of official excused absences that are documented will not be penalized, but it is necessary that students notify the instructors as soon as possible (an email message is fine) regarding a possible absence to determine whether the absence will be excused.  If you cannot notify us before a missed class, then you must notify us within two days after the missed class to have us consider whether the absence will be excused. After two days without any notification the absence will be marked as unexcused. Note that if you have the flu, for example, your absence will be excused, but you must notify us according to the guidelines above. Please stay home and get well if you have an infectious disease such as the flu, but do notify us. Graded assignments for the course can be made up only with good, legitimate, and verifiable reasons no later than three working days after their original due dates or administration. However, if you have the flu and you do not go to a doctor, you will still be able to make up missed work when you are better.  

Writing Assignments

Students are required to write three well-researched and well-argued position papers on three of the cases studies used during the course (these will be cases from the Southeast Regional Ethics Bowl that are used in the UCF Ethics Bowl).  In order to help the students to write the best papers possible, these steps will be followed:
  • First, a rough draft will be due (1000 words, typed in 12 pt font, Times New Roman, double-spaced with 1" margins) which identifies the ethically relevant issues of each case and identifies significant research for the case.  This draft is to be posted in WebCourses in the appropriate link or area.
  • Then, each student engages in peer evaluation of 2 other students' papers.  Peer evaluations are graded. E-mail (in WebCourses) a copy of the evaluation to the students whose papers you have evaluated AND to the instructors in course mail or in the assignments link, as indicated and appropriate.
  • After receiving evaluations from peers, students will present their position in a team debate format in class.
  • They then revise their papers and submit a second draft (1500 words each, typed in 12 pt font, Times New Roman, double-spaced, with 1" margins).  This draft is also to be posted in WebCourses in the appropriate area or link.
  • At the end of the course, submit a final, well-polished draft of one of the cases (of your choice), showing reflections developed from group discussions and presentations (2000 words, typed in 12 pt font, Times New Roman, double-spaced, with 1" margins).  Papers will be evaluated based on the following criteria: 
    • Clarity and Intelligibility:  Have you stated and defended your position with sound logic which allows the readers clearly to understand your line of reasoning?
    • Ethical Relevance:  Have you identified the relevant ethical theories and discussed their pertinence to the case while avoiding ethically irrelevant digressions?
    • Consistency:  Have you presented a unified argument and avoided contradictions and inconsistencies?
    • Thoughtfulness:  Have you specifically presented your position on the case with both awareness and thoughtful consideration of different viewpoints, including those which disagree with your position?
    • Preparation:  Have you exhibited sufficient preparation and background research to demonstrate a thorough understanding of the case being discussed?
    • Structure:  Have you proofread your document and corrected errors in grammar, spelling, punctuation, style, and format?

Test

There will be one test on ethical concepts and theories about halfway through the class.  This test will be on material that has been assigned and covered in course content.  The test may consist of multiple choice, true/false questions, short answer essay questions (definition and identification), and essay questions.  Anything from the assigned readings and classroom lectures and discussions will be considered fair game for the test.  A review will be given in class, although it is primarily the student's responsibility to compile a study guide for the test.

Additional explanations of the test and grading criteria will be presented in class.  Students should note that grades in this course are earned by you and recorded by the professors.  They are not "given" by anyone.

A missed test cannot be made up -- except for serious illnesses (normally requiring a formal physician's excuse) or serious emergencies (requiring consultation with the instructors and their consent).  If a student does not take the test, then he or she will earn a "0."  Students must speak to the instructor(s) as soon as possible if there is a conflict or issue regarding taking a test.

Ethics Bowl Participation

Each student will be required to participate in the UCF Ethics Bowl on Sunday, November 8th, from approximately 8:00 am to 4:00 pm.  There will be practice "ethics bowl" activities in class, and all students will be formed into teams that will participate in the UCF Ethics Bowl.  To prepare for ethics bowl competition in this course, every member of the group to which you are assigned will participate in doing research and preparing cases.  Each student will have done significant research and writing on three cases, but you will all be expected to participate as a team in discussing the cases. Detailed information about the UCF Ethics Bowl competitions can be found at http://ucfcorecommitments.wordpress.com/ethics-bowl/ (note that this is listed above under required reading material).

The cases for the UCF Ethics Bowl will be the same as those used in the Regional Ethics Bowl competitions.  All of the cases are written in summary format (usually about 1-2 pages each) and have content that is pulled from real-life situations that have appeared in the news, or issues that have occurred involving "real" people in ordinary, everyday circumstances.  Citations are usually available for the real-life source(s) of each case.
 
Although all students will be encouraged to attend, only selected students from the class will be able to participate in the Southeast Regional Ethics Bowl. The instructors will select students based at least in part on the following criteria: interest, availability for the competition, previous ethics bowl experience and success, outstanding oral communication of case studies, outstanding written communication of case studies, outstanding performance on test and quizzes, GPA, and college year. 

Grading

Students will be able to follow their progress in the course by the record of their grades found at MyGrades via MyUCF and/or in WebCourses.  The student's final grade will be determined by dividing the total points received by the total possible points.  The percentage will be judged according to the scale below. However, the instructors reserve the right to adjust the percentages required for final grades based on overall student performance. This would only be done for the benefit of all students.  In other words, the percentages required below would only be lowered, not raised, in the event of a curve.

 Grade Grade Point Value Percentage Comments 
 A 4.00 90-100  Excellent to superior, indicating that one has exceeded or far exceeded average understanding of course content as evidenced by course work and goes well or significantly beyond the basics. 
 B 3.00  80-89.9x  Far above average, fully meeting average understanding as evidenced in course work and fully understands the basics and goes somewhat beyond that level. 
2.00  70-79.9x  Average or slightly above average, meeting minimum expectations as evidenced in course work and satisfying course requirements.
1.00  60-69.9x  Below or slightly below average, meeting bare minimum requirements by completing all or most assignments and course requirements. 
 F 0.00  0-59.9x   Fails to meet minimum expectations in understanding and course work as evidenced by performance and submission/completion of graded elements of the course.

Grades will be based on the following points (see the schedule for the specific order of graded assignment/assessment appearance):
 
NOTE:  Due dates for each assignment will be added to the table below for clarification

Assignment/Assessment Points   % Due Date
 Test 100   10 Oct 22
 Quizzes 60 total   6 See Assessments link
1st Draft of Position Paper "Case A" 30   3  Oct 8
1st Draft of Position Paper "Case B"  30   3  Oct 23
1st Draft of Position Paper "Case C"  30   3  Nov 5?
Peer Review Case A 25  2.5  Oct 15
Peer Review Case B 25   2.5  Oct 29
Peer Review Case C 25   2.5 Nov 10?
Revised Draft Case A 50  5 Nov 6?
Revised Draft Case B 50   5 Nov 6?
Revised Draft Case C 50   5  Nov 12?
Final Draft Case A, B, or C 125  12.5 Dec 3
Oral Presentation Case A 100   10 Oct 29 & Nov 5
Oral Presentation Case B  100   10
Team Participation 100  10  Nov 8
UCF Ethics Bowl Participation 100   10  Nov 8
 Total Points 1000   100%  
 
Questions to be addressed in peer reviews:
 
Questions that need to be addressed in your peer review:  
  1. Is it clear that the author has understood the relevant facts of the case and has conducted significant research into the case? Are there any facts that you think should be included or need further explanation?

  2. Has the author clearly explained the central ethical issues of the cases? Could this consideration be further developed in any significant way?

  3. Has the author identified possible positions that may be taken regarding the case? Comment.

  4. Has the author presented a sound argument to deal with the central ethical issues of the case? Has the author proved evidence for his/her position? Can you think of any possible objections to the author’s argument? Explain.

  5. Can you think of any way that the author’s argument could be made more persuasive? Do you have any questions or suggestions to improve the paper? Explain.

  6. Is the writing clear and error-free? (Note: You don’t need to write a response to this provided that you mark corrections and unclear sentences within the text.)

Grading Rubric for Revised Drafts of Position Papers
 

 
At the end of the course, borderline students may be awarded minimal bonus points for outstanding class participation, observable effort, and philosophical endeavor (e.g., active and insightful participation in classroom discussions, excellent attendance, completing all assignments, attempting all activities, etc.)

Incompletes are granted only if a student could not complete end-of-term assignments because of something over which he or she had little or no control (e.g., an illness or death in the family).  To receive an "I" for the course, the student must have done most of the work for the course and he or she must speak to the instructor(s) before the final class meeting date.

Academic Policy

Students are expected to follow UCF's Golden Rule for academic excellence and integrity.  Any inappropriate behavior, academic or otherwise, will not be tolerated and may be reported to the Office of Student Conduct.  For further guidance, please see http://www.goldenrule.sdes.ucf.edu.  Students' work may be submitted to http://www.turnitin.com for authentication.  Students found guilty of academic dishonesty or plagiarism will receive, at minimum, an F for the assignment(s) in which some form of dishonesty occurs and be referred to UCF's Office of Student Conduct.  Remember that you are responsible for ensuring the accuracy of your essays/papers and the integrity of your research.

Other Course Policies for Online and Traditional Course Components

If and when you engage in discussions either online or in person, be courteous and considerate.  Simply put, be decent to each other (and to the course instructors).  Respect for everyone is necessary.  Being honest and expressing yourself freely are very important and are in fact essential, but so is being considerate of others.  When online, please use appropriate "Netiquette."  Please note, however, that if someone presents an absolutely ridiculous position, it is intellectually dishonest not to call it what it is.  But you can do so with grace and style and with respect for another person even if you find that person's position to be incomprehensible, insane, weird, peculiar, etc.  The point of intellectual honesty is the increase of knowledge.
 
Post documents correctly in the appropriate area of WebCourses, a blog, a group discussion area outside of WebCourses, or a wiki, as appropriate.  Note:  Occasionally, content will or may be moved to third-party sites, blogs, wikis, or discussion areas if and when it is beneficial in the course.  You will know where to post assignments, discussions, and other course related content and requirements as indicated in WebCourses.
 

Class Schedule

Note:  The instructors welcome comments and suggestions about the course and encourage feedback throughout the course.  They also reserve the right to amend the syllabus at their discretion.  In other words, the schedule is meant only as a guide.  Changes and alterations in the schedule of topics, examination dates, paper due dates, assignments and other schedule-related information may be made from time to time to facilitate completion of all major sections listed.

 
Date (Thurs, unless otherwise indicated) Class Content  Reading Assignments   Graded Assignments
Online Content   
 Week 1: August 27 (MS, NS) Introductions, Syllabus Review, Outline of Ethical Theories, Case Studies Warm-up Discussions
  General Introduction to Ethical Theories   
Week 2: September 3 (MS) Elements of Moral Philosophy  Rachels, 1-61  Questionnaire Relativism, Subjectivism, Religious Ethics   
 Week 3: September 10 (NS) Elements of Moral Philosophy  Rachels, 62-123    Egoism, Contractarianism, Utilitarianism   
 Week 4: September 17 (NS) Elements of Moral Philosophy  Rachels, 146-172   Feminist Ethics, Virtue Ethics  
 Week 5: September 24 (MS) Elements of Moral Philosophy  Rachels, 124-145, 173-183    Absolutism, Kantian Ethics, A Satisfactory Moral Theory?  
 Week 6:  October 1 (MS) Creative Thinking, Case Studies  Weston, CPSE, 1-47,
Case Proposals Due Deductive and Inductive Logic   
 Week 7:  October 8 (NS) Creative Thinking, Case Studies, Argumentation  Weston, CPSE, 48-79 and Weston, RA, 1-48  Position Paper A is Due Deductive and Inductive Logic  
 Week 8: October 15 (MS) Creative Thinking, Argumentation, Review 

Weston, RA, 49-88 

Peer Review of Position Paper A is due Deductive and Inductive Logic  
 Week 9: October 22 (NS, MS)  Research Presentations, Case Discussions    

 TEST (Midterm) ONLINE

Position Paper B is due on Fri Oct 23.

   
 Week 10: October 29 (MS, NS)
Research Presentations, Case Discussions
Peer Review 2 due before class on 10/29    
 Week 11: November 5 (NS, MS)
UCF Ethics Bowl Preparation
Student Presentations, Team Discussions, Revised Position Papers Due

Position Paper C due before class on 11/5;

Revised Paper A due by 11:55 pm on 11/6

   
 Week 11: November 8 (Sunday) (NS, MS) UCF Ethics Bowl in Teaching Academy Building        
 Week 12: November 12 (MS, NS)
Regional Ethics Bowl Preparation, Research Presentations
Student Presentations, Team Discussions

Peer Review 3 and Revised Paper B due on Thursday, 11/12

 

   
 Week 12: November 14 (Saturday) (NS, MS)
 Regional Ethics Bowl  Regional Ethics Bowl      
 Week 13: November 19 (MS, NS)
Research Presentations  TBD

Revised Paper C due on 11/19


   
 Week 14: November 26
 No Class
 Happy Thanksgiving!      
 Week 15: December 3 (MS)
 Ethics: The Ongoing Challenge  TBD
Final Position Paper is Due
   
 Week 16: December 10 (MS, NS)
Final Exam Period: 7:00-9:50
 Party