4.2 Practical and professional ethics bowl activity: follow-up in  (Page 2/5)

NSPE-BER Case

In-depth analysis: step by step

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 analysiscarrying 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 ofone 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:

• _____a list of the goals each group set for itself
• _____a careful, justified and documented assessment of your success in reaching these goals
• _____a careful assessment of what you did and did not learn in this activity
• _____a discussion of obstacles you encountered and measures your group took to overcome these.
• _____a discussion of member participation and contribution including the member contribution forms
• _____in general what worked and what didn’t work for you and your group in this activity

5. A group portfolio consisting of the materials prepared by your group during the group classactivities:

• _____Virtue Chart (Responsibility)
• _____Gray Matters Solution Evaluation Matrix
• _____Rights Chart: Free&Informed Consent
• _____Group Code of Ethics

Structure of written analysis

1. A brief summary of the case focusing on the ethically relevant facts.
2. A Socio-Technical System Table + Short paragraph on each of the seven categories.
3. A Value Table + a short paragraph on the embedded values you have identified and where they occur in the STS. Then state whether you have found any value mismatches, magnified existing value conflicts, and remote/harmful consequences.
4. On the basis of your STS analysis and value conflict analysis, provide a short, concise problem statement. Make sure your the problem you have identified is grounded in your STS and value analysis. If not, one or the other (or both) needs to be changed.
5. A brainstorm list in which you record the solutions your group has designed to solve the problem stated above. The rough unrefined list should include around 10 solutions. Then refine this list into three. Spend time detailing how you reached your refined list. Did you synthesize rough solutions? On what basis did you leave a solution out all together? Did you find other ways of relating or combining solutions? Spend time documenting your brainstorming and refining process. Show in detail how you came up with the refined list.
6. Do a comparative evaluation of three of the refined solutions you developed in the previous step. First, prepare a solution evaluation matrix that summarizes your comparative evaluation. Use the table provided below. Second, provide a verbal account of the solution evaluation and comparison process you present in the solution evaluation matrix.
7. Reach a final decision. Defend your decision using the ethics and feasibility tests. If the decision situation in which you are working is a dynamic one, then proppose a series of solutions that you will pursue simultaneously, including how you would respond to contingencies that might arise. (You could express this in the form of a decision tree.)
8. Fill out a Feasibility Matrix. See matrix below
9. Present an implementation plan based on your Feasibility Matrix. This plan should list the obstacles that might arise and how you plan to overcome them. (For example, don't just say, "Blow the whistle." Discuss when, how, where, to whom, and in what manner. How would you deal with reprisals? Would your action seriously disrupt internal relations of trust and loyalty? How would you deal with this?) Work out a detailed plan to implement your decision using the feasibility constraints to "suggest" obstacles and impedements.
10. Finally, discuss preventive measures you can take to prevent this type of problem from arising again in the future.