Category: Ethics

Book: https://cloudflare-ipfs.com/ipfs/bafykbzaceap77jw3oovxq7szwk3i4cr625zxbb2n6mdvi3l5opukhl7agi2aw?filename=James%20S.%20Bowman%2C%20Jonathan%20P.%20West%20-%20Public%20Service%20Ethics_%20Individual%20and%20Institutional%20Responsibilities-Routledge%20%282021%29.pdf     Include the “Word Count” after each of your answers. Not doing so will keep you from 
earning the points assigned in the grading rubric for including the word count. 
Part A:
• You need to answer the following questions/prompts (in no less than 150 words per answer) 
focusing on expressing accurate knowledge as presented in the course, without expressing your 
opinion or ideas not covered during class discussions or in the required readings/materials
assigned in the course —please do not copy others’ answers (I will give you F in the course if 
you do). You need to independently develop your own answers.
PUB – Public Sector Ethics Spring 2024
© 2024 Dr. Hugo D. Asencio Page 3 of 5
1. Explain the myths about ethics (Key: review book chapter assigned for Week 2 Chapter 1).
2. Discuss the reasons for studying ethics (Key: review book chapter assigned for Week 2 chapter 1).
3. Explain the levels of analysis in ethics (Key: review book chapter assigned for Week 3 chapter 2).
4. (a) Define values and ethics and (b) explain their relationship (Key: review book chapter 
assigned for Week 4 chapter 3).
5. Compare Lawrence Kohlberg’s moral development theory and Jonathan Haidt social 
intuitionalist approach (Key: review book chapter assigned for Week 5 chapter 4).
6. Explain the takeaways from the Milgram and Zimbardo experiments (Key: review book 
chapter assigned for Week 5 chapter 4).
7. Compare cognitive (result and rule problem-solving) and virtue ethics (Key: review book 
chapter assigned for Weeks 6 and 7 chapter 5/6).
8. Explain how the psychological tendencies discussed by James Bowman and Jonathan 
West influence the thinking and actions of people when they are faced with ethical 
dilemmas (Key: review book chapter assigned for Week 8 chapter 7 ).
• You need to include the full question (in bold) before your answer (not in bold). 
• After each answer, please include (in bold) the word count under the heading “Word Count.”
Part B:
• You need to answer the following questions/prompts (in no less than 250 words per answer) 
focusing on expressing what is in your mind/your moral character —Please reflect, reflect, and 
reflect as you develop your answers. Do not copy others’ answers (I will give you F in the 
course if you do).
1. (a) Identify the values of your personal moral code (i.e., your individual attitudes 
with respect to what is moral) and (b) illustrate with examples from your own 
experience how the values of your personal moral code actually guide your thinking 
and actions.
2. Based on the ethical decision-making models that you learned about/applied in the 
course, explain the mental steps that you will take in your life when faced with 
ethical dilemmas (i.e., “… when competing or conflicting ethical principles or values 
are embedded in a particular problem” (Cooper, 2012, p. 32):
a. When you do not have the luxury of time to make a decision; and
b. When you do have the luxury of time to make a decision.
• You need to include the full question (in bold) before your answer (not in bold). 
• After each answer, please include (in bold) the word count under the heading “Word Count.”
Developing an answer that avoids quoting directly from the instructional materials provided in 
the course.
5. Including the question/prompt (in bold font) before the answer.
Including after the answer (in bold font) the word count under the heading “Word Count”. 
8. Formatting an answer in line with APA style (7th edition) guidelines. 

1.Choose an environmental disaster that was caused, at least in part, by human agency, and that occurred in the past five years. This disaster will be the one you focus on for your final paper.
Find an article that describes the event. In this discussion, post a link to the article, and present a brief summary of the event. The ethical dimensions of an environmental disaster cannot be analyzed until the basic information about what actually happened is understood, so being able to explain the event and its consequences is a crucial first step to performing an ethical analysis.
2.The second asssignment for this class is attached

Hi! This paper is for my global ethics class, and the paper is a project proposal. The focus of the paper is Social Justice/Human Rights and the theme chosen is gender equality. Below I have added the project guide and rubric for this assignment, and a pdf of the chapter of the textbook that supports this theme. You don’t need to add any sources but if would be helpful if there was sources included. 
This is a link to help with question three of the assignment:
https://aese.psu.edu/teachag/curriculum/modules/bioethics/modules/copy2_of_introductory/4-scenarios/what-are-ethical-frameworks
This is a link of a video my professor added that relates to this theme as well:

Thank you so much!

Write a 450-600-word essay that addresses the following questions through the lens of Kohlberg’s and/or Gilligan’s stage theories of moral development. 
Should Heinz steal the drug?
Why or why not?
If so, should he go to jail?
Why or why not?
What would you do?
Why or why not?
you can watch this video as well for reference

Abortion is always a sticky subject. Taking the notions of care ethics and relationships in moral matters into consideration, present a researched argument that there are times when having an abortion is the morally right thing to do.
Before you post, please thoroughly edit your writing to ensure it is professional and academic. For more details about how the initial post and peer replies are graded, see the “Discussion Guidelines” and “Grading Rubric” linked below.

Scenario
You are the superintendent of a high school district engaged in a debate over requiring all incoming freshmen to sit for an entrance exam. Students will be placed in college-preparatory courses (including several advanced placement courses) OR a standard track based on the entrance exam results. Thus, students who perform well on the entrance exam will be grouped with students of similar advanced academic abilities. Many parents and teachers have strong opinions about this proposed policy (both for and against). You have been asked to conduct a presentation for the upcoming school board meeting, at which many parents and teachers will be present.
Directions
First, read the following articles:
“The Pygmalion Effect in Distance Learning: A Case Study at the Hellenic Open University” (Niari et al., 2016).
“Positive Adult Education, Learned Helplessness and the Pygmalion Effect” (Cobos-Sanchiz, 2022).
You may also wish to read the following popular press articles:
“Another last-minute change could come to high school admissions process” (Elsen-Rooney, 2022a).
“’Gifted’ more diverse ; Black, Hispanic students double after test tossed” (Elsen-Rooney, 2022b).
“The Access Trap” (Heller, 2022).
Next, develop a 1-page handout (Microsoft Word) explaining the Pygmalion Effect and the practice of ability grouping. Your audience for this handout should be the school board meeting attendees. Imagine that you have to explain the Pygmalion Effect and ability grouping to them. You must be creative and use images and graphics to help illustrate the principles. You should indicate both the pros and cons of these practices. Please be sure to cite graphics/images properly in APA format as if you were going to publish them in a journal article (see Ch. 7 of the APA manual).
Finally, write a 1–2 -page paper to accompany your handout answering the following questions:
How have you experienced the effects of the Pygmalion effect in educational or organizational settings? What informal practices do educators engage in that illustrate the Pygmalion effect? What are the impacts of these informal practices on educational settings?
What has been your experience with the practice of ability grouping? Is this strategy ethical, or is it unethical? To support your conclusions, evaluate the impact of ability grouping policies on your educational setting using evidence from Niari et al. (2016) and Cobos-Sanchiz et al. (2022).
References

What Would You Do? Scenario #2
The purpose of this exercise is to practice thinking critically about privacy-related issues. On page 174 of the textbook, review scenario #2 in the “What Would You Do?” section, and describe how you would handle the situation. Outline your response by using the five-step decision-making process as described in Chapter 1. Use your critical thinking skills, and compose your response in your own words. Your responses to Part 1 should be at least one page in length.
Part 2: Case #2: China’s Great Firewall
The purpose of this exercise is to practice thinking critically about how technology has impacted freedom of speech. On pages 215-216 of the textbook, analyze Case #2. Answer the three critical thinking questions that follow the case. Use your critical thinking skills, and compose your response in your own words. Your response to Part 2 should be at least one page in length.
You will combine both Part 1 and Part 2 together into one document and submit it for grading in Blackboard. Ensure that you label your responses as Part 1 and Part 2.
Your assignment will be at least two pages in length, not including the title and reference pages. You must use at least your textbook as a source in completing this assignment. All sources used will have proper citations and references formatted in APA style. 

Required Resources
Read/review the following resources for this activity:
Textbook: Chapters 9, 10
Lesson
Minimum of 5 scholarly sources (in addition to the textbook)
Instructions
First, return to your topic chosen in the week three assignment.
Answer this question: What are the personal and/or communal ethical factors that may be involved in determining the moral position of either side in that debate?
Next, articulate and then evaluate the ethical positions using Kantian ethics (that is, the categorical imperative) relative to the long standing debate (that is your topic chosen in the week three assignment).
Finally, create a complete annotated bibliography for 5 academic scholarly sources. You will annotate each source. The sources should be relevant to your topic chosen in the week three assignment.
Include the following:
Publication details
Annotation (a detailed reading of the source)
Each annotation section should include the following:
Summarize key points and identify key terms (using quotation marks, and citing a page in parentheses).
Describe the controversies or “problems” raised by the articles.
State whether you agree or disagree and give reasons.
Locate one or two quotations to be used in the final research project.
Evaluate the ways in which this article is important and has helped you focus your understanding.
Use the following as a model:
APA Reference
Mezirow, J. (2003). Transformative learning as discourse. Journal of Transformative Education, 1(1), 58-63.
Annotation Example
In this article, Mezirow (2003) makes a distinction between “instrumental” and “communicative” learning. “Instrumental learning” refers to those processes which measure and gauge learning, such as tests, grades, comments, quizzes, attendance records and the like. “Communicative learning,” on the other hand, refers to understanding created over time between individuals in what Mezirow calls “critical-dialectical-discourse,” (p. 59) which is a fancy way of saying, important conversation between 2 or more speakers. Another key idea Mezirow discusses is “transformative learning,” (p. 61) which changes the mind, the heart, the values and beliefs of people so that they may act better in the world. Mezirow argues that “hungry, desperate, homeless, sick, destitute, and intimidated people obviously cannot participate fully and freely in discourse” (p. 59). On the one hand, he is right: there are some people who cannot fully engage because their crisis is so long and deep, they are prevented. But, I don’t think Mezirow should make the blanket assumption that everyone in unfortunate circumstances is incapable of entering the discourse meaningfully. One thing is certain: if we gave as much attention to the non-instrumental forms of intelligence–like goodness, compassion, forgiveness, wonder, self-motivation, creativity, humor, love, and other non-measured forms of intelligence in our school curriculums, we’d see better people, actors in the world, and interested investigators than we currently have graduating high school.
Requirements
Length: 4-7 pages (not including title page or references page)
1-inch margins
Double spaced
12-point Times New Roman font
Title page
Grading
This activity will be graded based on the Assignment Grading Rubric.
Outcomes
CO 5: Analyze the personal and/or communal ethical factors that may be involved in determining the moral position of either side given a contemporary debate, such as those concerning animal rights, euthanasia, stem cell research, abortion, and so forth.
CO 6: Evaluate the ethical positions arrived at by using a key moral theory (such as Kantian ethics) relative to the long standing debate surrounding the death penalty, cloning, or some other key topic of moral controversy.

Welfare
**Be sure to include ideas from readings on what grounds our basic human rights. 
You must answer all parts of the question to receive credit. Your answers need to be written as short essays (200-350 words for each question and 1000-1500 words total). You must include an introduction and conclusion, and quotations or paraphrases must be appropriately cited.
In this essay, you have five tasks:
Give a clear and concise explanation of the case at hand.
Give a thorough, philosophical exegesis of the relevant aspects of Walzer’s and Murray’s arguments. (Click here for some tips on how to do a successful exegesis.)
Present an argument applying the relevant philosophers to the case at hand. This should include an argument justifying who each philosopher would give the welfare to and why.
Present an argument explaining why one of the philosophers can be viewed as offering a more successful solution to the case at hand.
In no more than one paragraph, explain what solution you would propose for Rebecca and Jimmy.
Consider Rebecca, a single mother of 4 who has been a long-term welfare recipient. Rebecca is a weekend meth user who often spends her money on meth. However, without her welfare money, her children would not have any food or medical treatment and would most likely be placed in foster homes where their lives would go worse than they currently are. Rebecca’s yearly welfare application is due.
Now consider Jimmy, a veteran of both Desert Storm and Operation Iraqi Freedom. During the battle, Jimmy was wounded and now suffers from some moderate physical disability and post-traumatic stress. Sadly, although Jimmy tried to find a job, there weren’t many systems to help him re-integrate or work through his issues. Each day, Jimmy begs for money at his local off-ramp. Jimmy has fallen through the proverbial cracks through no fault of his own. Jimmy applies for welfare.
You are the welfare overseer. At most, one person can get welfare. You can make ONE of the following three decisions:
Give the welfare only to Rebecca.
Give the welfare only to Jimmy.
Don’t give any welfare.

To begin to understand how this period began, this assignment focuses on watching a PBS documentary called Foreigners on Their Own Land. 
The documentary title makes use of the actual words expressed by Juan Seguin, who was from an elite Tejano family that welcomed Anglo Americans and even fought along the side of Anglo Americans for Texas independence from Mexico. Seguin’s expression captures the essence of a larger process of becoming a foreigner on his own land of Texas and reflects the process of Mexicans becoming less included in the future of the southwest as Anglo domination and control increased with Mexico having lost the war imposed by the United States in 1848. 
After you watch this documentary respond to following major question and the questions below in number order: 
What does this expression of becoming Foreigners on Their Own Land mean as understood though the experiences of Juan Seguin? Or put another way, what did he go through that would provoke him to express such statement? How does his experience reflect this process? Explain your response and support with details of how you are understanding this statement to mean.  
Can you find a similar parallel of becoming a foreigner on their own land with the experiences of another historical figure or events discussed in this documentary such as Apolenaria Lorenzana, Mariano Vallejo, and/or Las Gorras Blancas, the Gold Rush etc. told through this documentary? Explain your response and support with details of how you are understanding this statement to mean.  
Why did the Seguin family, and other Tejano families, decide to welcome Anglo families to Texas when it was still part of Mexico? 
What do you think about Prof. David Montejano’s statement about Juan Seguin having a conflicted identity for referring to himself as John? 
What is the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo? When was it created and what kind of protections was it supposed to provide Mexicans living in what would be considered new US territory?