Please see the attached PDF for the following instructions………………….
CIS340: Computer Ethics
Unit 2 Journal Assignment – Putting Theory into Practice in Computer Ethics
Due Date: 11:59 pm EST, Sunday of Unit 2
Total Points: 50
Overview: Throughout the term, you will keep a journal that you will add to every other
week by reflecting on questions or scenarios that pertain to that week’s topic(s).
Although not required, to ensure comprehension of each week’s material, you should
first review the self-assessment questions in the textbook at the end of the assigned
chapter(s). These questions relate to the journal topic and can help you formulate your
thoughts and writing.
This week, you will compose a journal entry reflecting on your experiences and how it
has influenced your thinking on the following questions/scenarios:
Discuss the theoretical and practical ethical considerations in decision-making
and how it will become more important as technology continues to advance.
Specifically:
Imagine you are the CEO of a company that is struggling. You are presented with an
opportunity to implement a new technology that will automate much of your
manufacturing processes, increasing efficiency. Your company will save money and will
even reduce its carbon footprint, but 1,000 workers will lose their jobs.
Recall from your readings this week how we can view moral questions like this one from
a theoretical ethics perspective or with a more practical or “applied” approach.
Theoretical ethics seeks to view moral dilemmas from a higher level and to identify a
consistent moral theory or framework to evaluate problems, whereas applied ethics is
concerned with analyzing and resolving specific moral dilemmas. Applied ethics
includes viewing moral dilemmas from a descriptive perspective (what is the case) and
a normative perspective (what ought to be the case), considering the broader social
impacts of our decisions. Understanding these different perspectives:
•
•
What are your thoughts on the proposal, considering both the positive and
negative potential outcomes and consequences of your decision (technological
advancement, the company’s well-being, worker safety, reduced traffic,
environmental benefits, lost jobs, reduced economic activity, etc.)?
How might your opinion change if you learned all your competitors are
implementing the same technology. Think about it from a theoretical and practical
perspective.
•
Who is best equipped to make such decisions: the CEO, the CFO, the head of
IT, VP of Human Resources, Legal, etc.? What might you consider in your
decision-making that others might not?
Notes:
•
•
•
•
Your journal is an informal self-reflection and does not require sources or APA
formatting.
There are no specific length/words requirements. Simply provide your thoughts.
However, each of the elements described in the assignment should be covered.
You will be graded on the depth of your critical thinking and the strength of your
writing.
The optional self-assessment questions for your review can be found at the end
of Chapter 1 in the textbook.
Review the grading criteria below before and after you write your journal entry.
Evaluation Rubric for Weekly Journal Assignment
Criteria
Content
Reflection
Exemplary
Proficient
24-25 points
Reflection
demonstrates a
high degree of
critical thinking in
applying,
analyzing, and
evaluating key
course concepts.
Insightful and
relevant
connections
made through
explanations and
examples.
14-15 points
20-23 points
Reflection
demonstrates
some degree of
critical thinking in
applying,
analyzing, and/or
evaluating key
course concepts.
Connections
made through
explanations,
and/or examples.
11-13 points
Needs
Improvement
16-19 points
Reflection
demonstrates
limited critical
thinking in
applying,
analyzing, and/or
evaluating key
course concepts.
Minimal
connections
made through
explanations
and/or examples.
8-10 points
Deficient
0-15 points
Reflection lacks
critical thinking.
Superficial
connections are
made with key
course concepts.
0-7 points
Personal
Growth
Writing
Quality
Conveys strong
evidence of selfreflection on own
work with a
personal
response to the
questions posed
and
demonstrates
empathy for other
points of view.
9-10 points
Well written and
clearly organized,
characterized by
elements of a
strong writing
style and
basically free
from
grammatical,
usage, and
spelling errors.
Conveys some
evidence of selfreflection on own
work with a
personal
response to the
questions posed
and recognizes
other viewpoints.
Conveys limited
evidence of selfreflection on own
work to the
questions posed
and limited
understanding of
other viewpoints
Conveys
inadequate
evidence of selfreflection on own
work and no
analysis of other
viewpoints.
7-8 points
Above average
writing style and
logically
organized using
standard English
with minor
grammatical,
usage, and
spelling errors.
5-6 points
Average writing
style that is
sometimes
unclear and/or
with some
grammatical,
usage, and
spelling errors
that detract from
the content.
0-4 points
Poor writing style
lacking in
standard English,
clarity, language
used, and/or
frequent
grammatical,
usage, and
spelling errors
that greatly
detract from the
content.
