Jane Doe is a nursing student at University X. Jane is in week eight of a course entitled: “Introduction to Ethics”.
For the week one discussion, Jane copied work done by her friend John Doe in the same class two months ago (with a different professor). John told Jane it was okay to use his work as John’s professor never checked any work in the class using Turnitin.com. John claimed to have earned an A on the work also.
In week two, Jane went to StudentPapering.com and paid ten dollars for a week two essay done by a student (not John Doe) who took the same course four months ago. StudentPapering promises that all its archived work is of excellent quality and cannot be detected as copied. Jane then uploaded an exact copy of the work for the week two assignment.
In week three, Jane paid a worker at PaperingStudent.com ten dollars to write for Jane a brand new essay after Jane shared with the worker the essay assignment instructions.In week four, Jane relied on her knowledge of Esperanto. She felt pressed for time and found an article by a professor from Esperanto on the week four topic. She translated Esperanto into English using Moogle Translate, and the translated text served as her week four paper.
In week five, Jane was running late again. Jane purposely uploaded a blank paper hoping that she would later claim it was an innocent mistake and not be assessed a late penalty. In a previous course on History, she had done the same (with an earlier paper from the History class rather than simply a blank) and had not seen any late penalty assessed.In week six, Jane took work she did in a nursing course from a year ago and submitted that for her discussion posting in her current class. She simply copied and pasted the work she had labored intensively on a year ago (even though University X forbids this practice as ‘self-plagiarism’). Jane was confident her Nursing instructor never checked that work using Turnitin.com or another method.In week seven, Jane copied work found at ChatGPT for the paper. Jane did not use any quotation marks or other documentation to show the text was from artificial intelligence and not by Jane.
Since Jane’s Ethics professor did not check papers and posting for any issues by using Turnitin.com or another method, the professor graded all of Jane’s work unaware of Jane’s actions throughout the weeks of the class. Jane feels her actions are morally justified both because her economic situation requires her to work too much to devote time to school (although other students are well-off enough to have such time) and her religion forbids cheating, but Jane ignores her religion’s teachings.
Now that you have had an opportunity to explore ethics formally, create a reflective assessment of your learning experience and the collaborations you engaged in throughout this session. You will submit both of the following:
For the written reflection, address Jane Doe’s and respond to the following:
- Articulate again your moral theory from week eight discussion (Ethical Balance – utilitarianism). What two ethical theories best apply to it? Why those two?
Wk 8 DB “My moral way of thinking is established in a mix of uprightness morals and utilitarianism, with an accentuation on compassion and social obligation. To promote the greatest good for individuals and society, I believe in striving for virtuous character traits while considering the overall consequences of actions. This approach recognizes the significance of self-awareness, moral standards, and aggregate prosperity.”
- Apply to Jane Doe’s case your personal moral philosophy as developed in week eight discussion and now. Use it to determine if what Jane Doe did was ethical or unethical per your own moral philosophy.
- Propose a course of social action and a solution by using the ethics of egoism, utilitarianism, the “veil of ignorance” method, deontological principles, and/or a theory of justice to deal with students like Jane. Consider social values such as those concerning ways of life while appraising the interests of diverse populations (for instance, those of differing religions and economic status).
- Length: 2-3 pages (not including title page or references page)
- 1-inch margins
- Double spaced
- 12-point Times New Roman font
- Title page
- References page (minimum of 2 scholarly sources)