Students will be assigned in a group of five (5) students from the same laboratory class. You must not change your group unless approved by your tutor. Please select one of the topics below and inform your tutor the topic you have chosen. Group must elect a group leader and only one submission per group is required on Moodle.
All students must collaborate in this group assignment and contribute equally. Group leader should report their progress on a regular basis to relevant tutor. Every student must participate in peer assessment on the SPARKPLUS system after submission on Moodle. SPARKPLUS Guide for students will be available on Moodle
In this section you need to find an online newspaper article that discussed privacy/security breaches involving Social Networking Sites.
Provide screen shot of the online article and provide a succinct summary of the issue presented in this article and its importance. Use ethical reasoning to support your views.
Case Study topics for Assignment
Case Study Topic 1
“Kara has been working as an environmental engineer at a consulting firm for over twenty-five years. Wellknown for settling disputes between her corporate clients before litigation must be pursued, Kara often analyzes technical data, particularly distributions of solid particle pollution, presented by disputing parties to help them reach a compromise on the cost of environmental cleanup. For example, two parties may be separated from one another by a strip of land; however, each party must fiscally contribute in keeping the land free from pollutants”.
“One day, Kara was contacted by a journalist to talk about her experiences at the firm. Kara spoke about how she often encountered cases where companies did not accurately depict levels of solid particle pollution occupying the companies’ respective surroundings. Instead, technical experts, who are mostly engineers, would misrepresent data in order to make it seem that minority parties were responsible for a greater part of the contamination. At the end of the interview, Kara emphasized the necessity of engineers taking ownership and being honest about the presentation of data.” (Jocelyn Tan, Markkula Center for Applied Ethics 2020)
Case Study Topic 2:
“Jeremy is a fellow for his University’s Global Service fellowship program. In his role, he must work with an international non-profit organization, SolarSolver, to develop a portable solar panel kit for rural villages in Belize. During a visit to the company’s headquarters, one of the organization’s representatives, Shiraine, asked Jeremy about using fellowship’s grant money to purchase items not readily available in Belize for SolarSolver. Since fellowship funds were obtained through a reimbursement process, she wanted Jeremy to falsify receipts from solar-kit related purposes to obtain the money”.
“Jeremy’s first instinct was that it would be unethical to use money intended for one purpose to fulfill another. However, he recalled Shiraine doing him several favors in the past. For instance, prior to his admittance into the fellowship, Jeremy had worked closely with Shiraine and other SolarSolver representatives to develop a proposal for his project. If it were not for her help (as well as her company’s help in sponsoring the project), Jeremy strongly believed that he would not have received the fellowship”.
“Another time, a power outage occurred while he was demonstrating the solar-kit’s operation and installment to local villagers. Jeremy tried calling SolarSolver’s headquarters, but it was already past sundown and nobody was in the office. Finally, he decided to call Shiraine’s house for help. To his relief, Shiraine answered and immediately sent a team with portable light generators to Jeremy’s rescue. Jeremy is grateful for Shiraine’s acts of kindness, but he does not believe that falsifying receipts is the right thing to do.” (Jocelyn Tan, Markkula Center for Applied Ethics 2020)
Case Study Topic 3:
“While at a cocktail party for his wife’s accounting firm, Nathan is introduced to two of his wife’s colleagues. He begins talking with them and mentions that he is a genetic engineer who works with stem cells. Colleague A immediately tells Nathan that he does not support stem cell research because it involves the use of human embryos. Colleague B disagrees, telling Nathan he fully supports this research because of all the therapies that have been developed from embryonic stem cells. Nathan is unsure of what to do, as both Colleague A and B have expressed opinions that are not true. Contrary to Colleague A’s beliefs, not all stem cell research involves the use of human embryonic stem cells; it can also be conducted on adult stem cells. Additionally, Colleague B is misinformed - currently there are no FDAapproved treatments that involve the use of human embryonic stem cells”.
“What is Nathan’s responsibility on educating the general public about stem cells? Nathan does not want to get into a long argument at a party, but also feels like he should not let the colleagues continue to believe this misinformation”. (Clare Bartlett, Markkula Center for Applied Ethics 2020)