Identify a recent ethical dilemma or ethically questionable situation relating to ICT that you are familiar with

Click here to order this assignment @Essaywriting.us.No Plagiarism.Written from scratch by professional writers.

Proceed according to the following instructions.

  • Identify a recent (within the last six (6) months) ethical dilemma or ethically questionable situation relating to ICT that you are familiar with. This situation can be either in the media (for example one you have sourced from a newspaper, or online through social media) or through your workplace.
  1. If using a workplace example, to maintain confidentiality, do not use real names.
  2. If you use a media article you must include the link to the media article in the references list of your assignment.
  • Identify the key ethical issues contained in your chosen case and use the three distinct perspectives of applied ethics including professional, philosophical, sociological/descriptive ethics to analyse the ethical issues involved in the case. The word limit should be between 1400-1500 words. Note: Headings, citations, references and any appendices do not count towards your word limit, but quotations do. At the start of the assignment indicates in brackets the word count of your assignment excluding those items mentioned above.
  • Include a Reference list at the end of your work, in the correct APA referencing style, corresponding to in-text citations. You must include at least THREE (3) quality academic references (one for each ethical perspective) from different sources. Please note that these references are in addition to those provided to you through this subject (for example, you still must reference, Tavani textbook, the Interact subject lecture notes etc BUT these references cannot be used as one of your three quality academic references from different sources). Only include references that have been cited in the body of your assignment and ones that support what you have presented in your assignment.

Rationale

 

This assessment task will assess the following learning outcome/s:

  • be able to identify ethical issues related to ICT.
  • be able to assess the implications of ethical problems.
  • be able to critically evaluate solutions to ethical problems.
  • be able to argue consistently and rationally about the moral issues raised by the adoption and use of ICT.

 

Ethical, legal, and social issues

Anonymity

Legal Liability

Censorship

Defamation

Property

Harassment

Civil Liberties

Access

Confidentiality

Privacy

Security

Deception

Free speech

Moral Responsibility

Equity

Surveillance

Crime

Pseudonymity

 

 

 

Marking Criteria

The following marking sheet will be used to assess students’ submissions. Please check that you have met all the criteria before you submit your assignment

 

 

Criteria 

Standards

High Distinction (HD)

Distinction (DI)

Credit (CR)

Pass (PS)

Fail (FL)

Use professional, philosophical, and sociological/descriptive ethics perspectives to analyse the ethical issues involved in the case.

(Value 70%)

 

Comprehensive understanding of the professional, philosophical, and sociological/descriptive ethics perspectives through in-depth discussion and analysis of three most relevant ethical issues involved in your chosen case.

Mostly comprehensive understanding of the professional, philosophical, and sociological/descriptive ethics perspectives through in-depth discussion and analysis of three most relevant ethical issues involved in your chosen case.

Some understanding of the professional, philosophical, and sociological/descriptive ethics perspectives through some discussion and analysis of two relevant ethical issues involved in your chosen case.

Basic understanding of the professional, philosophical, and sociological/descriptive ethics perspectives through some discussion and analysis of two relevant ethical issues involved in your chosen case.

Major omissions in understanding of the professional, philosophical, and sociological/descriptive ethics perspectives and irrelevant ethical issues are identified and analysed.

 

Writing & structure

(Value 20%)

 

Language features and structures are used to convey meaning effectively, concisely, unambiguously, and in a tone appropriate to the audience and purpose with no spelling, grammatical, or punctuation errors.

Well-developed skills in expression & presentation of ideas.

Fluent writing style appropriate to assessment task/document type.

Grammar & spelling accurate.

Good skills in expression & clear presentation of ideas.

Mostly fluent writing style appropriate to assessment task/document type.

Grammar & spelling contains a few minor errors.

The text contains frequent errors in spelling, grammar, word choice, and structure, lacks clarity, and is not concise, but the meaning is apparent to the reader with some effort.

Rudimentary skills in expression & presentation of ideas.

Not all material is relevant &/or is presented in a disorganised manner.

Meaning apparent, but writing style not fluent or well organised.

Grammar & spelling contains many errors.

Referencing

(Value 10%)

Referencing is comprehensive, demonstrates academic integrity, and conforms exactly to APA style conventions.

Very good referencing, including reference list and citations.

High quality references.

Good referencing, including reference list and citations.

Good quality references.

Referencing is comprehensive, mostly accurate according to APA style conventions, and demonstrates academic integrity. Some minor errors or omissions in style and formatting choices (e.g. italics, punctuation, etc) don’t impact on the transparency and traceability of the source, or demonstration of academic integrity.

Sub-standard (or no) referencing.

Poor quality (or no) references.

SCHOOL OF COMPUTING AND MATHS, Charles Sturt University
Title of YouTube Video
Assignment 1: Three Distinct Perspectives of Applied Ethics
 
Your Name
Student Number

 

 

Word Count:                

 

 

 

  1. Introduction

Just a short summary (one small paragraph)

 

  1. Professional Ethics Perspectives

 

  1. Philosophical Ethics Perspectives

 

  1. Sociological/Descriptive Ethics Perspectives

 

  1. References

 

 

Do not remove the following marking sheet.

Marking Sheet
Criteria Standards Marks awarded
Use professional, philosophical, and sociological/descriptive ethics perspectives to analyse the ethical issues involved in the case.

(Value 70%)

HD: Comprehensive understanding of the professional, philosophical, and sociological/descriptive ethics perspectives through in-depth discussion and analysis of three most relevant ethical issues involved in your chosen case. (59.5-70)

DI: Mostly comprehensive understanding of the professional, philosophical, and sociological/descriptive ethics perspectives through in-depth discussion and analysis of three most relevant ethical issues involved in your chosen case. (52.5-58.8)

CR: Some understanding of the professional, philosophical, and sociological/descriptive ethics perspectives through some discussion and analysis of two relevant ethical issues involved in your chosen case. (45.5-51.8)

PS: Basic understanding of the professional, philosophical, and sociological/descriptive ethics perspectives through some discussion and analysis of two relevant ethical issues involved in your chosen case. (35-44.8)

FL: Major omissions in understanding of the professional, philosophical, and sociological/descriptive ethics perspectives and irrelevant ethical issues are identified and analysed. (0-34.3)

 

 
Writing & structure

(Value 20%)

HD: Language features and structures are used to convey meaning effectively, concisely, unambiguously, and in a tone appropriate to the audience and purpose with no spelling, grammatical, or punctuation errors. (17-20)

DI: Well developed skills in expression & presentation of ideas. Fluent writing style appropriate to assessment task/document type. Grammar & spelling accurate. (15-16.8)

CR: Good skills in expression & clear presentation of ideas. Mostly fluent writing style appropriate to assessment task/document type. Grammar & spelling contains a few minor errors. (13-14.8)

PS: The text contains frequent errors in spelling, grammar, word choice, and structure, lacks clarity, and is not concise, but the meaning is apparent to the reader with some effort. (10-12.8)

FL: Rudimentary skills in expression & presentation of ideas. Not all material is relevant &/or is presented in a disorganised manner. Meaning apparent, but writing style not fluent or well organised. Grammar & spelling contains many errors. (0-9.8)

 

 
Referencing

(Value 10%)

HD: Referencing is comprehensive, demonstrates academic integrity, and conforms exactly to APA style conventions. (8.5-10)

DI: Very good referencing, including reference list and citations. High quality references. (7.5-8.4)

CR: Good referencing, including reference list and citations. Good quality references. (6.5-7.4)

PS: Referencing is comprehensive, mostly accurate according to APA style conventions, and demonstrates academic integrity. Some minor errors or omissions in style and formatting choices (e.g. italics, punctuation, etc) don’t impact on the transparency and traceability of the source, or demonstration of academic integrity. (5-6.4)

FL: Sub-standard (or no) referencing. Poor quality (or no) references. (0-4.9)

 
Total Marks