Final Case Study Report
Engineering Ethics
William J. Frey (Instr.)
Area One: Identify the Relevant Facts (Twenty points subtracted if omitted)
Skill Area
Ethical
Awareness
The ability to
uncover the
ethical issues
that are
embedded in
complex,
concrete
situations
Description
Needs
Improvement
Students identify 1. Includes facts
up to five
that are ethically
ethically relevant irrelevant or only
facts that
marginally
together provide relevant.
a comprehensive
summary of the
2. Leaves out
ethical issues
facts that are
raised in the case ethically
relevant.
3. Ethically
Relevant fact list
needs refining
(unclear,
unorganized)
Meets
Expectations
1. Excludes for
the most part
ethically
irrelevant facts
Exceeds
Expectations
1. No ethical
irrelevance
2. Includes most
of the ethically
relevant facts
2. Includes all
the ethically
relevant facts
3. List presented
is relatively
refined
3. List is
carefully refined
Comments/
Score
Final Case Study Report
Engineering Ethics
Area Two: Identify the Stakeholders and their Stakes
Skill Area
Description
Needs
Improvement
Students identify
1. Stakeholders left
Ethical
the
stakeholders
and
out
Awareness
their stakes. They
1a. Justification not
justify their claims
made or is only
The ability to
using the ethics tests partially made
uncover the
as well as isolate
2. Not all stakes
ethical issues
potential
included or
stakeholder
confusion as to what
that are
conflicts
counts as a stake
embedded in
2a. Justification not
complex,
This includes filling made or is only
concrete
out a stakeholder
partially made
situations
matrix
3. Possible conflicts
are omitted, pseudo
conflicts asserted, or
A stakeholder is
analysis is unclear.
any group or
3a. Justification not
individual that
made or is only
has a vital or
partially made
essential interest
4. Does not include
in what you do
stakeholder matrix,
or stakeholder
matrix is partial, or
has serious
problems
William J. Frey (Instr.)
Meets
Expectations
All (or almost all)
stakeholders
included ,
explained, and
justified
All (or almost all)
stakes are included,
explained, and
justified
Exceeds
Expectations
All stakeholders are
included along with
a clear justification
and explanation
All (or almost all)
conflicts between
stakeholders and
stakes are identified,
explained, and
justified
Possible conflicts
are clearly
illuminated and
justified
All stakes are
included and
insightfully
described and
justified
Comments/
Score (20/20)
Final Case Study Report
Engineering Ethics
William J. Frey (Instr.)
Area Three: Identify the Ethical Problem or Problems
Skill Area
Ethical
Awareness
The ability to
uncover the
ethical issues
that are
embedded in
complex,
concrete
situations
Description
Needs
Improvement
Student correctly 1. problem types
uses problem
employed
categories
incorrectly,
(disagreement,
incompletely, or
& conflict) to
in a confused
classify the
way
ethical
2. problem
components in a classification is
case or scenario. not relevant to
case
Students prepare
problem
3. problem
classification
classification
matrix
misses
significant
ethical elements
in the case
Meets
Expectations
1. employment
of problem types
(disagreement &
conflict) is for
the most part
successful
2. problem
classification is,
for the most part,
relevant to the
case
3. problem
classification
covers most of
the significant
ethical elements
in the case
Exceeds
Comments/
Expectations
Score (20/40)
1. Successfully
employs problem
types
(disagreement &
conflict)
2. problem
classification is
highly relevant to
the case and
insightful
3. problem
classification
covers
comprehensively
the ethical
elements in the
case
Final Case Study Report
Engineering Ethics
William Frey (Instr.)
Area Four: Solution Generation
Skill Area
Description
Ethical
Integration
Students
generate a list of
10 solutions to
the problem they
have identified
and the case
raises.
The ability to
integrate—not
just apply—
ethical
considerations
into the solution
so that it
optimizes (and
balances) ethical
and feasibility
considerations.
The solutions
generated
integrate the
ethical
considerations
raised by the
ethics tests and
the code test.
The solutions
have been
refined and
combined
Needs
Improvement
1. List is
incomplete (less
than 10)
Meets
Expectations
1. List is
complete (at least
10)
2. failure to
integrate ethical
considerations
into solution
3. solutions are
presented in a
confused and
unrefined
condition
2. solutions at
least partially
embody ethical
considerations
3. solutions are
somewhat
clarified and
refined
Exceeds
Expectations
1. List is
complete,
comprehensive,
and exhaustive
2. solutions fully
and clearly
embody ethical
considerations
3. solutions are
elaborately
clarified and
refined
Comments/
Score (20/60)
Final Case Study Report
Engineering Ethics William Frey (Instr.)
Area Five: Comparatively Evaluate the Top Three Solutions
Skill Area
Description
Needs
Improvement
Meets
Expectations
Exceeds
Expectations
Ethical Integration
Students correctly use
the reversibility,
harm/beneficence, public
identification, and
feasibility tests to
evaluate, compare, and
rank three solution
alternatives.
1. Problems with the set
up or execution of
reversibility test
1. Reversibility test
properly set up and
executed
1. clearly and
insightfully sets up and
executes the
reversibility test
2. Problems with the set
up or execution of the
H/B test
3. Problems with the set
up or the execution of
the P-ID test
2. H/B test properly set
up and executed
2. clearly and
insightfully sets up and
executes the H/B test
3. clearly and
insightfully sets up and
executes the P-ID test
4. Feasibility issues
either left out or
inadequately discussed
4. Feasibility issues are
adequately raised and
discussed
The ability to
integrate—not just
apply—ethical
considerations into the
solution so that it
optimizes (and
balances) ethical and
feasibility
considerations.
Includes a solution
evaluation matrix
Set Up Errors
1. Inadequate description of action
2. Inadequate description of agent or agent-switching
3. Incomplete consequence or stakeholder description
Ethics Tests Errors
Reversibility
1. Reversing with Hitler (i.e., reversing according to standards of immoral
agent)
2. Reducing reversibility to listing consequences
3. Not addressing, weighing, and balancing inconsistent reversibility results
3. P-ID test properly set
up and executed
Comments/
Score (40/100)
4. clearly and
insightfully set up and
executes the feasibility
test
Harm/Beneficence
1. Paralysis of Analysis—Identifying too many consequences, including
trivial ones
2. Superficial Analysis—Identifying too few consequences, including
leaving out important ones.
3. Omitting Justice Audit—Not properly attending to distribution of harms
and benefits
Public Identification
1. Reducing test to viewing the consequences of bad publicity
2. Not associating the action with the agent
3. Not identifying, weighing, and balancing conflicting test results
Final Case Study Report
Engineering Ethics
William Frey (Instr.)
Area Six: Make and Justify a Solution
Skill Area
Description
Ethical
Integration
Students design
solutions to the
scenario that
optimizes the
ethics tests and
satisfies
feasibility
considerations.
The ability to
integrate—not
just apply—
ethical
considerations
into the solution
so that it
optimizes (and
balances) ethical
and feasibility
considerations.
Needs
Improvement
1. Lack of or nor
fully adequate
integration of
ethics tests
2. Lack of or
incomplete
coherence with
problem,
stakeholders,
and/or general
situation
3. Solution fails
to meet fully one
or more of the
feasibility
considerations
Meets
Expectations
1. Solution
integrates the
three ethics tests
Exceeds
Comments/
Expectations
Score (20/120)
1. Solution
provides an
unusually
comprehensive
and illuminating
integration of the
ethics tests
2. Coheres with
2. Solution
problem,
coheres in an
stakeholders
unusually clear
and/or general
and
situation
comprehensive
manner with
problem,
stakeholders, and
situation
3. Solution meets 3. Provides a
the feasibility
totally
considerations
convincing
argument for
feasibility
Final Case Study Report
Engineering Ethics
William Frey (Instr.)
Area Seven: Intelligibility
Skill Area
Ethical
Integration
The ability to
integrate—not
just apply—
ethical
considerations
into the solution
so that it
optimizes (and
balances)
ethical and
feasibility
considerations.
Description
Needs
Improvement
Case analysis
1. Weaknesses
demonstrates the apparent in logical
following
consistency
formal
2. Incomplete
characteristics:
clarity and
precision of
1. logical
thought and
consistency
expression
2. clarity and
3. Incomplete
precision of
comprehensiveness
thought and
and depth in
expression
answer
3. comprehensiveness and
depth in answer
Meets
Expectations
1. Analysis is
logically
consistent
2. Analysis is
clear and precise
in thought and
expression
Exceeds
Expectations
1. Demonstrates
unusual logical
consistency
2. Demonstrates
unusual degree of
clarity and
preciseness
3. Analysis is
comprehensive
and
demonstrates
depth
3. Demonstrates
unusual
comprehensiveness
and depth
Comments/
Score (20/140)
Final Case Study Report
Engineering Ethics
William Frey (Instr.)
Area Eight: Group Self-Evaluation
Skill Area
Description
Needs
Improvement
Meets
Expectations
Ethical
Integration
Students prepare a
complete group
self-evaluation that
includes:
1. Goals are not
included or inadequately
stated
1. Goals includes and
adequately stated
2. Assessment not
included or inadequately
set forth
3. Problems and
obstacles along with
counter-measures are
omitted or inadequately
treated
2. Assessment included
and adequately treated
4. No or inadequate
documentation of
response to ethics bowl
4. Adequate
documentation of
response to ethics bowl
5. No or inadequately
prepared individual
member evaluation
forms
5. Individual member
evaluation forms
adequately completed
The ability to
integrate—not
just apply—
ethical
considerations
into the solution
so that it
optimizes (and
balances) ethical
and feasibility
considerations.
1. Group goals
2. Assessment of
group activity in
terms of these goals
3. Problems and
obstacles
encountered and
counter-measures
4. Documentation of
response to ethics
bowl experience
5. Individual
member evaluation
forms
3. Problems discussed
along with countermeasures. Discussion is
adequate
Exceeds
Expectations
Comments/
Score (40/180)
Final Case Study Report
Engineering Ethics
Area Nine: Summaries of Ethics Bowl Case Pool
Skill Area
Description
Ethical
Integration, Team
Working Skills
and Intermediate
Moral Concepts
Students provide
summaries of cases
that identify the
central problem(s) in
cases, comparative
evaluate different
solutions to these
problems, and make
and defend a
solution.
Group documents
through summaries
that they have
studied and
prepared each of 15
cases. Since the
cases are designed
to cover a range of
ethical and code
concepts, this shows
practice with major
conceptual issues in
Engineering Ethics.
This also documents
student practice in
cooperative
learning teams
William Frey (Instr.)
Needs
Improvement
Meets
Expectations
Exceeds
Expectations
1. Summaries need
more work in
problem
identification
1. Summaries
adequately
demonstration
problem
identification
Summaries surpass
expectations by…
2. Summaries need
more work in
comparatively
evaluating solution
alternatives
2. Summaries
adequately compare
and evaluate
solution alternatives
Summaries surpass
expectations by…
3. Summaries need
more work in
choosing and
defending a group
solution
3. Summaries
adequately choose
and defend a group
solution
Summaries surpass
expectations by…
Comments/
Score (20/200)