Applying the ethical frame work in practice

1
Unsatisfactory
71.00%

2
Less Than Satisfactory
75.00%

3
Satisfactory
83.00%

4
Good
94.00%

5
Excellent
100.00%

80.0 %Content

10.0 % Explain the Ethical Implications of a Breach of Confidentiality

Does not identify contextual features related to confidentiality. Does not distinguish among fact, opinion, and value judgments. Fails to identify implications and consequences of breach of confidentiality.

Incomplete discussion of issue. Superficial analysis of ethical implications. Limited consideration of preexisting assumptions.

Limited discussion of relevant context and exploration of implications. Identifies influence of assumptions, addressing ethical dimensions that underlie the issue.

Relevant context and thorough discussion of issue. Analysis includes consideration of preexisting socially constructed assumptions. Identifies implications and consequences from a practice perspective.

Analysis of issue is comprehensive. Explores confidentiality with global perspective, identifying underlying relationships between stakeholders and among socially constructed systems.

25.0 % Provide Ethical Theories and/or Ethical Principles to Substantiate Your Position

Does not identify ethical theory and/or principle from readings. Does not present own perspective. Discussion is grounded in absolutes, with little or no acknowledgement of own bias.

Applies ethical theory and/or principle to issue, though some aspects are incorrect or confusing. Key details and connections between theory and application are missing. Presents own perspective without justification, does not address other views.

Applies ethical theory and/or principle with limited integration. Analysis is incomplete. Presents own perspective without justification.

Integrates multiple viewpoints and comparisons of ideas or perspectives using ethical theory and/or principles as a framework. Identifies own position on issue, but justification and connection to theory are incomplete.

Appropriately identifies own position on issue, drawing support from lecture content, experience, and information beyond assigned sources. Integrates ethical theory and/or principle to substantiate position.

25.0 % Identify a Reasonable Alternative to Address the Dilemma

Does not adopt a decision-making framework. Presents a single perspective; alternatives are not addressed.

Applies decision-making framework incorrectly. Confuses cause and correlation; presents ideas and alternatives in confused or confusing sequence. Does not explain significance of applying framework.

Identifies alternatives with limited scope. Applies decision-making framework as foundation for selecting alternatives and justifying their application, given the context of the dilemma presented.

Identifies alternatives that demonstrate relevance, accuracy, and completeness. Applies decision-making framework with clearly distinct correlations of relationships among ideas.

Integrates decision-making framework in a complex process of judgment and justification with comprehensive discussion of implications for each alternative identified. Clearly articulates significance of framework with a thorough discussion of strengths and limitations.

20.0 % Explain How an Ethics Committee Might Approach the Dilemma Using Ethical Theories, Principles, and a Collaborative Approach to Ethical Decision Making

Does not discuss role of ethics committee and potential alternatives or approaches to decision making.

Misinterprets role of ethics committee in identifying reasonable solutions to ethical dilemmas.

Discusses role of ethics committee but provides an incomplete discussion of the approach or process of determining reasonable alternatives.

Distinguishes unique role of ethics committee as conduit for ethical decision making. Provides thorough discussion of approach used by committee to determine reasonable alternatives.

Qualifies role and limitations of ethics committees in influencing the outcome of ethical decision making. Addresses the diverse perspectives drawn from a collaborative approach to problem solving.

15.0 %Organization and Effectiveness

5.0 % Thesis Development and Purpose

Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.

Thesis and/or main claim are insufficiently developed and/or vague; purpose is not clear.

Thesis and/or main claim are apparent and appropriate to purpose.

Thesis and/or main claim are clear and forecast development of paper. It is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to purpose.

Thesis and/or main claim are comprehensive; contained within the thesis is the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.

5.0 % Paragraph Development and Transitions

Paragraphs and transitions consistently lack unity and coherence. No apparent connections between paragraphs are established. Transitions are inappropriate to purpose and scope. Organization is disjointed.

Some paragraphs and transitions may lack logical progression of ideas, unity, coherence, and/or cohesiveness. Some degree of organization is evident.

Paragraphs are generally competent, but ideas may show some inconsistency in organization and/or in their relationships to each other.

A logical progression of ideas between paragraphs is apparent. Paragraphs exhibit a unity, coherence, and cohesiveness. Topic sentences and concluding remarks are appropriate to purpose.

There is a sophisticated construction of paragraphs and transitions. Ideas progress and relate to each other. Paragraph and transition construction guide the reader. Paragraph structure is seamless.

5.0 % Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)

Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice and/or sentence construction are used.

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register), sentence structure, and/or word choice are present.

Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used.

Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used.

Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.

5.0 %Format

2.0 % Paper Format (1- inch margins; 12-point-font; double-spaced; Times New Roman, Arial, or Courier)

Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.

Template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken; lack of control with formatting is apparent.

Template is used, and formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.

Template is fully used; There are virtually no errors in formatting style.

All format elements are correct.

3.0 % Research Citations (In-text citations for paraphrasing and direct quotes, and reference page listing and formatting, as appropriate to assignment)

No reference page is included. No citations are used.

Reference page is present. Citations are inconsistently used.

Reference page is included and lists sources used in the paper. Sources are appropriately documented, although some errors may be present.

Reference page is present and fully inclusive of all cited sources. Documentation is appropriate and citation style is usually correct.

In-text citations and a reference page are complete. The documentation of cited sources is free of error.

100 % Total Weightage