Hi again,I need some help!

Project 1: How Would the Philosophers Handle the Situation?

Top of Form

Due June 17 at 11:59 PM

Bottom of Form

Project 1: How Would the Philosophers Handle the Situation? (20%)

In the first assignment, you have the opportunity to gain a better understanding of how to identify different types of ethical dilemmas that occur within business, apply ethical theories to solve dilemmas, and after comparing the results, take a critical stance of determining a theorist who can best address the dilemmas presented in the case scenario.

NOTE: All submitted work is to be your original work. You may not use any work from another student, the Internet or an online clearinghouse. You are expected to understand the Academic Dishonesty and Plagiarism Policy, and know that it is your responsibility to learn about instructor and general academic expectations with regard to proper citation of sources as specified in the APA Publication Manual, 6th Ed. (Students are held accountable for in-text citations and an associated reference list only). Serious sanctions can result from violations of any type of the Academic Dishonesty and Plagiarism including a zero on a project, a zero for the course or dismissal from the University.

Read the Case Scenario

Ang Lee owns and operates a well-respected online tutoring firm, Tutoring University (TU). The firm was started in 1996 by a group of Johns Hopkins University college students who wanted to make extra money to help defray their school costs. Originally, students offered their services to only Hopkins students. Lee sought out the best students in every field at the University and created a team of students that encompassed every major offered by the school. The tutors charged hourly fees. The service proved to be very successful. The student tutors who started with the company were able to pay most of their college expenses by offering tutoring.

From the outset TU established a code of conduct for its employees. The code’s underlying principle was that all employees were expected to live up to the traditions of a tutor, namely;

- Tutors are individuals who provide private instruction, coaching, or mentoring to one student or to a small group of students.
- The role of the tutor is to help the student to learn, think critically, and problem solve on their own.
- Tutors take steps to help the student understand that learning is a process that requires acts of reading, listening, comprehending, application, analysis, synthesis and evaluation.
- Tutors would never agree to do the work for the student.
- Tutors would never encourage the student to cheat by creating materials that would be presented as the student’s own work or create templates that answered an assessment with little to no work from a student.

Upon graduation in 2000, Lee decided to partner with one of the student tutors, Josh Jenkins. Jenkins was a business school graduate. The partners initially expanded the business by setting up tutoring services at other universities across the country. TU became well known and its tutoring services were recommended by the NCAA for teams in the association. The business had $10 million in gross sales by 2004. Riding high on success, and recognizing the growth of online education, Lee and Jenkins decided it was time to expand the business by offering services to students taking online courses.

Once the partners established services for students taking online courses, in 2005, the partners once again sought to expand the business by looking into tutoring students for the standard testing programs used by college and university admission boards. By 2010, the company had increased its gross sales to $20 million and by 2013, the company boasted $35 million in gross sales.

Although TU’s online tutoring market experienced significant growth, the industry saw many new entrants into the marketplace. Companies such as Course Hero, Homework Market, and Chegg began to offer tutoring services. The business model of these companies include several features that TU did not offer. First, students have access to a document and quiz repository and secondly, students are able to purchase or exchange quizzes or papers from the repository for a fee. Lastly, students could solicit the assistance of tutor by paying them to enter an online classroom to complete the required discussions and assessments.

Lee and Jenkins recognized the potential growth for TU, especially since the popularity of these organizations were growing exponentially. In an effort to compete with the market trend, Lee and Jenkins decided to move the company forward by adding the following services to its model:

- A repository of term papers, flash cards, projects, PowerPoints, videos and exams created by the tutors that can be purchased by students.
- A repository of term papers, projects, PowerPoints, and exams created by the students that can purchased by other students looking for help on current assessments.
- All purchases will earn points that the students can use toward future services.
- A subscription to a citation machine that will perform all academic in-text citation and reference formatting for the student.
- Tutors for hire (these tutors would offer services to write papers for a price per page or for approximately $500, enter an online classroom taking the place of the student completing all graded assessments).

Shortly after the new model was rolled out, the Marketing Department came out with a promotion of the new services called “Let Us Do Your Homework for you.” Television and radio commercials entice students to purchase the papers, videos, etc. by telling customers that the product would be customized to the assignment requirements.

Further, some of the services are advertised as being less costly since many of the papers are written by students submitting his or her work into the repository. Tutoring services are marketed as top quality individuals knowledgeable in many disciplines. One commercial features a tutor seated at a computer working while the student is at home watching the TV.

Spencer Tracy, a former tutor and Director of Tutors is worried about the promotion and finds the content unethical. Further, he is concerned that this promotion will place the tutors in a compromising position with respect to the expectations of the customer – the student!

Instructions

Step 1: Write the Introduction

Create the introductory paragraph. The introductory paragraph is the first paragraph of the paper and tells a reader the main points covered in the paper. To help you know how to write an introduction, view this website to learn how to write an introductory paragraph: http://www.writing.ucsb.edu/faculty/donelan/intro.html

Step 2: Answer the following

- Identify and discuss the two business dilemmas presented in the case scenario. Identify the facts relied upon to make the selection. Use the course material to support your reasoning and conclusions.
- Explain the role “Conduct of Behavior” played in the dilemma selection process. Did it create either of the dilemmas? If so why, if not why?
- Identify and discuss the two common ethical issue categories to which each of the business dilemmas belong. Use the course material to support your reasoning and conclusions.
- State the dilemma in question form and then apply the ethical theories of Rand, Kant and Bentham to answer the question: How would each of these theorists solve the dilemma? Explain in detail the reasoning and conclusions using the facts from the case scenario, and any additional resources necessary to respond to the answer.
- In a final paragraph, compare the results and select one theorist who would best solve the dilemma. Since this last part is reflective of your personal opinion, be sure to support the conclusion with the class material and facts from the case scenario.

Step 3: Review the Paper

Read the paper to ensure all required elements are present. Use the grading rubric to ensure that you gain the most points possible for this assignment.

Proofread the paper for spelling and grammatical issues, and third person writing.

- Read the paper aloud as a first measure;
- Use the spell and grammar check in Word as a second measure;
- Have someone who has excellent English skills proofread the paper;
- Consider submitting the paper to the Effective Writing Center (EWC). The EWC will provide 4-6 areas that may need improvement.

Step 4: Submit the paper in the Assignment Folder (The assignment submitted to the Assignment Folder will be considered the student's final product and therefore ready for grading by the instructor. It is incumbent upon the student to verify the assignment is the correct submission. No exceptions will be considered by the instructor).

How to Set Up the Paper

Create a Word or Rich Text Format (RTF) document that is double-spaced, 12-point font. The final product will be between 5-6 pages in length excluding the title page and reference page. Write clearly and concisely.

Completing the Paper

- Read the grading rubric for the project. Use the grading rubric while completing the project to ensure all requirements are met that will lead to the highest possible grade.
- Third person writing is required. Third person means that there are no words such as “I, me, my, we, or us” (first person writing), nor is there use of “you or your” (second person writing). If uncertain how to write in the third person, view this link: http://www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/first-second-and-third-person.
- Contractions are not used in business writing, so do not use them.
- Paraphrase and do not use direct quotation marks. Paraphrase means you do not use more than four consecutive words from a source document, but put a passage from a source document into your own words and attribute the passage to the source document. Not using direct quotation marks means that there should be no passages with quotation marks and instead the source material is paraphrased as stated above. Provide the page or paragraph number when using in-text citations. Note that a reference within a reference list cannot exist without an associated in-text citation and vice versa.
- You may not use books as source material.

**References to be used to write this paper are (in-text citation needed):

https://www.brown.edu/academics/science-and-technology-studies/framework-making-ethical-decisions

https://www.scu.edu/ethics/ethics-resources/ethical-decision-making/a-framework-for-ethical-decision-making/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uvmz5E75ZIA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W_Q8cNzjTv0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sLfJ7oNBarc

https://ethicalrealism.wordpress.com/2011/05/11/moral-issues-facing-employees/

https://learn.umuc.edu/content/enforced/275522-001154-01-2185-OL1-6380/Exploring%20Business%20-%20Chapter%202%20(1).pdf?_&d2lSessionVal=c7k7XLwOWbhp52Wy8BGQfDIaf

Rubric Name: Ethical Dilemmas (20%)

Criteria 1	Above Average	Sufficient	Developing	Needs Improvement	Failure
Introduction	0.8 points Writes an introduction that captures the reader's attention, gives context to the paper, and builds to the thesis that defines the main points to be discussed in the paper. (0.68 - 0.80)	0.68 points Writes an introduction that provides context to the paper and presents the thesis statement that defines the main points to be discussed in the paper. (0.64 - 0.719)	0.6 points Writes an introduction that provides a general context to the paper or the thesis is vague or underdeveloped. (0.56 - 0.639)	0.52 points Attempts to write an introduction but has little to no context to the paper and the thesis is missing main points or no thesis statement provided. (0.48 - 0.559)	0 points No attempt at presenting an introduction. (0)
Criteria 2	Above Average	Sufficient	Developing	Needs Improvement	Failure
Ethical Dilemmas	3.2 points Correctly identifies and discusses the correct two business dilemmas presented in the case scenario. Facts relied upon are correct and logically presented with a thorough use of the course material to support sound reasoning and conclusions. (2.88 - 3.2)	2.72 points Correctly identifies and discusses the correct two business dilemmas presented in the case scenario. Facts relied upon and use of the course material show sound reasoning and conclusions but explanation need more detailed development. (2.56 - 2.88)	2.4 points Two business dilemmas are identified but one dilemma was incorrectly identified or minimal use of case study facts and course material to support the reasoning and conclusions; needed significant development. (2.24 - 2.55)	2.08 points Incorrectly identifies the two business dilemmas; does not rely on correct facts or little or no use of case scenario facts and class material. (1.92 - 2.239)	0 points Failed to address the two business dilemmas. (0 - 1.191)
Role the “Code of Conduct”	3.2 points Correctly explains the role of the Code of Conduct played in the dilemma selection process and took a position as to whether the Code of Conduct created either of the dilemmas thoroughly using the course material and the case scenario facts to support sound reasoning and conclusions. (2.88 - 3.2)	2.72 points Correctly explains the role of the Code of Conduct played in the dilemma selection process and took a position as to whether the Code of Conduct created either of the dilemmas using the course material and the case scenario facts to support sound reasoning and conclusions but needs more detailed development. (2.56 - 2.88)	2.4 points The role of the Code of Conduct played in the dilemma selection process and the position taken as to whether the Code of Conduct created either of the dilemmas were explained incorrectly or minimal course material and case scenario facts were used or weak reasoning and conclusions were used; needed significant development. (2.24 - 2.55)	2.08 points The role of the Code of Conduct played in the dilemma selection process and the position taken as to whether the Code of Conduct created either of the dilemmas were explained incorrectly or used minimal course material to support the reasoning and conclusions; provided weak reasoning; the role of the Code of Conduct or the position taken was not discussed. (1.92 - 2.239)	0 points Failed to address the role of the Code of Conduct played in the dilemma selection process and the position taken as to whether the Code of Conduct created either of the dilemmas. (0 - 1.191)
Ethical Issue/Dilemma Category	3.2 points Correctly identifies and discusses the two common ethical issue/dilemma categories to which each of the business dilemmas belong thoroughly using the course material and case scenario facts to support logical reasoning and conclusions. (2.88 - 3.2)	2.72 points Correctly identifies and discusses the two common ethical issue/dilemma categories to which each of the business dilemmas belong using the course material and case scenario facts to support sound reasoning and conclusions but explanation needs more detailed development. (2.56 - 2.88)	2.4 points Accurately identifies and discusses the two common ethical issue/dilemma categories to which each of the business dilemmas belong with minimal/weak use of case study facts and course material to support the reasoning and conclusions; needed significant development. (2.24 - 2.55)	2.08 points Two ethical issue/dilemma categories are identified and discussed but one or both categories incorrectly identified or minimal use of case study facts and course material to support the reasoning and conclusions; weak reasoning and conclusions; one ethical issue/dilemma identified and discussed; (1.92 - 2.239)	0 points Fails to identify or discuss the ethical issue/dilemma categories. (0 - 1.191)
Criteria 3	Above Average	Sufficient	Developing	Needs improvement	Failure
State dilemmas and apply to theorists	3.6 points States each dilemma in question form and applies the ethical theories of Rand, Kant and Bentham correctly answering how each theorist would solve the dilemmas logically explaining with a thorough use of the course material, case scenario facts and independent research as support. (3.24 - 3.6)	3.06 points States each dilemma in question form and applies the ethical theories of Rand, Kant and Bentham correctly answering how each theorist would solve the dilemmas using sound reasoning and conclusions supported by the course material/research and case scenario facts, but needs more detailed development. (2.88 - 2.23)	2.7 points Attempts to state each dilemma in question form and applies the ethical theories of Rand, Kant and Bentham answering how each theorist would solve the dilemmas with minimal use of the course material/research and case scenario facts as support; needs significant development. (2.52 - 2.87)	2.34 points Attempts to state each dilemma in question form and applies the ethical theories of Rand, Kant and Bentham answering how each theorist would solve the dilemmas with little to no reasoning; only partially answered or did not support using the course material, independent research or case scenario facts; application of theories are incomplete. (2.16 - 2.51)	0 points Fails to state each dilemma nor apply ethical theories. (0)
Criteria 4	Above Average	Sufficient	Developing	Needs Improvement	Failure
Compare results and select one theorist who would best solve dilemmas.	1 point Compares the results and selects one theorist for each dilemma who would best solve the dilemma, concluded with a thorough use of case scenario facts, class material and personal ethical values that influenced decision process. (0.9 -1.0)	0.85 points Compares the results and selects one theorist for each dilemma who would best solve the dilemma, concluded with a sound use of case scenario facts, class material and personal ethical values that influenced decision process. (0.8 - 0.89)	0.75 points Compares the results and selects one theorist for each dilemma who would best solve the dilemma, concluded with some reasoning and minimal use of case scenario facts, class material, and personal ethical values. (0.7 - 0.79)	0.65 points Compares the results and selects one theorist for each dilemma who would best solve the dilemma with little reasoning and little or no use of class material, facts from the case scenario, and personal ethical values, failed to address both dilemmas. (0.6 - 0.69)	0 points Fails to compare the results or does not select at least one theorist. (0)
Criteria 5	Above Average	Sufficient	Developing	Needs Improvement	Failure
Attention to Instructions	2 points The paper contains all major assignment tasks. The paper also includes completion of all minor aspects of the assignment such as third person writing, required use of course readings, outside sources if needed, and assignment format. (1.8 - 2.0)	1.7 points The paper contains all major assignment tasks. The paper missed one minor aspects of the assignment such as third person writing, required use of course readings, outside sources if needed, and assignment format. (1.6 - 1.79)	1.5 points One major assignment tasks or two minor aspects of the assignment missed. (1.4 - 1.59)	1.3 points Two major assignment tasks and/or three or more minor aspects of the assignments missed. (1.2 - 1.39)	0 points Three or more major assignment tasks missed. (0 - 1.19)
Criteria 6	Above Average	Sufficient	Developing	Needs Improvement	Failure
Writing Mechanics	2 points Strictly adheres to standard usage rules of written English using paragraphs and sentence rather than bullets, including but not limited to capitalization, punctuation, run-on sentences, missing or extra words, stylistic errors, spelling and grammatical errors. No contractions or jargon used. Zero to two errors noted. (1.8 - 2.0)	1.7 points Excellently adheres to standard usage of mechanics: conventions of written English, including capitalization, punctuation, and spelling. Three to six errors noted. (1.6 - 1.79)	1.5 points Satisfactorily adheres to standard usage rules of mechanics: conventions of English, including capitalization, punctuation, and spelling. Seven to 10 errors noted. (1.05 - 1.19)	1.3 points Minimally adheres to standard usage rules of mechanics: conventions of written English, including capitalization, punctuation, and spelling. More than 10 errors found. (1.4 - 1.59)	0 points Does not adhere to standard usage rules of mechanics: conventions of written English largely incomprehensible; or errors are too plentiful to count. (0 - 1.39)
Criteria 7	Above Average	Sufficient	Developing	Needs Improvement	Failure
Adherence to APA (6th ed.)	1 point One to 2 APA style or usage errors; Proper citation of source material is used throughout paper; Reference titles follow APA with only the first word, the first word after a colon and proper nouns capitalized. (0.9 - 1.0)	0.85 points Attempts in-text citations and reference list but 3 - 4 APA style errors noted or fails to use APA citations when appropriate 1-2 times. (0.8 - 0.89)	0.75 points Attempts in-text citations and reference lists; APA style errors are noted throughout document with 5-6 errors noted; Fails to use APA citations when appropriate 3 - 4 times in document. (0.7 - 0.79)	0.65 points Attempts in-text citations and reference lists; Fails to use APA citation when appropriate 5-6 times; Fails to use APA citations when appropriate 5-6 times in document or presents a total of 1-2 in-text citations and reference list in a paper when requires APA citations are needed throughout the document. (0.6 - 0.69)	0 points No attempt at APA style; or attempts either in-text citations or reference list but omits the other. (0 - 0.59)