Analyzing Ethical Dilemmas Framework Archives

Analyzing Ethical Dilemmas Framework

(Analyzing Ethical Dilemmas Framework)

Question description

This paper is not only an analysis of an ethical dilemma, but an analysis of the framework to be used to analyze the dilemma.

The APA requirements for this paper include a title page (no abstract please), running head, citations and reference page. The total number of pages should range between 5-8.

More details for the ethical dilemma selection can be found under the Outline with References Assignment.(i will attach this as well)

I will also attach the outline paper with comments, the grading rubric with feedback on it and maybe any other helpful resource and please refer to all the attachments before or while doing the paper and follow all instructions.I can’t download rubric so will copy and paste here.Thanks

NAME: OUTLINE RUBRIC

	Failing	C	B	A
Purpose Statement	Points Range:0 (0%) – 15.2 (15.2%) Hard to understand or not written. Does not refer to policy change. More than one sentence to focus the purpose of the paper.	Points Range:15.4 (15.4%) – 15.8 (15.8%) Statement written in general, vague terms without engaging reader.	Points Range:16 (16%) – 17.8 (17.8%) One sentence used to describe paper without engaging reader.	Points:19 (19%) Points Range:18 (18%) – 20 (20%) Clearly defined in one sentence that is not: too broad or narrow. Challenging and Interesting –Makes reader want to read more. Grounded on facts. Feedback:I do want to read more.
Outline	Points Range:0 (0%) – 38 (38%) No outline at all or all unrelated Outline structure not used. Rules for outlines not followed. Questions from guidelines not addressed.	Points Range:38.5 (38.5%) – 39.5 (39.5%) Outline structure not used (paragraphs & bullets used instead), but points clear with answers supported.	Points:41.5 (41.5%) Points Range:40 (40%) – 44.5 (44.5%) Outline structure inconsistently used. The guideline questions are not fully addressed in the points or sub-points. Many points too broad. Feedback:While I did not put it in the initial feedback, as I forgot, I did think you might find the criteria on your own by reviewing the rubric which also includes the need to address whether or not the issue is moral vs. ethical- isn’t this the component you did for week 4? I also want to make sure you’re not just discussing the framework steps, but also applying details of the issue to the framework.	Points Range:45 (45%) – 50 (50%) Uses appropriate outline structure. Clear distinction: points & support. Answers to guideline questions not too broad or narrow.
References	Points Range:0 (0%) – 15.2 (15.2%) No references at all. Inappropriate references. Text books only.	Points Range:15.4 (15.4%) – 15.8 (15.8%) Websites and course material only and/or Sources over 5 years old.	Points Range:16 (16%) – 17.8 (17.8%) Not enough references from literature (valid sources). Sources over 5 years old. APA format of References inconsistent.	Points:19 (19%) Points Range:18 (18%) – 20 (20%) 3 additional references besides course material provided. Uses APA format • Word References is centered • Source entries left aligned • alphabet order by author last name Feedback:Is there a source for the Pause decision making framework?
Grammar & Language Use	Points Range:0 (0%) – 3.8 (3.8%) Serious errors, lack of clarity, and inappropriate usage Errors distract from message.	Points Range:3.85 (3.85%) – 3.95 (3.95%) Many errors, inappropriate usage, or meaning is unclear at times	Points Range:4 (4%) – 4.45 (4.45%) Mostly accurate, clear, and appropriate and meaning is clear	Points:4.75 (4.75%) Points Range:4.5 (4.5%) – 5 (5%) Grammar, thoughts, & vocabulary are accurate, clear, and appropriate for semi‐formal writing
Mechanics & Format	Points Range:0 (0%) – 3.8 (3.8%) Serious errors with mechanics Serious errors with format Work done, but not following directions.	Points Range:3.85 (3.85%) – 3.95 (3.95%) Many errors with mechanics Many errors with format	Points Range:4 (4%) – 4.45 (4.45%) Mostly correct mechanics Mostly correct format	Points:4.75 (4.75%) Points Range:4.5 (4.5%) – 5 (5%) 1” margins x 4, Indentations as appropriate, 12 point font, Double spaced whole document, Times New Roman Font, Left aligned as designated by APA. Feedback:Left- aligned- not justified.

Failing

Purpose Statement

Points Range:0 (0%) – 15.2 (15.2%)

Hard to understand or not written. Does not refer to policy change. More than one sentence to focus the purpose of the paper.

Points Range:15.4 (15.4%) – 15.8 (15.8%)

Statement written in general, vague terms without engaging reader.

Points Range:16 (16%) – 17.8 (17.8%)

One sentence used to describe paper without engaging reader.

Points:19 (19%)

Points Range:18 (18%) – 20 (20%)

Clearly defined in one sentence that is not: too broad or narrow. Challenging and Interesting –Makes reader want to read more. Grounded on facts.

Feedback:I do want to read more.

Outline

Points Range:0 (0%) – 38 (38%)

No outline at all or all unrelated Outline structure not used. Rules for outlines not followed. Questions from guidelines not addressed.

Points Range:38.5 (38.5%) – 39.5 (39.5%)

Outline structure not used (paragraphs & bullets used instead), but points clear with answers supported.

Points:41.5 (41.5%)

Points Range:40 (40%) – 44.5 (44.5%)

Outline structure inconsistently used. The guideline questions are not fully addressed in the points or sub-points. Many points too broad.

Feedback:While I did not put it in the initial feedback, as I forgot, I did think you might find the criteria on your own by reviewing the rubric which also includes the need to address whether or not the issue is moral vs. ethical- isn’t this the component you did for week 4? I also want to make sure you’re not just discussing the framework steps, but also applying details of the issue to the framework.

Points Range:45 (45%) – 50 (50%)

Uses appropriate outline structure. Clear distinction: points & support. Answers to guideline questions not too broad or narrow.

References

Points Range:0 (0%) – 15.2 (15.2%)

No references at all. Inappropriate references. Text books only.

Points Range:15.4 (15.4%) – 15.8 (15.8%)

Websites and course material only and/or Sources over 5 years old.

Points Range:16 (16%) – 17.8 (17.8%)

Not enough references from literature (valid sources). Sources over 5 years old. APA format of References inconsistent.

Points:19 (19%)

Points Range:18 (18%) – 20 (20%)

3 additional references besides course material provided. Uses APA format • Word References is centered • Source entries left aligned • alphabet order by author last name

Feedback:Is there a source for the Pause decision making framework?

Grammar & Language Use

Points Range:0 (0%) – 3.8 (3.8%)

Serious errors, lack of clarity, and inappropriate usage Errors distract from message.

Points Range:3.85 (3.85%) – 3.95 (3.95%)

Many errors, inappropriate usage, or meaning is unclear at times

Points Range:4 (4%) – 4.45 (4.45%)

Mostly accurate, clear, and appropriate and meaning is clear

Points:4.75 (4.75%)

Points Range:4.5 (4.5%) – 5 (5%)

Grammar, thoughts, & vocabulary are accurate, clear, and appropriate for semi‐formal writing

Mechanics & Format

Points Range:0 (0%) – 3.8 (3.8%)

Serious errors with mechanics Serious errors with format Work done, but not following directions.

Points Range:3.85 (3.85%) – 3.95 (3.95%)

Many errors with mechanics Many errors with format

Points Range:4 (4%) – 4.45 (4.45%)

Mostly correct mechanics Mostly correct format

Points:4.75 (4.75%)

Points Range:4.5 (4.5%) – 5 (5%)

1” margins x 4, Indentations as appropriate, 12 point font, Double spaced whole document, Times New Roman Font, Left aligned as designated by APA.

Feedback:Left- aligned- not justified.

Posts