Send the link below via email or IMCopy
Present to your audienceStart remote presentation
- Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
- People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
- This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
- A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
- Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article
The Ethics of Teaching (1&2)
Transcript of The Ethics of Teaching (1&2)
"Ethical thinking & decision making are not just following the rules."
Cynthia Allen , Henry & Plagiarism (p.1)
The Code of Ethics Implies:
*Teachers should act toward students with the students welfare first.
*Teachers should act honestly & with integrity in professional matters.
What was this scenario?
Two Types of Ethical Thinking....
If Cynthia does not fail Henry and report him because she feels the punishment is too great, she would be paying more attention to her thinking to the consequences of her actions than her obligation to the rules.
If she takes her personal sense of honesty and her professional obligation to maintain the academic code of her school fairly to all, because her her duty, obligation & principle are more important than the consequences.
Try to imagine being Henry???
We will be exploring ethical problems in teaching that center around punishment, intellectual freedom & equality in the treatment of students...
The Code of Ethics of the NEA contains the following statement:
"The educator...shall not deliberately suppress or distort subject matter relevant to the student's progress." (p.5)
This is an ethical statement...why?
Facts tell us something about the world...
Ethical claims state how something should be...
prescribe, NOT describe
What about "moral judgements?"
"what we ought to do and what we ought NOT to do" (p.6)
"statements of obligation"
Ms. Jones, Johnny & Mr. Pugnacious (p.9)
*What was the scenario?
*How did Ms. Jones react?
*How would you have handled it?
Is it acting to avoid bad consequences or produce good ones that makes an action right?
Is it always wrong to lie?
what about for a good cause?
The Ms. Jones scenario helps us understand the "
Principle of Benefit Maximization
What is this?
"Central doctrine is that social policy ought to be determined by what produces the greatest good for the greatest number...
BUT..its also requires, "that all of the consequences for everyone’s well-being be taken into account." (pg.12)
"Utilitarianism is used to "quantify" answers, NOT just answer them." (p.13)
Does the idea of utilitarianism have merit? (torturing example, p.13)
Let's take a look at some additional scenarios....
"Truth or Consequences"...Bayview High School
"The Electrician"...East Fork High School
Punishment & Due Process
What happened with Mr. Fuse? (p.24)
What's the Dispute?
Let's look at the other cases.....
A Graduating Senior (P.33)
Bang! Zero Tolerance (p. 35)
Take out your smart devices:)
Why are people confused about what "ethics" really are?
What is the difference between and ethical claim and an appraisal/preference?
Open To Page 6...
Ask yourself if you would be willing to treat some action that you take to be unquestionably evil as a simple difference of taste. We believe that murdering innocent children and putting poison into medicine bottles is wrong. Is that simply an arbitrary assumption on our part, or is it really wrong? Can we know it is wrong? Or are we to conclude that the difference between the Hitlers of the world and decent people is merely that they have different preferences? (p.8)
The general idea of due process is that people are entitled to procedures that ensure that decisions made about them are not arbitrary or capricious. Decisions are made arbitrarily when they are made without evidence. (pg.27)