EDU 689 EDU689 Week 3 DQ 2 Case Study Ethic of Care (Ashford)

EDU 689 EDU689 Week 3 DQ 2 Case Study Ethic of Care (Ashford)

soffix

  • $4.99


Ashford EDU 689 Week 3 Discussion 2 Case Study Ethic of Care

Case Study Analysis-Ethic of Care [CLOs: 1, 2, 4, 5]. 1st Post Due by Day 3. As with prior weeks, we again debate a case study from various stakeholder perspectives. To prepare for this discussion, read the Case Study 9.2: Whose Best Interests? A Testing Dilemma (Poliner Shapiro, & Stefkovich, 2011, p. 143-146). Next, review the initial post and guided response instructions making sure you respond from your assigned stakeholder’s perspective. One approach to this discussion is to create your viewpoint with consideration of the Questions for Discussion presented in the text following the case study. 

Initial Post: Create your initial post writing from your assigned stakeholder’s perspective. Discuss the case from the viewpoint of your stakeholder considering the dilemma presented and making sure you have taken a clearly articulated ethical stance on the case’s dilemma and including any legal considerations involved. If you are assigned the leader’s perspective, be sure to include a suggested decision for the outcome of the case.

Determine your stakeholder role assignment as follows:
 If your last name begins with letters A-I, write from the perspective of Dr. Carl Horne (district

superintendent).
 If your last name begins with letters J-Q, write from the perspective of Alicia Weston (English

department chair).
 If your last name begins with letters R-Z, write from the perspective of Charlie Franken (leader), high

school principal.

Guided Response: Respond to at least two peers. In responses, be sure to assert your viewpoint through the voice of your assigned stakeholder. Because this discussion is essentially a debate among stakeholder perspectives, replying to peers with a different assigned stakeholder perspective is advised, yet you may find you disagree with a peer who has the same assigned stakeholder as you. As you reply to peers, consider whether you agree with their ethical stance on the case’s dilemma and the legal considerations your peer named as evident in this case. The overarching goal of this discussion is to explore the various possible perspectives about the dilemma in the case in relation to the course topics of ethics and leadership. Though two responses is the basic expectation, for deeper engagement and learning, you are encouraged to provide responses to any comments or questions others have given to you, including the instructor, to further the conversation while giving you opportunities to further demonstrate your content expertise, critical thinking, and real world experiences with the topic. 


We Also Recommend


Sale

Unavailable

Sold Out