M1 Pre-Task: The Trolley Problem

The Trolley Problem (Youtube)

Would you sacrifice one person to save five? - Eleanor Nelsen

1. Is sacrificing one life to save the lives of many the best possible ethical outcome?
Why or why not?
 Sacrificing one life to save the lives of many is not the best possible ethical
outcome because the innocent person has nothing to do to the situation that
will happen to those people in the scene. I will not put an innocent person’s life
at danger just to save the life of the people who are in a situation like in the
video.
2. Based on the video itself, what is the "means" (or tool) in arriving what "end" (or
outcome)?
 Based on the video itself, the means or tool is the lever to be pulled by the
person who is in front of it and it is arriving to the end of either not pulling it and
let the 5 person die who are in the trail where the train leads to and not
dragging an innocent person on the situation or pulling it and sacrificing an
innocent life to save people in the trail where the train is intended to run to.
3. Does the video show "the means justify the end" or "the end justifies the means"?
Provide an explanation.
 The video shows “the end justifies the means” because whether we decide on
pulling the lever or not, there will be consequences resulting our decision. By
seeing the result in the end will give you more realizations about why you did
or did not pull the lever. Either deciding to what means, it will always have a
consequence and that consequence will provide reasons why you decided on
pulling the lever or not.
M1 Lesson 1: Intro to Ethics | While task 1
Questions:
1. Are there particular instances where you have experienced prioritizing your own
ethical or moral code over obedience to rules?
 There are particular instances that I have experienced that I have to prioritize
my own ethical or moral code over obedience to rules. There’s this instance
that in our school we have a rule that we are not allowed to have colored hair
for everyone and long hair for the men and I have a colored hair that catches
the attention of our department head. I questioned myself on how a hair color
will affect my studies or the school and as I’ve thought of it, I realize that there
is no relation that it will affect my studies and my school because that is just
my hair and it is my decision on what will I do with it. Also, in our community in
the province parents always advice their children not to wear shorts when
 going out to prevent them of being catcalled. My mom always reminds me that
up until now and it is like our “rule” in our house but as I grow older I realize
that there is nothing wrong with wearing shorts or anything a woman or man
prefer, it is the society that is wrong because they are reciprocating the
situation rather that correcting disrespectful people judging a person by the
way he/she looks.
2. Is there any rule enforced by your school, your parents, your local government,
or by the country that does not follow your personal moral code?
 Yes, there are rules by my school and my parents that do not follow my
personal moral code. These rules are not wearing shorts (rules by my
parents), not having any hair color rather than black and not wearing makeup
(rules by my school).

M1 Post-task: Decision-making
In this graded formative assessment, you are asked to decide what you will be doing
given the following scenarios.
A. A day before the wedding of your friend, you discovered that your friend’s spouse-to-
be is having an affair with an officemate.  You caught them sneaking out of a hotel
together.  What will you do?
 I will casually mention to my friend that I saw her spouse-to-be and his
officemate leaving a hotel but I will not jump into the conclusion they are
having an affair, I will let them sort if there’s a problem and I am just stating the
truth that I’ve witnessed.
B. You are an eyewitness to a robbery. A man robbed a rich woman for him to pay for
his son’s crucial operation. You know who committed the crime. What will you do? 
 I will call the police and tell them what is happening. I will also mention to the
officials what is the reason why he did rob the rich woman and ask for their
help for his son’s operation while giving him a lesson in the police station.
Answer in no more than 50 words.
M2 L1: What is Culture? | While task 1
In this formative assessment, you are asked to define and provide examples of
material and non-material culture, as well as subcultures and counter cultures.
Please summarize and paraphrase your answers before submitting them. There will
be consequences for any and all types of plagiarism committed here.

1. Material culture
Definition: Material culture consists of concrete and tangible objects that we can see
physically and are man-made. It is concerned with the external, mechanical, and
physical objects used by the people in their everyday living.
Examples: food, clothing, architecture, tools, devices, vehicles, artifacts
2. Non-material culture
Definition: Non-material culture consists of intangible, abstract, and non-physical
aspects of a culture. It refers to the internal and reflects the inward nature of a man.
Examples: norms, customs, tradition, habits, manners, attitude, beliefs, language,
literature, law, religion
3. Sub-cultures
Definition: Sub-culture is referred to cultural patterns that set apart a segment of a
society’s population. Sub-culture exists within the larger culture. It is a group of people
with cultural patterns (values, norms, artifacts) that distinguish them from the dominant
culture. They do things a little bit different than the mainstream culture. They arrive out
of shared backgrounds and activities. The values and norms of sub-cultures do not
challenge those of the dominant culture.
Examples: college students with different organizations within their university, different
tribes in the Philippines (Badjao, Tagbanwa, Aeta, Lumad, and many more)
4. Counter-cultures
Definition: Counter-culture exists outside of mainstream culture. But, counter-culture
differs in values because they directly oppose those of dominant culture. The values
and beliefs in counter-culture are very much in conflict with the mainstream culture.
Examples: New People’s Army

M2 L2: Valuing Culture | While task 2

In this formative assessment, you are asked to read the article “Body Ritual among the
Nacirema” by Horace Miner published on American Anthropologist, 1956, 58(3), 503-
507.
 Afterwards, answer the following questions in the discussion:
1. According to Miner, what functional beliefs underlie Nacirema body rituals?
 According to Miner, the functional beliefs underlie Narcinema body rituals are
that the whole system appears to show that the human body is ugly and its
only purpose is to have disease and be weak. They also believe that if the
body is diseased and weakened, it is only cured by the said rituals and
ceremonies done by the variety of specialized practitioners through magic and
by having many shrines built in their houses.
2. Why is it useful to study Nacirema beliefs?
 It is useful to study Narcinema beliefs as it opens our eyes that there are
cultures like this that exists in our world. As we acknowledge Narcinema
beliefs, we are able to understand their own perspective and not judge their
way of living in order to avoid misunderstanding and false judgements when
we encounter people who have this beliefs.
3. What is the basic focus of Nacirema society? Do you agree with these beliefs?
Why?
 The basic focus of Nacirema society is about how magic rituals and
ceremonies control their lives. Their body is their indication of how good or bad
their way of living is and when their body is not in the good state, they should
undergo rituals or ceremonies of healing it by the use of magic. I don’t agree
with these beliefs because it is not right to do things by their ways and it has a
big difference on what I believe in. As in my culture we believe that our body is
sacred and our basis for being right or wrong is the law and that is my basis
because that is where I belong but I have nothing against Nacirema society
because they also have their own basis because they have their own beliefs
and it is just my opinion why I don’t agree with their beliefs and not judging
them personally as a person.
4. Describe the Nacirema shrine. Do we have anything like this in our culture?
 Nacirema shrine is where they held their rituals and ceremony at the comfort
of their houses. It is a place built that most houses of the believers has that
and it is made with stone in the walls for the wealthy families but poorer
families only imitates the rich by making their shrine and building it with pottery
plaques. The focal point of the Nacirema shrine is the box or chest which is
built into the wall that is use to keep many charms and magical potions. We
don’t have anything like this in our culture. We don’t have shrine built inside
our home with charms and magic potions. But, in our culture have small altar
 with miniature statue of the saints and a cross that we make prayers to and we
are going to church for our own spiritual ceremonies.
5. Describe the job of the holy mouth man. Why do you think the Naciremas visit
him?
 The “holy-mouth-man” is the one that ordinate’s the mouth rite, this practitioner
have a set of paraphernalia like augers, awls, probes, and prods and these are
used for the exorcism of the evils of the mouth as they say. These
paraphernalia are used by the holy-mouth-man to enlarge any holes caused
by decay in the teeth of the client then magical materials are being put into
these holes. If there is no naturally occurring hole in the teeth, they are the
ones who will create holes on large sections of one or more teeth in order for
the supernatural substance can be applied. The Naciremas visit him because
they consider this ritual extremely sacred and traditional and has a purpose to
arrest decay and to draw friends even though it continues to decay their teeth.
6. What are your general feelings about the Nacirema civilization? Would you like to
live in this society?
 I was shocked to know that a civilization like Nacirema exists in our world
because it very different and unique in comparison to what civilization I belong
to. But, I have the outmost respect for the people who have their beliefs and
have nothing against them personally because it is their culture and I have no
right to judge because we are raised differently and we all have different
culture we believe as we grow up. As I’ve read almost everything about them, I
personally wouldn’t like to live in their society because I am well-off on my own
culture now in the society I live in because we have the freedom whether what
to decide about ourselves as long as it is right and without hurting other
people’s feelings and our rituals and ceremonies are simple and it is not
compulsory to do as long as we have faith to what we believe in.
7. How much of the world do you know?
 As I think of how much of the world do I know, I realize that I have limited
knowledge about the world because I am mainly focusing on my own culture
as it is what I have since I was born up until now. I might have heard about
other culture but it is just for educational purposes like the Naciremas but I
know there is still more to discover not just about them but to other living
cultures in the world and it interest me to discover more because I will be
enlightened about other beliefs that are existing in our world.
M2 L2: Valuing Culture | While task 3
In this graded formative assessment, you are asked to watch the video below and list
down the speaker’s suggestions in practicing cultural relativism.

1. Don’t assume bad intent.

Assuming immediately that a person will cause harm can cut off a
potentially good relationship in the future. Everyone’s opinion is valid because we
are experiencing different things and it does not mean wrong if a person’s
perspective doesn’t match with our own perspective. Assuming something
instantly will just cut off our chance to understand why someone does and
believes as they do. We tend to forget that they are just like us, filled with good
and bad experiences that shaped us for who we are and we get stuck on the
thought of assuming things ahead of us. We should also let the person express
his/her own self as the conversation grow in order to get to know what is the true
intent of each another.
2. Ask questions
As we grow up, we can encounter people from different culture and by
being curious and interested is the first step of hearing their own stories. We
should engage and ask questions we can connect the dots and realize our
differences make sense because we are raised from different perspective in life.
We get information from each other that we can use when starting to compare
and pin point each other’s flaws in our belief that will lead to enlightenment of one
another. Also, asking questions signals the other that we are interested on
hearing their story because it gives the opportunity to speak their mind and give
their story for someone to like and look on it in order for them to be understood
also which will have a good impact on their relationship.
3. Stay calm
Being calm is also a powerful thing to do when practicing cultural
relativism because we tend to make room for more ideas and we speak words
that have more sense. There is a chance to have a heated argument with
someone who is not the same culture as you have but when you are calmed
down, we can make more room for understanding and listening to the person we
are in conversation with. We can avoid being harsh to someone if we are calm
and we could share jokes or other topic to make the conversation lighter in order
for the both of you to speak truthfully without any grudge to each other.
4. Make the argument
By having such conversation towards a person with different culture as
you have, the both of you will obviously have arguments pointed to each other
and creating an argument will enlighten the other one about the other’s culture.
We can’t expect to someone to change their mind instantly and also believe what
 we believe but all we need is to understand each other in order to build a good
relationship. We should point our arguments with respect towards the other
person to be able to maintain the mood of calmness and be able to absorb each
other’s thoughts.

M3 Lesson 1: Reason and Impartiality | While task 1

Students whose first names begin with the letters A, D, G, J, M, P, S, V, Y must present
an argument on the ethics of the case assigned based on the benefits to be acquired.

Using the questions in the cases (linked above), present arguments based on the perspectives
assigned below:

WITH RUBRICS!!!!!

The Case of George: DNR for an Adult with Down Syndrome

CASE STUDY: WHAT SHOULD WE DO?

BIOETHICS FORUM, SUMMER 1999
BY ROSEMARY FLANIGAN

George is a twenty-three-year-old young man with Down's syndrome.

Until three years ago, he lived at home with his parents and had a part-time job washing dishes
at a restaurant. When George turned twenty, he and his parents decided that living in a group
home would be a good experience for him and he entered into his new life enthusiastically.
George and his parents have a good relationship and they have always encouraged him to be
prudently independent. George has often brought his good friend, Stan, home for supper. They
both live at the home for developmentally disabled young men, and his parents are happy that
he has found a friend.

But one Saturday, George and Stan were waiting for a bus and in the course of some horseplay,
Stan accidentally pushed George too hard and he fell in front of the bus. He suffers from severe
brain injury, has no swallowing reflex and has had a feeding tube placed. A year has passed. The
parents visit George each day at the rehabilitation hospital but he has shown no signs of
consciousness. Stan is devastated by George's condition and the parents permit him to visit
once a week, although the young man would prefer to be there every day.

The doctor has requested a Do Not Resuscitate Order for George and the parents have signed it
although they are not legally declared his guardians. But now they are talking to the doctor
about removing the feeding tube. It is not instrumental in restoring him to any quality of life
and they realize that it would be better that George simply be allowed to die.

George and his parents live in a state that requires "clear and convincing evidence" for
withholding/withdrawing nutrition and hydration, and they are feeling hard pressed to provide
 such evidence. They have not talked with George about dying; in the beginning, it was not
relevant; now they wish they had helped him make his advance directive. Even if they have
themselves declared his guardian they live in a state that does not permit guardians to withhold
or withdraw life-sustaining treatment.

They ask you for advice.

Questions

 The conflict in this case is between law and ethics. Address first what is the ethical thing
to do here.

The ethical to do here is to sign the Do Not Resuscitate order for George because in that way he
will not suffer anymore. Even if I will face challenges as a parent that is not listed as the
guardian but I will only prioritize what benefits my child that is having a hard time for so long in
the hospital that’s why I will find a way to talk to the listed guardian, if there is. As a parent, I
will also talk to the guardian that is listed in the hospital because I only want to make my son
happy even if he is in that situation and let the guardian he listed as the one who will sign the
order for him to ease and end his suffering.

 Is it ethically appropriate to remove the feeding tube? What is your argument?

It is ethically appropriate to remove the feeding tube if the guardian that is listed will be the
one to sign it in the hospital allowing them to do it and if it is proven by the medical
professionals that the condition of George has zero chance of survival. On the other hand, if the
parents who are not listed as the guardian of George are the ones who will sign in the hospital
regarding the removal of the feeding tube then it is unethical and also if the doctor proves that
there is a chance for George to survive then it really unethically appropriate. I looked into the
possibility that George can still survive his current condition that’s why it should first be proven
by the medical professionals before giving them the option to remove the feeding tube because
what if George can still survive but then they remove the feeding tube and the possibility of
survival will lessen and George’s possibility of dying will increase because of the removal of the
feeding tube.

 Should the parents ask Stan and the other boys at the group home if George has ever
expressed an opinion on the subject of end-of-life?

Yes, the parents should ask them because they are the people who are with George most of the
time and they might have talked about the subject of end-of-life with George. If Stan and the
other boys have an important statement about the subject that George had talked before then
it will be a big help for the parents to know what would benefit George based on his statement
when he talked to Stan and the boys.
 Is the ideal here that the parents use a substituted judgment or a best interest
judgment?

(Substituted judgment is one in which the surrogate or proxy decision maker can speak the
judgments previously articulated by the patient; best interest judgment is one in which decision
makers do not know the patient's wishes but choose to do what reasonable people would
decide under like circumstance or in similar positions.)

 If the parents got an idea once they talked to Stan and the boys that is mostly with George
before the accident about what would George decide if he is in the situation on end-of-life then
it is ideal that the parents should use a substituted judgment because they have an idea about
what George wants for himself. On the other hand, if the parents have no idea of what George
wants, then they should look into the different side of the situation for example, the possibility
of George to survive and to die and what is the best to do when they knew the possibilities.
When they investigated by the help of the doctors then it would be the best if they decide
based on their research on George’s situation because they would know what would benefit
George once they knew the possibility of surviving and dying.

 Distinguish between competency and decisional capacity. Even if George has been
declared incompetent, could he still have decisional capacity to make out an advance directive?

 He can’t make out an advance directive verbally because his brain injury might affect his way of
speaking but the people around him should look into his vital signs and current condition as it
can be an advance directive because it shows his capacity of surviving. By looking in to his vital
signs and possible improvements, it could be an advance directive that George still wants to get
better and he still can but, if his signs shows no difference and improvements, that’s when
people decide what to do base on that sign as a advance directive from George.

 What kind of ethical reasoning are you using-virtue, principles, consequences?

The ethical reasoning that I used is by consequences because I am looking into character’s
benefits to be acquired once the people around him will decide whether to sign the order or
not and whether to remove the feeding tube or not. I also considered the possibilities of
George’s survival and what George’s wants if he talked about the subject of end-of-life with his
friends before deciding what advice I should give to his parents. I also looked into his situation
that is very obvious about him close to dying because there are no sign of improvements in his
one year of being comatose that’s why giving him the benefit of not suffering anymore based
on his situation is what I keep in mind by making an ethical reasoning by thinking about
consequences if I let him stay that way or not.

 If the Disabled Advisory Group for Brain Injury protests your position, can you defend it?
Yes, I can defend it because I will not stand my position if I didn’t go on thorough investigation
about George’s case. I am able to look into the different sides of the situation and not stick on
one side only because I know that they are different things to consider when I looked into
different sides. As I provide my position about the situation, I mainly considered the benefits
that George should get on his situation because it must be very hard for him to deal with his
severe injury and being comatose for so long without any improvements.

M3 Lesson 3: The logical and the axiological individual | While task 2

In this graded formative assessment, you are asked to draw on a template of a

human body three versions of a character that embodies:
1. The logical individual;
2. The axiological individual; and
3. The logical and axiological individual.
 
Your drawings should be able to answer the following:
1. What is your character’s job/career?
2. What makes your character logical/axiological/both?
3. Where is this character usually found?
 
Note: These must be visible in the drawing itself, no need to attach an answer.
M3 Post-task: GIF-Hunting
In this formative assessment, you are asked to find a GIF from a movie or TV show of
your choice that shows one of the six stages of moral development. Embed this below,
and write a short explanation in 50 word s or less.

https://images.app.goo.gl/Eb7nbZLDmiKbEn7J8
Cady Heron, is a simple girl who grew up in Africa. She loved animals and nature but in
the GIF, she is all dressed up in an extremely girly way that is different from her true self
because this is what her new “friend” visualized her before joining the group.

M4 Lesson 1: Aristotle and Virtue Ethics | While task 1

In this graded formative assessment, you are asked to create a flowchart that
best summarizes the Aristotelian concepts described.

You may use online tools such as those available in the link below:
https://www.lucidchart.com (Links to an external site.)
Or you can make your own.

Everytime you make a choice it places a mark on your sould and it makes you what you
are.
Nobody makes them all perfect anybody who's determined to make them well every day
and having failed some that day start again in the morning those people become good
and will find out not only good also happy which is what we all want to be more than
anything else
Pleasures can be bad for you or they can be good for you it depends on your character
In Aristotle the being of a thing is just what it is now that makes it good by the way if it is
that thing it's good if it's a soil they're broken or damaged one or distorted one it's not a
good one anymore one made the very good point that he says that every action thought
and everything every voluntary thing we do seems to emit some good and then it has
been beautifully said that
every action aims at the good to say that all of them taken together aim it Z good and
then it's introduced a hierarchy of the goods
highest form of good-happiness
M4 Post-task: A discussion between Aristotle and Aquinas
In this graded formative assessment, you are asked to imagine a discussion
between Aristotle and Aquinas, comparing theories on virtue ethics and natural
law.
 
You may create free cartoons from the websites below:
https://www.pixton.com/ (Links to an external site.)
https://www.makebeliefscomix.com/ (Links to an external site.)
https://www.canva.com/create/comic-strips/ (Links to an external site.)
https://www.storyboardthat.com/comic-maker (Links to an external site.)
 
You may also use other computer programs or apps to do this activity, or you can
freehand draw your comic, take pictures/scan your work and upload that here.
M5 Lesson 1: Theories of Justice | While task 1
In this graded formative assessment, you are asked to read and understand the
given situations and decide on a proper action based on the theories on justice
previously discussed. Use the example also provided below as your guide.
 

Situation A:
During a rally, Nicki was arrested for anti-government sentiments. She was thrown inside a
small cell in a secluded area. That night, they tortured her for information and forced her to
admit to being involved in a plot to rebel against the current government. After a few hours, a
man exclaimed: “She’s guilty of terrorist acts, sedition, and possession of dangerous drugs!”,
took her outside and shot her dead. Were the men’s actions justified?
 If Plato is the one to decide if the actions of the men are justified, his view of justice is
“the whole duty of man and not merely his legal duties”. Therefore, Plato’s view is the
men’s actions are not justified because their whole duty is to enforce the safety of the
place but not to arrest and harass people during the rally where they are just defending
their human rights but then it is violated then and there when the rally is happening. It is
not the legal duty of the men to torture her to get information and force her to admit that
she is involved in a plot to rebel against the current government. Even though it is legal
for them to arrest people, their actions are not justified because it is not their legal duties
to harass, torture, and force people. However, to Thomas Hobbes’ view, ”People who
live in society come to a collective understanding to enforce rules in order to ensure the
safety and security of all.” The men’s actions are justified in Thomas Hobbes’ view
because they want to ensure the safety of the country and the current government
against the possible attack of the rebels that’s why they want to get information to Nicki
in order to protect the majority of the people to the possible war than may occur
between the rebels and the current government.

Situation B:
Alma was arrested for illegal possession of firearms for carrying an unlicensed .38 caliber gun.
Maria was arrested for the same charges for carrying an unlicensed bazooka, an automatic
rifle, and three hand grenades. Is it fair that Maria and Alma receive the same charges?
 In Aquinas’ view, it is fair that Maria and Alma will receive the same charges because
according to Aquinas, justice “denotes a sustained or constant willingness to extend to
each person what he or she deserves”. They both have a unlicensed firearms
regardless of how many it is but they both carried it without license that’s why it is fair for
them to have the same charges because it is what they both deserved for carrying
unlicensed firearms with them. On the other hand, it’s doesn’t agree with Aristotle’s view
of justice that is “equal treatment of individuals in proportion to their relevant
differences”. It is not fair that Maria and Alma receive the same charges because
according to Aristotle that the equal treatment should be in proportion to their relevant
 differences and Alma’s situation deserves less counts of charges because she only has
one firearm which is a .38 caliber gun compared to Maria that has three types of
deadlier firearms which are bazooka, automatic rifle, and three hand grenades that’s
why Maria deserve more counts of charges.

Situation C:
Debbie and her friends were fined by the barangay for attending a party to celebrate their
teacher’s 50th birthday while their area is still under enhanced community quarantine. Francis
and his friends also partied on the same night to celebrate the 50 th birthday of the chief of
police but were not fined. Francis claimed that the gathering was a short “mañanita” even
though they did the same activities that Debbie and her friends also did. Was the situation fair
for either party?
 In Aristotle’s view, the situation is not fair for either party especially to Debbie because
according to Aristotle’s view, justice demands “an equal treatment of individuals in
proportion to their relevant differences”. They both violated the law of the enhance
community quarantine but to the party of Francis, the birthday celebrant is a chief of
police that’s why they are not charged because they have someone high in power to
back them up; but in Debbie’s party, it is just a normal party with no high officials to back
them up for violating the rules that’s why it is unfair in Aristotle’s view because the
justice is not equally given because one has someone that uses his powers to not get
caught and the other is just a normal citizen that’s why they are caught. Also, it is also
the same with Aquinas’ view of justice that “denotes a sustained or constant willingness
to extend to each person what he or she deserves”. It is also unfair that the birthday
party that Francis attended was not charged of violating the rules of the enhanced
community quarantine compared to the birthday party that Debbie attended that consist
of normal citizen without the power of authority because of the Chief of Police is the
birthday celebrant and they have someone with the power to use once they are caught
violating but they also deserve to be charge because they also clearly violated the rules
as well regardless of the Chief of Police present in the party because the Chief of Police
must set an example of following the guidelines of the enhance community quarantine
and not to tolerate disobedience.

 
Example:
 
Baby is a massage therapist. She charges Php 2,000 per customer while her co-
worker Nilda charges Php 1,500 for the same service. Is it just that Nilda is paid a
lower amount than Baby? Would it be fair for Nilda to charge the same?
 
In Aquinas’ view, justice “denotes a sustained or constant willingness to extend
to each person what he or she deserve”. Therefore to Aquinas it would be fair for
 Nilda to charge the same as Baby; however, to Aristotle this would be unfair to
both Baby and the customers if Baby offers better services than Nilda because
justice according to Aristotle justice demands equal treatment “in proportion to
their relevant differences”.
Rubric
Case Study Rubrics

Case Study Rubrics

P
Criteria Ratings t
s

This 20.0  15.0  10.0  2

criterion pts pts pts 0
is linked Exc Mee Bel .
to a eed ts ow 0 
Learning s exp exp p
Outcome exp ect ect t
Analysis ect atio atio s
of the atio ns ns
issues ns Iden Iden
Iden tifie tifie
tifie s, s,
s, und und
und erst erst
erst and and
and s, s,
s, and and
and anal anal
thor yze yze
oug s s
hly the the
anal issu issu
yze es es
s at at
the han han
issu d. d.
es Mos Few
Case Study Rubrics

P
Criteria Ratings t
s

at t issu
han issu es
d. es and
All and mai
issu mai n
es n poin
and poin ts
mai ts iden
n hav tifie
poin e d.
ts bee
hav n
e iden
bee tifie
n d.
iden
tifie
d.

This 10.0  8.0  5.0  1

criterion pts pts pts 0
is linked Exc Mee Bel .
to a eed ts ow 0 
Learning s exp exp p
Outcome exp ect ect t
Presente ect atio atio s
d atio ns ns
solutions/ ns Well Fail
conclusio Well - ed
ns - reas to
doc one give
ume d, con
 Case Study Rubrics

P
Criteria Ratings t
s

nted and clus

, app ions
reas ropr and
one iate sug
d, con gest
and clus app
app ions ropr
ropr and iate
iate solu solu
con tion tion
clus s s
ions sug
and gest
solu ed
tion
s
sug
gest
ed

Total Points: 30.0

M5 Post-task: Situations
In this graded formative assessment, you are asked to write situations featuring
characters from your favorite TV shows, comic books, movies, or music that
displays any two of the four categories of justice described.  The situations may
either be based on real or imagined events.
Limit yourselves to 100-words for each example.

Compensatory Justice
When a person suffers any kind of loss, compensatory justice is the fair allocation of
resources as compensation for the losses incurred. Just compensation is proportional to
the losses inflicted.

Retributive or Corrective Justice

The extent to which punishments are fair, or their general aptness to the situation is
referred to as corrective or retributive justice.
 Ted Bundy is a known American serial killer who kidnapped, raped, and
murdered 30 young women and girls as he confessed during the 1970s and
possibly earlier to 1978. He is jailed for more than a decade and been to
decade of trials. His criminal penalty is death by electrocution. The punishment
he got for killing numerous women is by far fair because his life should end as
well as the victims he killed. The killing may have sound easy for the family of
the victims but it is fair because his life is the most precious thing he has and
that is how he would pay his crimes-by being executed.
Procedural Justice
This type of justice is concerned with transparency of the processes by which decisions
are made. Most people feel a sense of security or affirmation when decisions
implemented are done following consistent procedures. Procedural justice creates the
sense of respect and dignity that allows people to more easily accept negative
outcomes.
 Detective Chloe Decker is one of the best detectives in Los Angeles Police
Department. When there is a murder case to solve, she follows rules and regulations
to ensure the right enforcement when solving a crime to show the right justice by
being able to follow the right process to attain it. She has control over things and
doesn’t conclude things right away when some people is being interrogated that
might have a connection to the crime because she is very concerned with the
process of justice before decision are made to arrest or not to arrest the person.

Distributive Justice
The last type of justice refers to equal distribution. Distributive justice is the appropriate
distribution of costs and benefits within any society.
When analyzing if distributive justice has occurred or not, always keep in mind that it
does not merely refer to equal distribution of benefits, it also involves the equal sharing
of burden within the members of society.

M6 Post-task: Vlog
In this graded formative assessment, you are asked to produce a vlog that
features interviews with other members of your household that belong to different
generations. You will be asking them about the ethical dilemmas they faced then
that are not experienced by your own generation, and you will be speaking about
ethical dilemmas that you currently experience that other generations may not
understand.
 
Upload your work on Youtube.com and submit the link below.
 
Your rubrics for this activity will be posted as soon as it is available.