Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Key elements of teacher professionalism and ethics
Teachers ethics
Teacher ethics essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Key elements of teacher professionalism and ethics
Within the case study of Billy it is evident that the teacher was willing to grant the extension; however there are ethical issues which go against this action. For Billy he may compromise the subject grade due to missing a deadline when submitting his work, on the other hand it is his first time and it is contrasting to his usual behaviour. There are three types of ethics that can be used to argue the case study, firstly consequentialism, this being that when an individual is faced with different choices they should determine the act that promotes better outcomes (Eggleston, 2005). Secondly deontology discusses the moral rightness and this claims that people have certain duties that should be adhered to (Booth, 2008), meaning that rules should be followed regardless of the outcomes. Finally, contextualism believes that no two cases are the same; they follow a strict set of ethical rules which can be altered if the outcome leads to greater good (BBC, 2013). These three theorists each have an ideology of how the teacher should act within the case study, all having their own differing opinions and views.
Theorists of consequentialism consider that the teacher should grant Billy extra time to complete his work as it is unusual behaviour for him to miss the deadline. The
…show more content…
The journal of medicine and philosophy. [online] 30(5) pp. 467- 490 [accessed 12 Dec 2013] Available at
Nielsen, Kai. “Traditional Morality and Utilitarianism.” Ethics: The Big Questions. Ed. James Sterba. Blackwell Publishers, 1998. 142-151.
Nye, Howard. PHIL 250 B1, Winter Term 2014 Lecture Notes – Ethics. University of Alberta.
Consequentialism is a term used by the philosophers to simplify what is right and what is wrong. Consequentialist ethical theory suggests that right and wrong are the consequences of our actions. It is only the consequences that determine whether our actions are right or wrong. Standard consequentialism is a form of consequentialism that is discussed the most. It states that “the morally right action for an agent to perform is the one that has the best consequences or that results in the most good.” It means that an action is morally correct if it has little to no negative consequences, or the one that has the most positive results.
Consequentialism prohibit arbitrary moral prohibitions. If I want to condemn something as morally wrong so I have to show hos someone's life is made worse off. For consequentialism for example we cannot define homosexuality morally wrong if we cannot find bad consequences that arise from it.
The Alabama Educator Code of Ethics is designed for every educator in the state of Alabama. The Code must be implemented for the safety of students and educators. The goal of the Alabama Code of Ethics can be accomplished as long as all educators value the worth and dignity of all students, parents, and staff. There are nine Alabama Educator Code of Ethics and Standard 1: Professional Conduct, Standard 4: Teacher/Student Relationship and Standard 5: Alcohol, Drug and Tobacco Use of Possession are the most important standards.
Pojman, L. (2002). 6: Utilitarianism. Ethics: discovering right and wrong (pp. 104-113). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
On considering the consequentialist theory we need to evaluate the consequences of the situation and action is needed to be taken which seems to be apt. To some extent we Conseqentialist theory works to argue but Deontologist theory works even more better in this situation
According to Schneider (2009), consequentialism is when “the consequences of actions are the primary element in determining thr right action to take in a given situation.” Consequentialism is one of the most common
Cahn, Steven M., and Peter J. Markie. "John Stuart Mill's Utilitarianism; Chapter 2: What Utilitarianism Is." 2009. Ethics: History, Theory, and Contemporary Issues. 4th ed. New York: Oxford UP, 2009. 330-41. Print.
Mill, J. S., Bentham, J., & Ryan, A. (1987). Utilitarianism and other essays. Harmondsworth, Middlesex, England: Penguin Books.
ABSTRACT: Both utilitarians and the deontologists are of the opinion that punishment is justifiable, but according to the utilitarian moral thinkers, punishment can be justified solely by its consequences, while the deontologists believe that punishment is justifiable purely on retributive ground. D. D. Raphael is found to reconcile both views. According to him, a punishment is justified when it is both useful and deserved. Maclagan, on the other hand, denies it to be justifiable in the sense that it is not right to punish an offender. I claim that punishment is not justifiable but not in the sense in which it is claimed by Maclagan. The aim of this paper is to prove the absurdity of the enquiry as to whether punishment can be justified. Difference results from differing interpretations of the term 'justification.' In its traditional meaning, justification can hardly be distinguished from evaluation. In this sense, to justify an act is to say that it is good or right. I differ from the traditional use and insist that no act or conduct can be justified. Infliction of punishment is a human conduct and as such it is absurd to ask for its justification. I hold the view that to justify is to give reason, and it is only a statement or an assertion behind which we can put forth reason. Infliction of pain is an act behind which the agent may have purpose or intention but not reason. So, it is not punishment, but rather statements concerning punishment that we can justify.
Consequential-ism becomes an important subject to approach due to the process of decision making. In this case, consequential-ism will put a person in a situation that establishes who that person defines themselves to be. Starting off with the trolley scenario, the consequential-ism is scene in all the cases of pulling the level on a train track to determine the direction the train will go. So if a train is coming and the railroad splits into two different track with a people on each one, then who would I save. It is interesting which to choose because I would have to choose the lesser of the risk. So let say the is one person on track A and more than one people on track B, then I would save more people by directing the train onto track A. But know if that was my soulmate, lover or family, I would have to rethink the consequences I would have to face. These different scenarios are not to be easy decisions, but show who the person of their true nature. Personally, if it was someone I knew verse a stranger, I would be automatically incline to pull the level to kill the stranger. But there is also decision of the wrong and right chooses that should be regulated appropriately. In the end, we must be accountable for the decisions we make in life because we will be judge for all of them. We need to understand that the power of
Consequentialism Framework is the adecuate to study the etchic dilemma that Mylan Pharmaceutical is facing, due to the fact that we can analyze the internal and external impact of the increase in their medications price for convenience of their board members. Their decision is not right or wrong just the result of it might be negative to the society.
In its political philosophy utilitarianism provides an alternative to theories of natural law and the social contract by basing the authority of government and the sanctity of individual rights upon their utility, or measure of happiness gained. As an egalitarian doctrine, where everyone’s happiness counts equally, the rational, relatively straightforward nature of utilitarianism offers an attractive model for democratic government. It offers practical methods for deciding the morally right course of action - “...an action is right as it tends to promote happiness, wrong as it tends to diminish it, for the party whose interests are in question” (Bentham, 1780). To discover what we should do in a given situation, we identify the various courses of action that we could take, then determine any foreseeable benefits and harms to all affected by the ramifications of our decision. In fact, some of the early pioneers of utilitarianism, such as Bentham and Mill, campaigned for equality in terms of women's suffrage, decriminalization of homosexuality, and abolition of slavery (Boralevi, 1984). Utilitarianism seems to support democracy as one could interpret governments working to promote the public interest and welfare of citizens as striving for liberty for the greatest amount of people. While utilitarianism at its heart is a theory that calls for progressive social change through peaceful political processes, there are some difficulties in relying on it as the sole method for moral decision-making. In this essay I will assess the effectiveness of utilitarianism as a philosophy of government by examining the arguments against it.
sure that one's child does not hurt him or her self or others, and that