70476 BUS 303 Individual 2 Case AnalysisTrait Score

Identification of stakeholders and their frames of reference. Understands why/how people have different ideas about what ethical solutions would be? How do frames of reference (politics, environment, demographics culture) shape / inform positions?

Circle part 1 grade (10%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 0.0 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 3.20Change Identify the role of change or progress (i.e. societal, technological, environmental, governance, political, etc.) that led to emergence of the case’s central ethical dilemma.

Circle part 2 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 0.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 3.00Identification of alternatives

Circle part 3 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 0.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 3.00Identification of ethical issues / theories Identifies the sources of the ethical dilemma and / or the underlying conflicting ethical positions

Circle part 4 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 0.0 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 2.60Pros and Cons of Whistle Blowing Completely discusses the pros and cons for all the time periods asked about.

Circle part 5 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 0.0 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 3.40Choice of alternative Takes an ethical position and provides concrete rationale for taking that position?

Circle part 6 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 0.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 2.00Writing mechanics (grammar, sentence structure, vocabulary, spelling, and punctuation)

Circle part 7 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 0.0 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 2.20

Comments / Grade 2.75

Case has 6 or more errors. Case has 4-5 errors. Case has 1-3 errors. Case is free of errors.

Takes a position but can't defend. Does not use theory to support position taken.

Takes a position, but defence of position is weak. Little recognition of alternative or opposing positions. Little or no theory applied, or theory is applied incorrectly.

Takes a position & successfully defends it. The position is informed by theory and it refutes and/or acknowledges the alternative / opposing viewpoints.

Takes a position & defends it well. Position informed by theory; refers to alternative views. Applies creative thinking to address dilemmas in the context of diverse ethical frameworks. Adapts thinking / shows sophisticated grasp of ethical problem & long-term implications.

Incompletely looks at the pros and cons but not at all the three time periods

Looks at the pros and cons but either not for all the three time periods or not in any complete or systematic way.

Looks at the pros and cons for all the three time periods in a relatively systematic manner.

Looks at the pros and cons for all the three time periods in a complete and systematic manner.

Doesn't ID source of dilemma or does not identify the underlying conflicting ethical positions. Does not clearly articulate the ethical problem.

Identifies some of the sources of the ethical dilemma and underlying conflicting ethical positions, but has difficulty articulating these clearly.

Clearly articulates ethical dilemma & underlying conflicting ethical positions. Shows an understanding that individual needs be balanced with needs of the many.

Clearly identifies / articulates ethical dilemma & the underlying conflicting ethical positions. Shows understanding that needs of the indivi-dual must be balanced with needs of the many. Applies & recognizes relevant ethical theories.

Student misses out on key alternatives or explanations are lacking or unclear.

Student identifies some of the possible alternatives and provides some explanation.

Student identifies all key alternatives & explains them clearly.

Student identifies all key alternatives and explains them in a sophisticated manner.

Does not identify or understand the role of change that led to the emergence of the ethical dilemma at the centre of this business case.

Partially identifies or under-stands the role of change that led to the emergence of the ethical dilemma at the centre of this business case.

Identifies & understands role of change and/or progress that led to the emergence of the ethical dilemma at the centre of the business case.

Shows excellent ability to identify & understand the role of change leading to emergence of the case’s ethical dilemma. Has sophistication in understanding range of impact that change has on all stakeholders.

Little understanding of why/how people developed ideas about ethical solutions in the case. Little grasp of the importance of demographics in shaping people’s opinions.

Understands why / how folks have different ideas about ethical solution, but struggles to see connections amid ideas & demographics of those who put forward ideas.

Understands why / how folks have different ideas about ethical solution. Makes a less sophisticated connection between personal attributes and ethical positions.

Clearly understands diverse factors leading to development of other ethical positions. Comprehensive, sophisticated understanding that complex role differences play in forming ethical positions.

Fails Expectations (1) Approaches Expectations (2) Meets Expectations (3) Exceeds Expectations (4)

70980 BUS 303 Individual 2 Case AnalysisTrait Score

Identification of stakeholders and their frames of reference. Understands why/how people have different ideas about what ethical solutions would be? How do frames of reference (politics, environment, demographics culture) shape / inform positions?

Circle part 1 grade (10%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 0.0 3.8 4.0 …………. 3.60Change Identify the role of change or progress (i.e. societal, technological, environmental, governance, political, etc.) that led to emergence of the case’s central ethical dilemma.

Circle part 2 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 0.0 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 3.40Identification of alternatives

Circle part 3 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 0.0 3.8 4.0 …………. 3.60Identification of ethical issues / theories Identifies the sources of the ethical dilemma and / or the underlying conflicting ethical positions

Circle part 4 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 0.0 …………. 4.00Pros and Cons of Whistle Blowing Completely discusses the pros and cons for all the time periods asked about.

Circle part 5 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 0.0 3.8 4.0 …………. 3.60Choice of alternative Takes an ethical position and provides concrete rationale for taking that position?

Circle part 6 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 0.0 3.8 4.0 …………. 3.60Writing mechanics (grammar, sentence structure, vocabulary, spelling, and punctuation)

Circle part 7 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 0.0 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 3.40

Comments / Grade 3.60

Case has 6 or more errors. Case has 4-5 errors. Case has 1-3 errors. Case is free of errors.

Takes a position but can't defend. Does not use theory to support position taken.

Takes a position, but defence of position is weak. Little recognition of alternative or opposing positions. Little or no theory applied, or theory is applied incorrectly.

Takes a position & successfully defends it. The position is informed by theory and it refutes and/or acknowledges the alternative / opposing viewpoints.

Takes a position & defends it well. Position informed by theory; refers to alternative views. Applies creative thinking to address dilemmas in the context of diverse ethical frameworks. Adapts thinking / shows sophisticated grasp of ethical problem & long-term implications.

Incompletely looks at the pros and cons but not at all the three time periods

Looks at the pros and cons but either not for all the three time periods or not in any complete or systematic way.

Looks at the pros and cons for all the three time periods in a relatively systematic manner.

Looks at the pros and cons for all the three time periods in a complete and systematic manner.

Doesn't ID source of dilemma or does not identify the underlying conflicting ethical positions. Does not clearly articulate the ethical problem.

Identifies some of the sources of the ethical dilemma and underlying conflicting ethical positions, but has difficulty articulating these clearly.

Clearly articulates ethical dilemma & underlying conflicting ethical positions. Shows an understanding that individual needs be balanced with needs of the many.

Clearly identifies / articulates ethical dilemma & the underlying conflicting ethical positions. Shows understanding that needs of the indivi-dual must be balanced with needs of the many. Applies & recognizes relevant ethical theories.

Student misses out on key alternatives or explanations are lacking or unclear.

Student identifies some of the possible alternatives and provides some explanation.

Student identifies all key alternatives & explains them clearly.

Student identifies all key alternatives and explains them in a sophisticated manner.

Does not identify or understand the role of change that led to the emergence of the ethical dilemma at the centre of this business case.

Partially identifies or under-stands the role of change that led to the emergence of the ethical dilemma at the centre of this business case.

Identifies & understands role of change and/or progress that led to the emergence of the ethical dilemma at the centre of the business case.

Shows excellent ability to identify & understand the role of change leading to emergence of the case’s ethical dilemma. Has sophistication in understanding range of impact that change has on all stakeholders.

Little understanding of why/how people developed ideas about ethical solutions in the case. Little grasp of the importance of demographics in shaping people’s opinions.

Understands why / how folks have different ideas about ethical solution, but struggles to see connections amid ideas & demographics of those who put forward ideas.

Understands why / how folks have different ideas about ethical solution. Makes a less sophisticated connection between personal attributes and ethical positions.

Clearly understands diverse factors leading to development of other ethical positions. Comprehensive, sophisticated understanding that complex role differences play in forming ethical positions.

Fails Expectations (1) Approaches Expectations (2) Meets Expectations (3) Exceeds Expectations (4)

71233 BUS 303 Individual 2 Case AnalysisTrait Score

Identification of stakeholders and their frames of reference. Understands why/how people have different ideas about what ethical solutions would be? How do frames of reference (politics, environment, demographics culture) shape / inform positions?

Circle part 1 grade (10%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 0.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 3.00Change Identify the role of change or progress (i.e. societal, technological, environmental, governance, political, etc.) that led to emergence of the case’s central ethical dilemma.

Circle part 2 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 0.0 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 2.60Identification of alternatives

Circle part 3 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 0.0 3.8 4.0 …………. 3.60Identification of ethical issues / theories Identifies the sources of the ethical dilemma and / or the underlying conflicting ethical positions

Circle part 4 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 0.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 2.00Pros and Cons of Whistle Blowing Completely discusses the pros and cons for all the time periods asked about.

Circle part 5 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 0.0 4.0 …………. 3.80Choice of alternative Takes an ethical position and provides concrete rationale for taking that position?

Circle part 6 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 0.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 3.00Writing mechanics (grammar, sentence structure, vocabulary, spelling, and punctuation)

Circle part 7 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 0.0 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 2.80

Comments / Grade 2.97

Case has 6 or more errors. Case has 4-5 errors. Case has 1-3 errors. Case is free of errors.

Takes a position but can't defend. Does not use theory to support position taken.

Takes a position, but defence of position is weak. Little recognition of alternative or opposing positions. Little or no theory applied, or theory is applied incorrectly.

Takes a position & successfully defends it. The position is informed by theory and it refutes and/or acknowledges the alternative / opposing viewpoints.

Takes a position & defends it well. Position informed by theory; refers to alternative views. Applies creative thinking to address dilemmas in the context of diverse ethical frameworks. Adapts thinking / shows sophisticated grasp of ethical problem & long-term implications.

Incompletely looks at the pros and cons but not at all the three time periods

Looks at the pros and cons but either not for all the three time periods or not in any complete or systematic way.

Looks at the pros and cons for all the three time periods in a relatively systematic manner.

Looks at the pros and cons for all the three time periods in a complete and systematic manner.

Doesn't ID source of dilemma or does not identify the underlying conflicting ethical positions. Does not clearly articulate the ethical problem.

Identifies some of the sources of the ethical dilemma and underlying conflicting ethical positions, but has difficulty articulating these clearly.

Clearly articulates ethical dilemma & underlying conflicting ethical positions. Shows an understanding that individual needs be balanced with needs of the many.

Clearly identifies / articulates ethical dilemma & the underlying conflicting ethical positions. Shows understanding that needs of the indivi-dual must be balanced with needs of the many. Applies & recognizes relevant ethical theories.

Student misses out on key alternatives or explanations are lacking or unclear.

Student identifies some of the possible alternatives and provides some explanation.

Student identifies all key alternatives & explains them clearly.

Student identifies all key alternatives and explains them in a sophisticated manner.

Does not identify or understand the role of change that led to the emergence of the ethical dilemma at the centre of this business case.

Partially identifies or under-stands the role of change that led to the emergence of the ethical dilemma at the centre of this business case.

Identifies & understands role of change and/or progress that led to the emergence of the ethical dilemma at the centre of the business case.

Shows excellent ability to identify & understand the role of change leading to emergence of the case’s ethical dilemma. Has sophistication in understanding range of impact that change has on all stakeholders.

Little understanding of why/how people developed ideas about ethical solutions in the case. Little grasp of the importance of demographics in shaping people’s opinions.

Understands why / how folks have different ideas about ethical solution, but struggles to see connections amid ideas & demographics of those who put forward ideas.

Understands why / how folks have different ideas about ethical solution. Makes a less sophisticated connection between personal attributes and ethical positions.

Clearly understands diverse factors leading to development of other ethical positions. Comprehensive, sophisticated understanding that complex role differences play in forming ethical positions.

Fails Expectations (1) Approaches Expectations (2) Meets Expectations (3) Exceeds Expectations (4)

72505 BUS 303 Individual 2 Case AnalysisTrait Score

Identification of stakeholders and their frames of reference. Understands why/how people have different ideas about what ethical solutions would be? How do frames of reference (politics, environment, demographics culture) shape / inform positions?

Circle part 1 grade (10%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 0.0 4.0 …………. 3.80Change Identify the role of change or progress (i.e. societal, technological, environmental, governance, political, etc.) that led to emergence of the case’s central ethical dilemma.

Circle part 2 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 0.0 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 2.60Identification of alternatives

Circle part 3 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 0.0 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 3.20Identification of ethical issues / theories Identifies the sources of the ethical dilemma and / or the underlying conflicting ethical positions

Circle part 4 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 0.0 4.0 …………. 3.80Pros and Cons of Whistle Blowing Completely discusses the pros and cons for all the time periods asked about.

Circle part 5 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 0.0 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 2.60Choice of alternative Takes an ethical position and provides concrete rationale for taking that position?

Circle part 6 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 1.20Writing mechanics (grammar, sentence structure, vocabulary, spelling, and punctuation)

Circle part 7 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 0.0 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 2.60

Comments / Grade 2.78

Case has 6 or more errors. Case has 4-5 errors. Case has 1-3 errors. Case is free of errors.

Takes a position but can't defend. Does not use theory to support position taken.

Takes a position, but defence of position is weak. Little recognition of alternative or opposing positions. Little or no theory applied, or theory is applied incorrectly.

Takes a position & successfully defends it. The position is informed by theory and it refutes and/or acknowledges the alternative / opposing viewpoints.

Takes a position & defends it well. Position informed by theory; refers to alternative views. Applies creative thinking to address dilemmas in the context of diverse ethical frameworks. Adapts thinking / shows sophisticated grasp of ethical problem & long-term implications.

Incompletely looks at the pros and cons but not at all the three time periods

Looks at the pros and cons but either not for all the three time periods or not in any complete or systematic way.

Looks at the pros and cons for all the three time periods in a relatively systematic manner.

Looks at the pros and cons for all the three time periods in a complete and systematic manner.

Doesn't ID source of dilemma or does not identify the underlying conflicting ethical positions. Does not clearly articulate the ethical problem.

Identifies some of the sources of the ethical dilemma and underlying conflicting ethical positions, but has difficulty articulating these clearly.

Clearly articulates ethical dilemma & underlying conflicting ethical positions. Shows an understanding that individual needs be balanced with needs of the many.

Clearly identifies / articulates ethical dilemma & the underlying conflicting ethical positions. Shows understanding that needs of the indivi-dual must be balanced with needs of the many. Applies & recognizes relevant ethical theories.

Student misses out on key alternatives or explanations are lacking or unclear.

Student identifies some of the possible alternatives and provides some explanation.

Student identifies all key alternatives & explains them clearly.

Student identifies all key alternatives and explains them in a sophisticated manner.

Does not identify or understand the role of change that led to the emergence of the ethical dilemma at the centre of this business case.

Partially identifies or under-stands the role of change that led to the emergence of the ethical dilemma at the centre of this business case.

Identifies & understands role of change and/or progress that led to the emergence of the ethical dilemma at the centre of the business case.

Shows excellent ability to identify & understand the role of change leading to emergence of the case’s ethical dilemma. Has sophistication in understanding range of impact that change has on all stakeholders.

Little understanding of why/how people developed ideas about ethical solutions in the case. Little grasp of the importance of demographics in shaping people’s opinions.

Understands why / how folks have different ideas about ethical solution, but struggles to see connections amid ideas & demographics of those who put forward ideas.

Understands why / how folks have different ideas about ethical solution. Makes a less sophisticated connection between personal attributes and ethical positions.

Clearly understands diverse factors leading to development of other ethical positions. Comprehensive, sophisticated understanding that complex role differences play in forming ethical positions.

Fails Expectations (1) Approaches Expectations (2) Meets Expectations (3) Exceeds Expectations (4)

72760 BUS 303 Individual 2 Case AnalysisTrait Score

Identification of stakeholders and their frames of reference. Understands why/how people have different ideas about what ethical solutions would be? How do frames of reference (politics, environment, demographics culture) shape / inform positions?

Circle part 1 grade (10%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 0.0 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 3.20Change Identify the role of change or progress (i.e. societal, technological, environmental, governance, political, etc.) that led to emergence of the case’s central ethical dilemma.

Circle part 2 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 0.0 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 2.80Identification of alternatives

Circle part 3 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 0.0 3.8 4.0 …………. 3.60Identification of ethical issues / theories Identifies the sources of the ethical dilemma and / or the underlying conflicting ethical positions

Circle part 4 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 0.0 3.8 4.0 …………. 3.60Pros and Cons of Whistle Blowing Completely discusses the pros and cons for all the time periods asked about.

Circle part 5 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 0.0 4.0 …………. 3.80Choice of alternative Takes an ethical position and provides concrete rationale for taking that position?

Circle part 6 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 0.0 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 2.80Writing mechanics (grammar, sentence structure, vocabulary, spelling, and punctuation)

Circle part 7 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 0.0 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 2.60

Comments / Grade 3.20

Case has 6 or more errors. Case has 4-5 errors. Case has 1-3 errors. Case is free of errors.

Takes a position but can't defend. Does not use theory to support position taken.

Takes a position, but defence of position is weak. Little recognition of alternative or opposing positions. Little or no theory applied, or theory is applied incorrectly.

Takes a position & successfully defends it. The position is informed by theory and it refutes and/or acknowledges the alternative / opposing viewpoints.

Takes a position & defends it well. Position informed by theory; refers to alternative views. Applies creative thinking to address dilemmas in the context of diverse ethical frameworks. Adapts thinking / shows sophisticated grasp of ethical problem & long-term implications.

Incompletely looks at the pros and cons but not at all the three time periods

Looks at the pros and cons but either not for all the three time periods or not in any complete or systematic way.

Looks at the pros and cons for all the three time periods in a relatively systematic manner.

Looks at the pros and cons for all the three time periods in a complete and systematic manner.

Doesn't ID source of dilemma or does not identify the underlying conflicting ethical positions. Does not clearly articulate the ethical problem.

Identifies some of the sources of the ethical dilemma and underlying conflicting ethical positions, but has difficulty articulating these clearly.

Clearly articulates ethical dilemma & underlying conflicting ethical positions. Shows an understanding that individual needs be balanced with needs of the many.

Clearly identifies / articulates ethical dilemma & the underlying conflicting ethical positions. Shows understanding that needs of the indivi-dual must be balanced with needs of the many. Applies & recognizes relevant ethical theories.

Student misses out on key alternatives or explanations are lacking or unclear.

Student identifies some of the possible alternatives and provides some explanation.

Student identifies all key alternatives & explains them clearly.

Student identifies all key alternatives and explains them in a sophisticated manner.

Does not identify or understand the role of change that led to the emergence of the ethical dilemma at the centre of this business case.

Partially identifies or under-stands the role of change that led to the emergence of the ethical dilemma at the centre of this business case.

Identifies & understands role of change and/or progress that led to the emergence of the ethical dilemma at the centre of the business case.

Shows excellent ability to identify & understand the role of change leading to emergence of the case’s ethical dilemma. Has sophistication in understanding range of impact that change has on all stakeholders.

Little understanding of why/how people developed ideas about ethical solutions in the case. Little grasp of the importance of demographics in shaping people’s opinions.

Understands why / how folks have different ideas about ethical solution, but struggles to see connections amid ideas & demographics of those who put forward ideas.

Understands why / how folks have different ideas about ethical solution. Makes a less sophisticated connection between personal attributes and ethical positions.

Clearly understands diverse factors leading to development of other ethical positions. Comprehensive, sophisticated understanding that complex role differences play in forming ethical positions.

Fails Expectations (1) Approaches Expectations (2) Meets Expectations (3) Exceeds Expectations (4)

72931 BUS 303 Individual 2 Case AnalysisTrait Score

Identification of stakeholders and their frames of reference. Understands why/how people have different ideas about what ethical solutions would be? How do frames of reference (politics, environment, demographics culture) shape / inform positions?

Circle part 1 grade (10%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 0.0 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 3.20Change Identify the role of change or progress (i.e. societal, technological, environmental, governance, political, etc.) that led to emergence of the case’s central ethical dilemma.

Circle part 2 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 0.0 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 2.80Identification of alternatives

Circle part 3 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 0.0 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 3.20Identification of ethical issues / theories Identifies the sources of the ethical dilemma and / or the underlying conflicting ethical positions

Circle part 4 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 0.0 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 1.80Pros and Cons of Whistle Blowing Completely discusses the pros and cons for all the time periods asked about.

Circle part 5 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 0.0 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 3.40Choice of alternative Takes an ethical position and provides concrete rationale for taking that position?

Circle part 6 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 0.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 3.00Writing mechanics (grammar, sentence structure, vocabulary, spelling, and punctuation)

Circle part 7 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 0.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 3.00

Comments / Grade 2.90

Case has 6 or more errors. Case has 4-5 errors. Case has 1-3 errors. Case is free of errors.

Takes a position but can't defend. Does not use theory to support position taken.

Takes a position, but defence of position is weak. Little recognition of alternative or opposing positions. Little or no theory applied, or theory is applied incorrectly.

Takes a position & successfully defends it. The position is informed by theory and it refutes and/or acknowledges the alternative / opposing viewpoints.

Takes a position & defends it well. Position informed by theory; refers to alternative views. Applies creative thinking to address dilemmas in the context of diverse ethical frameworks. Adapts thinking / shows sophisticated grasp of ethical problem & long-term implications.

Incompletely looks at the pros and cons but not at all the three time periods

Looks at the pros and cons but either not for all the three time periods or not in any complete or systematic way.

Looks at the pros and cons for all the three time periods in a relatively systematic manner.

Looks at the pros and cons for all the three time periods in a complete and systematic manner.

Doesn't ID source of dilemma or does not identify the underlying conflicting ethical positions. Does not clearly articulate the ethical problem.

Identifies some of the sources of the ethical dilemma and underlying conflicting ethical positions, but has difficulty articulating these clearly.

Clearly articulates ethical dilemma & underlying conflicting ethical positions. Shows an understanding that individual needs be balanced with needs of the many.

Clearly identifies / articulates ethical dilemma & the underlying conflicting ethical positions. Shows understanding that needs of the indivi-dual must be balanced with needs of the many. Applies & recognizes relevant ethical theories.

Student misses out on key alternatives or explanations are lacking or unclear.

Student identifies some of the possible alternatives and provides some explanation.

Student identifies all key alternatives & explains them clearly.

Student identifies all key alternatives and explains them in a sophisticated manner.

Does not identify or understand the role of change that led to the emergence of the ethical dilemma at the centre of this business case.

Partially identifies or under-stands the role of change that led to the emergence of the ethical dilemma at the centre of this business case.

Identifies & understands role of change and/or progress that led to the emergence of the ethical dilemma at the centre of the business case.

Shows excellent ability to identify & understand the role of change leading to emergence of the case’s ethical dilemma. Has sophistication in understanding range of impact that change has on all stakeholders.

Little understanding of why/how people developed ideas about ethical solutions in the case. Little grasp of the importance of demographics in shaping people’s opinions.

Understands why / how folks have different ideas about ethical solution, but struggles to see connections amid ideas & demographics of those who put forward ideas.

Understands why / how folks have different ideas about ethical solution. Makes a less sophisticated connection between personal attributes and ethical positions.

Clearly understands diverse factors leading to development of other ethical positions. Comprehensive, sophisticated understanding that complex role differences play in forming ethical positions.

Fails Expectations (1) Approaches Expectations (2) Meets Expectations (3) Exceeds Expectations (4)

74995 BUS 303 Individual 2 Case AnalysisTrait Score

Identification of stakeholders and their frames of reference. Understands why/how people have different ideas about what ethical solutions would be? How do frames of reference (politics, environment, demographics culture) shape / inform positions?

Circle part 1 grade (10%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 0.0 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 2.40Change Identify the role of change or progress (i.e. societal, technological, environmental, governance, political, etc.) that led to emergence of the case’s central ethical dilemma.

Circle part 2 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 0.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 3.00Identification of alternatives

Circle part 3 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 0.0 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 3.20Identification of ethical issues / theories Identifies the sources of the ethical dilemma and / or the underlying conflicting ethical positions

Circle part 4 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 0.0 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 2.20Pros and Cons of Whistle Blowing Completely discusses the pros and cons for all the time periods asked about.

Circle part 5 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 0.0 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 2.80Choice of alternative Takes an ethical position and provides concrete rationale for taking that position?

Circle part 6 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 0.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 3.00Writing mechanics (grammar, sentence structure, vocabulary, spelling, and punctuation)

Circle part 7 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 0.0 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 2.60

Comments / Grade 2.76

Case has 6 or more errors. Case has 4-5 errors. Case has 1-3 errors. Case is free of errors.

Takes a position but can't defend. Does not use theory to support position taken.

Takes a position, but defence of position is weak. Little recognition of alternative or opposing positions. Little or no theory applied, or theory is applied incorrectly.

Takes a position & successfully defends it. The position is informed by theory and it refutes and/or acknowledges the alternative / opposing viewpoints.

Takes a position & defends it well. Position informed by theory; refers to alternative views. Applies creative thinking to address dilemmas in the context of diverse ethical frameworks. Adapts thinking / shows sophisticated grasp of ethical problem & long-term implications.

Incompletely looks at the pros and cons but not at all the three time periods

Looks at the pros and cons but either not for all the three time periods or not in any complete or systematic way.

Looks at the pros and cons for all the three time periods in a relatively systematic manner.

Looks at the pros and cons for all the three time periods in a complete and systematic manner.

Doesn't ID source of dilemma or does not identify the underlying conflicting ethical positions. Does not clearly articulate the ethical problem.

Identifies some of the sources of the ethical dilemma and underlying conflicting ethical positions, but has difficulty articulating these clearly.

Clearly articulates ethical dilemma & underlying conflicting ethical positions. Shows an understanding that individual needs be balanced with needs of the many.

Clearly identifies / articulates ethical dilemma & the underlying conflicting ethical positions. Shows understanding that needs of the indivi-dual must be balanced with needs of the many. Applies & recognizes relevant ethical theories.

Student misses out on key alternatives or explanations are lacking or unclear.

Student identifies some of the possible alternatives and provides some explanation.

Student identifies all key alternatives & explains them clearly.

Student identifies all key alternatives and explains them in a sophisticated manner.

Does not identify or understand the role of change that led to the emergence of the ethical dilemma at the centre of this business case.

Partially identifies or under-stands the role of change that led to the emergence of the ethical dilemma at the centre of this business case.

Identifies & understands role of change and/or progress that led to the emergence of the ethical dilemma at the centre of the business case.

Shows excellent ability to identify & understand the role of change leading to emergence of the case’s ethical dilemma. Has sophistication in understanding range of impact that change has on all stakeholders.

Little understanding of why/how people developed ideas about ethical solutions in the case. Little grasp of the importance of demographics in shaping people’s opinions.

Understands why / how folks have different ideas about ethical solution, but struggles to see connections amid ideas & demographics of those who put forward ideas.

Understands why / how folks have different ideas about ethical solution. Makes a less sophisticated connection between personal attributes and ethical positions.

Clearly understands diverse factors leading to development of other ethical positions. Comprehensive, sophisticated understanding that complex role differences play in forming ethical positions.

Fails Expectations (1) Approaches Expectations (2) Meets Expectations (3) Exceeds Expectations (4)

75864 BUS 303 Individual 2 Case AnalysisTrait Score

Identification of stakeholders and their frames of reference. Understands why/how people have different ideas about what ethical solutions would be? How do frames of reference (politics, environment, demographics culture) shape / inform positions?

Circle part 1 grade (10%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 0.0 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 2.40Change Identify the role of change or progress (i.e. societal, technological, environmental, governance, political, etc.) that led to emergence of the case’s central ethical dilemma.

Circle part 2 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 0.0 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 2.60Identification of alternatives

Circle part 3 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 0.0 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 3.20Identification of ethical issues / theories Identifies the sources of the ethical dilemma and / or the underlying conflicting ethical positions

Circle part 4 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 0.0 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 2.40Pros and Cons of Whistle Blowing Completely discusses the pros and cons for all the time periods asked about.

Circle part 5 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 0.0 3.8 4.0 …………. 3.60Choice of alternative Takes an ethical position and provides concrete rationale for taking that position?

Circle part 6 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 0.0 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 3.20Writing mechanics (grammar, sentence structure, vocabulary, spelling, and punctuation)

Circle part 7 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 0.0 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 2.80

Comments / Grade 2.91

Case has 6 or more errors. Case has 4-5 errors. Case has 1-3 errors. Case is free of errors.

Takes a position but can't defend. Does not use theory to support position taken.

Takes a position, but defence of position is weak. Little recognition of alternative or opposing positions. Little or no theory applied, or theory is applied incorrectly.

Takes a position & successfully defends it. The position is informed by theory and it refutes and/or acknowledges the alternative / opposing viewpoints.

Takes a position & defends it well. Position informed by theory; refers to alternative views. Applies creative thinking to address dilemmas in the context of diverse ethical frameworks. Adapts thinking / shows sophisticated grasp of ethical problem & long-term implications.

Incompletely looks at the pros and cons but not at all the three time periods

Looks at the pros and cons but either not for all the three time periods or not in any complete or systematic way.

Looks at the pros and cons for all the three time periods in a relatively systematic manner.

Looks at the pros and cons for all the three time periods in a complete and systematic manner.

Doesn't ID source of dilemma or does not identify the underlying conflicting ethical positions. Does not clearly articulate the ethical problem.

Identifies some of the sources of the ethical dilemma and underlying conflicting ethical positions, but has difficulty articulating these clearly.

Clearly articulates ethical dilemma & underlying conflicting ethical positions. Shows an understanding that individual needs be balanced with needs of the many.

Clearly identifies / articulates ethical dilemma & the underlying conflicting ethical positions. Shows understanding that needs of the indivi-dual must be balanced with needs of the many. Applies & recognizes relevant ethical theories.

Student misses out on key alternatives or explanations are lacking or unclear.

Student identifies some of the possible alternatives and provides some explanation.

Student identifies all key alternatives & explains them clearly.

Student identifies all key alternatives and explains them in a sophisticated manner.

Does not identify or understand the role of change that led to the emergence of the ethical dilemma at the centre of this business case.

Partially identifies or under-stands the role of change that led to the emergence of the ethical dilemma at the centre of this business case.

Identifies & understands role of change and/or progress that led to the emergence of the ethical dilemma at the centre of the business case.

Shows excellent ability to identify & understand the role of change leading to emergence of the case’s ethical dilemma. Has sophistication in understanding range of impact that change has on all stakeholders.

Little understanding of why/how people developed ideas about ethical solutions in the case. Little grasp of the importance of demographics in shaping people’s opinions.

Understands why / how folks have different ideas about ethical solution, but struggles to see connections amid ideas & demographics of those who put forward ideas.

Understands why / how folks have different ideas about ethical solution. Makes a less sophisticated connection between personal attributes and ethical positions.

Clearly understands diverse factors leading to development of other ethical positions. Comprehensive, sophisticated understanding that complex role differences play in forming ethical positions.

Fails Expectations (1) Approaches Expectations (2) Meets Expectations (3) Exceeds Expectations (4)

76300 BUS 303 Individual 2 Case AnalysisTrait Score

Identification of stakeholders and their frames of reference. Understands why/how people have different ideas about what ethical solutions would be? How do frames of reference (politics, environment, demographics culture) shape / inform positions?

Circle part 1 grade (10%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 0.0 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 2.80Change Identify the role of change or progress (i.e. societal, technological, environmental, governance, political, etc.) that led to emergence of the case’s central ethical dilemma.

Circle part 2 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 0.0 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 2.40Identification of alternatives

Circle part 3 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 0.0 3.8 4.0 …………. 3.60Identification of ethical issues / theories Identifies the sources of the ethical dilemma and / or the underlying conflicting ethical positions

Circle part 4 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 0.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 3.00Pros and Cons of Whistle Blowing Completely discusses the pros and cons for all the time periods asked about.

Circle part 5 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 0.0 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 2.80Choice of alternative Takes an ethical position and provides concrete rationale for taking that position?

Circle part 6 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 0.0 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 3.40Writing mechanics (grammar, sentence structure, vocabulary, spelling, and punctuation)

Circle part 7 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 0.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 3.00

Comments / Grade 3.01

Case has 6 or more errors. Case has 4-5 errors. Case has 1-3 errors. Case is free of errors.

Takes a position but can't defend. Does not use theory to support position taken.

Takes a position, but defence of position is weak. Little recognition of alternative or opposing positions. Little or no theory applied, or theory is applied incorrectly.

Takes a position & successfully defends it. The position is informed by theory and it refutes and/or acknowledges the alternative / opposing viewpoints.

Takes a position & defends it well. Position informed by theory; refers to alternative views. Applies creative thinking to address dilemmas in the context of diverse ethical frameworks. Adapts thinking / shows sophisticated grasp of ethical problem & long-term implications.

Incompletely looks at the pros and cons but not at all the three time periods

Looks at the pros and cons but either not for all the three time periods or not in any complete or systematic way.

Looks at the pros and cons for all the three time periods in a relatively systematic manner.

Looks at the pros and cons for all the three time periods in a complete and systematic manner.

Doesn't ID source of dilemma or does not identify the underlying conflicting ethical positions. Does not clearly articulate the ethical problem.

Identifies some of the sources of the ethical dilemma and underlying conflicting ethical positions, but has difficulty articulating these clearly.

Clearly articulates ethical dilemma & underlying conflicting ethical positions. Shows an understanding that individual needs be balanced with needs of the many.

Clearly identifies / articulates ethical dilemma & the underlying conflicting ethical positions. Shows understanding that needs of the indivi-dual must be balanced with needs of the many. Applies & recognizes relevant ethical theories.

Student misses out on key alternatives or explanations are lacking or unclear.

Student identifies some of the possible alternatives and provides some explanation.

Student identifies all key alternatives & explains them clearly.

Student identifies all key alternatives and explains them in a sophisticated manner.

Does not identify or understand the role of change that led to the emergence of the ethical dilemma at the centre of this business case.

Partially identifies or under-stands the role of change that led to the emergence of the ethical dilemma at the centre of this business case.

Identifies & understands role of change and/or progress that led to the emergence of the ethical dilemma at the centre of the business case.

Shows excellent ability to identify & understand the role of change leading to emergence of the case’s ethical dilemma. Has sophistication in understanding range of impact that change has on all stakeholders.

Little understanding of why/how people developed ideas about ethical solutions in the case. Little grasp of the importance of demographics in shaping people’s opinions.

Understands why / how folks have different ideas about ethical solution, but struggles to see connections amid ideas & demographics of those who put forward ideas.

Understands why / how folks have different ideas about ethical solution. Makes a less sophisticated connection between personal attributes and ethical positions.

Clearly understands diverse factors leading to development of other ethical positions. Comprehensive, sophisticated understanding that complex role differences play in forming ethical positions.

Fails Expectations (1) Approaches Expectations (2) Meets Expectations (3) Exceeds Expectations (4)

76562 BUS 303 Individual 2 Case AnalysisTrait Score

Identification of stakeholders and their frames of reference. Understands why/how people have different ideas about what ethical solutions would be? How do frames of reference (politics, environment, demographics culture) shape / inform positions?

Circle part 1 grade (10%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 0.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 3.00Change Identify the role of change or progress (i.e. societal, technological, environmental, governance, political, etc.) that led to emergence of the case’s central ethical dilemma.

Circle part 2 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.0 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 0.80Identification of alternatives

Circle part 3 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 0.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 3.00Identification of ethical issues / theories Identifies the sources of the ethical dilemma and / or the underlying conflicting ethical positions

Circle part 4 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 0.0 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 2.80Pros and Cons of Whistle Blowing Completely discusses the pros and cons for all the time periods asked about.

Circle part 5 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 0.0 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 2.20Choice of alternative Takes an ethical position and provides concrete rationale for taking that position?

Circle part 6 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 0.0 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 3.20Writing mechanics (grammar, sentence structure, vocabulary, spelling, and punctuation)

Circle part 7 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 0.0 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 2.80

Comments / Grade 2.52

Case has 6 or more errors. Case has 4-5 errors. Case has 1-3 errors. Case is free of errors.

Takes a position but can't defend. Does not use theory to support position taken.

Takes a position, but defence of position is weak. Little recognition of alternative or opposing positions. Little or no theory applied, or theory is applied incorrectly.

Takes a position & successfully defends it. The position is informed by theory and it refutes and/or acknowledges the alternative / opposing viewpoints.

Takes a position & defends it well. Position informed by theory; refers to alternative views. Applies creative thinking to address dilemmas in the context of diverse ethical frameworks. Adapts thinking / shows sophisticated grasp of ethical problem & long-term implications.

Incompletely looks at the pros and cons but not at all the three time periods

Looks at the pros and cons but either not for all the three time periods or not in any complete or systematic way.

Looks at the pros and cons for all the three time periods in a relatively systematic manner.

Looks at the pros and cons for all the three time periods in a complete and systematic manner.

Doesn't ID source of dilemma or does not identify the underlying conflicting ethical positions. Does not clearly articulate the ethical problem.

Identifies some of the sources of the ethical dilemma and underlying conflicting ethical positions, but has difficulty articulating these clearly.

Clearly articulates ethical dilemma & underlying conflicting ethical positions. Shows an understanding that individual needs be balanced with needs of the many.

Clearly identifies / articulates ethical dilemma & the underlying conflicting ethical positions. Shows understanding that needs of the indivi-dual must be balanced with needs of the many. Applies & recognizes relevant ethical theories.

Student misses out on key alternatives or explanations are lacking or unclear.

Student identifies some of the possible alternatives and provides some explanation.

Student identifies all key alternatives & explains them clearly.

Student identifies all key alternatives and explains them in a sophisticated manner.

Does not identify or understand the role of change that led to the emergence of the ethical dilemma at the centre of this business case.

Partially identifies or under-stands the role of change that led to the emergence of the ethical dilemma at the centre of this business case.

Identifies & understands role of change and/or progress that led to the emergence of the ethical dilemma at the centre of the business case.

Shows excellent ability to identify & understand the role of change leading to emergence of the case’s ethical dilemma. Has sophistication in understanding range of impact that change has on all stakeholders.

Little understanding of why/how people developed ideas about ethical solutions in the case. Little grasp of the importance of demographics in shaping people’s opinions.

Understands why / how folks have different ideas about ethical solution, but struggles to see connections amid ideas & demographics of those who put forward ideas.

Understands why / how folks have different ideas about ethical solution. Makes a less sophisticated connection between personal attributes and ethical positions.

Clearly understands diverse factors leading to development of other ethical positions. Comprehensive, sophisticated understanding that complex role differences play in forming ethical positions.

Fails Expectations (1) Approaches Expectations (2) Meets Expectations (3) Exceeds Expectations (4)

76650 BUS 303 Individual 2 Case AnalysisTrait Score

Identification of stakeholders and their frames of reference. Understands why/how people have different ideas about what ethical solutions would be? How do frames of reference (politics, environment, demographics culture) shape / inform positions?

Circle part 1 grade (10%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 0.0 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 2.40Change Identify the role of change or progress (i.e. societal, technological, environmental, governance, political, etc.) that led to emergence of the case’s central ethical dilemma.

Circle part 2 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 0.0 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 2.20Identification of alternatives

Circle part 3 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 0.0 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 3.20Identification of ethical issues / theories Identifies the sources of the ethical dilemma and / or the underlying conflicting ethical positions

Circle part 4 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 0.0 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 1.40Pros and Cons of Whistle Blowing Completely discusses the pros and cons for all the time periods asked about.

Circle part 5 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 0.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 2.00Choice of alternative Takes an ethical position and provides concrete rationale for taking that position?

Circle part 6 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 0.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 3.00Writing mechanics (grammar, sentence structure, vocabulary, spelling, and punctuation)

Circle part 7 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 0.0 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 2.80

Comments / Grade 2.43

Case has 6 or more errors. Case has 4-5 errors. Case has 1-3 errors. Case is free of errors.

Takes a position but can't defend. Does not use theory to support position taken.

Takes a position, but defence of position is weak. Little recognition of alternative or opposing positions. Little or no theory applied, or theory is applied incorrectly.

Takes a position & successfully defends it. The position is informed by theory and it refutes and/or acknowledges the alternative / opposing viewpoints.

Takes a position & defends it well. Position informed by theory; refers to alternative views. Applies creative thinking to address dilemmas in the context of diverse ethical frameworks. Adapts thinking / shows sophisticated grasp of ethical problem & long-term implications.

Incompletely looks at the pros and cons but not at all the three time periods

Looks at the pros and cons but either not for all the three time periods or not in any complete or systematic way.

Looks at the pros and cons for all the three time periods in a relatively systematic manner.

Looks at the pros and cons for all the three time periods in a complete and systematic manner.

Doesn't ID source of dilemma or does not identify the underlying conflicting ethical positions. Does not clearly articulate the ethical problem.

Identifies some of the sources of the ethical dilemma and underlying conflicting ethical positions, but has difficulty articulating these clearly.

Clearly articulates ethical dilemma & underlying conflicting ethical positions. Shows an understanding that individual needs be balanced with needs of the many.

Clearly identifies / articulates ethical dilemma & the underlying conflicting ethical positions. Shows understanding that needs of the indivi-dual must be balanced with needs of the many. Applies & recognizes relevant ethical theories.

Student misses out on key alternatives or explanations are lacking or unclear.

Student identifies some of the possible alternatives and provides some explanation.

Student identifies all key alternatives & explains them clearly.

Student identifies all key alternatives and explains them in a sophisticated manner.

Does not identify or understand the role of change that led to the emergence of the ethical dilemma at the centre of this business case.

Partially identifies or under-stands the role of change that led to the emergence of the ethical dilemma at the centre of this business case.

Identifies & understands role of change and/or progress that led to the emergence of the ethical dilemma at the centre of the business case.

Shows excellent ability to identify & understand the role of change leading to emergence of the case’s ethical dilemma. Has sophistication in understanding range of impact that change has on all stakeholders.

Little understanding of why/how people developed ideas about ethical solutions in the case. Little grasp of the importance of demographics in shaping people’s opinions.

Understands why / how folks have different ideas about ethical solution, but struggles to see connections amid ideas & demographics of those who put forward ideas.

Understands why / how folks have different ideas about ethical solution. Makes a less sophisticated connection between personal attributes and ethical positions.

Clearly understands diverse factors leading to development of other ethical positions. Comprehensive, sophisticated understanding that complex role differences play in forming ethical positions.

Fails Expectations (1) Approaches Expectations (2) Meets Expectations (3) Exceeds Expectations (4)

78499 BUS 303 Individual 2 Case AnalysisTrait Score

Identification of stakeholders and their frames of reference. Understands why/how people have different ideas about what ethical solutions would be? How do frames of reference (politics, environment, demographics culture) shape / inform positions?

Circle part 1 grade (10%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 0.0 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 2.40Change Identify the role of change or progress (i.e. societal, technological, environmental, governance, political, etc.) that led to emergence of the case’s central ethical dilemma.

Circle part 2 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 0.0 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 2.40Identification of alternatives

Circle part 3 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 0.0 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 3.20Identification of ethical issues / theories Identifies the sources of the ethical dilemma and / or the underlying conflicting ethical positions

Circle part 4 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 1.20Pros and Cons of Whistle Blowing Completely discusses the pros and cons for all the time periods asked about.

Circle part 5 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 0.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 2.00Choice of alternative Takes an ethical position and provides concrete rationale for taking that position?

Circle part 6 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 0.0 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 2.80Writing mechanics (grammar, sentence structure, vocabulary, spelling, and punctuation)

Circle part 7 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 0.0 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 2.80

Comments / Grade 2.40

Case has 6 or more errors. Case has 4-5 errors. Case has 1-3 errors. Case is free of errors.

Takes a position but can't defend. Does not use theory to support position taken.

Takes a position, but defence of position is weak. Little recognition of alternative or opposing positions. Little or no theory applied, or theory is applied incorrectly.

Takes a position & successfully defends it. The position is informed by theory and it refutes and/or acknowledges the alternative / opposing viewpoints.

Takes a position & defends it well. Position informed by theory; refers to alternative views. Applies creative thinking to address dilemmas in the context of diverse ethical frameworks. Adapts thinking / shows sophisticated grasp of ethical problem & long-term implications.

Incompletely looks at the pros and cons but not at all the three time periods

Looks at the pros and cons but either not for all the three time periods or not in any complete or systematic way.

Looks at the pros and cons for all the three time periods in a relatively systematic manner.

Looks at the pros and cons for all the three time periods in a complete and systematic manner.

Doesn't ID source of dilemma or does not identify the underlying conflicting ethical positions. Does not clearly articulate the ethical problem.

Identifies some of the sources of the ethical dilemma and underlying conflicting ethical positions, but has difficulty articulating these clearly.

Clearly articulates ethical dilemma & underlying conflicting ethical positions. Shows an understanding that individual needs be balanced with needs of the many.

Clearly identifies / articulates ethical dilemma & the underlying conflicting ethical positions. Shows understanding that needs of the indivi-dual must be balanced with needs of the many. Applies & recognizes relevant ethical theories.

Student misses out on key alternatives or explanations are lacking or unclear.

Student identifies some of the possible alternatives and provides some explanation.

Student identifies all key alternatives & explains them clearly.

Student identifies all key alternatives and explains them in a sophisticated manner.

Does not identify or understand the role of change that led to the emergence of the ethical dilemma at the centre of this business case.

Partially identifies or under-stands the role of change that led to the emergence of the ethical dilemma at the centre of this business case.

Identifies & understands role of change and/or progress that led to the emergence of the ethical dilemma at the centre of the business case.

Shows excellent ability to identify & understand the role of change leading to emergence of the case’s ethical dilemma. Has sophistication in understanding range of impact that change has on all stakeholders.

Little understanding of why/how people developed ideas about ethical solutions in the case. Little grasp of the importance of demographics in shaping people’s opinions.

Understands why / how folks have different ideas about ethical solution, but struggles to see connections amid ideas & demographics of those who put forward ideas.

Understands why / how folks have different ideas about ethical solution. Makes a less sophisticated connection between personal attributes and ethical positions.

Clearly understands diverse factors leading to development of other ethical positions. Comprehensive, sophisticated understanding that complex role differences play in forming ethical positions.

Fails Expectations (1) Approaches Expectations (2) Meets Expectations (3) Exceeds Expectations (4)

78854 BUS 303 Individual 2 Case AnalysisTrait Score

Identification of stakeholders and their frames of reference. Understands why/how people have different ideas about what ethical solutions would be? How do frames of reference (politics, environment, demographics culture) shape / inform positions?

Circle part 1 grade (10%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 0.0 4.0 …………. 3.80Change Identify the role of change or progress (i.e. societal, technological, environmental, governance, political, etc.) that led to emergence of the case’s central ethical dilemma.

Circle part 2 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 0.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 3.00Identification of alternatives

Circle part 3 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 0.0 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 3.20Identification of ethical issues / theories Identifies the sources of the ethical dilemma and / or the underlying conflicting ethical positions

Circle part 4 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 0.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 3.00Pros and Cons of Whistle Blowing Completely discusses the pros and cons for all the time periods asked about.

Circle part 5 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 0.0 4.0 …………. 3.80Choice of alternative Takes an ethical position and provides concrete rationale for taking that position?

Circle part 6 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 0.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 3.00Writing mechanics (grammar, sentence structure, vocabulary, spelling, and punctuation)

Circle part 7 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 0.0 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 2.80

Comments / Grade 3.20

Case has 6 or more errors. Case has 4-5 errors. Case has 1-3 errors. Case is free of errors.

Takes a position but can't defend. Does not use theory to support position taken.

Takes a position, but defence of position is weak. Little recognition of alternative or opposing positions. Little or no theory applied, or theory is applied incorrectly.

Takes a position & successfully defends it. The position is informed by theory and it refutes and/or acknowledges the alternative / opposing viewpoints.

Takes a position & defends it well. Position informed by theory; refers to alternative views. Applies creative thinking to address dilemmas in the context of diverse ethical frameworks. Adapts thinking / shows sophisticated grasp of ethical problem & long-term implications.

Incompletely looks at the pros and cons but not at all the three time periods

Looks at the pros and cons but either not for all the three time periods or not in any complete or systematic way.

Looks at the pros and cons for all the three time periods in a relatively systematic manner.

Looks at the pros and cons for all the three time periods in a complete and systematic manner.

Doesn't ID source of dilemma or does not identify the underlying conflicting ethical positions. Does not clearly articulate the ethical problem.

Identifies some of the sources of the ethical dilemma and underlying conflicting ethical positions, but has difficulty articulating these clearly.

Clearly articulates ethical dilemma & underlying conflicting ethical positions. Shows an understanding that individual needs be balanced with needs of the many.

Clearly identifies / articulates ethical dilemma & the underlying conflicting ethical positions. Shows understanding that needs of the indivi-dual must be balanced with needs of the many. Applies & recognizes relevant ethical theories.

Student misses out on key alternatives or explanations are lacking or unclear.

Student identifies some of the possible alternatives and provides some explanation.

Student identifies all key alternatives & explains them clearly.

Student identifies all key alternatives and explains them in a sophisticated manner.

Does not identify or understand the role of change that led to the emergence of the ethical dilemma at the centre of this business case.

Partially identifies or under-stands the role of change that led to the emergence of the ethical dilemma at the centre of this business case.

Identifies & understands role of change and/or progress that led to the emergence of the ethical dilemma at the centre of the business case.

Shows excellent ability to identify & understand the role of change leading to emergence of the case’s ethical dilemma. Has sophistication in understanding range of impact that change has on all stakeholders.

Little understanding of why/how people developed ideas about ethical solutions in the case. Little grasp of the importance of demographics in shaping people’s opinions.

Understands why / how folks have different ideas about ethical solution, but struggles to see connections amid ideas & demographics of those who put forward ideas.

Understands why / how folks have different ideas about ethical solution. Makes a less sophisticated connection between personal attributes and ethical positions.

Clearly understands diverse factors leading to development of other ethical positions. Comprehensive, sophisticated understanding that complex role differences play in forming ethical positions.

Fails Expectations (1) Approaches Expectations (2) Meets Expectations (3) Exceeds Expectations (4)

79210 BUS 303 Individual 2 Case AnalysisTrait Score

Identification of stakeholders and their frames of reference. Understands why/how people have different ideas about what ethical solutions would be? How do frames of reference (politics, environment, demographics culture) shape / inform positions?

Circle part 1 grade (10%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 0.0 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 1.80Change Identify the role of change or progress (i.e. societal, technological, environmental, governance, political, etc.) that led to emergence of the case’s central ethical dilemma.

Circle part 2 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 0.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 2.00Identification of alternatives

Circle part 3 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 0.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 3.00Identification of ethical issues / theories Identifies the sources of the ethical dilemma and / or the underlying conflicting ethical positions

Circle part 4 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 0.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 1.00Pros and Cons of Whistle Blowing Completely discusses the pros and cons for all the time periods asked about.

Circle part 5 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 0.0 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 1.80Choice of alternative Takes an ethical position and provides concrete rationale for taking that position?

Circle part 6 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 0.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 2.00Writing mechanics (grammar, sentence structure, vocabulary, spelling, and punctuation)

Circle part 7 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 0.0 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 1.40

Comments / Grade 1.86

Case has 6 or more errors. Case has 4-5 errors. Case has 1-3 errors. Case is free of errors.

Takes a position but can't defend. Does not use theory to support position taken.

Takes a position, but defence of position is weak. Little recognition of alternative or opposing positions. Little or no theory applied, or theory is applied incorrectly.

Takes a position & successfully defends it. The position is informed by theory and it refutes and/or acknowledges the alternative / opposing viewpoints.

Takes a position & defends it well. Position informed by theory; refers to alternative views. Applies creative thinking to address dilemmas in the context of diverse ethical frameworks. Adapts thinking / shows sophisticated grasp of ethical problem & long-term implications.

Incompletely looks at the pros and cons but not at all the three time periods

Looks at the pros and cons but either not for all the three time periods or not in any complete or systematic way.

Looks at the pros and cons for all the three time periods in a relatively systematic manner.

Looks at the pros and cons for all the three time periods in a complete and systematic manner.

Doesn't ID source of dilemma or does not identify the underlying conflicting ethical positions. Does not clearly articulate the ethical problem.

Identifies some of the sources of the ethical dilemma and underlying conflicting ethical positions, but has difficulty articulating these clearly.

Clearly articulates ethical dilemma & underlying conflicting ethical positions. Shows an understanding that individual needs be balanced with needs of the many.

Clearly identifies / articulates ethical dilemma & the underlying conflicting ethical positions. Shows understanding that needs of the indivi-dual must be balanced with needs of the many. Applies & recognizes relevant ethical theories.

Student misses out on key alternatives or explanations are lacking or unclear.

Student identifies some of the possible alternatives and provides some explanation.

Student identifies all key alternatives & explains them clearly.

Student identifies all key alternatives and explains them in a sophisticated manner.

Does not identify or understand the role of change that led to the emergence of the ethical dilemma at the centre of this business case.

Partially identifies or under-stands the role of change that led to the emergence of the ethical dilemma at the centre of this business case.

Identifies & understands role of change and/or progress that led to the emergence of the ethical dilemma at the centre of the business case.

Shows excellent ability to identify & understand the role of change leading to emergence of the case’s ethical dilemma. Has sophistication in understanding range of impact that change has on all stakeholders.

Little understanding of why/how people developed ideas about ethical solutions in the case. Little grasp of the importance of demographics in shaping people’s opinions.

Understands why / how folks have different ideas about ethical solution, but struggles to see connections amid ideas & demographics of those who put forward ideas.

Understands why / how folks have different ideas about ethical solution. Makes a less sophisticated connection between personal attributes and ethical positions.

Clearly understands diverse factors leading to development of other ethical positions. Comprehensive, sophisticated understanding that complex role differences play in forming ethical positions.

Fails Expectations (1) Approaches Expectations (2) Meets Expectations (3) Exceeds Expectations (4)

79477 BUS 303 Individual 2 Case AnalysisTrait Score

Identification of stakeholders and their frames of reference. Understands why/how people have different ideas about what ethical solutions would be? How do frames of reference (politics, environment, demographics culture) shape / inform positions?

Circle part 1 grade (10%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 0.0 3.8 4.0 …………. 3.60Change Identify the role of change or progress (i.e. societal, technological, environmental, governance, political, etc.) that led to emergence of the case’s central ethical dilemma.

Circle part 2 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 0.0 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 2.20Identification of alternatives

Circle part 3 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 0.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 3.00Identification of ethical issues / theories Identifies the sources of the ethical dilemma and / or the underlying conflicting ethical positions

Circle part 4 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 0.0 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 2.20Pros and Cons of Whistle Blowing Completely discusses the pros and cons for all the time periods asked about.

Circle part 5 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 0.0 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 2.40Choice of alternative Takes an ethical position and provides concrete rationale for taking that position?

Circle part 6 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 0.0 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 2.20Writing mechanics (grammar, sentence structure, vocabulary, spelling, and punctuation)

Circle part 7 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 0.0 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 2.40

Comments / Grade 2.52

Case has 6 or more errors. Case has 4-5 errors. Case has 1-3 errors. Case is free of errors.

Takes a position but can't defend. Does not use theory to support position taken.

Takes a position, but defence of position is weak. Little recognition of alternative or opposing positions. Little or no theory applied, or theory is applied incorrectly.

Takes a position & successfully defends it. The position is informed by theory and it refutes and/or acknowledges the alternative / opposing viewpoints.

Takes a position & defends it well. Position informed by theory; refers to alternative views. Applies creative thinking to address dilemmas in the context of diverse ethical frameworks. Adapts thinking / shows sophisticated grasp of ethical problem & long-term implications.

Incompletely looks at the pros and cons but not at all the three time periods

Looks at the pros and cons but either not for all the three time periods or not in any complete or systematic way.

Looks at the pros and cons for all the three time periods in a relatively systematic manner.

Looks at the pros and cons for all the three time periods in a complete and systematic manner.

Doesn't ID source of dilemma or does not identify the underlying conflicting ethical positions. Does not clearly articulate the ethical problem.

Identifies some of the sources of the ethical dilemma and underlying conflicting ethical positions, but has difficulty articulating these clearly.

Clearly articulates ethical dilemma & underlying conflicting ethical positions. Shows an understanding that individual needs be balanced with needs of the many.

Clearly identifies / articulates ethical dilemma & the underlying conflicting ethical positions. Shows understanding that needs of the indivi-dual must be balanced with needs of the many. Applies & recognizes relevant ethical theories.

Student misses out on key alternatives or explanations are lacking or unclear.

Student identifies some of the possible alternatives and provides some explanation.

Student identifies all key alternatives & explains them clearly.

Student identifies all key alternatives and explains them in a sophisticated manner.

Does not identify or understand the role of change that led to the emergence of the ethical dilemma at the centre of this business case.

Partially identifies or under-stands the role of change that led to the emergence of the ethical dilemma at the centre of this business case.

Identifies & understands role of change and/or progress that led to the emergence of the ethical dilemma at the centre of the business case.

Shows excellent ability to identify & understand the role of change leading to emergence of the case’s ethical dilemma. Has sophistication in understanding range of impact that change has on all stakeholders.

Little understanding of why/how people developed ideas about ethical solutions in the case. Little grasp of the importance of demographics in shaping people’s opinions.

Understands why / how folks have different ideas about ethical solution, but struggles to see connections amid ideas & demographics of those who put forward ideas.

Understands why / how folks have different ideas about ethical solution. Makes a less sophisticated connection between personal attributes and ethical positions.

Clearly understands diverse factors leading to development of other ethical positions. Comprehensive, sophisticated understanding that complex role differences play in forming ethical positions.

Fails Expectations (1) Approaches Expectations (2) Meets Expectations (3) Exceeds Expectations (4)

79834 BUS 303 Individual 2 Case AnalysisTrait Score

Identification of stakeholders and their frames of reference. Understands why/how people have different ideas about what ethical solutions would be? How do frames of reference (politics, environment, demographics culture) shape / inform positions?

Circle part 1 grade (10%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 0.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 3.00Change Identify the role of change or progress (i.e. societal, technological, environmental, governance, political, etc.) that led to emergence of the case’s central ethical dilemma.

Circle part 2 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 0.0 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 2.80Identification of alternatives

Circle part 3 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 0.0 4.0 …………. 3.80Identification of ethical issues / theories Identifies the sources of the ethical dilemma and / or the underlying conflicting ethical positions

Circle part 4 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 1.20Pros and Cons of Whistle Blowing Completely discusses the pros and cons for all the time periods asked about.

Circle part 5 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 0.0 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 2.40Choice of alternative Takes an ethical position and provides concrete rationale for taking that position?

Circle part 6 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 0.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 3.00Writing mechanics (grammar, sentence structure, vocabulary, spelling, and punctuation)

Circle part 7 grade (15%) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 0.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 …………. 2.00

Comments / Grade 2.58

Case has 6 or more errors. Case has 4-5 errors. Case has 1-3 errors. Case is free of errors.

Takes a position but can't defend. Does not use theory to support position taken.

Takes a position, but defence of position is weak. Little recognition of alternative or opposing positions. Little or no theory applied, or theory is applied incorrectly.

Takes a position & successfully defends it. The position is informed by theory and it refutes and/or acknowledges the alternative / opposing viewpoints.

Takes a position & defends it well. Position informed by theory; refers to alternative views. Applies creative thinking to address dilemmas in the context of diverse ethical frameworks. Adapts thinking / shows sophisticated grasp of ethical problem & long-term implications.

Incompletely looks at the pros and cons but not at all the three time periods

Looks at the pros and cons but either not for all the three time periods or not in any complete or systematic way.

Looks at the pros and cons for all the three time periods in a relatively systematic manner.

Looks at the pros and cons for all the three time periods in a complete and systematic manner.

Doesn't ID source of dilemma or does not identify the underlying conflicting ethical positions. Does not clearly articulate the ethical problem.

Identifies some of the sources of the ethical dilemma and underlying conflicting ethical positions, but has difficulty articulating these clearly.

Clearly articulates ethical dilemma & underlying conflicting ethical positions. Shows an understanding that individual needs be balanced with needs of the many.

Clearly identifies / articulates ethical dilemma & the underlying conflicting ethical positions. Shows understanding that needs of the indivi-dual must be balanced with needs of the many. Applies & recognizes relevant ethical theories.

Student misses out on key alternatives or explanations are lacking or unclear.

Student identifies some of the possible alternatives and provides some explanation.

Student identifies all key alternatives & explains them clearly.

Student identifies all key alternatives and explains them in a sophisticated manner.

Does not identify or understand the role of change that led to the emergence of the ethical dilemma at the centre of this business case.

Partially identifies or under-stands the role of change that led to the emergence of the ethical dilemma at the centre of this business case.

Identifies & understands role of change and/or progress that led to the emergence of the ethical dilemma at the centre of the business case.

Shows excellent ability to identify & understand the role of change leading to emergence of the case’s ethical dilemma. Has sophistication in understanding range of impact that change has on all stakeholders.

Little understanding of why/how people developed ideas about ethical solutions in the case. Little grasp of the importance of demographics in shaping people’s opinions.

Understands why / how folks have different ideas about ethical solution, but struggles to see connections amid ideas & demographics of those who put forward ideas.

Understands why / how folks have different ideas about ethical solution. Makes a less sophisticated connection between personal attributes and ethical positions.

Clearly understands diverse factors leading to development of other ethical positions. Comprehensive, sophisticated understanding that complex role differences play in forming ethical positions.

Fails Expectations (1) Approaches Expectations (2) Meets Expectations (3) Exceeds Expectations (4)