The “You Decide” assignment presents a difficult and painful dilemma, with you in an imagined professional role. Go through the You Decide presentation, make the decision it calls for, meet you’re your team or partner to discuss, and compose a paper and presentation that explains your decision and your reasoning and justification for it.
You are called upon to make a painful medical decision and to explain it both orally and in writing. Who benefits from what you decided, who gets denied a needed benefit, and why? You will compose an official memorandum that will be kept for the record and could potentially be read not only by your Peer Review Committee, but also by those involved in charitable fundraising, which supports hospital development, as well as by others with financial interests in the decision.
You will see notice that there is time pressure in the simulated situation, so remember that you would not have the luxury to dawdle in the decision-making process, and as the decision-maker, you would not have the luxury of consulting a broad spectrum of advisors. It falls on you and your team or partner to decide!
Include in the document and presentation the utilitarian ethical philosophy of John Stuart Mill (from the lecture and audio for this week) and one other ethical philosopher of your choosing that we have studied to date, and use both of those philosophies to bolster your decision. This paper will be at least 2 pages and no more than 3 pages with a 2-3 minute oral presentation on which you and your team or partner may (ideally and preferably) collaborate. Remember, both professional written form and potential audience, as well as tone when writing this sensitive memorandum.
Outside sources are not required, but if used, must be cited properly.
RUBRIC
You Decide
You Decide
Criteria Ratings Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIntroduction
Writer summarizes a difficult situation sensitively and offers a compelling purpose for writing. 40.0 pts
Full Marks 0.0 pts
No Marks
40.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSupport/Development
Course material and team or partner input is leveraged powerfully. Theoretical underpinnings are well understood and used to bring an argument/justification of choice forward. Both John Stuart Mill and another philosopher are used. 50.0 pts
Full Marks 0.0 pts
No Marks
50.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeGrammar, Mechanics, Style, Format, Quality of Thought
Grammar refers to correct Standard American Usage, e.g., subject/verb agreement and use of correct parts of speech. Mechanics refers to correct idiomatic usage, e.g., capitalized proper nouns, word choice, and word order. Style (5 pts) refers to dynamic writing, avoiding passive constructions, writing that shows, describes, and compels the reader’s interest. Evident care has been taken in composing; there are few errors, and they do not significantly interfere with meaning. APA format has been followed scrupulously. 40.0 pts
Full Marks 0.0 pts
No Marks
40.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeVisual Presentation 25.0 pts
Full Marks 0.0 pts
No Marks
25.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeOral Narration 20.0 pts
Full Marks 0.0 pts
No Marks
20.0 pts
Total Points: 175.0