Home
Blog
BUSR 186 San Jose SU Utilitarianism Theory of Ethics on Business Case Study

BUSR 186 San Jose SU Utilitarianism Theory of Ethics on Business Case Study

Daniel Kevins

0 comments

Choose 5 DIFFERENT CASE STUDIES (these can be those we discuss or those we don’t; as long as they are from the TEXT, any case study will work).
You are to analyze ALL 5 of the case studies using ONLY ONE of the following ethical theories: Kantian Deontology, Utilitarianism, Nozick’s theory, virtue ethics, Rawls’ theory, or Marxism.
Make sure you provide a paragraph that accurately describes the theory you will be using.
Make sure you describe the case study before you apply the theory.
Provide a general assessment of the paper, i.e., write a conclusion.
Avoid using phrases like: “In my opinion,” “I believe,” “Ethics is difficult and not certain, so it is hard to tell if this ethical theory is right or not.” This is an ETHICS course, so don’t do or say anything in your ETHICS PAPER that would undermine ethics as a discipline. Further, you are making an ARGUMENT in this paper, as such there is no room for “personal opinions” or “feelings.” Just turn those opinions and feelings into statements of fact.
This paper should be no less than 8 full pages and no more than 10. This papers should be well written, typed, doubled spaced, 12 point font, Times New Roman (Or equivalent font). No cover sheet needed. Include proper citation.

I will send you all the case studies information

Rubric

Final Paper

Criteria

Ratings

Pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMechanicsGrammar, Sentence Structure, etc.

20 to >15.0 pts

Good

Few mistakes in sentence structure, grammar, and clarity. Any mistakes do not interfere with the author’s point.

15 to >10.0 pts

Acceptable

There are a few issues with sentence clarity. Sentences could have been reformulated. Shows some proof reading, but not careful proof reading.

10 to >5.0 pts

Lacking

Multiple sentences were poorly structured. Sveral sentences interfered with the point the author was trying to make. Does not clearly indicate whether the author proof read.

5 to >0.0 pts

Not Acceptable

Nearly all sentences are poorly written. It is clear that there was no proof reading. The author did not take the time to use spell check.

0 pts

No Marks

20 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAccuracyAre all of the relevant themes, issues, and concepts displayed?

20 to >15.0 pts

Good

All relevant theoretical concepts are appropriately applied to the specified issue.

15 to >10.0 pts

Acceptable

Most relevant themes, concepts, and issues are employed. The missing themes, concepts, and issues, do not impede the author’s point. However, their presence could have significantly enhanced the paper.

10 to >5.0 pts

Lacking

The most relevant themes, concepts, and issues were not presented. THe author focused on the wrong aspects of the themes, concepts, issues. The author did not accurately apply the themes, concepts, issues.

5 to >0.0 pts

Not Acceptable

The author employed none of the relevant themes, concepts, and issues. Or, attributed the relevant themes, concepts, and issues to the wrong authors.

0 pts

No Marks

20 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSourcesAre sources adequately cited and employed to prove the authors point?

20 to >15.0 pts

Good

All sources are used to support the author’s points. ALl sources are cited appropriately and consistently.

15 to >10.0 pts

Acceptable

Sources are used. The sources are cited in a way that is clear but inconsistent or not adherent to some norm (MLA, APA, Chicago).

10 to >5.0 pts

Lacking

Sources are used and quotations given. However there is a poor attempt to cite.

5 to >0.0 pts

Unacceptable

Sources are not used, or improperly used. No citation is given

0 pts

No Marks

20 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomePromptDoes the presentation adequately follow the prompt?

20 to >15.0 pts

Good

All aspects of prompt are fully developed and answered correctly.

15 to >10.0 pts

Acceptable

The most important aspects of the prompt are adequately answered. The missing aspects of the prompt are not detrimental to the author’s point.

10 to >5.0 pts

Lacking

Some aspects of the prompt have been answered, but not in a clear and meaningful way.

5 to >0.0 pts

Unacceptable

The response does not adequately respond to the prompt.

0 pts

No Marks

20 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSubmissionWas the presentation submitted in a way that adheres to deadlines and standards?

20 to >15.0 pts

Good

Assignment was submitted on time and in the proper format.

15 to >10.0 pts

Acceptable

The assignment was submitted late. Or half was submitted on time, the other half was submitted late.

10 to >5.0 pts

Lacking

Submitted late and is improperly formatted.

5 to >0.0 pts

Unacceptable

Something was submitted, but it was late and had multiple formatting problems.

0 pts

No Marks

20 pts

Total Points: 100

About the Author

Daniel Kevins

Follow me