Ethics
The Association for Computing Machinery (ACM) and the Institute for Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) have developed codes of ethics for software engineers. The ACM policy is here, and the IEEE policy is here. It is important for all students graduating with a degree in Computer Science to have an understanding of these ethical frameworks.
You will explore ethical issues in CS individually in a directed paraphrase (see below) and as a team in a project quality & ethical practice presentation.
Directed Paraphrase
Computer professionals should be able to identify and succinctly state ethical issues related to computing. For this activity, we will practice that skill within our teams. Specifically, each individual will read an article and be prepared to describe that article during the team/advisor meeting. The format is a directed paraphrase:
- Using plain language:
- paraphrase (state in your own words) the main points of the article;
- identify which ACM/IEEE Ethics Principles were violated that led to the events in the article;
- discuss how different behavior on the part of the engineers might have changed the outcome.
- This should take approximately five minutes.
- Your goal is for your teammates and advisor to gain a quick understanding of the ethical issue(s) and possible solutions.
- Obviously in five minutes you can't cover everything discussed in the article. What is the primary issue? What is the most compelling example?
- If needed, you may have an index card or half page to remind you what you want to say. But do not just read this verbatim. You should be able to discuss these types of issues informally. Maybe practice with a friend or relative.
It's likely you have never done a directed paraphrase before. During this sprint team/advisor meeting, your advisor will do a directed paraphrase of a case study on the Denver International Airport baggage handling system, to give you an idea what we want. For your paraphrase, we recommend that you first read the entire article, possibly taking notes. Then select the issues and examples you want to discuss. You may want to write out what you plan to say. But as mentioned above, you should not just read from the paper. Remember, these are issues we should all be interested in. So just tell us what you learned as clearly as you can.
Students should coordinate within their teams to ensure everyone covers a different article. You will find an article of your choice to paraphrase.
Rubric
| Timing Target: 5 minutes |
+ 1.0 point 4.5 - 6 minutes |
+ 0.5 point 4 - 4.5 or 6 - 6.5 minutes |
+ 0.0 points 3.5 - 4 or 6.5 - 7 minutes |
- 1.0 point < 3.5 or > 7 minutes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Content - Events Summary |
+ 1.5 points Thorough summary, all points are relevant, no tangents |
+ 0.75 point Mostly accurate, some info/details missing, some short tangents |
+ 0.0 points Missing many key points, facts are incorrect, many pieces of irrelevant information added |
|
| Content - Ethics Summary |
+ 1.5 points At least two specific ACM/IEEE sub-principles selected AND are relevant to article |
+ 0.75 point Only one specific ACM/IEEE sub-principle selected AND is relevant OR At least two ACM/IEEE broad categories selected AND are relevant to article OR At least two specific ACM/IEEE sub-principles selected BUT are both NOT relevant to article |
+ 0.0 points Only one ACM/IEEE broad category selected |
- 1.0 point Ethics not mentioned |
| Clarity & Delivery | + 1.0 point Clearly & smoothly delivered, connections are clearly made between points, little to no fillers or pauses |
+ 0.5 point Some parts hard to follow, but mostly able to easily connect the dots, some fillers, few pauses |
+ 0.0 points Rambling, hard to follow, stumbling delivery, many pauses, filler words |
