4.1 Biomatrix case exercises - student module  (Page 21/21)

In this module, you have…

• studied a real world case that raised serious problems with intellectual property, privacy, security, and free speech. Working with these problems has helped you to develop a better “working” understanding of these key concepts,
• studied and practiced using four decision-making frameworks: (1) using socio-technical analysis to specify the problem in a complex, real world case, (2) practiced brainstorming techniques to develop and refine solutions that respond to your problem, (3) employed three ethics tests to integrate ethical considerations into your solutions and to test these solutions in terms of their ethics, and (4) applied a feasibility analysis to your solutions to identify and trouble-shoot obstacles to the implementation of your ethical solution,
• explored the analogy between solving ethical and design problems,
• practiced the skills of moral imagination, moral creativity, reasonableness, and perseverance, and…
• experienced, through key participant perspectives, the challenges of ethics advocacy “under the gun.”

Debrief on your group work before the rest of the class

1. Provide a concise statement and justification of the problem your group specified
2. Present the refined solution generation list your group developed in exercise 2.
3. Present and provide a quick summary explanation of the results of your group’s solution evaluation matrix.
4. Show your group’s feasibility matrix and summarize your assessment of the feasibility of implementing the solution alternatives you tested in exercise three.

Group debriefing

1. Were there any problem you group had working together to carry out this case analysis? What were the problems and how did you go about solving them?
2. What problems did you have with understanding and practicing the four frameworks for solving problems? How did you go about solving these problems? Does your group have any outstanding questions or doubts?
3. Now that you have heard the other groups present their results, what differences emerged between your group’s analysis and those of the other groups? Have you modified your analysis in light of the analyses of the other groups? If so how? Do the other groups need to take into account any aspects of your group’s debriefing?

Biomatrix presentation

Shortened responsibility presentation

Biomatrix decision points for fall 2011

Appendix

This optional section contains additional or supplementary information related to this module. It could include: assessment, background such as supporting ethical theories and frameworks, technical information, discipline specific information, and references or links.

References on biomatrix

1. Biomatrix Draft SEC Report (for fiscal year ending on Dec 31, 1999). Accessed on April 2, 2001. http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/747952/000091205700046056/0000912057-00-046056.txt. Report addresses risk facts with Biomatrix including protecting intellectual property and dealing with government regulations. Outlines financial weak spots with Biomatrix including patent protection and conforming to government regulations.
2. Buss, D. "Tender Joints." In Wall Street Journal November 6, 2000. Presents pros and cons of visco supplementaiton using Biomatrix product, Synvisc.
3. Guernsey, L. "Yahoo to Try Harder to Rid Postings of Hateful Material" In The New York Times January 3, 2001. Outlines Yahoo response to Biomatrix and other incidents of cyberslander.
4. Hines, J.I. and Cramer, M.H. (May-June 2003). "Protecting Your Organization's Reputation Against Cybersmear." In Legal Report : 1-8. Provides suggestions on how to respond to cyberslander.
5. Dean, J.W. (August 2003). "Defamation Immunity On The Internet." In Modern Practice . Accessed online http://practice.findlaw.com/feature-0803-html on7/5/04. Dean explains analogy of online service provider responsibility with publishers, distributors, and common carriers.
6. Pizzi, P.J. and Barnes, J.L. ((2001). " How to Respond to Cybersmear" Connell Foley, LLP. Accessed on 9/28/10 at http://www.connellfoley.com/seminar/employsmear.html.
7. Margaret Mannix, Toni Locy, Kim Clark, Anne Kates Smith, Joellen Perry, Frank McCoy, Joannie Fischer, Jeff Glasser and David E. Kaplan. "The Web's Dark Side: In the shadows of cyberspace, an ordinary week is a frightening time." In U.S. New and World Report . 8/20/00. Accessed online http://www.usnews.com/usnews/biztech/articles/000828/archive_013282_4.htm on 9/28/10.

References on associated ethical and philosophical concepts

1. Bradley, F.H. (1927/1963). Ethical Studies: Essay I . Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 3-4.
2. Brincat, Cynthia A. and Wike, Victoria S. (2000) Morality and the Professional Life: Values at Work. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
3. Cruz, J. A., Frey, W. J. (2003) An Effective Strategy for Integration Ethics Across the Curriculum in Engineering: An ABET 2000 Challenge, Science and Engineering Ethics , 9(4): 543-568.
4. Davis, M., Ethics and the University , Routledge, London and New York, 1999: 166-167.
5. Richard T. De George, "Ethical Responsibilities of Engineers in Large Organizations: The Pinto Case," in Ethical Issues in Engineering, ed. Deborah G. Johnson (1991) New Jersey: Prentice-Hall: 175-186.
6. Charles Harris, Michael Pritchard and Michael Rabins (2005) Engineering Ethics: Concepts and Cases , 3rd Ed. Belmont, CA: Thomson/Wadsworth: 203-206.
7. Huff, Chuck and Jawer, Bruce, "Toward a Design Ethics for Computing Professionals in Social Issues in Computing: Putting Computing in its Place , Huff, Chuck and Finholt, Thomas Eds. (1994) New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc.
8. Mill, J.S. (1978). On Liberty: Chapter 1 . Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing Company.
9. Solomon, Robert C. (1999) A Better Way to Think About Business: How Personal Integrity Leads to Corporate Success . Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
10. Spinello, R.A. (2001). "Internet Service Providers and Defamation: New Standards of Liability." In Readings in Cyberethics . Sudbury, MA: Jones and Bartlett Publishers, 198-209.
11. Tavani, H.T. (2004). Ethics and Technology: Ethical Issues in an Age of Information and Communication Technology . Danvers, MA: John Wiley and Sons, 251-255.
12. Velasquez, M. "Why Corporations Are Not Morally Responsible for Anything They Do." Business and Professional Ethics Journal . 2(2): 1-18.
13. Anthony Weston. (2001) A Practical Companion to Ethics , 2nd ed. USA: Oxford University Press, 2001, Chapter 3.
14. Carolyn Whitbeck (1998) Ethics in Engineering Practice and Research . U.K. Cambridge University Press: 55-72 and 176-181.
15. Wike, Victoria S. (2001) "Professional Engineering Ethics Bahavior: A Values-based Approach," Proceedings of the 2001 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference and Exposition, Session 2461 .

Eac toolkit project

This module is a work-in-progress; the author(s) may update the content as needed. others are welcome to use this module or create a new derived module. you can collaborate to improve this module by providing suggestions and/or feedback on your experiences with this module.

Please see the Creative Commons License regarding permission to reuse this material.