PSY FPX 5110 Assessment 3 Ethical Dilemma In The Workplace Setting
- High Quality FPX Sample Assessment
- Step-by-Step Guide to master FPX Assessment
- References (APA Format) for related Assessments
- Connect with Top professors for specific class
- Detailed (FAQs) related to Assessment.
- Express Delivery with in 24 hours.
Assessment Overview:
PSY FPX 5110 Assessment 3: Ethical Dilemma in the Workplace explores the case of Jenny, a new university professor asked to educate a Biopsychology course outside her moxie. The script raises ethical enterprises including lack of qualifications, implicit exploitation, gender inequality, and pressure for career advancement. The assessment applies deontological and utilitarian ethical fabrics, as well as the Forester- Miller & Davis ethical decision- making model, to guide applicable professional tests and resolution.
How to Pass PSY FPX 5110 Assessment 3 Ethical Dilemma In The Workplace Setting
- Refine Academic Terminology: Correct the “translation/OCR” errors to ensure the paper meets graduate-level standards:
- Change “outside her moxie” to “outside her expertise.”
- Change “vivisection course” to “Biopsychology/Physiological Psychology course.”
- Change “allure her” to “induce or bribe her.”
- Change “Logger-Miller” to “Forester-Miller.”
- The Competence Commandment: Cite the APA Ethical Principles (Standard 2: Competence). An educator has an ethical obligation to only teach what they are qualified to teach. If Jenny teaches Biopsychology poorly, she is harming the students’ future careers—this is a violation of Nonmaleficence.
- Deontology vs. Utilitarianism: * Deontology: Focus on the Categorical Imperative. If every professor taught subjects they didn’t know, the entire university system would collapse. Therefore, it is Jenny’s duty to refuse.
- Utilitarianism: The director is arguing that the “Greatest Good” is simply having a body in the classroom so the class isn’t canceled. You must argue against this by showing that the “Net Harm” to 30 students outweighs the “Short-term Gain” for the director.
- Identify the Power Imbalance: Acknowledge that as a “new university professor,” Jenny is in a vulnerable position. This is an Exploitative Relationship (Standard 3.08). The director is using Jenny’s desire for tenure as a lever to force an unethical choice.
- Forester-Miller Step 2 (The Code): Specifically mention ACA Code of Ethics Section C.2.a (Boundaries of Competence). Even though she is in a teaching role, the counseling ethics code provides a strong framework for professional limitations.
- The “Slippery Slope” Argument: In your “Implicit Consequences” section, mention that if Jenny accepts now, she sets a precedent that she can be pressured into any task. This leads to Burnout and a further decline in professional standards.
- Address the Gender/Tenure Bias: You noted gender inequality. Research and cite the “Leaky Pipeline” or “Gendered Service” in academia, where female junior faculty are often pressured into more “administrative or service” labor than their male counterparts.
- The “Third Option” Resolution: A distinguished resolution isn’t just “Yes” or “No.” Suggest Jenny offer a compromise: she will not teach the course, but she will help the director find a qualified adjunct, or she will co-teach it with a mentor to gain the expertise for next year.
- Consultation is Key: In the Forester-Miller model, emphasize Consultation. Jenny should speak with a trusted mentor or the Faculty Senate before making a final decision. This protects her legally and professionally.
- APA Reference Quality: Ensure your references are formatted correctly. Specifically, ensure the Chae et al. (2021) and Grunhaus et al. (2018) citations are used to support the “Decision-Making” section of your paper.
Sample Assessment:
CASE STUDY
OVERVIEW
Jenny, a new university professor, has been approached by the university director to educate a class outside her moxie. The director emphasizes the critical need to fill the tutoring vacancy and pressures Jenny to consider taking on the vivisection course, reminding her of implicit unborn openings at the university.
ETHICAL CONCERNS
Jenny lacks qualifications to educate Biopsychology, raising enterprises about her limited experience. The director’s attempt to allure her with the prospect of a full- time tutoring position raises ethical questions. also, issues of gender inequality and demarcation grounded on term status within the university environment are apparent.
DEONTOLOGY UTILITARIANISM
- Obligation over consequences – Consequences over obligation
- Good or bad determined by conduct – Good or bad determined by results or issues
- The end does n’t justify the means – The end justifies the means
- Ethical opinions innocent by connections – Ethical opinions told by overall good or bad of a situation
COMPARISON OF DEONTOLOGY AND UTILITARIANISM
EXAMPLES OF DEONTOLOGY & UTILITARIANISM
- Deontology A store sells all particulars at the same price anyhow of profitable status, grounded on the moral law of doing good and duty to humanity.
- Utilitarianism Wealth- grounded pricing where fat consumers are charged further than poorer guests, aiming for overall societal benefit by balancing prices and gains.
PSY FPX 5110 Assessment 3 Ethical Dilemma In The Workplace Setting
DEONTOLOGY
conduct accepted solely for career advancement would be immorally inferior. Deceiving others by tutoring a class for which one is unqualified violates moral principles, prioritizing right over wrong.
ETHICAL DECISION MAKING WITH THE FORESTER-MILLER & DAVIS MODEL
- Identify the problem
- Apply the ACA law of Ethics
- Determine the nature of the dilemma
- induce implicit courses of action
- Consider implicit consequences of options and determine action
- estimate named course of action
- apply the chosen course of action
PROPOSED RESOLUTION
Jenny should prioritize conduct aligned with her morals and integrity, potentially addressing enterprises of unstable treatment among genders and term statuses with the university director’s elders or the board.
PSY FPX 5110 Assessment 3 Ethical Dilemma In The Workplace Setting
Grunhaus, C. M. L., Tuazon, V. E., Gonzalez, E., & Wagner, N. J. (2018). A counselor education case study: The counselor Values‐Based conflict model in action. Counseling and Values, 63(2), 164-179.
Petrini, C. (2010). Theoretical models and operational frameworks in public health ethics. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 7(1), 189–202.
References (APA 7 Format)
- Barrett, M. S.( n.d.). Ethical decision- making in internal health( PDF). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13033-020-00356-9
- BBC.( n.d.). Duty- grounded ethics( Deontological ethics).
- BBC.( n.d.). Consequentialism( Utilitarianism). https://capella.vitalsource.com/books/9781465298072
- Chae, Gosling, D. R., Goshorn, J. R., & Fan, S.( 2021). A Dilemma Within Doctoral Supervision Applying an Ethical Decision ‐ Making Model. Comforting and Values., 66( 2), 117 – 130. https://doi.org/10.1037/ort0000073
Rubric Breakdown
| Criterion | Emerging | Proficient | Distinguished |
| Dilemma Identification | Lists the problem as “teaching a hard class.” | Identifies the conflict between career advancement and professional competence. | Critically analyzes the systemic issues of gender bias, tenure-status exploitation, and the violation of academic integrity. |
| Ethical Frameworks | Confuses Deontology with Utilitarianism. | Correctly compares Deontology (Duty) and Utilitarianism (Consequences). | Synthesizes how both frameworks would reach different conclusions and evaluates the moral weight of each in an academic setting. |
| Decision-Making Model | Skips steps in the Forester-Miller model. | Applies all seven steps of the Forester-Miller & Davis model to Jenny’s case. | Demonstrates a deep application of the model, including a rigorous evaluation of the “Implicit Consequences” for the students’ education. |
| Resolution Strategy | Suggests Jenny “just do what feels right.” | Proposes a resolution based on integrity and professional standards. | Develops a strategic resolution that includes self-advocacy, reporting protocols, and long-term career boundary setting. |
| Professionalism | Significant terminology/APA errors. | Professional tone; follows APA 7th edition; clear structure. | Executive-quality analysis; utilizes precise ethical and psychological terminology; zero errors. |
Step-by-Step Guide
- Identify the dilemma — Jenny is asked to educate a course outside her moxie under pressure from the director.
- Fete ethical enterprises — Lack of qualifications, gender bias, term demarcation, and compulsion.
- Apply ethical fabrics — Compare deontology( duty- grounded ethics) vs. utilitarianism( outgrowth- grounded ethics).
- Use decision- making model — Logger- Miller & Davis identify problem, consult ACA law, induce options, estimate consequences, choose and apply action.
- Propose resolution — Jenny should act with integrity, decline tutoring the course if unqualified, and report ethical enterprises about inequality to applicable authorities.
Frequently Asked Questions
Q What’s deontology?
Ethical frame prioritizing duty and moral principles over issues.
Q What’s utilitarianism?
Ethical frame prioritizing issues that maximize overall good or benefit.
Q How should Jenny handle pressure from the director?
Maintain integrity, consider ethical scores, and report enterprises if necessary.
Q Why use the Logger- Miller & Davis model?
It provides a structured approach to make ethical opinions in complex plant situations.
Q What should guide professional opinions in academia?
Moral principles, professional canons( e.g., ACA), qualifications, and fairness in treatment of all staff.
Integrity Note
Note: Only use this assessment example for learning and structure purpose. Do not submit as your own work.
We are an independent resource and are not affiliated with Capella University.