Sunday, October 8, 2017

University Ethics Review

University Ethics Review

In the Duke’s Fuqua School of Business situation if I had been an Ethics Review Arbitrator for these cases I would have sided with the students as this is a common practice today. Networking in all forums from social media to linking up with people and putting yourself out there has been a way in which people grow and obtain new information. This is due to everyone having a unique way in which we think. By the students collaborating they were able pick up information that they may have not thought of thus expanding their knowledge as well as they outlook on the answers. As the answers were not identical each student formed their opinion and drafted their answers based upon the information that they personally retained and how their perspective had been changed, if it had changed at all. One would expect that the answers would have been similar as they did collaborate. 

   If Duke’s Fuqua School of Business had a problem with this collaboration from the students they should have called a meeting and discussed that they were not in favor of the way in which the students chose to go about completing their take home test. As these students were the “cream of the crop” with six years of experience it is unlikely that they were cheating. The school could have easily drafted up another test and had the students take it in a traditional manner thus there would not be any dispute over the students ethical behavior. Often when people study together they get the same questions correct an incorrect based upon what they focused on when studying; this is essentially the same situation. In the working world being able to work together is a key element to success. 

   However, in the Centenary College situation there was proven plagiarism from a large group of 400 students. Of those students it was most likely the two students that did not opt for the refund were able to speak English and the rest just copied them. This is unethical especially as the school was unable to establish a relationship with the student being the distance between the school in New Jersey while the students were all located between Beijing, Shanghai, and Taiwan. The fact that the students chose the refund over the degree speaks volumes at they were aware they could not meet the requirements. If I were the Arbitrator I would have deemed this to be unethical and sided with the school.
 Pearce, J.A., & Robinson, R.B. (2013).  Strategic management: Planning for Domestic & Global competition (13th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill

No comments:

Post a Comment

Today's Top Picks for Our Readers:
Recommended by Recommended by NetLine

Featured Post

Johns Hopkins Aramco Healthcare Business Case Study

Business Case:   Johns Hopkins Aramco Healthcare    Operations Management Report   Table of Content...