Reference no: EM13286785 , Length: 1500 Words

Case study:Diane the consultant Summary of case :

Three years ago Diane started her own consulting business. She has been so successful that shenow has several people working for her and many clients. Their consulting work includedadvising on how to set up corporate intranets, designing database management systems, andadvising about security.

Presently she is designing a database management system for the personnel office of a

medium-sized company. Diane has involved the client in the design process, informing the CEO,the director of computing, and the director of personnel about the progress of the system. It isnow time to make decisions about the kind and degree of security to build into the system.

Diane has described several options to the client. Because the system is going to cost morethan they planned, the client has decided to opt for a less secure system. She believes theinformation they will be storing is extremely sensitive. It will include performance evaluations,medical records for filing insurance claims, salaries, and so forth.With weak security, employees working on client machines may be able to figure out ways toget access to this data, not to mention the possibility of on-line access from hackers. Dianefeels strongly that the system should be much more secure. She has tried to explain the risks,but the CEO, director of computing and director of personnel all agree that less security will do.

What should she do? Should she refuse to build the system as they request?

Assessment item 2

Length: 1,500 words

Task

Your lecturer will place several links in Interact to a number of relevant articles and/or case studies. These will be available to you just after your first assignment has been submitted.

1. Choose one of the media articles or case studies listed by the lecturer in Interact.
2. Use the title of the article/case study provided in interact as the title of your essay, so that the lecturer knows which article you are analysing.
3. Undertake further research about your chosen topic, to assist you in analysing and discussing it in your essay.

You are required to complete the following:

Step 1. Construct a diagram using Rationale to map the arguments about a moral claim that you have identified in the article/case study:

• Include all supporting and objecting claims. These claims should include facts collated from your own research, classical ethical theories that support or object to the claim and ACS codes that are in conflict with the claim
• You are expected to 'finish off' the case's arguments, turning it into a valid and properly structured argument.
• You should use information from the article/case study, other sources discovered during your research, and your own reasoned arguments. A balanced and impartial argument is the objective.
• All arguments must obey the Golden Rule, Rabbits Rule, Holding Hands Rule and the Pyramid Rule.
• The main claim/conclusion must be an ethical claim.  

Step 2. Write an essay, which maps closely to the Rationale diagram that you constructed in Step 1.

• The word limit for the essay is 1,300 words ± 10%. Headings, citations and references do not count towards the word limit, but quotations do.
• All the claims shown on the Rationale diagram must appear in the essay, and all claims made in the essay must appear on the Rationale diagram. The essay must present all the detailed information that the Rationale diagram cannot.
• Remember to analyse the article/case study from the perspective of at least two different classical ethical theories and present well reasoned arguments for your assessments and recommendations.  

Step 3. Write an overall conclusion that justifies your recommendations made in your essay.

Step 4. Reference list

• Include a Reference list at the end of your work, in the correct APA referencing style, corresponding to in-text citations.
• You must include at least five (5) quality references from different sources. Please note that these five references are in addition to those provided to you through this subject (for example, you still must reference, Tavani, the ACS code, the Interact subject lecture notes etc BUT these references cannot be used as one of your five quality references from different sources).
• Only use references that have been cited in the body of your assignment and ones that support what you have presented in your assignment.

NOTE: Format your assignment according to the instructions given in the Assessment Information, Presentation section.

Rationale

This assessment extends the skills practiced in Assessment item 1, to help you to achieve all the learning objectives.

In addition to identifying a contentious situation in ICT and dissecting the argument(s) about it, you must also now demonstrate the ability to convert an argument into proper form and evaluate the elements of the argument by introducing classical ethical principles where appropriate.

Since Assessment item 1, your knowledge will have grown, and you will now realize that almost all ICT ethical dilemmas can be classified under one of the main ICT ethical issues that are discussed in this subject; for instance, surveillance is a sub-issue of privacy, harmful software is a sub-issue of ICT professionalism, and piracy is a sub-issue of intellectual property.

In ICT, the main ethical issues are taken to be:

• ICT professionalism
• Privacy
• Security
• Cyber-crime
• Intellectual property
• Regulation on the internet
• Social inclusion
• Community and identity
• Pervasive and convergent computing.

The assessment item is designed to help you to build skills towards achieving the learning objectives, by requiring you to:

• identify an ICT-related ethical issue from a media article or case study;
• using a critical analysis technique (Rationale), analyse the detailed logical structure of the arguments given in the media article/case study and convert the overall argument into a valid and well-structured argument that supports or refutes an ethical position;
• apply classical ethical theory to the analysis of an ethically questionable situation to determine the rightness or wrongness of actions/decisions made therein;
• derive logical and justifiable conclusions to resolve the ethical issue(s);
• develop structured, coherent and logical arguments to support or refute claims; and
• apply proper academic referencing.