This assignment is only for Group 3. Other students do not have to do this assignment. You can find your group by clicking on the tab called users/groups on the vertical menu on the left side of the course website.
This presentation will build your professional skills in:
Evaluating the quality of research sources.
Evidenced based Critical thinking and logic.
Communication skills through public speech and the written form of your presentation.
Using technology to present your ideas with the visual effects.
Teamwork, cooperation and discussion of ideas through the production of your presentation with your group.
Presentation Instructions:
The presentation should be between 6 and 8 minutes long.
You should include PowerPoint slides.
Use hand written note cards if you have to remind yourself of points, do not look at your screen to remember points.
Memorize and rehearse your presentation beforehand so that it is polished and so that your use of note cards is minimally needed.
Upload your PowerPoint presentation, as well as paste the zoom link to your recorded presentation to the dropbox for this assignment; after you do that, also upload your presentation to the Discussion board assignment in this weeks “Graded Assignment” folder. Upload your presentation by Wednesday night of week 3 to both of these destinations so that other students may respond to it.
See the rubric in the tab “Rubric Presentations” on the course website for the ways that I will be grading for elements of presentation and content.
See the tab called “Tips for How to Avoid Common Mistakes in the Ethical Analysis for Presentations” and watch the videos there–they will help you to make a complete ethical analysis and not lose points for mistakes.
Topic: Disability and the legal case of Olmstead v. L.C.
Materials to review for your presentation:
For context that explains why the case was important:
(just the home page): https://www.olmsteadrights.org/
https://www.olmsteadrights.org/iamolmstead/stories/item.5703-Olmstead_Speaks_Eight_People_Impacted_by_Olmstead_in_Their_Own_Words
https://www.ada.gov/olmstead/olmstead_about.htm#faces
https://www.americanbar.org/publications/aba_health_esource/2014-2015/september/olmstead.html
For descriptions of the case itself:
https://www.oyez.org/cases/1998/98-536
Instructions for how to treat the above material in your presentation:
Section 1: Name each person that had to be present and play a role for the situation to unfold, and describe the actions that each person performed.
These persons usually include:
The plaintiff(s).
The defendant(s).
People who played a necessary role for the situation to unfold but who were not explicitly the defendant (s) or the plaintiff (s) (make sure to list each one by name when that exists and describe their part in the story, with quotations from them when those exist).
The judges and the decisions that they make in the case (do they decide in favor of the plaintiff or the defendant? Include the details of their judgment).
IMPORTANT: when/if judges make new pronouncements that grant new kinds of legal rights or that take legal rights away in a new way, make sure to describe these new contributions that the judges articulate (use quotations from the judges where those exist to include all of the new rights for people that they articulate).
Segments of the wider population that the new judgment will affect even though they are not personally tried in the case. Name the population and explain how they are impacted by the decision.
For example, in the recent legalization of gay marriage, while the case focused upon specific couples who brought the lawsuit, gay people in the wider United States population gained the right to marry nationwide.
Section 2: Indicate which persons in the case violated an ethical theory and explain why they did.
Choose one ethical theory from the three main ethical theories that we cover to identify the ethical codes that were violated in this study. You only need to use one theory, not all three of them, in your presentation. You may choose which of the three that you would like to use.
If you choose Virtue Ethics, explain and apply the following terms to a person/s in the case study: character (as in “the state of one’s character”), habit, mean and extreme, and happiness over a lifetime.
IMPORTANT: when you name a virtue, especially explain the way that a virtue may only be defined in relation to the two vices that describe the excess and deficiency of feeling in relation to that virtue. The virtue describes the “middle way”, or the right amount of feeling, between the excess of feeling or deficiency of feeling that are the vices in relation to that virtue. Name those vices and also name the virtue that you analyze (for example, the virtue is courage, the feeling in relation to that virtue is fear). Also, note that you may only describe happiness in the same character for which you also choose to anlyze virtue or vice. You cannot describe happiness for others who are involved, because happiness is based on whether a person has virtue or vice. So you first have to establish how a person has virtue or vice before you can argue whether s/he is happy or not.
If you choose Kantian Ethics, explain and apply the following terms to the characters in the case study: categorical imperative, universality, and dignity.
IMPORTANT: when you talk about dignity, especially explain the difference between treating a person as a means to an end (which is moral according to Kant), as opposed to treating that person as “merely” a means to an end (which is immoral according to Kant).
If you choose Utilitarian Ethics, chooes Rule Utilitarianism (not Act Utilitarianism). Explain and apply the following terms to the characters in the case study: predictive rules for human behavior, and greatest amount of pleasure, utility and happiness.
IMPORTANT: when you talk about predictive rules for human behavior, especially explain the difference between decisions based upon intuition (which is unethical according to rule utilitarians) and decisions based upon induction (which is ethical according to rule utilitarians).
IMPORTANT: You must explain and apply these terms. If you merely mention the terms in your analysis but do not explain and apply them you will not have completed the assignment.
As mentioned above, see the tab in the course website called “Tips for How to Avoid Common Mistakes in the Ethical Analysis for Presentations” and let it guide you.
Criteria for 3 articles that you find and use:
Use secondary sources for your articles.
They may be from Professional News agencies (local, national and international), government agencies or universities.
Please refer to the information below to help you assess the quality of your internet sources.
http://depts.washington.edu/trio/trioquest/resources/web/assess.php
https://www.e-education.psu.edu/styleforstudents/c5_p3.html
The rubric that I will use to give you credit is listed in the tab called “rubric presentations” on the course website.
Last Completed Projects
| topic title | academic level | Writer | delivered |
|---|