Final Essay details
1. Overview
Due Date/Submission
Part 1: 5pm Fri 16/10 (Wk 10); Part 2: 5pm Fri 30/10 (Wk 12).
Both parts of your Final Essay must be submitted on iLearn (via Turnitin). Your Final Essay should clearly state your NAME, your STUDENT NUMBER and
the statement THIS IS MY OWN WORK. Referencing should follow the APA 7 style.
Estimated student workload
45 hours.
Extensions and Penalties
There will be a deduction of 10% of the total available marks made from the total awarded mark for each 24-hour period or part thereof that the submission is
late (for example, 25 hours late in submission: 20% penalty).
This penalty does not apply for cases in which an application for Special Consideration is made and approved. Note that here are limits on how long special
consideration can be applied for, so please submit any applications as soon as possible. BESS can assist with inquires about the special consideration process.
Overview
The purpose of the essay is to undertake a comprehensive ethical analysis of the topic selected for the essay proposal. Essentially, you are asked to consider the
ethical issue from multiple perspectives and reach an overall conclusion. You will use three different ethical theories:
1. Utilitarian;
2. Kantian; and
3. Your choice from the theories we have studied (virtue ethics, critical theory, environmental ethics and Habermasian ethics).
You are also asked to extend your analysis by summarising and applying one academic paper, which focuses on one of the three theories you have selected.
The following diagram illustrates the relationship between the Essay Proposal and the Final Essay:
Final Essay details
2. Deliverables
Please submit your essay using the following headings (refer to the Marking Criteria for the key elements of each section):
Essay Part 1
1.0 Essay Proposal [unchanged from Assessment Task 3]
2.0 Utilitarian analysis
2.1 Stakeholder analysis
2.2 Other considerations
2.3 Utilitarian analysis conclusions
3.0 Kantian analysis
3.1 Categorial imperative analysis
3.2 Other considerations
3.3 Kantian analysis conclusions
4.0 Additional theory description
4.1 Description of theory
4.2 Criteria for ethical analysis
5.0 Reference list
Essay Part 2
6.0 Additional theory application
6.1 Application of ethical analysis criteria [from 4.2]
6.2 Other considerations
6.3 Additional theory conclusions
7.0 Theory extension
7.1 Description of theory extension
7.2 Application of theory extension
7.3 Implications of theory extension for conclusions
8.0 Conclusion
8.1 Summary of application of theories [from previous sections]
8.2 Overall conclusion
8.3 Limitations and suggested further analysis
9.0 Reference list
Details
Essay Part 1 (25%)
1/ The utilitarian and Kantian analysis of the topic you selected in the Essay Proposal task (or a new topic with the permission of the Seminar Leader). The
main task is NOT to write lots of facts about the case. It is also NOT to write about what utilitarian or Kantian ethics is. Rather the task is to conduct the
ETHICAL ANALYSIS – i.e. to APPLY the theories to your individual case. For example, “Utilitarians believe that the moral action is the one that produces the
most aggregate utility” is a writing about utilitarianism. In contrast “Taxing the rich to give to the poor would be ethical from a utilitarian point of view, because
though a few rich people would lose utility, this would be more than outweighed by the many rich people who would gain utility and hence aggregate utility
would increase” is an application of utilitarian theory to the moral question as to whether the rich should be taxed. As you will see in the marking criteria,
higher grades are awarded to those students that apply the more sophisticated elements of the moral theories.
2/ A description of the additional theory you have selected to apply to your case: i.e. virtue ethics, Critical Theory, environmental ethics or discourse ethics.
Note that you should not apply the theory to your case as that is the requirement of Part 2 of your essay.
Essay Part 2 (30%)
3/ The application of the additional theory to your case. As you have provided a summary of this theory in Part 1 of the essay, you should assume that the
eader is familiar with the theory and focus on the APPLICATION to your case.
4/ The theory extension is the use of one academic paper to deepen your analysis. The paper you select should be about an aspect of utilitarian theory, Kantian
theory or the theory you have selected as your additional theory. In this section you should NOT assume that the reader is familiar with the academic paper you
have selected and you should therefore
iefly describe the way that the paper extends the theory and then apply that extension to your case. You should
conclude this section by clearly stating whether this extension supports or refutes the original conclusion you reached. For example, a paper might extend
utilitarian theory by providing some specific tests to identify which stakeholders should be included and excluded from the utilitarian analysis. You would then
follow this method and describe which stakeholders changed as a result and what the impact on overall utility was. Note that you do not have to use the entire
academic paper – it may be only a section of the paper that you wish to describe and apply.
5/ The conclusion is the section where first and foremost you provide an answer to the question you have set yourself in your essay. In providing you
conclusion you should refer to the sub-answers you obtained from the three theories you have used and the theory extension. Better answers will explain why
they gave some theories greater weight then others, especially if there are conflicting answers between theories, and also the overall level of confidence they
have in their conclusion. Better answers will also provide practical steps that should be taken (e.g. by industry, government or other stakeholders) to promote
the practice which has been determined to be moral.
Essay Parts 1 and 2
The word limit for Part 1 and Part 2 including the Essay Proposal and references is 4,000 words. Note that this is a maximum word limit – there is no penalty
for writing less than the word limit if you can meet the marking criteria described below.
References should be cited using the APA 7 style.
Final Essay details
3. Marking criteria - Part 1
Grade Utilitarian analysis
(8 marks)
Kantian analysis
(8 marks)
Additional theory description
(5 marks)
Style
(4 marks)
Fail · One or more pass elements
not achieved.
· One or more pass elements
not achieved.
· One or more pass elements
not achieved.
· One or more pass elements not
achieved.
Pass · Key stakeholders identified
· Approximate size of
stakeholder group determined
· Impact on each stakeholde
group (i.e. increase or decrease)
shown
· Overall impact on utility
provided
· At least one formulation of
the categorical imperative
iefly explained and applied to
the case.
· Core elements of the theory
explained
· Essay proposal attached.
· Few grammatical and
typographical e
ors.
· Referencing follows APA 7
equirements
· Word limit is not exceeded by
more than 10%
Credit As per a Pass grade, and:
· A convincing justification fo
each change in utility provided.
As per a Pass grade, and:
· Two or more formulations of
the categorical imperative
iefly explained and applied to
the case.
As per a Pass grade, and:
· Key differences to Kantian
and utilitarian ethics explained
As per pass grade and:
· Writing is free from
unsupported / uncritical statements
(e.g. generalisations about
particular stakeholder groups)
Distinction As per a Credit grade, and:
· Deeper aspects of the theory
considered and analysed
clearly/critically, e.g. qualitative
versus quantitative aspects of
utility (i.e. Bentham vs Mill); the
selection of geographic and
temporal boundaries justified.
As per a Credit grade, and:
· Deeper aspects of the theory
considered and analysed
clearly/critically, e.g.
intentionality and/or autonomy.
As per a Credit grade, and:
· Deeper aspects of the theory
considered and critically
analysed.
As per a Credit grade, and:
· Paragraphs have clear topic
sentences that summarise the
contents of each paragraph.
· Ideas and arguments are
expressed precisely and succinctly.
High
Distinction
As per a Distinction grade, and:
· Limitations of the theory
identified;
· Conclusion as to the
confidence in the utilitarian
analysis provided and justified
clearly and critically. In othe
words, to what extent does this
case lend itself to a utilitarian
analysis and therefore to what
extent can we be confident that
the utilitarian conclusion is
valid?
As per a Distinction grade, and:
· Limitations of the theory
identified;
· Conclusion as to the
confidence in the Kantian
analysis provided and justified
clearly and critically. In othe
words, to what extent does this
case lend itself to a Kantian
analysis and therefore to what
extent can we be confident that
the Kantian conclusion is valid?
As per a Distinction grade, and:
· Limitations of the theory
identified;
· Arguments AND ethical
discussion demonstrate an high
degree of understanding of the
material and include at least
one reference to high quality
external sources such as a
esearch report or academic
paper.
As per Distinction grade, and:
· Writing uses engaging
techniques such varied sentence
lengths and vocabulary as well as
appropriate metaphors and/o
similes.
· Arguments and analysis are
linked and build sequentially
Final Essay details
4. Marking criteria - Part 2
Grade Additional theory
(8 marks)
Theory extension
(9 marks)
Conclusion
(9 marks)
Style
(4 marks)
Fail · One or more pass
elements not achieved.
· One or more pass elements
not achieved.
· One or more pass
elements not achieved.
· One or more pass elements not
achieved.
Pass · Core elements of the
theory applied to the
case (using description
provided in Part 1).
· Appropriate additional
academic source identified and
cited;
· Brief summary provided of
the additional academic source
· Simple explanation provided
as to how the additional
academic source might extend
one of the theory sections (i.e.
utilitarian, Kantian o
additional)
· Overall conclusion
provided which refe
ed
to the sub-conclusions of
each of the sections (i.e.
utilitarian, Kantian,
additional theory and
theory extension).
· Reference list attached.
· Few grammatical and
typographical e
ors.
· Referencing follows APA 7
equirements
· Word limit is not exceeded by
more than 10%
Credit