Ethics And Stakeholders In Sam’s Dilemma And College Constru

Ethics and Stakeholders in Sam’s Dilemma and College Construction Projects

Sam Walters, a first-year college student, faces an ethical dilemma regarding whether to use a solution manual to complete his accounting homework. The case presents broader issues of academic integrity, honesty, and the impact of individual decisions on various stakeholders. Additionally, a construction project database assignment involves creating and managing data related to college building projects, emphasizing accuracy, organization, and ethical considerations in project management and data handling.

Paper For Above instruction

In the complex landscape of academic and professional environments, ethical decision-making plays a crucial role in maintaining integrity and trust. The case of Sam Walters exemplifies the moral quandaries students often confront, especially when faced with academic pressures. Ultimately, evaluating whether it is ethical for Sam to use the solution manual involves scrutinizing the principles of honesty, fairness, and personal integrity.

Using the solution manual for homework raises significant ethical concerns. From a deontological perspective, academic honesty requires students to complete assignments independently, demonstrating their understanding and effort. By copying solutions, Sam would be violating the integrity policies of his institution, risking disciplinary action and undermining the value of his education. This approach reflects dishonesty and could diminish his self-respect and the respect of his peers and instructors. Moreover, it compromises the fairness principle, as other students might refrain from using unfair shortcuts, and it could devalue the authenticity of the grading process (Kidder, 2005).

Conversely, some may justify using the solution manual as a temporary aid to overcome frustration, especially if the manual is accessible to others and some professors recommend or store solutions in the library. In this context, the justification might rest on the premise that the manual serves as a learning aid rather than a shortcut. However, this justification overlooks the risks of academic misconduct and the importance of genuine mastery of course material. If Sam relies solely on copied solutions, he compromises his learning process, which could adversely affect his performance in future courses and his professional competence (Bea et al., 2011).

The consequences of each course of action are profound. Using the manual without acknowledgment risks academic penalties, damage to his reputation, and a compromised sense of personal integrity. On the other hand, choosing not to use the manual and seeking alternative methods—such as asking for help from his instructor, participating in study groups, or utilizing tutoring services—would foster genuine learning and uphold ethical standards. These actions, although more effortful, can lead to a better understanding of accounting principles, better grades, and long-term academic and professional success (Liu & Hwang, 2013).

The decision to cheat or act ethically impacts various stakeholders beyond Sam. First, his instructor and academic institution are affected because academic dishonesty diminishes the credibility of the educational process and the institution's reputation. When students cheat, it corrupts the grading system, leading to unfair advantages and devalues the degrees awarded (McCabe & Butterfield, 2008). Second, Sam's fellow students are impacted because if dishonesty becomes prevalent, it fosters an environment where cheating is normalized, ultimately disadvantaging honest students. Third, Sam's future professional life could be compromised if unethical behavior becomes habitual; employers value integrity, and a record of dishonest conduct, even in school, can have long-lasting repercussions (Resnick, 2010).

In summary, the ethical stance supports that Sam should refrain from using the solution manual improperly. Engaging in honest effort aligns with core values of integrity and fairness, which are essential both academically and professionally. Recognizing the impact on stakeholders emphasizes the importance of making morally responsible choices, not just for immediate academic success but for long-term character development and societal trustworthiness.

References

• Bea, F., et al. (2011). Academic Integrity and Student Learning. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 33(2), 123-132.
• Kidder, R. M. (2005). How Good People Make Tough Choices: Resolving the Dilemmas of Ethical Living. HarperOne.
• Liu, Y., & Hwang, G. H. (2013). Assessment and Evaluation of Students' Learning: An Exploratory Study. International Journal of Educational Technology, 2(1), 56-65.
• McCabe, D. L., & Butterfield, K. D. (2008). Cheating in College: Why Students Do It and What Educators Can Do About It. Johns Hopkins University Press.
• Resnick, D. J. (2010). Developing Moral Characteristics in the Classroom: Effective Integrity Education. Journal of Moral Education, 39(4), 459-471.
• Resnik, D. B. (2015). The Ethics of Scientific Research. In J. R. Hurlbut (Ed.), Ethical Decision-Making in Science Conduct, Policy, and Practice (pp. 45-66). Springer.
• Shelton, K. (2013). Enhancing Academic Integrity. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 10(2), 1-15.
• Whitley, B. E., & Keith-Spiegel, L. (2002). Academic Dishonesty: An Educator's Guide. Routledge.
• Zimmerman, B., & Schunk, D. (2011). Self-regulated Learning and Academic Achievement: Theoretical Perspectives. Routledge.
• Resnick, D. J. (2010). Developing Moral Characteristics in the Classroom: Effective Integrity Education. Journal of Moral Education, 39(4), 459-471.