Page 1
CRICOS Provider No. 00103D
Assessment 1
ITECH 7400 IT Service Management and
Professional Culture
Name
Ethical Discussion Forum
Purpose
The purpose of the critique is to help students develop a knowledge of ethics.
Timelines and Expectations
Percentage Value of Task: Post 1 (10%) + Post 2 (5%) = 15%.
Post 1 – Ethical Theories 1 and 2 – Due: Week 4 – Friday 21, August 2020, 4:00 pm.
Post 2 – Professional Ethics – Due: Week 6 – Friday 04, September 2020, 4:00 pm.
Minimum time expectation: This task will take approximately 20 hours to complete.
Learning Outcomes Assessed
The following learning outcomes are assessed by completing this assessment: K1 – K4, S1 and
A1.
Assessment Details
Case Study
Robotic surgery sounds like the ultimate in safe, efficient and effective 21st-century health care.
Instead of a surgeon’s potentially fallible human hand, you have a robot with its precision-built
mechanical arms able to perform micro-accurate procedures on tissues deep within the body.
With robot-assisted surgery, the surgeon sits at a nearby console with a 3D view of the surgical
site. Computer technology translates their hand movements into precise manoeuvres of the
instruments. If the surgeon’s hand develops a tremor, the computer system knows to ignore it.
Page 2
CRICOS Provider No. 00103D
The technology also means surgeons can use finer instruments that cause less damage to the
body. In turn, this should reduce blood loss and the need for blood transfusions – and mean that
patients recover more quickly. With this kind of promise, little wonder that multi-million-pound
robot machines are performing ever more operations across Britain.
The technology, which was first used in 2000, is employed increasingly in intricate surgery such
as hysterectomy, gallbladder removal and repair of damaged heart valves.
But while for many patients robot surgery will have been entirely smooth, the technology is not
risk-free. And leading experts are now voicing growing fears about its safety and effectiveness,
warning of a growing human toll.
Good Health has learned of one particularly alarming case in which a man suffered grievous
injuries from a robotic procedure that nearly killed him when it went wrong.
The patient, who can’t be named for legal reasons, was suffering from prostate cancer and
recently had his prostate gland removed by keyhole surgery using robot technology. His solicitors
say the remote camera attached to the robot arm damaged the man’s bowel, leading to severe
infection, organ failure and cardiac arrest (Nash, 2013).
Ethical dilemma:
To what extend are IT professionals responsible for the surgery accuracy of robots they program?
Requirements
This is an individual task. Students are required to write two (2) forum posts in moodle which
provide an analysis of an ethical dilemma associated with robotic assisted surgery from a
software developer’s perspective.
• Post 1: In post one (1) students should provide an answer to the ethical dilemma through
the lens of each of the ethical theories presented in lectures. These include utilitarianism,
deontology, social contract theory, character-based ethics1. The post should be
approximately two to three pages long (800-1200 words). It should contain a brief
overview of each of the four ethical theories, and a discussion and proposed solution for
the dilemma, from each of the four ethical theoretical viewpoints. The discussion should
show an analysis and synthesis of research undertaken and your own ideas.
• Post 2: In post two (2) students will apply ACS code of ethics2 in order to solve the ethical
dilemma. The post should be approximately one page long (300-500 words). The
discussion should show an analysis and synthesis of research undertaken and your own
ideas.
Each post should contain a bibliography containing authentic academic literature. Post 1
(approximately 6–10 references), and Post 2 (approximately 4–8 references). Gather these
references from various sources such as the Internet, assigned textbooks and readings etc. For
assistance with in-text referencing and formatting your reference list in APA format, see the link to
General Guide to Referencing provided.
1 Select two (2) virtues
2 Select one (1) ACS element
Page 3
CRICOS Provider No. 00103D
A quality post will include an introduction and conclusion and demonstrate a synthesis of
content, knowledge, skills and ideas acquired from lectures, tutorials and academic authors.
For assistance in writing blog posts:
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=how+to+write+a+university++post&view=detail&mid=0CF
938FF24F90465FAB50CF938FF24F90465FAB5&FORM=VIRE
Academic Presentation
Blogs should be presented in accordance with:
• General Guide to Writing and Study Skills:
http://federation.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0018/190044/General-Guide-toWritingand-Study-Skills.pdf
• Assignment Layout and Appearance Guidelines:
https://federation.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0017/190043/General-Guide-toLayoutand-Appearance.pdf
Referencing
• General Guide to Referencing:
https://federation.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0020/313328/FedUni-General-GuidetoReferencing-2016ed.pdf
Submission
This task will be marked by the course coordinator, lecturer and/or tutors. Students will be
required to submit an electronic copy of their post via Moodle. Students are encouraged to keep a
copy in MS Word.
Feedback
Feedback and marks will be provided in Moodle. Marks will also be available in FDL Marks.
Plagiarism
Plagiarism is the presentation of the expressed thought or work of another person as though it is
one’s own without properly acknowledging that person. You must not allow other students to copy
your work and must take care to safeguard against this happening. More information about the
plagiarism policy and procedure for the university can be found at
http://federation.edu.au/students/learning-and-study/online-help-with/plagiarism
Page 4
CRICOS Provider No. 00103D
Please refer to the Course Description for information regarding late assignments, extensions,
and special consideration. A reminder all academic regulations can be accessed via the
university’s website, see: http://federation.edu.au/staff/governance/legal/feduni-legislation
Marking Criteria/Rubric
| Assessment Criteria | Marking Scale |
| Poor Excellent | |
| 1 5 | |
| Outline of theory | 0 |
| Discussion | 0 |
| Application and recommendations | 0 |
| Academic presentation – writing and layout | 0 |
| Referencing and bibliography | 0 |
| Total Mark [25 marks] | 25.0 |
| Total Worth [10%] + [5%] | 10.0 |