Critical Analysis (Research Paper Sample)

 Critical Analysis University Subject code: Lecturer’s Name Student ID Date submitted Introduction Ethical decision making has been a significant aspect in the continuity of the society, and learning institutions are no exception. Teachers have a wide scope of operations and decision making processes undertake, ranging from supervising the students’ progress, mentoring the students in their studies, and offering them moral support (Nash, 2002 p.35). The decision making process that should be undertaken should inculcate the moral aspect governing the operations across the learning institution. The school administration should have always devised strategies and processes that will ensure both the students and the teachers are safeguarded from harsh or harmful decision making that might be resorted to by the panel of decision makers (Hobson and Walsh, 1998 p.68). Learning institutions that consider ethical decision making process have minimal problems in regard to supervision of their duties and operations. Therefore, it is prudent for teachers to consider ethical behaviour when making a decision on the conduct of the students. In this essay, the case analysis of the ethical behaviour of Rachel in making a decision on the confidentiality of the students’ files will be assessed. Rachel ethical decision making is questionable given the fact that she exposes the students private information to third parties; although, not through a consent. Reflection on Rachel’s Decision With awareness and enlightenment among teachers and students in the education sector, teachers have resorted to re-evaluating their strategies and attitudes when undertaking their daily practices (Strike et al., 2005 p.109). Decision making process does not only rely on the principles and guidelines outlined by the institution, but on the moral aspect of the decision. The decision made should be acceptable by the majority of the society, and should conform to the legal consideration of the region. Rachel’s decision to access the files that contained the confidential information about the students was aimed at devising the right strategies for her to tackle the student’s financial needs. Although such information is always collected from students with a written consent that it would not be displayed to a third party, being one of the teachers of the institution gave her right to access the confidential information regarding the students (Hardy, 2009 p.89). Rachel should have consulted the other teachers or the special education departmental head in order to ascertain whether there was a need to carry the files to her premises. The ethical concept of confidentiality is critical to all the professionals regardless of ones affiliation in the academic arena (Zubay and Soltis, 2004 p.21). As such, teachers should ne concerned on the individuals who should be allowed to access the confidential information and those who should be restricted. Carrying the files to Rachel’s premises was a mistake, as the information can easily be distorted or another person, other than Rachel, can use the files for his or her benefit. Though Rachel perceived that her decision was morally right, based on the circumstance that she was currently on, consulting the teachers and head of the department would have safeguarded her from unforeseen calamities. However, the intention of Rachel in removing the seven files was positive as she wanted to improve the students’ academic and social life. Private information should have always been secured in order to prevent them from being in the hands of manipulators or rowdy people in the society (Strike and Soltis, 2004 p.92). Following the breaking of Rachel’s car, it is evident that the private information of the students can be used for other selfish benefits; it will be to the detriment of the teacher, students, and the whole institution. Rachel has breached confidentiality aspects between the student and the school administration. In that case, the student’s private information would be in the hands of strangers, and this would have an implication on the private life. Although the information about the lost files might not be revealed to the students, which is another unethical behaviour by the administration, the parents and students in the long run would understand the situation and as such have little or no trust to the teachers. Most of the people in the society are against revealing their private information to the public. They often entrust delicate information that might affect their way of living on specific people in the society, and the teachers are among them (Infantino and Wilke, 2009 p.19). Although poverty is not something that is new in the economy, and cannot be made private, some of the details about the extent of poverty of an individual should be highly privatized. In this case, the students, upon understanding that the information on their private is in the hands of a stranger, they will be stigmatized. They will be worried that such information would reach other students or friends in the society, and they will, eventually, be discriminated due to the low-social status. In the long-run, this will hamper their studies as they will lack concentration. Stigmatization will also be evident from the realization that their private information about their medical conditions was in the hands of the public. Having been assured of confidentiality, the students were willing to provide all the information concerning their medical conditions towards the school administration. They believed that the information would be secure in their teacher’s office, and even the other students would not have access to the other’s medical information. Some diseases or ailments are better when they remain private as it can cause adverse psychological trauma when they are made public. Unlike medical doctors and psychiatrists who have taken the oath when administering medication to the patients, the ‘strangers’ who have the stolen documents have no consideration for the privacy of the medical conditions of the students. They can easily redistribute the information to other parties. The other concern on the student is on their social security life. Such information may provide owners of the stolen documents with vital information about the students’ assets and security status. This may be used in performing raids on the premises of the students; therefore, jeopardizing their security and social life. Under such scenario, most of the students would resort changing the school as their privacy has been compromised (Macfarlane, 2003 p.56). It is important to note that not only will the situation adversely affect the students, but also Rachel, Principal and the whole school will be affected. The role of the teacher is to guide the students on their studies, and, only should she have to consult with the head of academic and counselling, when in need of accessing vital information about the students. Rachel will be faced with role specific obligations as she will be answerable to the students, the head of counselling and academic department, the principal, and the society. Rachel’s concern was to guide the students in their studies; though, it was morally right for her to understand the challenges facing the students. She was only allowed to do so by coercing with the relevant authorities; that is the counselling department. Consequently, the situation showed that there was disrespect of authority and the chain of command (Mackenzie and Mackenzie, 2010 p.121). Such revelation will make the students and the parents have minimal if no, respect on the teachers and the overall administration of the school. In a typical society and where rules are followed to the latter, access to confidential information and other sophisticated materials should be left to specific individuals in the institution. In the case of counselling and academic office, it is the head of that department that is accountable for information that gets out of the office. Such a situation would make the society and students question the credibility of the management of the school. The principal would be seen as lacking the administrative power to govern the activities of each department. Although it was the carelessness of Rachel that led to the disappearance of the files that contained confidential information of the students, it can be argued that it was the lack of necessary supervision and ethical consideration of situations that led to the unfortunate scenario (Mackenzie and Mackenzie, 2010 p.125). The school will have to compensate the students for the damages caused due to negligence of administration. It cannot be argued that it was morally right for Rachel to assess the social life and poverty level of her students before commencing her teaching as she should have done that at the safety of counselling and academic offices. It depends with the parents’ logical interpretation of the situation at hand; otherwise, the worst is expected (Strain and Robinson, 2005 p.86). The parents would not be happy when the information regarding their social and security status has been leaked to the public. They understand the implications such a situation would lead to, especially their security level. The school would see most of the students terminated their studies in search for reliable and trustworthy decision making institution. In the case where the institution knew that the information would not be well-safeguarded, then it would not have bothered to file such private information (Strain and Robinson, 2005 p.90). Rachel had a wide spectrum of alternative actions that she should have relied in obtaining informant from the students without necessarily relying on ‘sneaking’ the files to her car. One such strategy is through conducting private interview or personal assessment of the student. This will involve Rachel conducting ...