Introduction
The Case:
In this case, Professor Dazed and Flustered the main people involved in this vignette is the professor himself and his college students that are unhappy. I have also added in the department head because it is who the professor has to answer to, so if he is doing not such an ethically great of a job then he needs to be held accountable by his boss. So, for whatever hypothetical reason, the professor is not being respectful of his students by allowing them to feel that their time and money are being blown out the window. Though not only is Professor Dazed and Flustered at fault but the department head is also responsible for making sure that the appropriate action is taken to rectify this situation before school boards get involved and refunds are made. Professor dazed and Flustered and the department head have an ethical responsibility to the students, who are collectively complaining, to make sure that they are being treated as human beings with valuable time and money and not just cash cows to pay their paychecks. Otherwise, the integrity of the professor as well as the school is at stake for having hired such an unethical employee and then not taking the right steps to correct the problem. Even if Professor Dazed and Flustered is hypothetically experiencing health, financial, or mental issues that are contributing to his incompetent nature, it is his responsibility and duty to make his students aware of it the moment he is aware of it so that the students can then make an informed decision whether they want to continue with this course or choose another or another professor. The department head also has a responsibility to find out exactly what is going on as soon as possible so that they may make accommodations if necessary for Professor Fluster or relieve him of his responsibilities and get another qualified professor in his place. Failure to disclose pertinent information to people who are paying for an education they feel they are not receiving is an inaccuracy in teaching.
The Ethical Conflict:
The ethical conflicts in this case are in section 2 competence, subsection 2.03 maintaining competence along with subsection 2.06 personal problems and conflicts. Since Professor Dazed and Flustered is presumably (hypothetically) dealing with something causing his constant state of "un-connectedness" it's perpetuating his inability to teach his students at all. The other ethical conflict about this case is in section 7 education and training subsection 7.03 accuracy in teaching since he has been reported to have "no readily apparent agenda for each class session". This could be, in part, due to a lack of the department head possibly not assessing their employed professors correctly and/or often enough to have possibly known about Professor Dazed's confusion prior to the school term starting.
The APA Code of Ethics Standards:
The Ethical Standards:
These are a set of guidelines that is even more fine-tuned than the basic principles. It is defined by 10 categories that are each broken up into a certain number of sub-points. (Again, those highlighted in black apply to Professor Dazed and Flustered's vignette.)
1. Resolving ethical issues is broken up into 8 sub-points clearly defining the guidelines that are to be followed to resolve ethical issues should they arise.
Students complained to the department chair about professor Daze Fluster regarding the quality of Fluster's classes. The students claimed that he often arrived late, spent time flipping through a tangled mass of papers in his briefcase, had no readily apparent agenda for each class session, and spoke in an unconnected fashion. The students asserted that their time and tuition were not being well spent.Detailed Case Study Description:
In this case, Professor Dazed and Flustered the main people involved in this vignette is the professor himself and his college students that are unhappy. I have also added in the department head because it is who the professor has to answer to, so if he is doing not such an ethically great of a job then he needs to be held accountable by his boss. So, for whatever hypothetical reason, the professor is not being respectful of his students by allowing them to feel that their time and money are being blown out the window. Though not only is Professor Dazed and Flustered at fault but the department head is also responsible for making sure that the appropriate action is taken to rectify this situation before school boards get involved and refunds are made. Professor dazed and Flustered and the department head have an ethical responsibility to the students, who are collectively complaining, to make sure that they are being treated as human beings with valuable time and money and not just cash cows to pay their paychecks. Otherwise, the integrity of the professor as well as the school is at stake for having hired such an unethical employee and then not taking the right steps to correct the problem. Even if Professor Dazed and Flustered is hypothetically experiencing health, financial, or mental issues that are contributing to his incompetent nature, it is his responsibility and duty to make his students aware of it the moment he is aware of it so that the students can then make an informed decision whether they want to continue with this course or choose another or another professor. The department head also has a responsibility to find out exactly what is going on as soon as possible so that they may make accommodations if necessary for Professor Fluster or relieve him of his responsibilities and get another qualified professor in his place. Failure to disclose pertinent information to people who are paying for an education they feel they are not receiving is an inaccuracy in teaching.
The Ethical Conflict:
The ethical conflicts in this case are in section 2 competence, subsection 2.03 maintaining competence along with subsection 2.06 personal problems and conflicts. Since Professor Dazed and Flustered is presumably (hypothetically) dealing with something causing his constant state of "un-connectedness" it's perpetuating his inability to teach his students at all. The other ethical conflict about this case is in section 7 education and training subsection 7.03 accuracy in teaching since he has been reported to have "no readily apparent agenda for each class session". This could be, in part, due to a lack of the department head possibly not assessing their employed professors correctly and/or often enough to have possibly known about Professor Dazed's confusion prior to the school term starting.
The APA Code of Ethics Standards:
The ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct is a set of guidelines adopted by the American psychological association and consists of 5 general principles : (Highlighted in black are the principles that correlate with Professor Dazed and Flustered's vignette.)
- Beneficence and Non-Maleficence- basically states that a psychologist will do no harm, physically or mentally to any persons who put their care in the psychologist's hands. They will make every effort to avoid conflicts but should they arise they will take every measure to handle them responsibly and rationally.
- Fidelity and Responsibility- basically states that psychologists will treat clients and colleagues with professional respect and will serve them without exploitation and/or harm. They will accept responsibility for their professional roles and obligations and set clear boundaries that they respect and do not cross. (Responsibility can be applied to my case vignette because Professor Dazed and Flustered is not taking his obligations to his students very seriously since he comes to class unprepared and not altogether with it.)
- Integrity- basically states that a psychologist should adhere to the 10 commandments with regards to clients, students they may be teaching, and/or colleagues. They will not make empty promises and they will weigh the bad vs the worse if they absolutely must engage in anything that could cause someone distress and minimalize the distrust and fix anything that comes of the distrust. (I believe that Professor Dazed and Flustered lacks integrity for his students since he has made an empty promise to teach them when he agreed to take on the class at the beginning of the term, then continuing to come to class unprepared was a display of making no attempts to correct his actions or explain them to his paying students.)
- Justice- basically states that psychologists will not practice anything illegally such as prejudicial behavior. Nor will they misrepresent their abilities. They will practice fair objectivity when dealing with anyone and not play favoritism or games.
- Respect for Peoples Rights and Dignity- basically states that NO matter who the person is they will treat everyone as a person and no less than one and they will respect each individual as an individual with rights to think and believe as they'd like as long as they do not harm themselves or anyone else. Also, they will never run their mouth about anyone's personal business as it is confidential and private.
The Ethical Standards:
These are a set of guidelines that is even more fine-tuned than the basic principles. It is defined by 10 categories that are each broken up into a certain number of sub-points. (Again, those highlighted in black apply to Professor Dazed and Flustered's vignette.)
1. Resolving ethical issues is broken up into 8 sub-points clearly defining the guidelines that are to be followed to resolve ethical issues should they arise.
2. Competence is broken up into 6 sub-points that clearly define how a psychologist stay competent about their work and make professional judgments to avoid problems and conflicts. Professor Dazed and Flustered shows and obvious lack of competence to do his job in any way currently for whatever the reason may be.
3. Human relations are broken up into 12 sub-points that clearly define issues such as discrimination, harassment, multiple roles, conflicts of interest, exploitation of professional cooperation, informed consent, organizational services, and interruptions in services.
4. Privacy and confidentiality are broken up into 7 sub-points all dealing with keeping clients, students, and other people’s information, well, private and confidential.
5. Advertising and other public statements are broken up into 6 sub-points that clearly define how to deal with media relations and client solicitation.
6. Record keeping and fees are broken up into 7 sub-points all clearly outlining how professionals should keep their financial books and payrolls as well as clients who don't pay.
5. Advertising and other public statements are broken up into 6 sub-points that clearly define how to deal with media relations and client solicitation.
6. Record keeping and fees are broken up into 7 sub-points all clearly outlining how professionals should keep their financial books and payrolls as well as clients who don't pay.
7. Education and training is broken up into 7 sub-points that explain the design of educational or training programs, how to accurately teach, student personal information, mandatory therapies, performance assessments, and the big no-no of student-teacher sexual relations. Professor Dazed and Flustered has lost his ability to accurately teach his students, again, for whatever reason and by not communicating with his students what is going on to him shows a lack of respect for them as well as himself at the moment.
8. Research and publication are broken up into 15 sub-points that clearly define how research can be conducted, also what, where, when, and why of researching and then publication and verification of data.
9. Assessment is broken up into 11 sub-points all clearly defining how to assess and test data and score and/or report the findings.
10. Therapy is broken up into 10 sub-points that cover individual, couples, family, group therapies as well as the other big no-no of sexual relations with clients, how to provide services, and avoid no-nos.
Statement of Culture and Social Orientations in the Case Study:
The culture and social orientation of my case vignette is that of college students. Due to the fact that we don't know enough about Professor Dazed and Flustered it is hard to tell whether there is a cultural issue that is troubling him such as depression due to doubts he has about his particular faith, it's a stretch but there are many things that can cause depression in someone, doubts about faith is definitely a big one. Again, since we don’t know enough about the professor it is also hard to know if his confusion is because of social concerns. The professor could be having issues adjusting to his particular university if the university is new to him. He could also be dealing with personal issues such as conflicts with another faculty member or student in a different class than constantly take up his mental capacity making it hard for him to concentrate lending to a snowball effect where he never knows where anything is anymore and he is constantly flustered. If the professor's mind is not fully dedicated to the task at hand, i.e. his current class, then any number of things could be the reason for his absent-mindedness. Including even the possibility for issues in his home life or the ailment of a loved one or even health issues of his own. It is very hard to pinpoint a cause when so little is said and the students, in this case, would have been wise to not only go to the department head but also ask the professor if they could help him get back to competent.
Statement of Dual or Multiple Role Relationship Issues in the Study:
There was no mention or intention stated that the reason for the professor to be dazed and flustered due to dual or multiple role relationships. So, unless hypothetically the professor was having a relationship with a current student of his or looking to go into business with a student or faculty member, which are actual possibilities, but unless a scenario of that nature is causing his mind to constantly be elsewhere then there are just too many possibilities for why the professor is acting in the manner in which he is. More information about who he is personally is needed.
Eight-Step Ethical Decision-Making Model:(Parts of each number that are my assessment of how they would be incorporated into the Professor Dazed and Flustered vignette are highlighted in black.)
Alternative Model:
An alternative model is the Restorative Justice Model. This is an ethical model used for crimes where victims and their offenders meet in mediation to rectify their problems. Where repairing situations can occur by encountering the people affected and opening the doors for potential transformations to be reintroduced back into the community as a reformed individual. This process can be used in criminal cases as well as social justice cases and has also been used in prisons. It’s about restorative actions made by groups of people such as families, friends, people from the community where the offense happened, psychologists, and law enforcement officials against the offender. These people come together with the offender and come up with collective solutions such as community service work or other ways that the offender can rectify their wrongdoings to restore things back to right.
Ethical Strategy
There is value in the Eight Step Ethical Decision Making Model because it’s all common sense. That is why it is a supported model. It’s a model with logic and reasoning that allows individuals to checklist-style each issue to make sure all avenues of each issue are being exhausted before making a concrete final decision because the decision affects human lives. Unsupported models are riskier. Unsupported models step outside the box and could have a possibility for failure more so than supported models. Supported models are proven effective in calm, collective, and organized ways. However, for Professor Dazed and Flustered’s case, I would be inclined to say that a little bit of outside the box thinking with the 8 steps would, in my opinion, work best. If all students in Professor Dazed and Flustered’s class or classes got together to confront him, such as in the Restorative Justice Alternative Model, and let him know how they were feeling and why and gave him a chance to rectify his behavior, a solution could be compromised on collectively without having to involve any further action. The students would have to figure out, collectively themselves before confronting the professor, what the exact issue is and what they would like to see done or alternatives in case it is something that the professor cannot control, like in following the 8 Steps Model.
Should the Restorative Justice Model not work for the students, it is again my opinion, that they should then clearly follow all the 8 Steps Model in approaching the department head or possibly the school dean about further action to be taken. The professor hypothetically, could be going through something that he is unable to comprehend therefore is unaware of consciously. So, if the students bring his flustered behavior to is attention he possibly, hypothetically could deny it, causing further problems that the students will need to address with someone above the professor head.
Summary and Conclusion:
In the case of Professor Dazed and Confused it would probably be extremely beneficial to use a combination of the 8-Step Model with a form of the Restorative Justice Model. While this case has nothing to do with criminal actions I feel that a group meeting consisting of the professor, his superiors, and the students he was supposed to be teaching would work well to benefit all those involved. The group meeting to restore class to the way it should be being taught. Depending on how the professor explains his actions should set the tone for how any other decision making should go. There is an exponential amount of reasons why the professor was acting dazed and flustered and it is imperative that the students and faculty get their information straight before accusations or rash decisions are made. However, upon finding out the reason for the professor’s actions then figuring out what the ethical issue is and talking with professionals about the situation and deciding collectively on alternative ways the student's concerns can be handled is the only logical way to make clear informed concise decisions in the particular case.
Statement of Culture and Social Orientations in the Case Study:
The culture and social orientation of my case vignette is that of college students. Due to the fact that we don't know enough about Professor Dazed and Flustered it is hard to tell whether there is a cultural issue that is troubling him such as depression due to doubts he has about his particular faith, it's a stretch but there are many things that can cause depression in someone, doubts about faith is definitely a big one. Again, since we don’t know enough about the professor it is also hard to know if his confusion is because of social concerns. The professor could be having issues adjusting to his particular university if the university is new to him. He could also be dealing with personal issues such as conflicts with another faculty member or student in a different class than constantly take up his mental capacity making it hard for him to concentrate lending to a snowball effect where he never knows where anything is anymore and he is constantly flustered. If the professor's mind is not fully dedicated to the task at hand, i.e. his current class, then any number of things could be the reason for his absent-mindedness. Including even the possibility for issues in his home life or the ailment of a loved one or even health issues of his own. It is very hard to pinpoint a cause when so little is said and the students, in this case, would have been wise to not only go to the department head but also ask the professor if they could help him get back to competent.
Statement of Dual or Multiple Role Relationship Issues in the Study:
There was no mention or intention stated that the reason for the professor to be dazed and flustered due to dual or multiple role relationships. So, unless hypothetically the professor was having a relationship with a current student of his or looking to go into business with a student or faculty member, which are actual possibilities, but unless a scenario of that nature is causing his mind to constantly be elsewhere then there are just too many possibilities for why the professor is acting in the manner in which he is. More information about who he is personally is needed.
Eight-Step Ethical Decision-Making Model:(Parts of each number that are my assessment of how they would be incorporated into the Professor Dazed and Flustered vignette are highlighted in black.)
- Determine whether the matter truly involves ethics - make sure the matter is actually an ethical issue that falls into the parameters of the ethical standards and principles and isn't just a mad tantrum searching for backing or validation. Professor Dazed and Flustered’s behavior is an ethical issue for his students who feel cheated out of the education they are paying for.
- Consult guidelines already available that might apply as a possible mechanism for resolution - much like when you’re in a car accident you want to take notes gather information about the surrounding situation and information about all parties involved. Like G.I. Joe said, "knowing is half the battle". So, know the laws, policies, procedures, regulations, statutes, and rules. The students will need to look over the policies and producers for what pecking order they will need to follow in order to make a formal complaint about his teaching to the department head, school boards, and/or dean.
- Pause to consider, as best as possible, all factors that might influence the decision you will make - Look at the big picture. People tend to be nearsighted in confrontational situations, it is imperative to be open-minded and assess the whole situation and the many possibilities of misunderstandings and where they could lead. Unless it’s a situation that is so clear cut like sleeping with a client or notifying authorities of foul play that could or has happened, you’re usually going to be in a gray area where you need to think before you react. Easier said than done, I know. The student will need to figure out what is causing the professor to act in the manner that he is before accusing him of anything just in case it does fall within the realms of something he possibly can’t control. While that will still entitle the students to possible refunds at least it will head off any false accusations. It’s better to know then to ignorantly insult based on frustration.
- Consult with a trusted colleague - Having a sounding board for your thoughts is a wonderful thing to have especially it is necessary to have one who is unbiased, realistic, and blunt. The truth hurts, that’s why it’s the truth and not fantasies. It’s also best to have one who has been around the block a time or two as a therapist, in the sense that they know a thing or two about everything and its copy. Knowledge is better than ignorance! The students will need to consult with other professors possibly as well as the department head, school boards, and/or dean.
- Evaluate the rights, responsibilities, and vulnerabilities of all affected parties - everyone, client, or family of the client or anyone is entitled to confidentiality, informed consent, or evaluation feedback. The students will need to take all measures to make sure that whatever they find out about the professor does not become a campus hot story for everyone to gossip, rumor, and exploit. Should something be wrong with the professor, he has the right to keep that confidential and only disclose what needs to be disclosed so that the students can decide what they want to do with regards to the education they are paying to get.
- Generate alternative decisions - In life, we have many choices even when we think we only have one or none cause having no choice is still a choice. Weird concept but true. So, when in any situation always pan out the possibilities of any and all solutions even if they’re beyond our comfort zone. Then assess which one is best for the particular circumstances. The students will need to consider all the avenues that this could go down depending on what the reason is for the professor’s actions. Then proceed in only going after what is fair and right such as their money back or a make-up class with a different professor.
- Enumerate the consequences of making each decision - Again, look at the whole picture! This also includes looking at the consequences from every angle and weigh out is the crime worth the punishment. Sometimes, honestly, it will be because we have to make poor decisions to elevate the good ones. In order to make that decision, we must make it knowing all other consequences will be worse. The students will need to look at this whole picture, not just their narrow frustrations in case there’s something mentally, emotionally, or physically wrong with the professor.
- Make the decision - Always minimize any harm that could possibly occur to anyone or anything that comes from any decision we make, then make the decision. Don’t flounder on it. It will feel like the right thing to do if you’re doing the right thing. Trust your gut, "Gitter done" and move on. Once the students know what they need to know in order to make an informed decision, they then need to make that informed decision and move past it and hope the best for the professor to get his stuff straightened out.
Alternative Model:
An alternative model is the Restorative Justice Model. This is an ethical model used for crimes where victims and their offenders meet in mediation to rectify their problems. Where repairing situations can occur by encountering the people affected and opening the doors for potential transformations to be reintroduced back into the community as a reformed individual. This process can be used in criminal cases as well as social justice cases and has also been used in prisons. It’s about restorative actions made by groups of people such as families, friends, people from the community where the offense happened, psychologists, and law enforcement officials against the offender. These people come together with the offender and come up with collective solutions such as community service work or other ways that the offender can rectify their wrongdoings to restore things back to right.
Ethical Strategy
There is value in the Eight Step Ethical Decision Making Model because it’s all common sense. That is why it is a supported model. It’s a model with logic and reasoning that allows individuals to checklist-style each issue to make sure all avenues of each issue are being exhausted before making a concrete final decision because the decision affects human lives. Unsupported models are riskier. Unsupported models step outside the box and could have a possibility for failure more so than supported models. Supported models are proven effective in calm, collective, and organized ways. However, for Professor Dazed and Flustered’s case, I would be inclined to say that a little bit of outside the box thinking with the 8 steps would, in my opinion, work best. If all students in Professor Dazed and Flustered’s class or classes got together to confront him, such as in the Restorative Justice Alternative Model, and let him know how they were feeling and why and gave him a chance to rectify his behavior, a solution could be compromised on collectively without having to involve any further action. The students would have to figure out, collectively themselves before confronting the professor, what the exact issue is and what they would like to see done or alternatives in case it is something that the professor cannot control, like in following the 8 Steps Model.
Should the Restorative Justice Model not work for the students, it is again my opinion, that they should then clearly follow all the 8 Steps Model in approaching the department head or possibly the school dean about further action to be taken. The professor hypothetically, could be going through something that he is unable to comprehend therefore is unaware of consciously. So, if the students bring his flustered behavior to is attention he possibly, hypothetically could deny it, causing further problems that the students will need to address with someone above the professor head.
Summary and Conclusion:
In the case of Professor Dazed and Confused it would probably be extremely beneficial to use a combination of the 8-Step Model with a form of the Restorative Justice Model. While this case has nothing to do with criminal actions I feel that a group meeting consisting of the professor, his superiors, and the students he was supposed to be teaching would work well to benefit all those involved. The group meeting to restore class to the way it should be being taught. Depending on how the professor explains his actions should set the tone for how any other decision making should go. There is an exponential amount of reasons why the professor was acting dazed and flustered and it is imperative that the students and faculty get their information straight before accusations or rash decisions are made. However, upon finding out the reason for the professor’s actions then figuring out what the ethical issue is and talking with professionals about the situation and deciding collectively on alternative ways the student's concerns can be handled is the only logical way to make clear informed concise decisions in the particular case.