| MODULE NAME: | MODULE CODE: |
| PROFESSIONAL ETHICS | PRET7311/p/w |
| ASSESSMENT TYPE: POE (PAPER & MARKING RUBRIC) TOTAL MARK ALLOCATION: 100 MARKS TOTAL HOURS: A MINIMUM OF 24 HOURS IS SUGGESTED TO COMPLETE THIS ASSESSMENT |
| By submitting this assignment, you acknowledge that you have read and understood all the rules as per the terms in the registration contract, in particular the assignment and assessment rules in The IIE Assessment Strategy and Policy (IIE009), the intellectual integrity and plagiarism rules in the Intellectual Integrity Policy (IIE023), as well as any rules and regulations published in the student portal. INSTRUCTIONS: No material may be copied from original sources, even if referenced correctly, unless it is a direct quote indicated with quotation marks. No more than 10% of the assignment may consist of direct quotes.Any assignment with a similarity index of more than 25% will be scrutinised for plagiarism. Please ensure you attach an originality report to your assignment if required.Make a copy of your assignment before handing it in.Assignments must be typed unless otherwise specified.All work must be adequately and correctly referenced.Begin each section on a new page.Follow all instructions on the assignment cover sheet.This is an individual assignment – For group assignments, the group may not exceed 4 members, and all will be awarded the same mark. |
Referencing Rubric Providing evidence based on valid and referenced academic sources is a fundamental educational principle and the cornerstone of high-quality academic work. Hence, The IIE considers it essential to develop the referencing skills of our students in our commitment to achieve high academic standards. Part of achieving these high standards is referencing in a way that is consistent, technically correct and congruent. This is not plagiarism, which is handled differently.
Poor quality formatting in your referencing will result in a penalty of a maximum of ten percent being deducted from the mark awarded, according to the following guidelines. Please note, however, that evidence of plagiarism in the form of copied or uncited work (not referenced), absent reference lists, or exceptionally poor referencing, may result in action being taken in accordance with The IIE’s Intellectual Integrity Policy (0023).
Markers are required to provide feedback to students by indicating (circling/underlining) the information that best describes the student’s work.
Minor technical referencing errors: 5% deduction from the overall mark – the student’s work contains five or more errors listed in the minor errors column in the table below.
Major technical referencing errors: 10% deduction from the overall mark – the student’s work contains five or more errors listed in the major errors column in the table below.
If both minor and major errors are indicated, then 10% is deducted from the overall mark. The examples provided below are not exhaustive but are provided to illustrate the error.
| Required: Technically correct referencing style | Minor errors in technical correctness of referencing style Deduct 5% from mark awarded | Major errors In technical correctness of referencing style Deduct 10% from mark awarded |
| Consistency The same referencing format has been used for all in-text references and in the bibliography/reference list. | Minor inconsistencies. The referencing style is generally consistent, but there are one or two changes in the format of in-text referencing and/or in the bibliography. For example, page numbers for direct quotes (in-text) have been provided for one source, but not in another instance. Two book chapters (bibliography) have been referenced in the bibliography in two different formats. | Major inconsistencies. Poor and inconsistent referencing style used in-text and/or in the bibliography/ reference list. Multiple formats for the same type of referencing have been used. For example, the format for direct quotes (in-text) and/or book chapters (bibliography/ reference list) is different across multiple instances. |
| Technical correctness Referencing format is technically correct throughout the submission. Position of the reference: a reference is directly associated with every concept or idea. For example, quotation marks, page numbers, years, etc. are applied correctly, sources in the bibliography/reference list are correctly presented. | Generally, technically correct with some minor errors. The correct referencing format has been consistently used, but there are one or two errors. Concepts and ideas are typically referenced, but a reference is missing from one small section of the work. Position of the references: references are only given at the beginning or end of every paragraph. For example, the student has incorrectly presented direct quotes (in-text) and/or book chapters (bibliography/reference list). | Technically incorrect. The referencing format is incorrect. Concepts and ideas are typically referenced, but a reference is missing from small sections of the work. Position of the references: references are only given at the beginning or end of large sections of work. For example, incorrect author information is provided, no year of publication is provided, quotation marks and/or page numbers for direct quotes missing, page numbers are provided for paraphrased material, the incorrect punctuation is used (in-text); the bibliography/reference list is not in alphabetical order, the incorrect format for a book chapter/journal article is used, information is missing e.g. no place of publication had been provided (bibliography); repeated sources on the reference list. |
| Congruence between in-text referencing and bibliography/reference list All sources are accurately reflected and are all accurately included in the bibliography/reference list. | Generally, congruence between the in-text referencing and the bibliography/ reference list with one or two errors. There is largely a match between the sources presented in-text and the bibliography. For example, a source appears in the text, but not in the bibliography/reference list or vice versa. | A lack of congruence between the in-text referencing and the bibliography. No relationship/several incongruencies between the in-text referencing and the bibliography/reference list. For example, sources are included in-text, but not in the bibliography and vice versa, a link, rather than the actual reference is provided in the bibliography. |
| In summary: the recording of references is accurate and complete. | In summary, at least 80% of the sources are correctly reflected and included in a reference list. | In summary, at least 60% of the sources are incorrectly reflected and/or not included in reference list. |
Overall Feedback about the consistency, technical correctness and congruence between in-text referencing and bibliography:
| Assessments | |||
| The assessment weighting for this PoE is as follows: Assessment Name Weighting ICE 10% Summative POE 90% Portfolio of Evidence (PoE) This Portfolio of Evidence needs to be developed as you progress through this module. The questions in this assignment all form part of a single Portfolio of Evidence (POE) to be submitted at the end of the module. Module Assessment — Background and Instructions As explained in your Module Guide, this module assessment structure is comprised of three activities. In order to prepare you for these activities, there will be two compulsory ICE tasks that must be submitted for marking to your lecturer as per their timeline. These need not be included in the POE and will be done through the course of your module at various times decided by your lecturer. The aim of the two Compulsory ICE tasks is to render additional support to you so that you can be able to complete your Summative PoE effectively. You will have three lecturer facilitated touchpoints which will be scheduled prior to the expected completion of the POE activity as per pacer. This is an opportunity for you to receive developmental feedback for your three POE activities which you will be working on throughout the module and will submitting as a summative at the end of the module. PS: Activities will only be marked on the final summative submission. | |||
| Duration | 24 hours | ||
| Open/ Closed book | Open book | ||
| Resources Required | Prescribed texts; Module Guide; and Own additional research. | ||
| Learning Units covered | All |
| NB: Failure to submit your final portfolio of evidence by the prescribed time and date (to be given to you by your campus head of department) will be treated as an absence from examination, and not as a late assignment. Please refer to the IIE 009 Assessment Strategy and Policy (updated September 2016) for further details. |
| Task 1: Argument Analysis – Short Essay [Marks: 30] |
| For this task, you will need to use your knowledge of argument structures and analysis, as well as of the various philosophical approaches you covered in Learning Units 1 and 2 and apply these to a real-life education scenario in the form of a short academic essay. Specifically, you need to: Carefully read the news article by Bongekile Macupe (2017), ‘Parents, NGOs must pay for school toilets’, available here: https://mg.co.za/article/2017-11-24-00-parents-ngos-must- pay-for-school-toiletsThen, using the article above as your context, write a short but formal academic essay of between 800 and 900 words in which you:Analyse the viewpoints, propositions and quality of both positions’ (i.e. that of State Counsel Simon Phaswane’s, and Section 27’s Mark Heywood’s) arguments, based on the context and facts provided in this article;Comment on the assumptions made about the responsibilities of NGOs, parents, and the State by the two parties concerned;Identify the kinds of questions posed by Phaswane, noted their intended purpose, and outline any one logical fallacy evident in these questions,Identify the most likely philosophical approach/theory likely taken by both Phaswane and Heywood through an application of each one’s claims, arguments, and/or positions. |
| Please use Rubric – Task 1, provided at the end of this PoE, to guide the nature of your essay. It is important that you use the rubric to evaluate your own work before you submit Task 1 to ensure that you have completed all required elements adequately. |
| Note: Please remember to submit Task 1 through SafeAssign. |
| That said, in summary, you will be awarded marks for the following elements of your essay: Use of an academic style, tone, and format, and evidence of additional, relevant and credible research in your 800- to 900-word essay;Analysis of both positions’ arguments;Comment on the assumptions regarding responsibilities of parents, NGOs and the State;Brief analysis of Phaswane’s questions and a logical fallacy contained therein; andSuitable application of both positions’ stances and statements to relevant philosophical approaches or theories. |
| Suggested resources for this question: For content: Horsthemke, K. et al. 2016. Education Studies. 2e. Cape Town: Oxford University Press Southern Africa. (Sections 10.3 and 14.3; and Chapter 12)The School of Thought Org. 2017. Thou shalt not commit logical fallacies. [Downloadable online poster] Available at: https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com. Accessed 12 October 2017.Wheeler, L.K. 2017. Logical Fallacies Handlist. [Online]. Available at. Accessed 12 October 2017. For formatting/editing/referencing/argument analysis and construction: Siewierski, C. 2015. An Introduction to Scholarship – Building Academic Skills for Tertiary Study. Cape Town: Oxford University Press Southern Africa. (Chapters 2, 7, 8 and 10, among others) |
| Task 2 — The Role-players in South African Education – Long Essay [Marks: 40] |
| For this task, you will need to use your command of the various conceptualisations of education, as well as the roles that teachers play within these different conceptions, as covered in Learning Unit 3. Additionally, you will need to combine this with some of the principles covered in Learning Units 1 and 2 to draw a conclusion regarding a hypothetical ‘ideal’ for the South African education context. With the circumstances around Michael Komape’s death as your reference point, write a formal essay (of between 800 and 1000 words) in which you offer your informed opinion regarding which role-player (or combination of role-players) you think is/are best suited to doing justice to the conceptualisation and control of education in South Africa. You need to: Discuss your informed view on the roles that the state, the parents, and the community should play in the provision of basic sanitation at the Mehlodumela Primary School that Michael Komape attended;Support your opinions with reference to (at minimum) the positions of Locke, Plato, Mill, Adeyemi and Adeyinka, and Gutmann;Discuss the effects that your selection of role-player/s might have on the roles of teachers in South African classrooms. |
| Please use Rubric – Task 2, provided at the end of this PoE, to guide the planning, structure, and contents of your essay. It is important that you use the rubric to evaluate your own work before you submit Task 2 to ensure that you have completed all required elements adequately. |
| Note: Please remember to submit Task 2 through SafeAssign. |
| Task 3 — My Teaching Philosophy (Marks: 30) |
| For this final task, which covers all Learning Units of your PRET7311 module, you need to imagine that you have accepted your first teaching job after graduation in a rural, under-resourced South African school (such as Mehlodumela Primary). You have gained limited (but invaluable) teaching experience in differently-resourced schools during your studies at The IIE, and now need to use these short experiences, and your well-developed theoretical knowledge, to outline a clear philosophy of teaching practice that will work for the learners and new environment in which you will teach. You therefore need to create your personal philosophy in a way that shows clear consideration of the under-resourced nature of your new school and its learners in terms of: Your philosophically supported view of learning and knowledge;Your philosophically supported view of the role of teachers and teaching;Your philosophically and personally justified goals for your pupils;Your philosophically supported views on discipline; andYour planned approach for prioritising conflicting rights and dealing with ethical dilemmas, as supported by various philosophical principles and the rights and codes of both the Constitution of South Africa, and the SACE Code of Professional Ethics. Your personal philosophy may take any logical format, but should not exceed five pages in total, and should reflect polished use of English grammar and syntax. Please include subheadings to help you locate the different elements. |
| Please use Rubric – Task 3, provided at the end of this PoE, to guide your approach. It is important that you use the rubric to evaluate your own work before you submit Task 3 to ensure that you have completed all required elements adequately. |
| Note: This task must be submitted through SafeAssign. |
Appendix A: Task 1 Rubric Please note: Rubrics should be included when submitting your work.
| MODULE NAME: | MODULE CODE: |
| PROFESSIONAL ETHICS | PRET7311/p/w |
| STUDENT NAME: | STUDENT NUMBER: |
| RUBRIC 1: ARGUMENT ANALYSIS – SHORT ESSAY | |||
| Absent/Poor | Developing | Good | Excellent |
| 0 | 1-2 | 3–4 | 5 |
| The academic style, tone and format is unacceptable. There is a lack of proofreading and revision. There is a lack of credible research. | The academic style, tone and format is acceptable. There is a lack of proof readings and revision. There is some credible research | The academic style, tone and format has been reviewed and proof readings. The essay shows evidence of additional and credible research but there are less than 3 | Used a formal academic style, tone and format that reflect evidence of proofreading and revision. Essay also reflects evidence of additional, relevant and credible research through the citing of at least three suitable resources. |
| 0–3 | 4-5 | 6-8 | 9-10 |
| There is a lack of analysis on the positions arguments that reflects critical thinking. The argument does not follow a logical, coherent and support discussion. | There is an attempt at analysis on the positions arguments that reflects critical thinking. The argument does not follow a logical, coherent and support discussion. | There is an analysis of one position and reflect an attempt at critical thinking. There is a lack of discussion of both parties’ views. | Analysis of both positions’ arguments reflects critical thinking, and includes a logical, coherent, and supported discussion of both parties’ (Phaswane’s and Heywood’s) viewpoints, propositions, and argument quality, in the context of the facts and context of the case. |
Continued …
| RUBRIC 1: ARGUMENT ANALYSIS – SHORT ESSAY cont. | |||
| Absent/Poor | Developing | Good | Excellent |
| 0 | 1-2 | 3–4 | 5 |
| There were no comments on the assumptions made by Heywood and Phaswane regarding the responsibilities of parents, NGO’s and the State | Commented on the assumptions but did not specific which author they were from and what the responsibilities of parents, NGO’s and the State. | Commented on the assumptions made by either Heywood or Phaswane. But did not compare the two sides. | Commented briefly but logically on the assumptions made by both Heywood and Phaswane regarding the responsibilities of parents, NGOs and the State. |
| 0–3 | 4-5 | 6-8 | 9-10 |
| There is a no identification of the main kinds of questions posed by Phaswane and the intended purpose. The logical fallacy is not identified or misidentified. There is a lack of identification at each of the positions of the particular philosophical approach/theory. There was lack of support to the claims. | There is identification of the main kinds of questions but there is a lack of an argument supporting the allocation. There is an attempt of identification at each of the positions of the particular philosophical approach/theory. There is an attempt to produce support for the claims. | The main kind/s of questions posed by Phaswane and the purpose of these. The logical fallacy is identified is correct, but there is a lack of support regarding the allocation. There was a philosophical approach/theory included but there was a lack of supporting assertions of the claims, arguments or positions. There is an attempt to link them to the authors. | Clearly identified the main kind/s of questions posed by Phaswane, and the intended purpose of these. Additionally, and more significantly though, students have also analysed a logical fallacy contained in one of these questions. The logical fallacy identified is correct and the student has supported the allocation through a brief application of the statement/s to the nature of the logical fallacy itself. Clearly located each of the positions (held by Heywood and Phaswane) within one (or, if justified, more than one) particular philosophical approach/theory, and supported these assertions by applying their claims, arguments or positions to the nature of the relevant philosophical stance. |
| /30 |
Appendix B: TASK 2 RUBRIC
| RUBRIC 2 — THE ROLE OF PARTIES | |||
| Absent/Poor | Developing | Good | Excellent |
| 0–3 | 4 | 5–7 | 8–10 |
| The document seems unedited with careless language and punctuation errors and general referencing concerns. Writing style is too informal and/ or inconsistent. Formatting of the document is poor. | The document does not follow a formal academic style, tone or format. There is a lack of evidence of proof reading and revision. There is a lack of credible sources included. | Used a formal academic style, tone and format that reflect evidence of proofreading and revision. The report does not adhere to the 800 – 1000-word count but is within the 100 word limit. Essay also reflects evidence of additional, relevant and credible research however, there is less than 3 suitable sources. | Used a formal academic style, tone and format that reflect evidence of proofreading and revision within the prescribed length of 800 to 1000 words. Essay also reflects evidence of additional, relevant and credible research through the citing of at least three suitable resources. |
| 0–1 | 2 | 3–4 | 5–6 |
| There is no thesis statement included. There is a lack of discussion regarding the role players in relation to the South African education | There is a lack of a clear view regarding the thesis statement. There is an attempt at discussing the role players of the South African education. | The thesis statement is clear regarding the role players, but there is a lack of conceptualisation. | Developed a clear view, embedded in a thesis statement, regarding which role-player/s is/are best suited to conceptualising and controlling education in South Africa. |
| RUBRIC 2 — THE ROLE OF PARTIES | |||
| Absent/Poor | Developing | Good | Excellent |
| 0–3 | 4 | 5–7 | 8–10 |
| There is no logical discussion regarding the roles of the state, parents and the community in the case of Mehlodumela Primary. None of the role players have been discussed and there is no discussion regarding the responsibilities. | There is a discussion regarding the viewpoint of the roles of the state, parents, and/or community in the case of Mehlodumela Primary. Some of the role players have been mentioned but there is a lack of discussion regarding them. | There is a strong discussion regarding the roles of the state, parents, and/or community in the case of Mehlodumela Primary. Some of the role-players are discussed, advocating for or against responsibility/ies. Relevant community agents (such as Section 27) have not been included in the discussion. | Bolstered their thesis viewpoint via a thorough, practical and logical discussion of the roles of the state, parents, and/or community in the case of Mehlodumela Primary. All role-players are discussed, advocating for or against responsibility/ies. Relevant community agents (such as Section 27) are included in the discussion. |
| 0–2 | 3-4 | 5-6 | 7-8 |
| None of the claims have been cited. There is no discussion regarding Locke, Mill, Plato, Adeyemo and Adeyinka and Gutmann to reinforce the opinions. | Some of the claims have been cited, but there is a lack of logical assertion. The positions of Locke, Mill, Plato, Adeyemi and Adeyinka, and Gutmann have not been included. | Ensured that all claims are cited and founded in logical assertion. The positions of Locke, Mill, Plato, Adeyemi and Adeyinka, and Gutmann have been mentioned but they have not been used to reinforce their arguments. | Ensured that all claims are cited and founded in logical assertion. The positions of Locke, Mill, Plato, Adeyemi and Adeyinka, and Gutmann are used to reinforce their arguments. |
| RUBRIC 2 — THE ROLE OF PARTIES | |||
| Absent/Poor | Developing | Good | Excellent |
| 0–1 | 2 | 3–4 | 5–6 |
| There is no discussion or consideration on how the selected role-player involvement/control might impact on the role of teachers in South African classrooms. There is no conclusion or justification. | The selected role-player involvement/control might impact on the role of teachers in South African classrooms has been mentioned but there is no justification or logical deduction. | Considered how the selected role- player involvement/control might impact on the role of teachers in South African classrooms. There is a lack of logical deduction and conclusion, however, some justification has been included. | Considered how the selected role- player involvement/control might impact on the role of teachers in South African classrooms. While this element does not need to be theoretical, conclusions drawn must indicate logical deduction and be justified. |
| /40 |
| RUBRIC 3 – PERSONAL PHILOSOPHY | |||
| Absent/Poor | Developing | Good | Excellent |
| 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 |
| The format is not logical or user friendly. The teaching philosophy does not conform to the 5-page limit and there is a lack of the required elements. The grammar and syntax are weak and has not been proof read. | There is an attempt to make the teaching philosophy logical, user- friendly. It does not conform to the 5-page limit and does not include all the relevant elements and there is a lack of proof reading. | Selected a logical, user-friendly format to outline their personal teaching philosophy that conforms to the 5- page limit not all the elements have been included, but there is evidence of proof readings. | Selected a logical, user-friendly format to outline their personal teaching philosophy that conforms to the 5-page limit but sufficiently provides for all required elements and displays polished use of English grammar and syntax. |
| 0–1 | 2 | 3 | 4–5 |
| The elements have not been included in the philosophy to the given scenario. Aspects of the philosophy included are impractical and out of context. There is a lack of outlining of their view on the learning and knowledge for the given South African context. | Some of the elements have been adapted to the philosophy to the given scenario. Some of the elements are practical but not all. The outlined view on learning and knowledge for the given south African context has not been supported. | Clearly and consistently adapted all elements of their philosophy to the given scenario (i.e. as newly graduated teachers in an under-resourced rural school) – no elements of their philosophy include impractical/unlikely elements for the indicated context. The outline of their view on the learning and knowledge of the South African context is not supported this view and there is a lack of relevant theory/philosophical positions. | Clearly and consistently adapted all elements of their philosophy to the given scenario (i.e. as newly graduated teachers in an under-resourced rural school) – no elements of their philosophy include impractical/unlikely elements for the indicated context. Outlined their view on learning and knowledge for the given South African context and supported this view with relevant theory/philosophical positions. |
| RUBRIC 3 – PERSONAL PHILOSOPHY | |||
| Absent/Poor | Developing | Good | Excellent |
| 0–1 | 2 | 3 | 4–5 |
| The role of the teachers and teaching is not given in context and it is not supported by the view. | The view is included but it is not given in context and does not support the relevant theory. | Outlined their view on the role of teachers and teaching within the given context, but there is a lack of information regarding the relevant theory/philosophical position. | Outlined their view on the role of teachers and teaching within the given context and supported this view with relevant theory/philosophical positions. |
| 0–1 | 2 | 3 | 4–5 |
| There is a lack of a planned approach to the discipline suited to the context. There is no mention of the SACE code of professional ethics. There is a lack of personal goals for their learners in a way that demonstrate clear consideration of their context. | A planned approach has been included but it does suit the context of the discipline. The SACE code of professional ethics has been mentioned but there is a lack of consideration of the theoretical/philosophical principles. | Indicated a planned approach to discipline suited to the context, and which is supported by consideration of theoretical/philosophical principles, as well as by the SACE Code of Professional Ethics. There is no clarity on the personal goals and how these will take into consideration of their context. | Indicated a planned approach to discipline suited to the context, and which is supported by consideration of theoretical/philosophical principles, as well as by the SACE Code of Professional Ethics. Established their personal goals for their learners in a way that demonstrates clear consideration of their context, South Africa as a whole, and its Constitutional ideals. |
| RUBRIC 3 – PERSONAL PHILOSOPHY | |||
| Absent/Poor | Developing | Good | Excellent |
| 0–3 | 4–5 | 6–9 | 10–12 |
| There is a lack of a prioritisation plan in which consideration of the Bill of Rights from the Constitution of South Africa, the SACE Code of Professional Ethics, and any other philosophical views and goals are balanced in the case of ethical dilemmas that may arise in the course of teaching. | There is a prioritisation plan included but there is a lack of consideration of the Bill of Rights from the Constitution of South Africa, the SACE Code of Professional Ethics, and any other philosophical views and goals are balanced in the case of ethical dilemmas that may arise in the course of teaching. There are no specific elements of these documents, and sources considered critical to the student are highlighted and form part of the prioritised elements noted. | Carefully outlined a prioritisation plan in which consideration of the Bill of Rights from the Constitution of South Africa, the SACE Code of Professional Ethics, and any other philosophical views and goals are balanced in the case of ethical dilemmas that may arise in the course of teaching. Some of the elements have been included and the student attempted to highlight it in form part of the prioritised elements. | Carefully outlined a prioritisation plan in which consideration of the Bill of Rights from the Constitution of South Africa, the SACE Code of Professional Ethics, and any other philosophical views and goals are balanced in the case of ethical dilemmas that may arise in the course of teaching. Specific elements of these documents, and sources considered critical to the student are highlighted and form part of the prioritised elements noted. |
| /30 |
END OF POE
