Take your Ethics for Public Administration course online today!
Home / FAQs / Online Degrees / Certificate Courses / Admission Policies / Class Rooms / Request Info.
Canyon College

COURSE SYLLABUS: Ethics for Public Administration

Course Title: Department: Instructor: Prerequisites:

PA585 - Ethics for Public Administration Public Administration Don E. Peavy, Sr., J.D. E-Mail Vita None

PURPOSE OF THE COURSE

The purpose of this course is to explore the arena of public service with a keen eye toward ethical behavior. No doubt, students are aware of the post-Enron corporate scandals and the many calls for re-envisioning the way America does business. Likewise, students are familiar with the post-Watergate calls for re-imaging and revamping government to make it more responsive to the needs of the people and more deserving of the public trust. This course seeks to capture instances of ethical lapses in government as well as posit some ways of avoiding such lapses. Specifically, this course explores some of the philosophical systems that undergird ethics and challenges students to adopt one or more as their own. We use philosophy in its ancient sense of meaning the love of wisdom. Ethics then, which emerges out of philosophy, means the practical application of philosophical principles in such a way as to determine and do "the right thing."

I like to think of ethics as the system by which I decide which of the spices I will extract from my cupboard at any given moment to make whatever dish I am preparing. In this metaphor, the spices are my values and the dish is the decision I have to make. My culinary knowledge and skills is the system I employ to determine which spices make it to my cupboard (there are no poisons on my shelves!). In ethics, my philosophical ideals determine my values as well as my faith tradition. Just like in cooking, where certain spices are better used in particular dishes, in making ethical decisions, certain values will apply to certain situations. Further, there are times when the benefits of particular spices clash against one another and yet both spices are needed. I have to have a way of resolving that conflict and my cooking skills and knowledge of foods (as well as the people who will eat the dish) enable me to resolve this conflict and to use the spices in the right combination and order. Ethics follow a similar pattern. The most difficult ethical issues arise when my values conflict with each other. For instance, in deciding whether or not to oppose abortion, my value of respect for life will conflict with my value of individual freedoms. Nevertheless, my own ethical system is such that I am able to resolve this conflict and to make a decision on the issue of abortion. By the end of this course, students should have a similar system in place regardless of the philosophical system(s) they choose to inform their own selection of values.

REQUIREMENTS

1. Readings. The required texts are: Online Bookstore

Garofalo, Charles and Dean Geuras, Ethics in the Public Service: The Moral Mind at Work (Washington, D.C.: Georgetown Univ. Press, 1999).

Peavy, Don E., "What Must I Do?": Exploring Themes in Christian Ethics (1st Books Library, 2002) (http://www.1stbooks,com/bookview/6748).

Richter, William L., Frances Burke and Jameson W. Doig, eds., Combating Corruption Encouraging Ethics: A Sourcebook for Public Service Ethics (Washington, D.C.: American Society for Public Administration, 1990).

2. Conferences. Students may schedule no more than two Internet conferences between the student and the professor. These should be scheduled as necessary by the student. Of course, students may ask questions of the professor at any time by sending an E-mail to the address at the link above or by posting them to the message board.

3. Exams. There will be a mid-term exam and a comprehensive final examination. The exams will cover the assigned readings. The mid-term exam should be taken prior to the end of the week indicated below and the final examination should be taken before the end of week six.

4. Papers. There will be a short paper of at least two single-spaced pages or 1,250 words (not counting end-notes and bibliography), due at the end of each week's readings in which students will answer the discussion questions and give a reaction to their readings. These papers are to be e-mailed to the professor. Those who do not feel comfortable with e-mailing the papers can contact the professor for a mailing address. Papers should conform to the form and style outlined in Kate L. Turabian's "A Manual for Writers of Term Papers, Theses, and Dissertations," 6th ed. Students should use end notes instead of footnotes. Finally, the papers are intended to be reflection papers and not research or the "author said" papers. Students should indicate their understanding of the texts and this cannot be done merely by quoting the authors. The papers should contain the student's name and id number, course title and number, week of assignment, and number of words.

5. Grades. Course work will be weighted as follows:

Papers: Mid-term exam: Final Exam:

45% 30% 25%

6. Grading Scale.

90-100% 80-89% 70-79% 60-69% 59% or below

A - Excellent B - Above Average C - Average D - Below Average F - Failing Grade

A = Clearly stands out as excellent performance. Has unusually sharp insight into material and initiates thoughtful questions. Sees many sides of an issue. Articulates well and writes logically and clearly. Integrates ideas previously learned from this and other disciplines. Anticipates next steps in progression of ideas.

B = Grasps subject matter at a level considered to be good to very good. Is an active listener and participant in chats, message boards, e-mails and conferences. Speaks and writes well. Accomplishes more than the minimum requirements. Work is of high quality.

C = Demonstrates a satisfactory comprehension of the subject matter. Accomplishes only the minimum requirements, and displays little or no initiative. Communicates at an acceptable level for a college student. Has a generally acceptable understanding of all basic concepts.

D = Quality and quantity of work is below average and barely acceptable.

F = Quality and quantity of work is unacceptable.

Week 1

Read Peavy, Preface and Introduction. Read Richter, pp. 1-17 and Garofalo, pp.1-22.

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS:

1. What are the sources of ethics?
2. What are your sources of ethics?
3. What are some of the values/ground rules that inform your ethical decision making?
4. What are some critical virtues needed for public administrators?

Week 2

Read Garofalo, pp. 23-93.

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS:

1. What are the main differences between the theories discussed by Garofalo this week?
2. With which of the theories, if any, do you most agree with? Why?
3. Find an article on the Internet that discusses government corruption. Which theory discussed by Garofalo do the participants in the article seem to subscribe to? How could the scandal have been avoided? What changes would you make in government to help prevent the problem from resurfacing?

Week 3

Read Garofalo, pp. 95-185.

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS:

1. What are the differences between deontology and teleology?
2. In what ways can deontology and teleology be unified?

PLEASE TAKE MID-TERM EXAMINATION BEFORE PROCEEDING TO THE NEXT WEEK.

Week 4

Read Richter, pp. 21-60 and Peavy, Chapter One.

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS:

Read Case 3 on pages 37-38 and answer the questions on page 38.

Week 5

Read Richter, pp. 61-134.

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS:

Answer the seven questions on page 132.

Week 6

Read Richter, pp. 135-216.

PLEASE TAKE FINAL EXAMINATION BY THE END OF THIS WEEK.