Category: Social justice

Ethics: Dilemmas of Loyalty
First, read chapter 9 from Justice by Michael Sandel. Linked here:
https://iasbaba.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Michael_Sandel-_Justice-_What_s_the_Right_Thing_to_Do.pdf
Next, watch the lecture here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dIO1M8mpU9M
Then, complete both of the following tasks (#1 and #2):
-First, in the lecture, I make some claims. I am genuinely trying to sort through some of these ethical issues along with you, therefore I welcome your critique and feedback. Do either of the following:
–Option one: if you disagree with one of the following claims I made, explain why:
—The only way to maximize welfare is to respect freedom.
—The force of law cannot enforce goodness (promote virtue), only punish badness. Virtue must be promoted within smaller groups and institutions like churches, clubs, schools, families, and peer groups.
—The force of law should only enforce obligations derived from “natural duties” and not “obligations of solidarity.”
–Option two: if you agree with all of the claims I made above, tell how we ought to think about voluntary obligations. What are the relationships between voluntary obligations and the force of law, the respect of freedom, and the cultivation of virtue? Should the force of law enforce all or only some voluntary obligations? If it is only some obligations, how do we decide which voluntary obligations should be enforced by law? Note: I am not asking whether the law should force us to undertake certain voluntary obligations, but should the law have a role in punishing people who break their voluntary obligations?
– Second, regarding obligations of solidarity, there is one of two options. Defend which approach to obligations of solidarity seems correct:
— Option one: obligations of solidarity don’t actually exist. When we observe people performing actions of solidarity, we are observing their inherent bias. For example, a parent choosing to save their drowning child over another drowning child is a demonstration of the parent’s bias in favor of their child, but the parent is not morally obligated to save their child over another child.
— Option two: obligations of solidarity actually exist, and with belonging comes responsibility. Moral obligations can be imposed on us without our consent. For example, a parent is morally obligated to save their drowning child over another drowning child.

This reflection essay is where you will connect your knowledge gained throughout the course to your personal growth and ability to apply a critical social justice lens to real-world examples. You are welcome to use a first person narrative to answer the questions; however, please read the questions closely as I am also wanting you to apply a critical social justice lens through examining events. Below, you will find a total of 4 groups questions that match the first questions you were asked in your preflection. Where appropriate, I want you to strongly consider making reference to your preflection as a method of demonstrating your growth in understanding. I am NOT looking for you to have textbook definitions for any of the terms below; the goal is for you to answer the questions with the knowledge that YOU have RIGHT NOW. For each group of questions, please make sure you are answering in full.
Group 1: Prejudice and Discrimination
Revisit your initial understanding of prejudice and discrimination. How has your understanding evolved over the course of the semester?
Reflect on specific instances of prejudice or discrimination that you identified in your reflection. How do these experiences align with or challenge your previous understanding? What new insights have you gained?
What is an example of a real-world event that you can examine through a critical social justice lens, using the terms prejudice and discrimination? (Use a news article and make sure you cite it in-text [where appropriate] and include a link in an APA-formatted references page)
Group 2: Oppression and Power
How have your perspectives on oppression and power shifted since writing your preflection?
Consider the ways in which power operates in your life or community. Have you noticed any changes in your awareness of power dynamics since the beginning of the semester?
Reflect on historical and modern-day instances of oppression discussed in the course. How have your views on these examples evolved, and what new connections have you made?
Ableism, Sexism, Racism, and Classism
Reflect on your initial understanding of ableism, sexism, racism, and classism. How have your perceptions of these -isms changed over time?
Recall instances from your own life or from course materials where these societal forces were at play. How has your analysis of these instances deepened since learning more about critical social justice?
How have you come to understand the complexities and intersectionality of privilege and discrimination more fully?
Connecting Theory and Experience
How have your personal encounters, stories, or media representations shaped your understanding of prejudice, discrimination, power, and oppression?
How have the discussions and readings in this course challenged or reinforced your previous beliefs and assumptions about social justice issues?
In what ways has your understanding of social justice been enriched by engaging with diverse perspectives and voices throughout the semester?
Overall Reflection
What are the most significant insights or lessons you’ve gained about social justice?
How do you envision applying your learning from this course in your personal life, academic pursuits, and future endeavors?
Finally, consider how your understanding of social justice has evolved since the beginning of the semester. What areas of growth do you still see for yourself, and how do you plan to continue your exploration of social justice issues beyond this course?
Your paper should be written in a 12-point font, double-spaced, and APA-formatted, including a references page. Purdue Online Writing LabLinks to an external site. is a resource to help you learn how to format your paper according to APA. MSJC’s Learning Resource CenterLinks to an external site. is also a great place to get some writing support!
This reflection is your chance to show off all you’ve learned throughout this course. As you begin writing, make sure you take time to intentionally consider where you started and where you currently are!
Grading
The following rubric is based on a traditional essay:
Breakdown
Requirement Points
Group 1 Reflection 20 points
Group 2 Reflection 20 points
-Ism Reflection 20 points
Connecting Theory Reflection 20 points
Overall Reflection 15 points
Grammar, Organization & Clarity 2 points
APA-formatting 3 points
TOTAL 100 points
Select “Next” to continue.
Rubric
Reflection
Reflection
Criteria Ratings Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeGroup 1 Reflection
20 to >17.0 pts
Full Marks
Student demonstrates a clear evolution in their understanding of prejudice and discrimination, showing depth of insight and critical reflection. Student provides detailed and insightful reflections on personal experiences of prejudice or discrimination, demonstrating a nuanced understanding of how these experiences relate to course concepts.
17 to >14.0 pts
Great
Student demonstrates limited evolution in understanding, with shallow or superficial reflections. Student briefly mentions personal experiences, but fails to provide detailed or insightful reflections.
14 to >11.0 pts
Good
Student shows minimal evolution in understanding, with little depth or critical reflection. Student mentions personal experiences, but the reflections are vague or lack coherence.
11 to >8.0 pts
Needs Work
Student demonstrates little to no evolution in understanding, with unclear or incorrect reflections. Student briefly mentions personal experiences, but fails to provide meaningful reflections.
8 to >0 pts
Poor
Student does not demonstrate any evolution in understanding. Student does not provide reflections on personal experiences.
20 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeGroup 2 Reflection
20 to >17.0 pts
Full Marks
Student demonstrates a clear evolution in their understanding of oppression and power, showing depth of insight and critical reflection. Student provides insightful reflections on power dynamics in their life or community, demonstrating an understanding of how power operates in various contexts. Student offers thoughtful analysis of historical and modern examples of oppression and power dynamics, drawing connections to course concepts and discussions.
17 to >14.0 pts
Great
Student demonstrates some evolution in understanding, but lacks depth or clarity in their reflections. Student provides reflections on power dynamics, but lacks depth or fails to connect these reflections effectively to course concepts. Student offers basic analysis of examples, but lacks depth or fails to draw clear connections to course concepts.
14 to >11.0 pts
Good
Student demonstrates limited evolution in understanding, with shallow or superficial reflections. Student briefly discusses power dynamics, but lacks depth or critical insight. Student mentions examples of oppression, but the analysis is cursory or lacks coherence.
11 to >8.0 pts
Needs Work
Student demonstrates little to no evolution in understanding, with unclear or incorrect reflections. Student briefly mentions personal experiences, but fails to provide meaningful reflections.
8 to >0 pts
Poor
Student does not demonstrate any evolution in understanding. Student does not provide reflections on power dynamics. Student does not provide analysis of historical or modern examples.
20 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome-Ism Reflection
20 to >17.0 pts
Full Marks
Student demonstrates a clear evolution in their understanding of ableism, sexism, racism, and classism, showing depth of insight and critical reflection. Student provides detailed reflections on personal experiences or course materials related to these -isms, demonstrating a nuanced understanding of their complexities. Student demonstrates an understanding of the intersectionality of these -isms and how they intersect with other forms of oppression, such as race, gender, sexuality, etc.
17 to >14.0 pts
Great
Student demonstrates some evolution in understanding, but lacks depth or clarity in their reflections. Student provides reflections on personal experiences or course materials, but lacks depth or fails to connect these reflections effectively to course concepts. Student mentions intersectionality, but the analysis lacks depth or fails to fully integrate it into the discussion.
14 to >11.0 pts
Good
Student demonstrates limited evolution in understanding, with shallow or superficial reflections. Student briefly discusses personal or course examples, but lacks depth or critical insight. Student briefly mentions intersectionality, but the analysis is cursory or lacks coherence.
11 to >8.0 pts
Needs Work
Student shows minimal evolution in understanding, with little depth or critical reflection. Student mentions personal or course examples, but the analysis is vague or lacks coherence. Student does not adequately address intersectionality.
8 to >0 pts
Poor
Student does not demonstrate any evolution in understanding. Student does not provide reflections on personal or course examples. Student does not address intersectionality.
20 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeConnecting Theory and Experience
20 to >17.0 pts
Full Marks
Student provides insightful reflections on personal encounters with social justice issues, demonstrating a clear connection between theory and lived experience. Student demonstrates a thorough engagement with course materials, incorporating relevant readings, discussions, and assignments into their reflections. Student applies diverse perspectives and voices to their reflections, showing an understanding of the complexity of social justice issues.
17 to >14.0 pts
Great
Student provides reflections on personal encounters, but lacks depth or fails to effectively connect them to course concepts. Student demonstrates engagement with course materials, but the integration into their reflections is somewhat superficial. Student mentions diverse perspectives, but the application lacks depth or fails to fully integrate them into the discussion.
14 to >11.0 pts
Good
Student briefly discusses personal encounters, but lacks depth or critical insight. Student engages with course materials, but the integration into their reflections is minimal. Student briefly mentions diverse perspectives, but the application is cursory or lacks coherence.
11 to >8.0 pts
Needs Work
Student demonstrates little to no reflection on personal encounters, with unclear or incorrect reflections. Student minimally engages with course materials, with little integration into their reflections. Student mentions diverse perspectives, but the application is unclear or irrelevant.
8 to >0 pts
Poor
Student does not provide reflections on personal encounters. Student does not engage with course materials. Student does not address diverse perspectives.
20 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeOverall Reflection
15 to >13.0 pts
Full Marks
Student demonstrates insightful reflections on the most significant insights or lessons learned about social justice, showing depth of understanding and critical thinking. Student articulates clear and meaningful ways in which they plan to apply their learning from the course in personal life, academic pursuits, and future endeavors. Student reflects on personal growth and development throughout the course, and outlines specific plans for continued exploration of social justice issues in the future.
13 to >11.0 pts
Great
Student provides reflections on insights and lessons learned, but lacks depth or critical insight. Student discusses applications of learning, but the connections are somewhat superficial or unclear. Student mentions personal growth and future plans, but the reflections lack depth or specificity.
11 to >8.0 pts
Good
Student shows minimal reflection on insights and lessons learned, with little depth or critical insight. Student briefly discusses applications of learning, but the connections lack clarity or relevance. Student briefly mentions personal growth and future plans, but the reflections lack depth or specificity.
8 to >5.0 pts
Needs Work
Student demonstrates little to no reflection on insights and lessons learned, with unclear or incorrect reflections. Student minimally discusses applications of learning, with little clarity or relevance. Student briefly mentions personal growth and future plans, but the reflections lack clarity or relevance.
5 to >0 pts
Poor
Student does not provide reflections on insights and lessons learned. Student does not provide applications of learning. Student does not provide reflections on personal growth and future plans.
15 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeGrammar, Organization, and Clarity
2 to >0.0 pts
Full Marks
Student demonstrates consistently strong grammar, organization, and clarity throughout the reflection, enhancing the readability and coherence of their writing.
0 pts
No Marks
Student’s reflection contains numerous grammar errors, lacks organization, or is unclear and difficult to follow, hindering comprehension.
2 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAPA formatting
3 to >0.0 pts
Full Marks
Student consistently follows APA formatting guidelines throughout the reflection, including proper citation format, reference list formatting, and adherence to APA style rules for headings, font, spacing, and margins.
0 pts
No Marks
Student’s reflection does not adhere to APA formatting guidelines, with significant deviations from APA style rules, incorrect citation format, or absence of a reference list.
3 pts
Total Points: 100

The final assignment is an ethical paper that requires students to address the specific question set and the moral issues identified. From the materials presented in class anyour own independent research, please answer the following prompt: 
There are many personal philosophical tenses that someone can use (the golden 
rule, utilitarianism, libertarianism, transcendental idealism, etc.). Please either           
support or reject the following thesis: Human dignity and respect are the primary 
moral philosophies to uphold.
Using the Sisters of Mercy Critical Concerns, explain why or why not human dignity 
and respect are primary. If you agree with the thesis, state why and how it fits into 
other philosophies or does not fit. If you disagree with this thesis, propose what you 
think is the primary philosophy to uphold.
Directions·      Answer the directive fully and support with reasons, evidence, and examples.
·      At least one reputable source beyond the core texts (i.e., peer-reviewed journals,
government reports, etc.).
·      At least one case study from class AND at least one current issue (can be from clasor one you feel most passionate about.
·      Refer to the argument through the lens of the Sisters of Mercy and the life of Catherine 
Mauley.
·      Response must be 3 full pages in length, which does not include the title or reference 
pages.
Please use APA format, 7th edition