Home
>>    




Ethical analysis assignment

CS 390 (CAP), Interim 2022

Note: Revised for remote teaching

The ethical analysis component of the Capstone consists of two stages:

  • Proposal for ethical analysis. The results of this stage is an approved proposal for ethical analysis of some aspect(s) of the project, describing

    • questions to be explored,

    • context for those questions, and

    • methods being considered for the study.

    For example, a proposal might list a small number of questions that together assess some general aspect of the project, such as security and protection, or usability and interface. A preliminary and summary description of a relevant socio-technical system could identify the context of those questions, and the methodology might be described by presenting two or three contrasting strategies, e.g., a focus group matched with a literature search, both of which shed light on most of the questions.

    It is essential to scale the proposed work so it can be completed within the bounds of the Capstone course, concurrently with work on the other requirements of the course. For this and other benefits of collaboration, students are encouraged to propose and carry out ethical analysis projects in teams of 3-5 students.

    Format: Here is a recommended format for the proposal document.

    • Include title, names of the collaborators, date of this submission at the top.

    • Introduction section, describing the project(s) being analyzed by this team.

    • Questions section, with: a numbered list of questions; explanation/elaboration on each question; and rationale for choosing those questions for this analysis (potentially comparing to alternatives).

    • Methods section, containing: a list of proposed ethical analysis methods; an explanation or elaboration of each listed method; the relationship(s) of each method to each question; and rationale for your choices, including reasons for excluding other relevant methods.

    • STS Appendix, providing context for this ethical study expressed as a draft socio-technical system. For drafts of the proposal, preferably use a grid format for the STS; for earlier drafts, the STS may be quite incomplete, but start with the seemingly most relevant items.

    WRI exercise: Everyone in the team is responsible for the content of the proposal, but each individual should write the first drafts of some elements of the initial proposal, for WRI writing feedback.

    • Annotate the paragraphs or STS elements that individuals wrote using initials at the end of that paragraph or STS element, like this. [rab]

    Deliverables:

    • draft proposal documents with feedback;

    • presentation of proposal (on Fri 1/14);

      • 6-10 min video. Everyone should present

        • Introduction, reminder of your project goals ($≤ 1 min)

        • Sample of some relevant/interesting items from STS ($≤ 2 min)

        • Your questions, with

          • elaboration of what question means in context of your project, focusing on ethical issues,

          • rationale for choosing that question, in context of your project, significance of ethical issues, and time constraints,

          • (optional) other questions that didn't fit, etc.

        • Your methods, with

          • which questions each method informs, and describing how that method is appropriate for those questions,

          • rationale for choosing this method, considering value for the ethical study and time constraints.

    • final version of proposal document (due Mon 1/17)

  • Implementing the analysis. The proposing team (or individual) carries out the analysis described in the proposal, taking into account feedback from the evaluating faculty member(s).

    Deliverables:

    • items for feedback such as interview questions, focus group questions, reflection exercises (e.g., "day in the life"), as appropriate;
    • draft report documents with feedback;

      Preliminary report 1/21/22:

      • Create a shared document with section-level outline of your final report (see below)

      • Copy content of sections from your latest ethics proposal document as draft wording

      • List/report progress on data collection in the Data section, including progress on draft or final methods documents.

        • For example, indicate how much progress you've made on on draft text of your focus-group questions, or your life-cycle document, or whether you've already collected some data from your focus group, etc.

        • Goal at this point is to report on progress, not to draft wording for the final ethics report.

        • Don't include the documents or data themselves here - instead, add links or copies to Appendix section at end

      • Also list any progress in your Analysis section or Findings/Recommendations section, or updates to proposal sections (e.g., STS), if any

      • at the beginning of this document (e.g., in a box), add a timeline for completing the ethical analysis including final report

      • If ethics proposal has changed, link or include as an Appendix

    • presentation of report (on );
    • final version of report document (due Wed 1/26)

    Format: Here is a recommended format for the report document. (As you can see, report grows out of the proposal document, after updating for changes in questions, methods, completing the STS, etc.)

    • Include title, names of the collaborators, date of this submission at the top.

    • Introduction section, describing the project(s) being analyzed by this team.

    • Questions section, with: a numbered list of questions; explanation/elaboration on each question; and rationale for choosing those questions for this analysis (potentially comparing to alternatives).

    • Methods section, containing: a list of proposed ethical analysis methods; an explanation or elaboration of each listed method; the relationship(s) of each method to each question; and rationale for your choices, including reasons for excluding other relevant methods.

    • Data section, describing the raw data gathered through the methods but without analysis. For example, summarize the information gathered in interviews or focus groups, outline the contents of exploratory exercises such as day-in-the-life scenarios, review the papers and other literature in relation to the questions, etc.

    • Analysis section, in which you draw inferences and explain theire rationale, expressing your results appropriately (sometimes with graphs or charts; sometimes in lists or paragraphs; perhaps in a summary diagram or other representation).

    • Findings and recommendations. Summarize the conclusions you reached on the basis of your methods and data analysis, and make a list of recommendations based on those findings. Ideally, state these in a way that a reader of the (whole) report can trace back through the reasoning and rationale, the data that was gathered, and the methods that yielded those data, to the questions themselves in their STS context, while being concise. Make sure to address each question explicitly, even if you weren't able to resolve all questions.

    • STS Appendix. The final STS should describe a full context relative to the questions under consideration, expressed using a grid and/or paragraphs.

    • Data appendices, portraying complete gathered data that was summarized in the data section. Edit the raw data to make it more readable and understandable, and to protect private information as appropriate.




rab@stolaf.edu, January 21, 2022