When I am teaching a class by myself and encounter situations that involve ethical dilemmas, I often resolve them intuitively and move on. As the decision is mine to make and I've made many similar decisions before, this is not a complicated process. However, when I have to assist TAs who face ethical dilemmas I am called upon to do more than make a decision. I need to model how the decision-making process should be explored and the criteria that should guide our conclusions.  A more explicit decision-making process helps the TAs, but it also keeps me on my toes by forcing me to think more carefully about what needs to be done. I welcome the opportunity to examine the implicit assumptions that may be influencing our thinking process as we untangle ethical dilemmas more completely.

Here's one recent issue:

Two TAs knock on my door and I detect that they are troubled by something. They explain that as they were grading students' critical thinking papers they discovered that two students (one from each of their sections) had submitted papers that included two (out of five) paragraphs that were very similar. The TAs are disturbed by the discovery that one of the students has been visiting during the TA's office hours and appears to be trying very hard to improve his grades. How could such a student be involved in something like this? Perhaps the other student, who rarely attends class and has not turned in any of the previous papers, is most likely the "culprit."

As I listen to them I emphasize that we must remain open-minded and ask both students to provide an explanation for our evidence.  Based on previous experiences I know that sometimes the explanations we receive absolves one or more students, but there are times when all the implicated students have been willing accomplices. A typical explanation is, "He is my friend since middle school and is struggling with writing. He asked for my assistance and I wanted to help him. He is worried about doing poorly in class, losing his financial aid and dropping out of college. I don't want that to happen to him."

I work with the TAs to explore possible punishments for the unethical behavior of submitting plagiarized papers.  We try to reconcile two issues.  First, we want to administer a consequence/punishment that will deter these students—as well as others—from repeating such a behavior.  Second, we want to use this opportunity to teach students how to make ethical choices the next time they face a similar problem situation (e.g., having to write a paper within a short period of time after procrastinating until the last minute). If we appear to be too "soft" or "kind" when determining the consequence might we be mistakenly viewed as being weak?  Should we go easy on the student who is working hard and be harsher with the one who appears to not care about school work? Are those details relevant to our decision? Are we aware of how our personal feelings towards the students might be biasing our judgment?

Because the class consists of a majority of first-semester freshmen from a wide variety of high school backgrounds with varying degrees of writing preparation, my TAs and I examine many possible influences that might be determining the students' behavior. At the same time, we do not want to be so accommodating that we fail to stop behavior that will not be tolerated in any college level classes. We want students to learn what is not acceptable and to know what else they could have done other than "help" each other out.  We want them to learn that they need to utilize campus resources such as the writing center rather than copying off a classmate. I hope my TAs and their students may benefit from this process of scrutinizing the decision-making process.  In a similar circumstance in the future, I want both TAs and students to make excellent choices.

Of course, sometimes my ethics assistance to TAs involves their behavior more directly.  As the course coordinator, I occasionally find myself having to hold the line when teaching assistants face conflicts between their own responsibilities (tests, thesis, etc.) and fulfilling their obligations to the students in their break-out sections. For example:  A TA stops by and asks, "Is it okay if I miss my class next Friday?  I need to attend a conference. One of the other TAs is willing to cover my class."

"Are you presenting at the conference? Do you absolutely have to go?" I ask.

"No, I am not presenting anything. But my advisor thinks it'd be good for me; it's relevant to my area of specialization."

Some of the questions I must explore revolve around beneficence and nonmaleficence-doing good and avoiding harm to all involved:  What's more important in the grand scheme of this TA's professional development? Must the graduate student attend the conference, or do the students in the discussion section deserve good quality instruction by having their regular TA conduct every class period?  Does the lack of consistency in the TA's attendance as the instructor take away from the quality of the classroom experience?  How many classes can an instructor miss before the quality of the classroom experience is altered?   How to get the TA to think beyond what is good for her?

Another set of questions revolves around justice issues:  If I allow this TA to take off one class period, what if another TA asks for a similar accommodation?  What if yet another TA makes a similar request for a slightly different, but not quite so important, reason?  I have to keep in mind that I usually have 20-22 TAs at any given point in time. Do I have good pedagogical and ethical reasons for saying yes" to one and "no" to another?   What if the TA were in my class, and needed time to finish an assignment for me?  Might my personal feelings bias my thinking? 

Just as I want my TAs to be fair and objective in dealing with their students, I try to do the same with them. My responsibility to my TAs means that I have to tell them how to make good choices, but I also have to show them what I mean through the choices I make.

-----------------------------------

Meera Komarraju is Associate Professor of Applied Psychology and Director of the Undergraduate Program at Southern Illinois University Carbondale.  She holds doctorates in Industrial/Organizational Psychology (1983, Osmania University, India) and Applied Social Psychology (1987, University of Cincinnati, Ohio). She has been teaching a large Introduction to Psychology course and a Practicum in the Teaching of Psychology for over 10 years. Her research interests include self-efficacy, motivation and achievement.