Case Study: Exam Malpractice & Institutional Integrity

(a) Ethical Issues Involved

The case presents a multitude of ethical issues:

• Compromised Integrity: The senior lecturer’s involvement in unfair means directly violates the principles of academic integrity and professional ethics.
• Conflict of Interest: The management’s directive to “resolve the issue” at any cost, coupled with the hint regarding promotion, creates a clear conflict of interest for the Vice Principal.
• Abuse of Power: The involvement of the politician’s and businessman’s sons demonstrates an abuse of power and privilege, undermining the principles of equal opportunity.
• Pressure to Conform: The management’s pressure on the Vice Principal to prioritize institutional image and relationships over ethical conduct represents undue influence.
• Violation of Justice: Covering up the incident would be a grave injustice to honest students and would erode public trust in the education system.
• Transparency and Accountability: The management’s attempt to suppress the incident directly contradicts the principles of transparency and accountability.

(b) Critical Examination of Options and Chosen Course of Action

As Vice Principal, I have several options:

1. Comply with Management’s Directive: Attempt to influence the flying squad to downplay the incident. This is ethically unacceptable as it compromises integrity and justice.
2. Ignore the Issue: Do nothing and allow the situation to unfold. This is a dereliction of duty and would contribute to a culture of impunity.
3. Report Directly to University Authorities: Bypass the management and report the incident directly to the university authorities. This could lead to repercussions from the management but upholds ethical principles.
4. Negotiate with the Management: Attempt to persuade the management to take appropriate action, emphasizing the long-term damage to the college’s reputation.
5. Publicly Disclose the Incident: A drastic step, potentially damaging to all parties involved, but could be considered if all other avenues fail.

My Chosen Option: Report Directly to University Authorities & Simultaneously Negotiate with Management

I would adopt a two-pronged approach. Firstly, I would immediately report the incident, with all supporting evidence, directly to the university authorities. This fulfills my duty to uphold academic integrity and ensures a fair investigation. Secondly, I would simultaneously attempt to negotiate with the management, explaining the potential consequences of a cover-up – including potential legal ramifications, damage to the college’s reputation, and erosion of public trust. I would emphasize that a transparent and ethical response, while initially challenging, would ultimately be in the best long-term interests of the institution.

Justification

This approach is grounded in deontological ethics, emphasizing the duty to do what is right regardless of consequences. While utilitarian considerations (minimizing harm to the college’s image) are relevant, they cannot supersede the fundamental principles of justice and integrity. Furthermore, virtue ethics demands courage and moral fortitude in the face of pressure. I acknowledge that this course of action may jeopardize my chances of promotion, but ethical leadership requires prioritizing principles over personal gain. The involvement of a politician’s and a businessman’s son necessitates a particularly cautious and transparent approach to avoid any perception of bias or favoritism.

I would also proactively engage with the student union, assuring them that the matter is being taken seriously and that a fair investigation will be conducted. This will help to manage the protests and demonstrate a commitment to student concerns.