EDUC 525: Learning Task 2

The Ethics Assignment

Jennifer Guy, Jonathan Huynh, Spencer Nowoselski,

Nicholl Urdal and Greg Young

November 9, 2018
Introduction

When considering the case of Professor Ben Levin it is relatively easy to decide his fate

based on a personal opinion of his crimes and the resulting consequences. Some may feel as

though the crimes he committed are inexcusable and he should not be rewarded by being allowed

to return to the university. Others may feel as though his time has been served and he should be

allowed to move on with his life. The ethical implications of him returning to the ABC

University can be considered through the five principles outlined in Beyond Relativism to Ethical

Decision-Making by Walker & Donlevy (2006). These principles include commitment to:

common ethical principles, reciprocal relationships, professional constraints, personal

conscience, and professional convictions. By using these principles to examine the case we will

be able to see the situation through a more critical lens rather than simply a personal lens. This

article outlines that these principles can be used to help clarify the content of the case but are not

exhaustive in nature. Instead they are based on “reasonable, responsible and balanced set of

ethical content” (Walker & Donlevy, pg. 14, 2006).

Common Ethical Principles

Faculty members of the ABC University should uphold the ethical principles to

demonstrate to the students the importance of ethical integrity. The common ethical principles

outline the foundation of a democratic society (Walker & Donlevy, pg. 15, 2006). These

principles apply to all people within society regardless of differences such as cultural

backgrounds, religious beliefs, and socio-economic status.

Dr. Levin has accomplished positive things throughout his career, however he is no

longer a respectable member of the academic community based on his lack of ethical leadership.

The main ethical principles are as follows; trustworthiness, respect, responsibility, justice,
fairness, caring and civic virtue, and citizenship. Looking at these principles Dr. Levin has failed

in all areas as an ethical leader. As a professor, he has a responsibility to be a leader for those

which he advises. Through his criminal actions he has violated the trust of his students and has

acted in a disrespectful manner towards others. Through breaking the law and committing crimes

he has discredited his work. Academics are unable to substantiate his previous claims as these

claims are called into question because of his personal actions (Yosef-Hassidim, 2013). If Dr.

Levin were to return to this position, one must consider he may be in the presence of underaged

children and as a university it is our responsibility to protect all students and ensure they feel safe

within the learning environments provided.

Reciprocal Relationships

There are many types of relationships that can exist between a leader and people within

both their personal and professional circles. These leaders should strive to achieve the I – thou

relationship. This type of relationship allows for the best results for both the leader and the

participants. Valuing both sides of the relationship equally and committing to the view that all

people matter regardless of differences. This path may not always be the easiest for external

factors such as political influences, public opinions, and dehumanization of themselves and

others often impact the relationship which they are working to establish. In order to remain

balanced, a leader must ensure that they respect themselves as well as respect the dignity of those

involved, implicated or affected by their personal choices (Walker & Donleavy, pg. 16, 2006).

Dr. Levin was unable to create a balanced relationship for he had placed the importance

of his desires over that of the others in his relationships. When moving to this extreme he created

an I – it relationship. This dehumanized those in which he interacted and stripped them of

respect, choice, and worth. He used those around them for his own personal gain with little to no
understanding of the consequences that could negatively impact their lives. If he were to return

to the ABC university his students may struggle to create a positive relationship with Dr. Levin.

This imbalance within the relationship would lead to a devaluing of the leaders role and

negatively impact the chemistry of the relationship.

Professional Constraints

Although Dr. Levin had been punished for his actions and “done his time” his past

actions have violated his commitment to professional constraints and codes of conduct. Most

professional educational leader organizations have codes of conduct that ensure members will

meet the standards of that code (Walker & Donleavy, pg. 17, 2006). These codes ensure that

members are responsible for upholding the honor and dignity of their profession in all their

actions and relations with pupils, colleagues, school board members and the public (Walker &

Donleavy, pg. 17, 2006). According to The Alberta Teachers’ Association Code of Professional

Conduct (2004) Teachers may not engage in activities which adversely affect the quality of the

teacher’s professional service. These activities not only include actions in the workplace but also

actions made in a teachers’ personal life if they become public knowledge. Despite having been

punished for his actions, Dr. Levin’s past crimes violated the Alberta Teachers’ Association

Code of Professional Conduct and compromised his ability to uphold the honor and dignity of an

educator. If Dr. Levin should be allowed to return to ABC University as a guest lecturer, then the

Faculty of Education at ABC University will be allowing the breach of professional constraints,

thus questioning the facilities integrity of adhering to professional code of conduct and allowing

certain members to be above the policies based on previous academic performance.

Personal Conscience
 Personal commitment to conscience requires administrators to use their own moral

judgment when it comes to applying ethical conscience to the management of their schools

(Walker & Donleavy, pg. 231, 2006). The question of allowing Dr. Levin to guest lecture at the

ABC University must be examined through our own understandings of what is right and wrong.

As faculty members of ABC University we have a covenant to our students and faculty members

to protect them from any harm, potential or immanent. There are underage students on our

campus and there are daycares and preschools on campus whose children may be endangering by

allowing Dr. Levin onto campus grounds. The conditions of Dr. Levin’s parole explicitly

prohibit him from having contact with any persons under the age of 18 (Mandel, 2017) because

he is a threat to those individuals. Any benefit that Dr. Levin would bring to the university does

not outweigh the severity of the crimes he has committed. Any other scholar could provide much

the same impact without the negative and potentially dangerous consequences that Dr. Levin

would carry with him. The consideration of the safety of all members of the university must be

considered and take precedence over all else.

Commitment to Professional Convictions

While Dr. Levin's work is respected and his knowledge would provide quality learning,

the Faculty must consider more when making this decision. Walker and Donleavy state that

"school leaders promote and safeguard the interests of students, parents, support staff, teachers,

and other professional and community leaders" (p. 18, 2006). It may be in the best interest of the

students academically to be taught by Dr. Levin but from a student safety perspective it could be

detrimental to be around a convicted sadist. Even at the university level there is still a chance that

minors could be required to interact with Dr. Levin. There are members of the Faculty who do

not believe that Dr. Levin should be invited and even believe that his work should no longer be
referenced (Yosef-Hassidim, 2013). The interests of these Faculty members need to be

considered as their safety and professional opinions are important as well. As mentioned in

Walker and Donleavy, leaders will listen to others to refine their convictions (2006). These

convictions will lead to an environment that is in the best interest of the students and staff and

will promote high quality instruction. While some Faculty believe that Dr. Levin has paid his

dues, having him lecture at the university does more harm to the quality of education than it

benefits.

Conclusion

As the committee of professors at ABC University we feel as though the following

actions should be taken with regards to Dr. Levin. Looking at the five fundamental principles we

feel it would not be ethical to include Dr. Levin as a guest lecturer or a scholar. His presence on

campus may compromise the safety and respect of both students and faculty members. Although

he has served his time, we feel as though his previous actions would compromise the Facilities

code of conduct and send the wrong message to student and other stakeholders. With regards to

Dr. Levin’s previous research projects, we believe that they should be replaced with works from

other authors. Although Dr. Levin’s work may hold credibility the value of sharing his work

does not outweigh the importance of insuring all people within the institution feel respected. We

wish Dr. Levin the best, however, at this time we are unable to include him within our

community.
 References

Alberta Teachers’ Association. (2004). Code of Professional Conduct. Retrieved from

https://www.teachers.ab.ca/SiteCollectionDocuments/ATA/Publications/Teachers-as-
Professionals/IM-4E%20Code%20of%20Professional%20Conduct.pdf

Mandel, M. (2017). Depraved World View of Ben Levin Continues On Parole. Toronto Sun. Retrieved
from:

Walker K. & Donlevy, J. (2006) Beyond Relativism to Ethical Decision-Making. Journal

of School Leadership Vol. 16, No. 3, pp. 216-239. Retrieved from
https://books.google.ca/books?hl=en&lr=&id=fpcjBQAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PA216&dq
=Beyond+Relativism+to+Ethical+Decision-
Making.+Journal+of+School+Leadership+Vol.+16++No.+3++pp.+216-
239.+&ots=iuTNbYx8Rv&sig=xlBUZ5rj-
EeHCJ9Z0h_A34o2Y6Q#v=onepage&q&f=false

Yosef-Hassidim, D. (2013). Following Dr. Ben Levin’s case: Posing Difficult Academic-Ethical
Questions. Critical Intersections in education. Vol. 1(2), 111-116.