OK.... 3 problems here.
First, I have to say that I would have failed you if I were the Prof. - even though I mostly agree.
While I agree with your sentiments, you really didn't deal with all the questions. Lets look at it:
Did Ford act unethically in the Pinto case? This one you answered, so you get credit for it.
Is American industry at too much risk for lawsuits to remain competitive? You didn't even attempt to answer this in any kind of yes/no fashion, with reasoning to back it up. You went badly off topic into basically what lawsuits are from your perspective. Sorry - at this point your batting 50%.
Should lawsuits such as the one against Ford be disallowed or limited?
OK, again you totally missed this one. I mean, there wasn't even a mention of this question in your response. Can't give you credit if you don't answer.
Why or why not? Well, without answering the disallowed or limited question, you really can't be giving your reasoning for the answer itself.
Should we try to restrain, in this and other situations, the litigiousness that seems to characterize American life? Again, no answer to be found.
How might we do this? Now this one I am going to give you a pass on - because its is a leading question - it intimates that your answer for the question prior SHOULD be "Yes". Questions that lead or point to a specific thought or outcome are flawed - regardless of my or the Prof. personal opinion. While I agree with the premise - this question should be striken from the assignment on the grounds it is not neutral.
Will your answers to any of the above change now that the US government (you, the taxpayer) are part owners of the car companies? You answered this, so you get credit, though its funny the Prof. is not aware that it is company, not companies.
Does your ethical stance change if the government (or a private company partially owned by the government) is the party under discussion rather than a totally private company? I would say your answer in the prior question suffices for both of these, so you get credit.
So, based on the assignment, you answered 3 questions, get a free pass on one other, out of a total of 8. Best case scenario for you - is a 4/8 - equating to 50%. Given that your Prof. gave you the questions, that person won't give you that fourth one - so your actually looking at a 3/8 score.
Sorry - but that just won't pass. The fail is justified.
Now - to the second problem. The Professor's remarks that you "Obviously had no idea" what was going on could be taken two ways. Either that your political viewpoints are unwelcome - or that your lack of focus on the questions put to you make him think you take this (the educational experience) as a joke. Neither are good, but as a professional he needs to approach it with you differently.
The last problem is really the stickler.
Quote:
|
You guys are the smartest gang I hang out with, so I'd like your opinions.
|
I don't know whether to be honored, tell you to get out more, or just advise you that your situation is now hopeless.
