Critique the use of encryption. Why is encryption necessary? What are the ethical dilemmas surrounding encryption? Should big technology companies provide the government with tools to break encryption with or without warrants? Would the Internet of Things survive without encryption? (Weekly learning objective 2)
See the attached 100-point Technology Ethics Rubric
All weekly writing assignments will be written in APA and are due at the end of each respective week by Sunday at 11:59 pm.
Each writing assignment must consist of a 4 -page paper written in APA, unless otherwise specified.
Each writing assignment must include at least two scholarly, peer-reviewed resources, as well as at least one more reputable (magazines, Ted Talks, etc) source.
Weekly writing assignments will include prompts that allow Learners to dive deeper into subjects covered in our weekly textbook readings and that align with the Course Learning Outcomes.
Criteria Unsatisfactory Meets Basic Requirements Excellent Maximum Points Points Awarded General Content/Context Content lacks sufficient coverage of topic, relevance, and/or depth of analysis. Thesis is not clearly identified. Terms and definitions not clearly stated. Reader is confused or may be misinformed. (Points:<79.9%; 0-19.9="" pts)="" content="" reflects="" minor="" problems="" re:comprehensive-ness,="" relevance,="" detail,and/or="" persuasiveness.="" thesis="" is="" only="" supported="" at="" times.="" terms="" and="" definitions="" are="" reasonably="" clear.="" reader="" gains="" few="" insights.="" (points:="" 80%="" -="" 89.9%;="" 20-22.4="" pts)="" coverage="" of="" topic="" is="" very="" comprehensive,="" relevant,="" well="" detailed,="" and="" persuasive.="" thesis="" is="" well-supported="" throughout.="" terms="" and="" definitions="" are="" clear="" and="" precise.="" reader="" gains="" insights.="" (points:="" 90%+;="" 22.5-25="" pts)="" 25%="" or="" 25="" points="" discipline="" specific="" category="" -="" technology="" ethics="" ethical="" issues="" may="" or="" may="" not="" be="" clearly="" identifed.="" ethical="" framework="" is="" not="" present="" or="" weak="" and="" murky.="" solutions="" may="" be="" identified="" but="" may="" not="" fit="" the="" ethical="" dilemma.="" reader="" has="" a="" difficult="" time="" understanding="" the="" writer's="" ethical="" viewpoint.="" (points:=""><79.9%; 0-15.9="" pts)="" ethical="" issues="" are="" clearly="" identified.="" ethical="" framework="" may="" not="" be="" clearly="" identified,="" but="" there="" is="" a="" clear="" solution.="" reader="" identifies="" but="" may="" not="" fully="" understand="" the="" writer's="" ethical="" viewpoint.="" (points:="" 80%="" -="" 89.9%;="" 16-17.9="" pts)="" ethical="" issues="" are="" clearly="" identified.="" ethical="" framework="" is="" clear="" and="" includes="" a="" clear="" solution.="" reader="" easily="" identifies="" and="" understands="" the="" writer's="" ethical="" viewpoint.="" (points:="" 90%+;="" 18-20="" pts)="" 20%="" or="" 20="" points="" research,="" sources,="" and="" evidence="" occasional="" references="" are="" provided.="" writer="" overrelies="" on="" unsubstantiated="" statements.="" the="" reader="" is="" confused="" about="" the="" source="" of="" the="" ideas="" or="" the="" references="" are="" not="" cited.="" does="" not="" meet="" the="" minimum="" requirements="" for="" academic/scholarly="" sources.="" (points:=""><79.9%; 0-7.9="" pts)="" research="" meets="" basic="" requirements="" in="" terms="" of="" relevance,="" credible="" academic="" sources,="" and="" timeliness.="" writer="" may="" rely="" too="" much="" on="" sources="" or="" not="" enough.="" sources="" help="" to="" substantiate="" thesis.="" (points:="" 80%="" -="" 89.9%;="" 8-8.9="" pts)="" research="" is="" very="" timely,="" relevant,="" and="" addresses="" all="" of="" the="" issues="" stated="" in="" the="" assignment’s="" criteria.="" writer="" relies="" on="" academic/scholarly/professional="" sources="" to="" substantiate="" thesis.="" (points:="" 90%+;="" 9-10="" pts)="" 10%="" or="" 10="" points="" analysis="" sets="" a="" compelling="" argument="" argument/purpose="" is="" not="" always="" clear.="" argument,="" purpose,="" and/or="" thesis="" is="" not="" well="" supported.="" tone="" is="" not="" consistently="" professional="" or="" appropriate="" for="" the="" audience,="" argument,="" and/or="" purpose.="" (points:=""><79.9%; 0-11.9="" pts)="" argument/purpose="" takes="" a="" clear="" stance="" but="" may="" occassionally="" digress="" from="" the="" main="" argument="" and/or="" purpose.="" tone="" is="" generally="" professional="" and="" appropriate="" for="" the="" audience,="" argument,="" and/or="" purpose.="" (points:="" 80%="" -="" 89.9%;="" 12-13.4="" pts)="" argument/purpose="" takes="" a="" clear="" stance="" and="" is="" readily="" apparent="" to="" the="" reader.="" tone="" is="" consistently="" professional="" and="" appropriate="" for="" the="" argument,="" audience,="" and/or="" purpose="" (points:="" 90%+;="" 13.5-15="" pts)="" 15%="" or="" 15="" points="" conclusion="" conclusion="" is="" not="" included="" or="" leaves="" the="" reader="" confused="" (points:=""><79.9%; 0-3.9="" pts)="" conclusion="" summarizes="" the="" main="" points,="" though="" some="" new="" information="" is="" introduced="" (points:="" 80%="" -="" 89.9%;="" 4-4.4="" pts)="" conclusion="" summarizes="" the="" main="" points.="" no="" new="" information="" is="" introduced;="" conclusion="" flows="" from="" the="" body="" of="" report="" (points:="" 90%+;="" 4.5-5="" pts)="" 5%="" or="" 5="" points="" structure="" organization="" and="" structure="" of="" the="" paper="" detract="" from="" the="" writer’s="" message.="" paragraphs="" are="" disjointed.="" writing="" is="" not="" arranged="" logically.="" ideas="" fail="" to="" make="" sense="" together.="" does="" not="" include="" all="" assignment="" requirements.="" (points:=""><79.9%; 0-7.9="" pts)="" adequate="" structure;="" ideas="" are="" arranged="" logically="" to="" support="" thesis="" and="" are="" usually="" clearly="" linked="" to="" each="" other.="" paragraph="" and="" sentence="" transitions="" are="" mostly="" logical="" with="" minor="" flow="" issues="" (points:="" 80%="" -="" 89.9%;="" 8-="" 8.9="" pts)="" paper="" is="" very="" well="" structured.="" ideas="" are="" arranged="" logically="" to="" support="" thesis.="" they="" flow="" smoothly="" from="" one="" to="" another="" and="" are="" clearly="" linked="" to="" each="" other.="" paragraph="" and="" sentence="" transitions="" are="" logically="" presented="" and="" flow="" throughout="" the="" paper="" (points:="" 90%+;="" 9-="" 10="" pts)="" 10%="" or="" 10="" points="" notre="" dame="" college="" business="" division="" mba="" 630="" -="" ethics="" writing="" assignment="" rubric="" c="" o="" n="" t="" e="" n="" t="" w="" r="" it="" in="" g="" writing="" style="" writing="" contains="" numerous="" grammar,="" punctuation,="" spelling,="" and="" word="" choice="" errors.="" language="" uses="" slang="" or="" conversational="" tone="" with="" minimal="" to="" no="" use="" of="" terms="" and="" concepts.="" word="" choice="" distracts="" the="" reader,="" while="" some="" words="" are="" used="" inappropriately.="" some="" sentences="" may="" be="" constructed="" awkwardly.="" (points:=""><79.9%; 0-7.9="" pts)="" writing="" contains="" few="" grammar,="" punctuation,="" spelling,="" and="" word="" choice="" errors.="" some="" mechanical="" errors="" or="" typos="" are="" present,="" but="" are="" not="" overly="" distracting.="" some="" appropriateness="" to="" terms="" and="" concepts="" with="" moderate="" explanation.="" sentences="" are="" well="" phrased="" and="" demonstrate="" some="" variety="" in="" length="" and="" structure.="" (points:="" 80%="" -="" 89.9%;="" 8-8.9="" pts)="" writing="" follows="" rules="" of="" grammar="" usage="" and="" punctuation;="" spelling="" and="" word="" choices="" are="" correct,="" language="" clear="" and="" precise="" with="" appropriateness="" to="" terms="" and="" concepts.="" sentences="" are="" well-="" phrased="" and="" varied="" in="" length="" and="" structure.="" (points:="" 90%+;="" 9-="" 10="" pts)="" 10%="" or="" 10="" points="" formatting="" -="" apa="" or="" other="" professional="" formatting="" paper="" significantly="" deviates="" from="" designated="" guidelines="" for="" apa="" format="" or="" other="" assigned="" professional="" formatting="" style="" re:="" required="" sections,="" documentation,="" margins,="" headings,="" etc.="" (points:=""><79.9%; 0-3.9 pts) paper follows designated guidelines for apa format or other asigned professional formatting style re: required sections, documentation, margins, headings, etc. with minor deviations (points: 80% - 89.9%; 4-4.4 pts) paper follows all designated guidelines for apa format or other assigned professional formatting style re: required sections, documentation, margins, headings, etc. (points: 90%+; 4.5-5 pts) 5% or 5 points 0 total (out of 100) 100 percentage 100.00% w r it in g comments: 0-3.9="" pts)="" paper="" follows="" designated="" guidelines="" for="" apa="" format="" or="" other="" asigned="" professional="" formatting="" style="" re:="" required="" sections,="" documentation,="" margins,="" headings,="" etc.="" with="" minor="" deviations="" (points:="" 80%="" -="" 89.9%;="" 4-4.4="" pts)="" paper="" follows="" all="" designated="" guidelines="" for="" apa="" format="" or="" other="" assigned="" professional="" formatting="" style="" re:="" required="" sections,="" documentation,="" margins,="" headings,="" etc.="" (points:="" 90%+;="" 4.5-5="" pts)="" 5%="" or="" 5="" points="" 0="" total="" (out="" of="" 100)="" 100="" percentage="" 100.00%="" w="" r="" it="" in="" g="">