NCJ Number
170174
Date Published
1996
Length
9 pages
Annotation
William C. Heffernan responds to John Kleinig's critique of his essay on the aims of criminal justice ethics education (NCJ- 170173 and NCJ-170172, respectively), and Kleinig in turn responds to Heffernan's response.
Abstract
Heffernan supports the "contested-issues" model for the aim of criminal justice ethics education. Under this model, students become familiar with a wide range of readings so as to contrast ideas and develop distinctions regarding ethical reasoning, as well as analyze the issues that confront them in the course. Instructors who follow the contested-issues model do not grade students on the substantive correctness of the positions, but rather whether the positions are skillfully presented. Kleinig also claims to support the contested-issues model, but would grade students on the perceptiveness of their ethical reasoning in confronting practical issues. This is not to say that there is one correct ethical decision in each situation, but there are clearly some decisions that would be considered "moral flat- earthers," according to Kleinig. Heffernan responds that no theoretical base for moral decisionmaking should be considered "flat-earth" when teaching ethics. Kleinig responds that "flat- earth" ethical postures are not per se unacceptable in an ethics course, but the students who develop positions from them must show skill in responding to challenges from other ethical postures. 13 notes