GLA3 Case Studies

IUPUI Working Group on Ethical Community Engagement in Global Learning (2019). Conflicted Faculty Advisor: An Ethics in Action Case Example. Retrieved from: https://scholarworks.iupui.edu/handle/1805/21362 Links to an external site.

Conflicted Faculty Advisor: An Ethics in Action Case Example

The Scenario:

You are the faculty advisor for a university-recognized national undergraduate student organization that participates in global health volunteerism each year. Students state that they typically participate in the program because they are excited about immersing themselves in a new culture, learning new health care practices and systems, and helping locals gain access to medical care. As students begin preparations for this year’s trip, you come across a news report detailing some unethical practices uncovered by commercial global health volunteerism programs. Some of the students recall witnessing similar behaviors on previous trips.

As you discuss ethical practices with students, you begin to question some of the activities that the national organization endorses and in which students have engaged. When discussing your concerns, students present you with questions about their roles in global health volunteerism; what responsibilities they have to the program, the community, and themselves; and how to ensure that participants recognize and engage in ethical behaviors. The students' inquiries prompt you to question your role and responsibilities as a faculty
advisor. Do you have the time and capacity to offer the support and guidance they appear to need?

As the group’s faculty advisor, what action do you take?

Questions to consider:

• How should you respond to the students' inquiries?
• What specific types of support could you provide students?
• How can you assist students in identifying appropriate behaviors?
• To what degree do the core principles offer you assistance in responding to this scenario?

Some Tension Points:

• Educator role
• Living ethical standards
• Capacity given competing commitments

One Resolution:

The faculty advisor met with the student leadership team on multiple occasions to discuss concerns raised by both the students and the advisor. They discussed ethical practices and used research by Judith Lasker as a framework for assessing the ethical behaviors witnessed. By carefully evaluating the program’s impact on both host partners as well as participants (principle 6), the faculty advisor and
students recognized the potential negative effect that their participation may have. Based on this assessment and their discussions and additional investigation into the practices of the organization, the faculty advisor decided to resign from the role and the students disbanded the student organization. The students’ overwhelming concern for potentially unethical practices and the lack of transparent
communication from the national organization led to the decision to not renew their university- recognized student organization status. The faculty advisor supported the students’ decision and cited frustration and feelings of inadequacy in trying to invoke change within a larger national structure in which she did not agree.

How did your response compare to the one above?

This case example was adapted from: Price, M.F., Leslie, S., Brann, M., Mulholland, J., Christy, L., Custer, J., Brann, M., & Besing, K.L. (2018). Supporting university-wide institutional change in global health volunteerism: A case in progress. Global Service-Learning Summit 5, Notre Dame, April 16th, 2018

IUPUI Working Group on Ethical Community Engagement in Global Learning (2019). Proactive Advising: An Ethics in Action Case Example. Retrieved from: https://scholarworks.iupui.edu/handle/1805/21362 Links to an external site.

Proactive Advising: An Ethics in Action Case Example

The Scenario:

A student is meeting with their advisor to talk about their goal of attending medical school. In discussing how they might prepare for medical school, the student shares that they are planning to pursue a medical mission trip abroad because they “have always loved traveling” and it would be a great way to help “really poor people” at the same time. The advisor is concerned by the limited lens by which the student is viewing the community he would be serving, and feels obligated to begin a conversation about their concerns. On the other hand, the student is only in their first year of college, so there is plenty of time for things to change before the student actually would need to apply. Should the advisor start a very difficult conversation, or just assume that the student will gain perspective as he moves throughout his college career?

Given what you know, what do you do?

Questions to consider:

• Where are other places that the student might gain exposure to these issues? Are there other places?
• Is your role merely to advise, or is it to educate?
• What resources exist that might help the student gain a different perspective on these trips?
• What specific issues might you bring up with the student to help them reconsider their motives?
• Are there other experiences that you might encourage the student to pursue before they register for a trip?

Some Tension Points:

• Privilege – The student presents themselves as wanting to be helpful, but only acknowledges the other population in the conversation by their socioeconomic status.
• Motivation – The student’s primary motivation seems to be travel and adventure.
• Professional Role – Is it the advisor’s job to tell the student what their motivation should be? If the student is right, and the trip would enhance their medical school application, where is the advisor’s loyalty?
• Relationship with the Student – You want to be encouraging and supportive of the student and her ambitions, and you want the student to feel comfortable returning to you when she needs assistance in the future.
• Campus Politics – If the program has an affiliation with the university (sponsorships, alumni ties, etc.), what are the concerns about questioning its ethics?

One Resolution:

Because it is an advisor’s job is to ask students questions, it is possible to gather more information about the student’s goals without sounding like you are questioning their integrity, or giving them a lecture. Below is a list of questions you can ask to help a student think critically about the scenario from a different perspective, while still sounding like you have the student’s best interests at heart (because, you do!):

• What part of the world do you hope to visit?
  • Why are you targeting that location?
  • What are some of the challenges you know that are facing that area?
• What kind of skills do you hope to be able to contribute to the cause?
  • What kind of skills do you think the people there truly need from “outsiders”?
• How do you think the people in that community feel about having so many strangers in their town?
• How will the cause continue to be supported after you leave?
• What do you think you will learn from the people there? (Note: from the people is important, not from the trip.)
• What kind of training are you going to receive before the trip?
• If you were planning the trip, what are some things you would plan to do. Why?
• How have you researched the organizations that lead these trips?
  • How will you choose which organization to go with?

After asking several of these questions, I think it’s safe to say something like “This is really interesting to me, and I’m so glad you’re willing to think critically about these issues. I’ve been doing some reading recently about how important it is to help, but to help in a way that doesn’t hurt the people you’re trying to help. I have a few articles (books, chapters, etc.) that I wonder if you’d be willing to review. I would love to know your thoughts – can we schedule another appointment to chat about it next week...?

Hopefully, that helps you get the conversation started in a way that indicates curiosity and a partnership, and not
judgment.

How did your response compare to the one above?

IUPUI Working Group on Ethical Community Engagement in Global Learning (2019). Safe Space? An Ethics in Action Case Example. Retrieved from: https://scholarworks.iupui.edu/handle/1805/21362 Links to an external site.

Safe Space? An Ethics in Action Case Example

The Scenario:

As part of a conference devoted to exploring ethics in global health volunteer experiences hosted by your university, student leaders representing several health professions schools and pre-professional programs host a lunch conversation with the conference’s keynote speaker. The session is designed to support open discussion of:

• Personal or peer experiences of clinical and/or pre-professional global health volunteer trips,
• Stated and perceived motivations and gains from participation and,
• Positionality of student leaders within student-led programs, including their sense of comfort/discomfort with specific elements of their program experience and the responsibilities they shoulder within and across programs.
• Resources they’d like to have in order to increase their sense of efficacy when they are confronted with
  challenging situations.

The student groups organizing this session have agreed to allow you, and a couple of other faculty/staff involved in the conference, to sit-in on this session to gain a more robust understanding of student leaders’ experiences and perspectives. The lead groups organizing the discussion are directly connected to and supported by your office.

At the onset of the meeting, the keynote speaker and students state that students don’t need to worry about their frankness of their comments...it is a safe space. While most of the participating students are from university-recognized student-led volunteer and service-learning programs, the buzz about this event has been circulating through student peer networks. As a result, it happens that a 2nd year medical student, we’ll call her Josie, has come to the event in the hope of recruiting additional students for an upcoming trip a group of fellow students are organizing to Nicaragua the following month to offer care in a temporary “clinic.” This trip has been taking place for a few years. The more Josie shares about the experience, the more you realize it is not an approved international experience at your school. In  addition, there are several dimensions of the experience that expose the students to risk.

As a paid employee of the university, you have a responsibility to share the possible implications with the student of operating without approval and uphold university policy, and yet you also understand the need to honor the safe space agreement everyone entered into for this discussion.

Given what you know, what do you do?

Questions to consider:

• What are the key ethical issues to consider here?
• What are some of the implications that Josie and her fellow sojourners may or may not be aware of? For themselves? For the university? For the community and the community project?
• What responsibilities do you have as both a mentor and a university employee?
• What responses offer a balance of your commitments/responsibilities in these roles?
• To what degree do the core principles offer your assistance in responding to this scenario?

Some Tension Points:

• Scope - Expressed university authority may not lie in your hands or may be unclear
• Mentorship role – To what degree to respect the space to encourage students to ask for advice
• Guilt by association – Agencies, host communities, etc. may see the students as agents of the university even when they aren’t sanctioned by the university to do so.

One Resolution:

As a mentor, it is important to respect the space in which the information was shared. Waiting for the student to step outside the meeting to start the conversation privately seemed to be the best approach. The most important point to share at that moment was information regarding an approved curricular program traveling to the same country; the program leaders cancelled due host travel restrictions recently
passed to protect Nicaraguan citizen form unsanctioned programs.

Upon return to the office, I email the student to share specific policies and protocol put in place to ensure safety, reciprocity and appropriate university representation and reached out to organization that provided housing and service opportunities to also share this information.

• University international program approval policies regarding student group travels
• Departmental policy regarding student group international travel
• Misrepresentation of the university to host community
• Inability of the university to step in for safe return in case of an emergency for unapproved travel

In addition to the email of the risk and policies, I impressed upon here that in no way could they represent themselves in any way as IUSM students; and offered to meet with them to provide support for creating a sustainable volunteering experience or connecting with one that exists.

How did your response compare to the one above?

This case example was adapted from: Price, M.F., Leslie, S., Brann, M., Mulholland, J., Christy, L., Custer, J., Brann, M., & Besing, K.L. (2018). Supporting university-wide institutional change in global health volunteerism: A case in progress. Global Service-Learning Summit 5, Notre Dame, April 16th, 2018

IUPUI Working Group on Ethical Community Engagement in Global Learning (2019). Sense-Making with Students: An Ethics in Action Case Example. Retrieved from: https://scholarworks.iupui.edu/handle/1805/21362 Links to an external site.

Sense-Making with Students: An Ethics in Action Case Example

The Scenario:

A student has recently returned from a service trip abroad, and meets with her academic advisor to plan classes for the following semester. The advisor is anxious to hear about the student’s experience, but as the student begins to share stories, she reveals some information that raises red flags for the advisor. She begins sharing the pictures she took with members of the host community that she has posted on her Facebook page, and there is little evidence that the host community participated in planning the event in any way. The advisor also suspects
that the student has been allowed to complete duties outside her scope of knowledge, and with little supervision.

As the advisor pushes on these points of concern, the student becomes frustrated and defensive. She believes the trip did wonders for the community it served, and she is shocked that the advisor might suggest otherwise. The student is planning to apply for professional medical programs and she is certain that this experience will give her a “leg up” in the admission process. The advisor isn’t so sure, and wants to help the student reflect more critically on the experience without shutting down her enthusiasm for serving vulnerable populations.

As the student’s advisor, how would you approach this important conversation?

Questions to consider:

• Developmentally, how ready is the student for this conversation?
• What was the student’s initial motivation for going on this trip? Was it altruistic, or was it motivated her by desire to be accepted into a competitive post-graduate program?
  • Does this difference matter? Would you approach the conversation differently, depending on the answer?
• What are questions you can ask to gain more information about the situation, before making your concerns public?
• What are questions can you ask the student to help her begin to analyze the situation from a different perspective?
• How might you advise the student regarding her intention to publicize this experience in her professional school application process
• What are campus/community resources that might help you learn more about the situation? Or, resources that might help the student learn more?

Some Tension Points:

• Campus Politics – If the program has an affiliation with the university (sponsorships, alumni ties, etc.), what are the concerns about questioning its ethics?
• Student Relationship – You want to be encouraging and supportive of the student and her ambitions, and you want the student to feel comfortable returning to you when she needs assistance in the future.
• Boundaries – It may feel like having this conversation isn’t “your job.” Does that matter?
• Perspective – You only know the student’s side of the story.

One Resolution:

You might let the student know that you have heard rumors about how these trips are perceived on professional school applications, and give some specific examples. You could also help the student connect with some admission representatives, so she can hear it directly from those who may be evaluating her application. Let the student know that you think it’s great that she’s had this experience, and let her know that you think it will enhance her application if she’s able to address multiple sides of the issue.

How did your response compare to the one above?

IUPUI Working Group on Ethical Community Engagement in Global Learning (2019). Vetting Campus Exhibitors: An Ethics in Action Case Example. Retrieved from: https://scholarworks.iupui.edu/handle/1805/21362 Links to an external site.

Vetting Campus Exhibitors: An Ethics in Action Case Example

The Scenario:

While visiting a campus event, an administrator notices a booth for a local organization that offers service programs in a variety of locations around the world. The administrator has worked with this organization before and has concerns about the group and the experiences they offer.

As the administrator considers the situation, she notes several concerns. These include: 1) volunteers are operating outside the scope of their knowledge 2) host community members are not treated as equal partners in the project 3) the services the group provides don’t seem to meet the needs of the local community.

Based on these concerns, the administrator reaches out to the event organizer and alerts them to the concerns. She also suggests that it would be helpful to have a review process for outside organizations that want to exhibit at the event. While the event organizers acknowledge their own concerns with this local volunteer sending organization, they aren’t sure that implementing an exhibitor review process is practical for event staff.

As the event exhibitor, what would you do?

Questions to consider:

• How might you use the core principles in responding to this scenario?
• If you decide to move forward with developing a review process:
  • What criteria would be used?
  • Who should vet the organizations?
  • Who should tell the organizations, and in what way, that they did not meet the standards?
  • What might the political costs be of refusing a group permission to exhibit on campus? 

Some Tension Points:

• Time – it takes time to vet exhibitors
• Living ethical standards – it isn’t always easy to walk the talk
• Campus-community politics – lost opportunities to collaborate or future donors

One Resolution:

In follow up conversations, the event organizers agree that some level of review is appropriate for exhibitors. At the time of writing this statement the final resolution is not complete. Current thinking is that:

1. Exhibitors must “apply” for a space at the event rather than “sign up” which begins to lay the foundation for a formal review.
2. A statement such as the following will be added to the exhibitor application:
   “USE OF SPACE: The event organizers reserve the right to decline or prohibit any group, exhibit, or part of an exhibit that is not in keeping with the character of the event or the Office of International Affairs.”
3. The office will draw upon its mission and values statement to identify guidelines or criteria for
   exhibitors.

How did your response compare to the one above?

This case example was adapted from: Price, M.F., Leslie, S., Brann, M., Mulholland, J., Christy, L., Custer, J., Brann, M., & Besing, K.L. (2018). Supporting university-wide institutional change in global health volunteerism: A case in progress. Global Service-Learning Summit 5, Notre Dame, April 16th , 2018

IUPUI Working Group on Ethical Community Engagement in Global Learning (2019). When Partners Have Real Autonomy-Managing a Program Cancellation: An Ethics in Action Case Example. Retrieved from: https://scholarworks.iupui.edu/handle/1805/21362 Links to an external site.

When Partners Have Real Autonomy-Managing a Program Cancellation: An Ethics in Action Case Example

The Scenario:

You are the program manager for a medical student clinical rotation that occurs in a developing country. This program embeds US medical students, under the supervision of local physicians, into government-sponsored health care facilities for low income families. One month before the beginning of your program, you receive word from your local partner that the government has temporarily suspended the necessary approvals for foreign doctors and students to see patients in government hospitals and clinics. Though the government says the suspension is for the reevaluation of such programs, there are rumors that this action may be in retaliation to recent US foreign policy.

As the program manager, you are experiencing pressure from administrators and students to “rescue” the program. Your concerns include:

• How do you ensure that your students have a positive an international global health experience
• How do you respect the autonomy and concerns of your international partners?
• How do you help the University administration understand the political complexities of the situation?

How do you respond to this pressure?

Questions to consider:

• How might you use the core principles in responding to this scenario?
• How do you use this as a “teachable” moment for students?
• What resources are available for you in responding?

Some Tension Points:

• Organizational/Program Survival- often ethics are overlooked in order to keep organizations and programs alive
• Campus and Community relationships- is it possible to stay in relationship with communities and organizations now that the program is not active

One Resolution:

When discussing how to proceed given this new information, the program manager and the international partner referred to the core principles for global ethical engagement to guide the responses to all parties: international partners, students and University administration.

• Principle 1: An appropriate cross cultural and ethical collaboration always respects the right of the host partner(s) to define the program, including the needs to be addressed and the role of the host.
• Principle 3. All programs should demonstrate a respect for local governance and abide by the legal and ethical standards of the host partner(s) and host country (ies).
• Principle 4. In the recruitment, preparation, and supervision of program participants, every opportunity should be taken to educate and remind participants of the ethical and cross-cultural pitfalls of volunteering when there are disparities in power and affluence.

Responding to the situation from a principled stance rather than reacting based on emotion, privilege and power allowed this to become a learning situation for all, especially students.

In both written communication and face-to-face meetings with students, partners and administration, these core principles (outlined above) served as the foundation to respect the decision of the host country government. The program was cancelled.

While students were disappointed not to be able to travel, they gained valuable knowledge around ethical and respectful interaction with host countries where there are disparities in power and affluence. Interestingly, this key learning would most likely not have occurred had the program not been cancelled.

How did your response compare to the one above?

This case example was adapted from: Price, M.F., Leslie, S., Brann, M., Mulholland, J., Christy, L., Custer, J., Brann, M., & Besing, K.L. (2018). Supporting university-wide institutional change in global health volunteerism: A case in progress. Global Service-Learning Summit 5, Notre Dame, April 16th, 2018

IUPUI Working Group on Ethical Community Engagement in Global Learning (2019). Why the Hell are We Going? Ethical Concerns during Orientation: An Ethics in Action Case Example. Retrieved from: https://scholarworks.iupui.edu/handle/1805/21362 Links to an external site.

Why the Hell are We Going? Ethical Concerns during Orientation: An Ethics in Action Case Example

The Scenario:

You are asked to provide a pre-departure orientation on ethical cross-cultural engagement to a student-led service-learning group a few weeks prior to their traveling to Central America. They are traveling under the auspices of an international travel entity of which you know very little. As you present the ethical considerations in cross-cultural engagement, you notice that some of the students, including the student leaders, are becoming uncomfortable. From the questions they ask, you realize that their partner organization is likely violating some of the ethical standards you have just presented.

Your concerns include:

• What are the dynamics at your university that have allowed this disconnect?
• What, if anything, can you do in response to this disconnect?
• How do you handle the student’s present discomfort and misgivings?

Finally, one of the students asks, “If what you are saying about the ethics of cross-cultural engagement are true, why the hell are we going on this trip?”

How do you respond to the student?

Questions to consider:

• What does this experience suggest to you about your university’s present screening, preparation and global education process?
• How do you help students that are already committed to a questionable trip navigate and learn from the potential ethical conflicts in that experience?
• What resources might you draw upon in our response?
• How might you use the core principles in responding to this scenario?

Some Tension Points:

• Power – student autonomy vs. institutional priorities
• Campus policies – determining the location of appropriate monitoring and regulation
• Educator’s role – providing ethical guidelines vs. setting ethical boundaries
• Actual Resolution

One Resolution:

The orientation facilitator replied, “I can’t answer that question for you. My task is to encourage you to examine your motives and determine where they may be ethically questionable. In so doing, I hope to mitigate the harm that might come from unexamined motives in international engagement.” The student seemed to understand and appreciate this reply. The facilitator went on to encourage the group to examine their motives and behavior before, during and after their international experience.

• In retrospect, the facilitator realized the student’s question was the appropriate response to any ethically responsible and comprehensive orientation to international engagement, especially one where there is volunteerism or service learning involved. If an orientation doesn’t provoke this kind of second thought, is the orientation being honest and transparent? Is it frankly addressing the potential for abuse in interactions where the power differentials are significant?

This case example was adapted from: Price, M.F., Leslie, S., Brann, M., Mulholland, J., Christy, L., Custer, J., Brann,
M., & Besing, K.L. (2018). Supporting university-wide institutional change in global health volunteerism: A case in
progress. Global Service-Learning Summit 5, Notre Dame, April 16th , 2018