IMPORTANT NOTE: These are the archived stories for Belmont News & Achievements prior to June 26, 2023. To see current stories, click here.

HomeAchieversEthics Bowl Team Selected for National Competition

Ethics Bowl Team Selected for National Competition

Belmont’s Ethics Bowl Team recently competed at a regional event in Indianapolis and placed high enough (top 4 teams) to be selected for Nationals in Cincinnati March 2011. Led by Dr. Jennifer Wilgus and Dr. Barry Padgett, the Belmont teams include students Kathleen Bond, Nick Calderwood, Eric Deems, Stas Ghiletchi, Lindsey Ricker, Melanie Bond, Kaitlin Grigsby and Olaf Wasternack. Belmont is one of only 32 teams across the country that will be competing.
The Seventeeth Intercollegiate Ethics Bowlsm will be March 3, 2011 in Cincinnati, OH, as a part of the Association for Practical and Professional Ethics’ 2011 20th Anniversary Annual Meeting. Colleges and universities across the United States and throughout the world who qualified in a regional bowl are invited to enter a team of undergraduate students in the national competition. The Intercollegiate Ethics Bowl (IEB) is a team competition that combines the excitement and fun of a competitive tournament with an innovative approach to education in practical and professional ethics for undergraduate students. In the IEB, each team receives a set of cases which raise issues in practical and professional ethics in advance of the competition and prepare an analysis of each case. At the competition, a moderator poses questions, based on a case taken from that set, to teams of three to five students. Questions may concern ethical problems on wide ranging topics, such as the classroom (e.g. cheating or plagiarism), personal relationships (e.g. dating or friendship), professional ethics (e.g. engineering, law, medicine), or social and political ethics (e.g. free speech, gun control, etc.) A panel of judges may probe the teams for further justifications and evaluates answers. Rating criteria are intelligibility, focus on ethically relevant considerations, avoidance of ethical irrelevance, and deliberative thoughtfulness.

Related Articles