TPS3704 ASSIGNMENT 02
Year module 2026
Marks: 100
Opened: Monday, 2 February 2026, 8:00 AM
Due: Tuesday, 28 July 2026, 11:00 PM
, QUESTION 1
1.1 Identification and critical analysis of ethical and professional breaches (15)
Breach 1: Indirect humiliation and violation of learner dignity
The comment that learners who fail to submit work “lack discipline and commitment”
constitutes an ethical breach because it resulted in indirect public humiliation.
Although Lerato was not named, the timing of the remark, immediately after her
disclosure of limited access to data, made her identifiable to peers. The laughter and
attention directed at her confirms the harmful impact of the comment. From an ethical
perspective, this violates the SACE requirement that teachers respect learners’ dignity
and emotional well-being. Professionally, it reflects poor judgement, as teachers hold
positional power and must anticipate how generalised comments may
disproportionately harm vulnerable learners. The consequence was not neutral; Lerato
withdrew from participation and later experienced a further decline in academic
performance, demonstrating real educational harm.
Breach 2: Breach of confidentiality and lack of professional discretion
The discussion of Lerato’s academic difficulties in a public corridor represents a clear
breach of confidentiality. Even though the conversation occurred with another student
teacher, the setting made it inappropriate and unprofessional. Ethical teaching practice
requires that learner information be shared only on a need-to-know basis and in private,
professional spaces. This breach is ethically problematic because it exposes the
learner to further embarrassment, undermines trust, and signals to learners that their
personal struggles are not treated with seriousness or respect. In the long term, such
behaviour discourages learners from seeking support.
Breach 3: Unprofessional conduct and ethical negligence on social media
Posting frustrations about learners on social media, accompanied by a classroom
photograph, constitutes serious unprofessional conduct. The SACE Code extends
ethical responsibility beyond the classroom and requires teachers to protect the image
of the profession at all times. Even without naming learners, the post risks indirect
identification and portrays learners in a deficit-oriented manner. This behaviour reflects
a lack of ethical foresight and weak professional boundaries. It also contradicts the
teacher’s role as a responsible role model and contributes to the erosion of public trust
in educators.
Year module 2026
Marks: 100
Opened: Monday, 2 February 2026, 8:00 AM
Due: Tuesday, 28 July 2026, 11:00 PM
, QUESTION 1
1.1 Identification and critical analysis of ethical and professional breaches (15)
Breach 1: Indirect humiliation and violation of learner dignity
The comment that learners who fail to submit work “lack discipline and commitment”
constitutes an ethical breach because it resulted in indirect public humiliation.
Although Lerato was not named, the timing of the remark, immediately after her
disclosure of limited access to data, made her identifiable to peers. The laughter and
attention directed at her confirms the harmful impact of the comment. From an ethical
perspective, this violates the SACE requirement that teachers respect learners’ dignity
and emotional well-being. Professionally, it reflects poor judgement, as teachers hold
positional power and must anticipate how generalised comments may
disproportionately harm vulnerable learners. The consequence was not neutral; Lerato
withdrew from participation and later experienced a further decline in academic
performance, demonstrating real educational harm.
Breach 2: Breach of confidentiality and lack of professional discretion
The discussion of Lerato’s academic difficulties in a public corridor represents a clear
breach of confidentiality. Even though the conversation occurred with another student
teacher, the setting made it inappropriate and unprofessional. Ethical teaching practice
requires that learner information be shared only on a need-to-know basis and in private,
professional spaces. This breach is ethically problematic because it exposes the
learner to further embarrassment, undermines trust, and signals to learners that their
personal struggles are not treated with seriousness or respect. In the long term, such
behaviour discourages learners from seeking support.
Breach 3: Unprofessional conduct and ethical negligence on social media
Posting frustrations about learners on social media, accompanied by a classroom
photograph, constitutes serious unprofessional conduct. The SACE Code extends
ethical responsibility beyond the classroom and requires teachers to protect the image
of the profession at all times. Even without naming learners, the post risks indirect
identification and portrays learners in a deficit-oriented manner. This behaviour reflects
a lack of ethical foresight and weak professional boundaries. It also contradicts the
teacher’s role as a responsible role model and contributes to the erosion of public trust
in educators.
