NORTH CAROLINA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION
Policy Manual

Policy Identification
Priority: Quality Teachers, Administrators, and Staff
Category: Qualifications and Evaluations
Policy ID Number: QP-C-014

Policy Title: 16 NCAC 6C .0601 and 16 NCAC 6C .0602 Policy regarding the Code of Ethics
for North Carolina Educators

Current Policy Date: 02/05/1998

Other Historical Information: Previous board dates: 06/05/1997

Statutory Reference:

Administrative Procedures Act (APA) Reference Number and Category: 16 NCAC 6C
.0601 and .0602

Preamble: The purpose of this Code of Ethics is to define standards of professional conduct.

The responsibility to teach and the freedom to learn, and the guarantee of equal opportunity for
all are essential to the achievement of these principles. The professional educator acknowledges
the worth and dignity of every person and demonstrates the pursuit of truth and devotion to
excellence, acquires knowledge, and nurtures democratic citizenship. The educator exemplifies a
commitment to the teaching and learning processes with accountability to the students, maintains
professional growth, exercises professional judgment, and personifies integrity. The educator
strives to maintain the respect and confidence of colleagues, students, parents and legal
guardians, and the community, and to serve as an appropriate role model.

To uphold these commitments, the educator:

I. Commitment to the Student.

A. Protects students from conditions within the educator’s control that circumvent
learning or are detrimental to the health and safety of students.

B. Maintains an appropriate relationship with students in all settings; does not

encourage, solicit, or engage in a sexual or romantic relationship with students, nor
touch a student in an inappropriate way for personal gratification, with intent to harm,
or out of anger.

C. Evaluates students and assigns grades based upon the students’ demonstrated

competencies and performance.

D. Disciplines students justly and fairly and does not deliberately embarrass or humiliate
them.

E. Holds in confidence information learned in professional practice except for

professional reasons or in compliance with pertinent regulations or statutes.

F. Refuses to accept significant gifts, favors, or additional compensation that might
influence or appear to influence professional decisions or actions.

II. Commitment to the School and School System

A. Utilizes available resources to provide a classroom climate conducive to learning and

to promote learning to the maximum possible extent.

B. Acknowledges the diverse views of students, parents and legal guardians, and
colleagues as they work collaboratively to shape educational goals, policies, and
decisions; does not proselytize for personal viewpoints that are outside the scope of
professional practice.

C. Signs a contract in good faith and does not abandon contracted professional duties

without a substantive reason.

D. Participates actively in professional decision-making processes and supports the
expression of professional opinions and judgments by colleagues in decision-making
processes or due process proceedings.

E. When acting in an administrative capacity:

1. Acts fairly, consistently, and prudently in the exercise of authority with
colleagues, subordinates, students, and parents and legal guardians.

2. Evaluates the work of other educators using appropriate procedures and
established statutes and regulations.

3. Protects the rights of others in the educational setting, and does not retaliate,
coerce, or intentionally intimidate others in the exercise of rights protected by law.

4. Recommend persons for employment, promotion, or transfer according to their
professional qualifications, the needs and policies of the LEA, and according to
the law.

III. Commitment to the Profession

A. Provides accurate credentials and information regarding licensure or employment and

does not knowingly assist others in providing untruthful information.

B. Takes action to remedy an observed violation of the Code of Ethics for North
Carolina Educators and promotes understanding of the principles of professional
ethics.

C. Pursues growth and development in the practice of the profession and uses that

knowledge in improving the educational opportunities, experiences, and performance
of students and colleagues.

Adopted by the State Board of Education June 5, 1997.

.0601 PURPOSE AND APPLICABILITY

The purpose of these rules is to establish and uphold uniform standards of professional conduct
for licensed professional educators throughout the State. These rules shall be binding on every
person licensed by the SBE, hereinafter referred to as “educator” or “professional educator,” and
the possible consequences of any willful breach shall include license suspension or revocation.
The prohibition of certain conduct in these rules shall not be interpreted as approval of conduct
not specifically cited.

History Note: Authority G.S. 115C-295.3;
Eff. April 1, 1998.

.0602 STANDARDS OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT

(a) The standards listed in this Section shall be generally accepted for the education
profession and shall be the basis for State Board review of performance of
professional educators. These standards shall establish mandatory prohibitions and
requirements for educators. Violation of these standards shall subject an educator to
investigation and disciplinary action by the SBE or LEA.

(b) Professional educators shall adhere to the standards of professional conduct contained

in this Rule. Any intentional act or omission that violates these standards is
prohibited.
(1) Generally recognized professional standards. The educator shall practice the

professional standards of federal, state, and local governing bodies.
(2) Personal conduct. The educator shall serve as a positive role model for students,

parents, and the community. Because the educator is entrusted with the care and
education of small children and adolescents, the educator shall demonstrate a
high standard of personal character and conduct.

(3) Honesty. The educator shall not engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud,
deceit, or misrepresentation in the performance of professional duties including
the following:
(A) statement of professional qualifications;
(B) application or recommendation for professional employment,

promotion, or licensure;
(C) application or recommendation for college or university admission,

scholarship, grant, academic award, or similar benefit;
(D) representation of completion of college or staff development credit;
(E) evaluation or grading of students or personnel;
(F) submission of financial or program compliance reports submitted to

state, federal, or other governmental agencies;
(G) submission of information in the course of an official inquiry by the

employing LEA or the SBE related to facts of unprofessional conduct,
provided, however, that an educator shall be given adequate notice of the

allegations and may be represented by legal counsel; and
(H) submission of information in the course of an investigation by a law

enforcement agency, child protective services, or any other agency with
the right to investigate, regarding school-related criminal activity;
provided, however, that an educator shall be entitled to decline to give
evidence to law enforcement if such evidence may tend to incriminate the
educator as that term is defined by the Fifth Amendment to the U.S.
Constitution.

(4) Proper remunerative conduct. The educator shall not solicit current students or
parents of students to purchase equipment, supplies, or services from the
educator in a private remunerative capacity. An educator shall not tutor for
remuneration students currently assigned to the educator’s classes, unless
approved by the local superintendent. An educator shall not accept any
compensation, benefit, or thing of value other than the educator’s regular
compensation for the performance of any service that the educator is required to
render in the course and scope of the educator’s employment. This Rule shall not
restrict performance of any overtime or supplemental services at the request of
the LEA; nor shall it apply to or restrict the acceptance of gifts or tokens of
minimal value offered and accepted openly from students, parents, or other
persons in recognition or appreciation of service.

(5) Conduct with students. The educator shall treat all students with respect. The
educator shall not commit any abusive act or sexual exploitation with, to, or in
the presence of a student, whether or not that student is or has been under the
care or supervision of that educator, as defined below:
(A) any use of language that is considered profane, vulgar, or

demeaning;
(B) any sexual act;
(C) any solicitation of a sexual act, whether written, verbal, or physical;
(D) any act of child abuse, as defined by law;
(E) any act of sexual harassment, as defined by law; and
(F) any intentional solicitation, encouragement, or consummation of a

romantic or physical relationship with a student, or any sexual contact
with a student. The term “romantic relationship” shall include dating any
student.

(6) Confidential information. The educator shall keep in confidence personally
identifiable information regarding students or their family members that has
been obtained in the course of professional service, unless disclosure is required
or permitted by law or professional standards, or is necessary for the personal
safety of the student or others.

(7) Rights of others. The educator shall not willfully or maliciously violate the
constitutional or civil rights of a student, parent/legal guardian, or colleague.

(8) Required reports. The educator shall make all reports required by Chapter 115C
of the North Carolina General Statutes.

(9) Alcohol or controlled substance abuse. The educator shall not:
(A) be under the influence of, possess, use, or consume on school

premises or at a school-sponsored activity a controlled substance as
defined by N.C. Gen. Stat. § 90-95, the Controlled Substances Act,
without a prescription authorizing such use;

(B) be under the influence of, possess, use, or consume an alcoholic
beverage or a controlled substance on school premises or at a school-

sponsored activity involving students; or
(C) furnish alcohol or a controlled substance to any student except as

indicated in the professional duties of administering legally prescribed
medications.

(10) Compliance with criminal laws. The educator shall not commit any act referred
to in G.S. 115C-332 and any felony under the laws of the Unite States or of any
state.

(11) Public funds and property. The educator shall not misuse public funds or
property, funds of a school-related organization, or colleague’s funds. The
educator shall account for funds collected from students, colleagues, or
parents/legal guardians. The educator shall not submit fraudulent requests for
reimbursement, expenses, or pay.

(12) Scope of professional practice. The educator shall not perform any act as an
employee in a position for which licensure is required by the rules of the SBE or
by Chapter 115C or the North Carolina General Statutes during any period in
which the educator’s license has been suspended or revoked.

(13) Conduct related to ethical violations. The educator shall not directly or
indirectly use or threaten to use any official authority or influence in any
manner that tends to discourage, restrain, interfere with, coerce, or discriminate
against any subordinate or any licensee who in good faith reports, discloses,
divulges, or otherwise brings to the attention of an LEA, the SBE, or any other
public agency authorized to take remedial action, any facts or information
relative to actual or suspected violation of any law regulating the duties of
persons serving in the public school system, including but not limited to these
Rules.

History Note: Authority G.S. 115C-295.3;
Eff. May 1, 1998.

SECONDARY ETHICS DILEMMAS

SCENARIO 1: Immediately after she graduated college, Coach Parnell began coaching volleyball, track, and soccer and

teaching Algebra I and II at Deer Springs High School. She has been there for almost 3 years. In early May, Coach Parnell

joined a dating app that locates singles in the area. Not long after joining, a 19-year-old senior at Deer Springs HS, saw

Coach Parnell’s dating profile and indicated, via the app, that he would be interested in going out on a date with her.

When she saw this, Coach Parnell, sent the student a message stating that, even though he was 19, she could not date

him until after graduation in less than a month. The student responded, letting her know that he couldn’t wait take her

out on a date, and the two decided to set up a time to meet for dinner the day after graduation ceremonies. Coach

Parnell let the student know that there could be no further communication between the two of them until then, and

that he couldn’t tell anyone about the conversation they’d had so far. She let him know that she was excited to be able

to go out with him, but she could not pursue anything further until the date they had set up. This student had never

been in Coach Parnell’s Algebra class, nor had he played any of the sports that she coached. As planned, the day after

graduation, Coach Parnell and the now former Deer Springs High School student went out on a date and continued to

see each other for the next 8 months.

1. Identify the behaviors (if any) that you believe violate standards in the Educator Code of Ethics.

2. Which standards do you think were violated? Explain your reasoning. If you feel that no standards were

violated, explain your reasoning.

3. Should Coach Parnell have handled this situation differently so as not to violate the Code of Ethics, or (if you

feel that there was no violation) to avoid their actions being called into question?

SCENARIO 2: Mr. Shanfeld is a Language Arts teacher at Bayshore Middle School. For the last several years he has been

the director of the annual 8th grade trip to Washington D.C. Unhappy with the quality of the different tour companies

that the district has used in the past, Mr. Shanfeld decides to start his own tour company that specializes in school field

trips to Washington D.C. This is something that he will be doing in his spare time, and he has informed HR of this

business venture, so that he is acting in accordance with the district policy regarding second jobs for teachers.

The bids to be the tour company used by the district is often very competitive, but – because he knows several people at

the administration building – he is able to secure the bid without much convincing. There is a formal process for students

applying to the trip, and the criteria for selection is set by the school district and the principal of each middle school. The

trip is often cost prohibitive for some families due to the $700 price tag, though the PTA offers 5 scholarships each year

for students whose families cannot pay. Mr. Shanfeld is still the director for the field trip for Bayshore Middle School,

and now he is also the owner of the tour company the school will be using.

A student who Mr. Shanfeld really hoped would go on the trip missed the deadline for applying, and after speaking to his

parents, Mr. Shanfeld realizes that the reason is due to temporary financial issues. It is too late for the student to apply

for one of the PTA scholarships, but Mr. Shanfeld and the parents work out a deal where they will provide him with free

landscaping services for the next year if he can help them get their son a spot on the trip. Mr. Shanfeld agrees, and since

it is his company, he can and does secure a spot for the student.

1. Identify the behaviors (if any) that you believe violate standards in the Educator Code of Ethics.

2. Which standards do you think were violated? Explain your reasoning. If you feel that no standards were

violated, explain your reasoning.

3. Should Mr. Shanfeld have handled this situation differently so as not to violate the Code of Ethics, or (if you

feel that there was no violation) to avoid his actions being called into question?

SCENARIO 3: Alicia is an 11th grade student at T. H. Berry High School, and is one of the star athletes on the basketball

team. Berry is known for its outstanding athletics, and many of the teams make the playoffs every school year, with over

10 state titles in different sports in the 14 years since the school opened. Alicia struggles academically in English and she

has not been able to bring her average above a 68 by the end of the grading period, as is required by UIL rules. Knowing

that this means that the team will lose one of its star players for much of the season, Coach Mitchell pleads Alicia’s case

to Ms. Johnston, Alicia’s English teacher. Because Ms. Johnston’s daughter is also on the team, Coach Mitchell feels

confident that she will be easily persuaded to ensure Alicia is able to play.

Coach Mitchell explains how important Alicia’s participation is for the team and for the school, and she assures Ms.

Johnston that she will personally guarantee that Alicia attends tutoring before and after school until she is able to

improve her grade for the next grading period, if Ms. Johnston will agree to change her grade to a 70 just this once. The

coach also vaguely implies that Ms. Johnston’s daughter will get more playing time if Alicia’s grade is changed. Ms.

Johnston agrees to change Alicia’s grade to a 70, and to keep their conversation quiet, so that other students and

administrators will not find out.

1. Identify the behaviors (if any) that you believe violate standards in the Educator Code of Ethics.

2. Which standards do you think were violated? Explain your reasoning. If you feel that no standards were

violated, explain your reasoning.

3. Should Coach Mitchell and/or Ms. Johnston have handled this situation differently so as not to violate the

Code of Ethics, or (if you feel that there was no violation) to avoid their actions being called into question?

SCENARIO 4: The Life Skills classroom at Hasting High provides Community Based Instruction to its small group of

students with severe disabilities. The district provides some funds for transportation and community outings, but it isn’t

usually enough to keep the students busy throughout the school year. To help with the funds, the principal allows the

students, with the support of the teachers, to sell breakfast items to the school three days a week. This fundraiser

becomes very popular with the rest of the student body because the breakfast items are inexpensive, delivered straight

to their 1st period classes, and they get to feel good about helping the Life Skills classroom in a positive way.

Ever since the Life Skills fundraising began, the Student Council sponsor, Mrs. Sumner, has noticed that support for their

daily candy fundraiser has declined, and she believes it is due to the popularity of the breakfast items being sold. One

day she notices a Life Skills student and one of the teachers, Mr. Moore, out making deliveries and collecting money. The

student is clearly struggling with handling the money, so Mr. Moore helps her by taking some of the money and putting

it into his own pocket. Mrs. Sumner sees only this small interaction and has no other context for the exchange.

Later that day, when speaking to a group of other teachers she mentions seeing Mr. Moore putting some of the

breakfast fundraiser money into his pocket. Over the next several days, this comment makes its way through the faculty,

and when she is questioned by other faculty members, Mrs. Sumner’s response is that she did see Mr. Moore pocket the

money, but she doesn’t know what he did with it after that. In the same conversations, she also casually mentions the

expensive new car Mr. Moore recently started driving.

1. Identify the behaviors (if any) that you believe violate standards in the Educator Code of Ethics.

2. Which standards do you think were violated? Explain your reasoning. If you feel that no standards were

violated, explain your reasoning.

3. Should Mr. Moore and/or Mrs. Sumner have handled this situation differently so as not to violate the Code

of Ethics, or (if you feel that there was no violation) to avoid their actions being called into question?

Criteria Exemplary Proficient Developing

Identification of
Behavior

Behavior that is or
could be an issue is
explicitly identified
from each
scenario. 8 pts.

Behavior that is or
could be an issue is
generally identified
from each
scenario. 6 pts.

Behavior that is or
could be an issue is too
vague or not identified
for each scenario.
4 – 0 pts.

Standard(s) Cited Standards are explicitly
cited by Number,
letter, and roman
numeral.
8 pts.

Standards are cited by
a general description.
6 pts.

Standards are not
correctly cited for most
of the scenarios.
4 – 0 pts.

Justification A coherent and cogent
statement is provided
that explicitly and
clearly aligns and
connects the behavior
to the standard
believed to be
violated. 8 pts.

Justification is provided
but it doesn’t explicitly
align and connect the
behavior to the
standard believed to be
violated.
6 pts.

Justification is not
provided, or it doesn’t
align and connect the
behavior to the
standard believed to be
violated.
4 – 0 pts.

Alternative behavior Intern provides a
detailed and
appropriate approach
that could be taken by
the teachers in the
scenario, so no
standards are
violated. 8 pts.

Intern provides a
general description of
an alternative
approach that could be
taken by the teachers
in the scenario, so no
standards are violated.
6 pts.

Intern does not provide
a different approach
that could be taken by
the teachers in the
scenario, so no
standards are violated.
4 – 0 pts.

Spelling and Grammar Writing is professional
quality, with fewer
than 2 spelling or
grammar mistakes.
8 pts.

There are 3 to 6 issues
with grammar and
spelling, but the writing
is still up to an
adequate professional
standard.
6 pts.

There are more than 6
issues with spelling
and/or grammar, or
the quality of the
writing is not up to a
professional standard.
4 – 0 pts.

ELEMENTARY ETHICS DILEMMAS

SCENARIO 1: Andrea Miles is the GT teacher at Meridian Elementary school. As part of her duties, she is to screen,

identify, and assess students who exhibit characteristics of gifted and talented students. The GT program in her school

district is well known for being rigorous and enriching for students, and many times families will move into the district in

hopes of getting their child identified for the program. Ms. Meridian recently found out that her close friend’s niece,

Stefanie, has enrolled at her school. Stefanie was identified as GT in her previous district, but – because GT identification

has different criteria for each school district in the state – being GT in one school district does not always mean a student

will be GT in a new school district.

Meridian ISD has very rigorous criteria for the GT program, and oftentimes students who were GT in a previous district

will no longer qualify for the GT program once they move to Meridian. Unfortunately, this was the case for Stefanie. Her

test scores, at the 95th percentile, were just shy of the qualifying 97th percentile score, set by district policy. Admission

into the GT program requires a committee of at least 3 GT certified teachers as per the state plan. The committee has

the authority to qualify students whose scores, like Stefanie’s, are close to qualifying on the basis of a “preponderance

of evidence.” The last couple of students with almost qualifying scores that were brought to the committee, in hopes of

a “yes” decision based on the “preponderance of evidence,” were not admitted into the program. Because Stefanie was

related to her good friend, and because she truly felt that she was a great candidate for the program, Ms. Miles did not

want risk her not being admitted. In preparing the paperwork for the committee admission meeting, Ms. Miles changed

Stefanie’s score from a 95th to a 97th percentile. With the information Ms. Miles provided, the committee admitted

Stefanie into the program as it appeared she met the Meridian school district requirements.

Questions:

1. Identify the behaviors that you believe violate standards in the Educator Code of Ethics.

2. Which standards do you think were violated? Explain your reasoning.

3. What different choices or actions could Ms. Miles have made in order to act in accordance with the code of

ethics?

SCENARIO 2: Mr. Armstrong is a 3rd grade Language Arts teacher at Cold Creek Elementary. He shares students with his

teaching partner, Mrs. Long, who teaches Math, Science and Social Studies. These two teachers have been teaching

partners for several years, and have shared personal information with each other as it pertains to their work and home

life. Recently, Mrs. Long confided in Mr. Armstrong about difficulties she is having with medication she takes for anxiety,

and she let him know that she would be missing school to go to a doctor’s appointment for help with the issue.

While Mrs. Long was out for her appointment, Mr. Armstrong told the substitute, who is also a parent of a student who

attends Cold Creek Elementary, that Mrs. Long would probably be needing her several more times in the upcoming

weeks, saying specifically that she would be visiting the doctor until she gets her anxiety controlled by her medications.

Mr. Armstrong’s purpose in speaking to the substitute was only to secure her for upcoming days because he prefers to

have consistency for the students.

Questions:

1. Identify the behaviors that you believe violate standards in the Educator Code of Ethics.

2. Which standards do you think were violated? Explain your reasoning.

3. What different choices or actions could Mr. Armstrong have made to act in accordance with the code of

ethics?

SCENARIO 3: Ms. Olsen and Mr. Parker both teach physical education at Putnam Grove Elementary school, and have –

after assessing the need for their students to have more opportunities for physical activity – decided to start an after

school run club. The afterschool clubs and programs at PGE are typically very popular with the students, so Ms. Olsen

and Mr. Parker have decided to cap run club membership at 100 students for the first year, until they can determine

how many more students they can safely accommodate in the program. This will depend on parent volunteers, the

number of students who attend regularly, and the behavior of students while they are participating.

When they announce the run club and begin taking applications, they are excited to find out that over 200 students are

interested in participating, which means they will need to set the criteria for choosing which students will be admitted.

The criteria they choose include:

1. Did the student submit the application by the specified deadline?

2. Parents or guardians must sign a letter acknowledging that they are able to come pick their child up when

they stay after school on run club days.

3. Students must not have any office referrals for behavior.

4. Is the child a sibling of another student that has been accepted into the run club?

In speaking to their colleagues, they are aware of certain families who sign their children up for these afterschool

programs, but often fail to pick them up on time on meeting days. Before they begin the selection process, they have

already determined a list of students who will not get in to the run club, even if they meet all of the above criteria, due

to a history of late pick-ups by the parents. Mr. Parker notices that most of the students being excluded qualify for free

or reduced lunch (the low SES category), but he doesn’t mention this because he does not want to get stuck waiting at

the school when parents don’t show up on time. Ms. Olsen accepts a few late applications because they are students

who are good friends with her daughter, and she wanted them to be able to participate together. Finally, a student with

autism, who is an avid runner, was denied entry because he is known to have behavior issues (though he does not have

office referrals since his behavior issues are addressed through his IEP). Mr. Parker and Ms. Olsen are the only ones who

were present during the selection process, so no one knows why any of the students were not admitted, only that they

had to cap the membership at 100.

Questions:

1. Identify the behaviors (if any) that you believe violate standards in the Educator Code of Ethics.

2. Which standards do you think were violated? Explain your reasoning. If you feel that no standards were

violated, explain your reasoning.

3. Should Mr. Parker and/or Ms. Olsen have handled this situation differently so as not to violate the Code of

Ethics, or (if you feel that there was no violation) to avoid their actions being called into question? Explain.

SCENARIO 4: Mrs. Nelson is a 5th grade teacher at Xander Elementary School. Mrs. Nelson is very tech-savvy and uses

many forms of social media to communicate with her parents and students. At the beginning of the year she asks

parents to follow her on a communication app, Remind, so that they can receive important text reminders about

upcoming events. Remind is typically used for group communication. For example, Mrs. Nelson might send out a

reminder to the class that they have a field trip and will need to remember to bring their lunch. After receiving a group

text, parents then have the option to respond individually to Mrs. Nelson and they can then carry on a conversation in a

private environment if they need to discuss more student-specific information.

Many of her students have their own cell phones and have also begun following Mrs. Nelson on the Remind app. While

Mrs. Nelson does not encourage this, she doesn’t remove them when they do. It has never been an issue in the past,

and she assumes it might help them to know about upcoming and important events too.

Mrs. Nelson is a very loved and respected teacher, and she is known for providing a very safe and nurturing

environment in her classroom. Whenever a student is struggling with an issue, he or she knows that Mrs. Nelson will

listen and support them. Because of the precarious nature of 5th grade, students often come to Mrs. Nelson with all

kinds of problems. After sending out a Remind text about the upcoming early dismissal day, a student, Maddie,

responded with a private message to Mrs. Nelson telling her that she needed to talk to her about a problem. Mrs.

Nelson tells her to come to her first thing in the morning, so they can talk before class begins. The next morning,

Maddie shows up early to class as instructed and tells Mrs. Nelson that she thinks something is wrong with her because

she doesn’t like boys the way her friends do, but she really doesn’t want to be gay. She is afraid of what her parents and

friends would say if she never likes boys the way she thinks she is supposed to. Though she was a little taken aback by

this confession, Mrs. Nelson assures her that she will be ok, and that it is ok that she doesn’t have the answers to those

questions right now. Thinking about it later that evening, Mrs. Nelson was concerned that she hadn’t been supportive

enough in talking with Maddie, so she sends her a private Remind text saying, “I want you to know that you are a very

smart and beautiful young lady, and that won’t change if you like boys or girls. I won’t say anything to anyone about

our conversation.”

Questions:

1. Identify the behaviors (if any) that you believe violate standards in the Educator Code of Ethics.

2. Which standards do you think were violated? Explain your reasoning. If you feel that no standards were

violated, explain your reasoning.

3. Should Mrs. Nelson have handled this situation differently so as not to violate the Code of Ethics, or (if you

feel that there was no violation) to avoid her actions being called into question?