BCSAI · 4th year · Compulsory · 3 ECTS · 15 sessions

Course Structure

The complete, syllabus-driven outline of Ethics, Policy Making and Legislation in Computer Science — meta, learning objectives, methodology, assessment, and every one of the 15 sessions with topics and readings.

Subject description

What this course is about

"Developers of new technologies should strive to identify potential adverse consequences early in the design process and take actions to eliminate or mitigate them."

The subject Ethics, Policy Making and Legislation in Computer Science is designed to delve into the ethical, regulatory, and legal issues surrounding the field of computer science and technology. It provides students with the ability to recognize and anticipate ethical dilemmas in the development and use of computing technologies, and equips them with the skills to analyze these problems and potential solutions — both individually and through collaboration — employing concepts and principles from moral philosophy, ethics, and regulation.

Through the analysis of cases, debates, and in-depth discussions, students develop critical thinking regarding the ethical challenges faced by IT professionals, and gain insight into the regulations and legislations affecting the industry in real-world scenarios. The course addresses ethical principles within various frameworks and international laws applicable to privacy, security, accountability, intellectual property, sustainability, equality and autonomy — initially through debates, and subsequently by applying them to different realities and technologies. By the end, students will be capable of making informed and ethical decisions in their future careers in technology.

Course at a glance

Program
BCSAI — Bachelor in Computer Science & AI
Course code
EPML-CSAI.4.M.A
Area
Computer Science
Sessions
15 (live, in-person)
Credits
3.0 ECTS
Academic year
2025–26
Degree course
Fourth
Semester
2nd
Category
Compulsory
Language
English

Prof. Paula Ortiz López

Lawyer & senior policy executive · portiz@faculty.ie.edu

Lawyer and senior executive with 20+ years in policy and advocacy focused on the Internet industry, across both public and private institutions at national and EU levels. Substantial experience advising companies on global and European privacy law, including compliance strategy and programs for online advertising, technology and online services. Former international delegate of the Spanish Data Protection Authority before the EU institutions, the OECD and the US Federal Trade Commission; for 10 years spokesperson for IAB Spain. LLM in Telecommunications & IT Law; Master in Digital Advertising. Office hours on request by email.

Learning objectives

What you will be able to do

By the end of the course you will master five capabilities.

1

Identify and comprehend the ethical, social, and regulatory issues that underlie decision-making in computer science.

2

Analyze, reason, and debate key ethical problems in computer science — including privacy, security, and responsibility, among others.

3

Become familiar with relevant international and national regulations and legislations that impact computer science.

4

Apply ethical and legal principles to real-life situations and dilemmas, so they can be incorporated into procedures and strategies from the first steps of design.

5

Carry out expert reports, opinions and computer arbitrations, taking into account the applicable regulations.

Methodology & assessment

How the course is taught & graded

IE's teaching method is collaborative, active and applied: students build their knowledge across a diverse mix of activities. Total dedication is 75 hours.

Learning activity weighting

Lectures20.0%
≈ 15.0 hours
Discussions26.7%
≈ 20.0 hours
Group work26.7%
≈ 20.0 hours
Individual studying26.7%
≈ 20.0 hours · total 75.0 h

Evaluation criteria

Individual work40%
Final exam20%
Covers all course material · held in the last session
Individual presentation20%
Group presentation20%

What each component asks of you

Individual work

40%

Deliverable: the single largest component — sustained individual analysis applying course concepts to real dilemmas (expert-report style: state the dilemma, the affected rights/principles, the applicable regulation and a reasoned recommendation). Evaluated on depth of analysis, correct use of frameworks and law, originality and clarity.

Individual presentation — ethics & robotics

20%

Deliverable: an individually prepared robotics case (briefed in Session 10), presented and defended in Session 12. Evaluated on argument quality, grounding in principles/regulation, and the ability to defend it under questioning.

Group presentation — AI ethics case

20%

Deliverable: a team analysis of an AI scenario (autonomous cars, dark patterns, medical use, neurorights…) selected in Session 7 and presented in Session 8, with affected rights and compliance solutions through an ethics framework. Evaluated on teamwork, completeness and applied reasoning.

Final exam

20%

Deliverable: a written exam in Session 15 covering all course material. Evaluated on integration — combining the right ethical lens with the right legal instrument on an applied problem.

Participation & attendance. Class participation, group work and intermediate tests carry a formal weight of 0%, but participation still counts: it means attendance plus active, quality-over-quantity contribution to discussions, supporting a continued learning process and good teamwork. Behaviour, attendance and ethics follow IE University's Code of Conduct, Attendance Policy and Ethics Code; the Program Director may issue further indications. There is a re-sit / re-take policy per IE regulations for students who do not pass.
AI policy. Generative AI tools are allowed but must be documented and acknowledged — list the technologies, how you used them, the prompts, and how outputs were incorporated. Fact-check all AI output for hallucinations and bias, use multiple sources, protect personal data, and ensure your own voice is evident. Submitting AI output as your own work violates IE Academic Standards.
Program

The 15-Session Program

Every session is live and in-person. Grouped into seven thematic modules — each opening with a module overview and learning outcomes, then unpacking every session's topics with the core framework or regulation, a key idea, the in-class activity, suggested preparation, and cross-links into the interactive view.

Module 1

Foundations: ethics, regulation & principles

Sessions 1–2

The opening module builds the conceptual vocabulary for the whole course. Before touching any specific technology or law, it separates three ideas that are routinely confused — what is ethical (what we ought to do), what is regulated (soft rules, standards and guidance), and what is legislated (binding law with sanctions) — and then surveys the moral-philosophy toolkit and the major ethics frameworks that recur throughout the syllabus.

    By the end of this module you can
  • Distinguish ethics, regulation and legislation and place a real dilemma in the right register.
  • Name the two foundational moral lenses — consequentialism (judge by outcomes) and deontology (judge by duties/rights) — and apply them.
  • Identify the leading principle frameworks (OECD, UNESCO, EU) and the six recurring principles.
  1. Live in-person

    Introduction to ethics, regulation & legislation in CS

    Set up the course and draw the line between three notions that are often conflated.

    • Welcome, course logistics and the evaluation system.How the four graded components (individual work 40%, exam, individual and group presentations) fit together.
    • Differences between ethics, regulation and legislation — the three pillars.Ethics = what we ought to do; regulation = standards, codes and soft rules; legislation = binding law backed by sanctions. A practice can be legal yet unethical, or ethical yet not (yet) legal.
    • First mapping of the ethical issues affected by computer science.Privacy, security, accountability, intellectual property, sustainability, equality and autonomy — the seven threads revisited all semester.
    Key idea. The gap between "legal" and "right" is where most technology dilemmas live — law lags innovation, so engineers cannot outsource ethics to compliance.
    In-class debate (last 5 min) ↳ Three Pillars

    Prepare: skim Hare, Technology Is Not Neutral, intro — the claim that design choices always embed values.

  2. Live in-person

    Ethics: fundamental principles

    Explore the moral and philosophical principles behind responsible technology.

    • Ethical, philosophical and moral principles; different frameworks (OECD, UNESCO, EU…).OECD AI Principles (2019, human-centred, the first intergovernmental standard); UNESCO Recommendation on the Ethics of AI (2021, 193 states); EU Ethics Guidelines for Trustworthy AI (HLEG, 2019).
    • Principles tied to Fundamental Rights: responsibility, equality, autonomy, justice, privacy, sustainability.These map onto the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and feed directly into the AI Act's risk approach.
    Two lenses. Consequentialism asks "which action produces the best outcome?"; deontology asks "which action respects duties and rights, whatever the outcome?" Most CS dilemmas can be productively argued from both.
    Exercise: business ethical frameworks ↳ Six Principles ↳ Frameworks

    Prepare: compare one corporate AI-ethics charter (e.g. a major tech firm's responsible-AI principles) against the OECD principles.

Module 2

Policy making & regulation: global scope

Sessions 3–5

This module turns from principles to hard rules. It maps the institutions that write technology law, explains why EU rules end up governing products worldwide (the Brussels effect), then drills into the two regimes that matter most to a computer scientist: the EU AI Act and data-protection law (the GDPR and its US contrast).

    By the end of this module you can
  • Locate the main EU digital statutes (AI Act, DSA, DMA, Data Governance Act, Data Act) and say what each governs.
  • Classify an AI system into the AI Act's four risk tiers and state the obligations that follow.
  • Apply the GDPR's core principles and data-subject rights, and contrast the EU "omnibus" model with the US sectoral model.
  1. Live in-person

    Global scope — laws affecting CS

    Map the international regulatory landscape and understand who sets the rules.

    • International context; regulators and institutions — "who is who".EU Commission & Parliament, national data-protection authorities (e.g. Spain's AEPD), the OECD, UNESCO and the US FTC each shape the rulebook.
    • Global regulatory frameworks and the Brussels Effect: AI Act, Digital Services Act, Digital Markets Act, Data Governance Act, Data Act, sustainability, copyright.DSA = illegal content & platform transparency; DMA = "gatekeeper" competition rules; Data Governance Act & Data Act = trusted data sharing and access.
    Brussels effect. Because firms find it cheaper to apply one global standard than to fragment products by market, the EU's strict rules become the de-facto world standard — regulatory power without territorial reach.
    In-class quiz (last 5 min) ↳ Brussels Effect ↳ EU Rulebook

    Prepare: Susskind, Future Politics — how code and platforms quietly govern behaviour ("code is law").

  2. Live in-person

    Artificial Intelligence Act & copyright

    Analyze the EU's flagship AI law and the strain technology puts on copyright.

    • Key aspects of the AI Act: types of uses, oversight of AI systems, transparency, accountability.A risk-based law: obligations scale with the danger of the use-case, plus dedicated transparency rules for general-purpose / generative AI.
    • Copyright in the digital age: protecting creative works and the challenges posed by technology.Who owns AI-generated output? Is training on copyrighted works infringement or text-and-data-mining exception? Watermarking and provenance.
    AI Act risk tiers. Unacceptable (banned, e.g. social scoring) → High-risk (strict duties: data quality, logging, human oversight, e.g. CV-screening, biometrics) → Limited (transparency: tell users they are dealing with AI) → Minimal (no extra duties, e.g. spam filters).

    Prepare: read a one-page summary of the AI Act risk pyramid; note one example system per tier.

  3. Live in-person

    Privacy & data protection

    Build a working understanding of data-protection regulation and its practical tools.

    • Data mining, profiling, use of public data, transparency."Publicly available" does not mean "free to repurpose" — context and purpose limitation still apply.
    • Scope, principles and rights; privacy impact assessment and privacy by design.A DPIA assesses risk before high-risk processing; privacy by design bakes data minimisation and security into the architecture from day one (a legal duty, not a nice-to-have).
    • Comparison between EU & US data-protection laws.EU: one omnibus regulation (GDPR) for everyone. US: a patchwork of sector laws (HIPAA, COPPA) plus state laws (CCPA/CPRA).
    • Ethical dilemmas of 3D printing: 3D-printed weapons and design piracy.A worked example of how a manufacturing technology raises safety, IP and liability questions at once.
    GDPR principles. Lawfulness/fairness/transparency · purpose limitation · data minimisation · accuracy · storage limitation · integrity & confidentiality · accountability. Rights include access, rectification, erasure ("right to be forgotten"), portability and objection.
    In-class quiz (last 5 min) ↳ Privacy & GDPR

    Prepare: Véliz, Privacy Is Power — why personal data is a form of power and a collective, not just individual, concern.

Module 3

AI: transversal challenges in ethics & regulation

Sessions 6–8

AI brings huge benefits but a multitude of risks; this debate-driven module raises them through real cases (medical decision-making, automated surveillance) so students can argue both the harms and the design solutions. Two seminars of dilemmas feed a graded group case in which a team applies an ethics framework to a concrete AI scenario.

    By the end of this module you can
  • Diagnose algorithmic bias, opacity and the explainability gap, and propose mitigations (audits, documentation, human oversight).
  • Explain the environmental cost of large models and what "green algorithms" try to fix.
  • Reason about disinformation, deepfakes, accountability across the supply chain, and the emerging idea of neurorights.
  1. Live in-person

    AI challenges I — fairness, transparency & sustainability

    Through debate and real cases, surface the dilemmas AI poses to society and how to design responsibly.

    • Data protection in profiling; bias, discrimination and equal opportunity.Models trained on historical data reproduce past discrimination; "fairness" itself has competing mathematical definitions that cannot all hold at once.
    • Explainability and transparency; moral decision-making (e.g. medical decisions, automated surveillance).A "black box" that cannot justify a denial of credit, parole or diagnosis is hard to contest — hence the right to an explanation.
    • Sustainability in AI and green algorithms; organizations leading AI-ethics efforts.Training and serving large models consumes significant energy and water; green-AI work optimises for efficiency, not only accuracy.
    Key idea. There is no single "fair" algorithm — fairness is a value choice (equal outcomes vs equal treatment vs calibrated risk), so the ethical work is making that choice explicit and accountable.

    Reference: Council of Europe, Unboxing AI: 10 steps to protect Human Rights.

  2. Live in-person

    AI challenges II — disinformation, accountability & neurorights

    Tackle the second wave of AI dilemmas and prepare the group practical case.

    • Disinformation: online impact, examples on social media, deep fakes.Synthetic media erodes the "seeing is believing" baseline; responses range from provenance/watermarking to platform liability under the DSA.
    • Copyright: piracy of digital content, fair use and licenses.Where does fair use / TDM end and infringement begin when models ingest protected works?
    • Accountability across actors (developers, platforms); introduction to neurorights.Neurorights = proposed human rights protecting mental privacy and cognitive liberty against brain-reading/writing technology (pioneered by Chile's constitutional reform).
    • Select the AI-ethics case to present next session (autonomous cars, dark patterns, medical use, neurorights…).Teams pick a scenario, map affected rights and propose compliance solutions through an ethics framework.
    Accountability gap. When harm involves a chain of developers, deployers and platforms, "no one is responsible" is the default failure mode — clear allocation of duties is the fix.
  3. Live in-person

    Group case presentations — AI ethics

    Apply ethical frameworks to a real AI case, identifying affected rights and compliance solutions.

    • Groups present the proposed practical case, with affected rights and compliance solutions.Deliverable: a structured analysis — scenario, stakeholders, rights at stake, applicable framework/law, recommended safeguards.
    What good looks like. A strong case names the specific principle and legal hook (e.g. AI Act high-risk duty, GDPR Art. on automated decisions) rather than gesturing at "ethics" in general.
    Group presentation · 20%
Module 4

Robotics: ethical & regulatory dilemmas

Sessions 9–10, 12

Robotics moves the questions from software into the physical world, where machines act, move and sometimes harm. The module pairs the classic thought experiment (Asimov's laws) with present-day issues — labour displacement, opaque autonomy, medical and industrial robots — and ends with a graded individual presentation defending a robotics analysis (Session 12, after the IoT detour in Session 11).

    By the end of this module you can
  • Use Asimov's laws as a foil to see why simple rule sets fail for real autonomous systems.
  • Weigh the labour, liability and safety trade-offs of automation (including the "robot tax" debate).
  • Apply sector-specific ethics (medical, industrial, supply chain) and principles of ethical-by-design robotics.
  1. Live in-person

    Robotics dilemmas I — autonomy, labor & Asimov

    Examine the consequences of robotics development through classic and modern lenses.

    • Asimov's laws; employment and labor-rights protection; robot taxes.Asimov's three laws (don't harm humans; obey; self-preserve, in that order) are deliberately under-specified — a teaching device for why real safety rules must be far richer. "Robot tax" = taxing automation to fund displaced workers.
    • Effects of autonomy: black boxes, opacity and bias in human-robot interaction.As robots make more decisions unsupervised, attributing responsibility for accidents gets harder.
    • Transhumanism and neurorights.Where does augmentation end and a new threat to human autonomy begin?
    Key idea. Autonomy creates a "responsibility gap": the more independently a machine acts, the less obvious it is who answers for the outcome.
    In-class debate ↳ Robotics & Asimov
  2. Live in-person

    Robotics dilemmas II — industry applications & ethical design

    Look at robotics ethics across sectors and how to design robotic systems responsibly.

    • Ethics in robotics by industry: medicine (surgery, care), industrial robotics, supply chains, responsibility, security.Surgical and care robots raise consent, dignity and de-skilling concerns; industrial robots raise worker-safety and liability concerns.
    • Ethical design of robotic systems.Safety-by-design, fail-safe behaviour, transparency about machine vs human action, and meaningful human control.
    • Brief on the individual practical case to prepare.Sets up the Session 12 individual presentation.
    Meaningful human control. Across high-stakes domains the recurring design answer is to keep a human able to understand, override and be accountable for the machine's actions.
    In-class debate ↳ Robotics & Asimov
  3. Live in-person

    Individual presentation — ethics & robotics

    Defend an individual analysis applying course concepts to a robotics dilemma.

    • Individual presentation on ethics and robotics.Deliverable: an individually prepared case (briefed in Session 10) presented and defended in class.
    What good looks like. A clear dilemma, the affected rights/principles, the applicable rules, and a defensible recommendation — argued, not merely described.
    Individual presentation · 20%
Module 5

IoT & nanotechnologies

Session 11

A single session on the technologies that dissolve the boundary between the digital and the physical: always-on connected devices (IoT) and matter engineered at molecular scale (nanotech, including nanomedicine). The common thread is that pervasive sensing and tiny, invisible systems make privacy, security and environmental harm harder to see and to govern.

    By the end of this module you can
  • Spell out why ubiquitous IoT sensing strains consent, security and energy/e-waste sustainability.
  • State design principles for responsible IoT (security-by-default, data minimisation, updateability).
  • Discuss the promise and risks of nanomedicine and why nanotech regulation lags the science.
  1. Live in-person

    Regulation & ethics of IoT & nanotechnologies

    Understand the ethical implications of interconnected devices and nanotech.

    • Ethical challenges of IoT: privacy, security, environmental impact.Cheap connected devices often ship insecure and unpatched, sense people who never consented, and generate e-waste at scale.
    • Responsible development approaches and regulation for IoT and nanotechnologies.Security-by-default, data minimisation, guaranteed updates; the EU Cyber Resilience Act pushes these as legal duties.
    • Applications to health and nanomedicine.Targeted drug delivery and diagnostics promise huge benefit but raise safety, long-term-effects and equity-of-access questions.
    Key idea. The smaller and more pervasive the technology, the lower its visibility — and the harder it is for users to notice, consent to or contest what it does.
    In-class debate: ethical design of IoT & nanotech ↳ Tech Frontier
Module 6

Software, web development & cybersecurity

Sessions 13–14

The course lands back in the student's daily craft: building software. Session 13 puts every earlier principle into the act of designing an app — data use, ML, secure coding, honest interfaces and privacy policies — while Session 14 treats cybersecurity as a regulatory, technical and ethical problem at once, including where the line falls between legitimate ethical hacking and a crime.

    By the end of this module you can
  • Embed compliance and privacy-by-design into an app's data, ML and UX decisions.
  • Recognise and avoid dark patterns — interface tricks that manipulate consent or spending.
  • Frame cybersecurity duties and the ethical/legal limits of penetration testing and disclosure.
  1. Live in-person

    Software & web application development

    Put learned principles into practice in the design and development of an app.

    • Ethical aspects and regulatory compliance in development.Turning GDPR, the AI Act and consumer law into concrete engineering requirements.
    • Use of data and machine learning; security in software development.Lawful data sourcing, model documentation, and secure-by-design coding practices.
    • Dark patterns, interface design and user experience; app use and privacy policies.Dark patterns = manipulative UI (pre-ticked boxes, "confirmshaming", hard-to-cancel flows) that steer users against their interest; increasingly restricted by the DSA and consumer rules.
    Key idea. Defaults are decisions. Whatever the interface makes easy is what most users will do, so the default setting is itself an ethical choice.
  2. Live in-person

    Cybersecurity

    Address current cybersecurity challenges from regulatory, technical and ethical angles.

    • Cybersecurity challenges and the regulatory, technical and ethical limits.Where does authorised testing end and unauthorised access begin? Responsible disclosure vs. exploitation.
    • Best cybersecurity practices and company regulatory compliance.Breach-notification duties (GDPR 72-hour rule), the NIS2 Directive for critical sectors, and a security-as-process mindset.
    Ethical hacking line. The same technique is lawful with scope and consent (a pentest with a contract / bug-bounty) and criminal without it — intent and authorisation, not skill, draw the line.
    Debate: cybersecurity & ethical-hacking compliance ↳ Tech Frontier
Module 7

Assessment

Session 15

The course closes by testing integration rather than recall: the final exam asks students to bring the principles, frameworks and laws from all six modules to bear on the kind of dilemma they will meet in practice.

  1. Live in-person · final

    Final exam

    Demonstrate mastery of the entire course.

    • Covers all material explained during the course; held in the last session.Expect to combine an ethics lens (consequentialist / deontological) with the right legal instrument (AI Act, GDPR, DSA…) on an applied scenario.
    How to prepare. Revisit the six principles, the AI Act risk tiers and the GDPR principles, and practise arguing a case from two opposing ethical lenses.
    Final exam · 20% ↳ Practice quiz
Key concepts

Glossary of recurring terms

The vocabulary that ties the fifteen sessions together — the frameworks, regulations and ideas you should be able to define and apply.

Ethics vs. regulation vs. legislation

Ethics = what we ought to do; regulation = standards, codes and soft rules; legislation = binding law backed by sanctions. They can diverge.

Consequentialism

An action is right if it produces the best overall outcomes; judges by results (e.g. utilitarianism).

Deontology

An action is right if it respects duties and rights, regardless of consequences; judges by rules and obligations.

Brussels effect

The tendency for strict EU rules to become global de-facto standards, because firms apply one compliant design worldwide.

EU AI Act

The EU's risk-based AI law: obligations scale from banned "unacceptable" uses down through high-risk, limited and minimal risk.

High-risk AI system

AI in sensitive uses (biometrics, hiring, credit, critical services) subject to strict duties: data quality, logging, human oversight, documentation.

GDPR

The EU's omnibus data-protection regulation, built on principles (minimisation, purpose limitation, accountability…) and enforceable data-subject rights.

Privacy by design

A legal and engineering duty to build data minimisation and security into a system's architecture from the outset, not bolt them on later.

DPIA

Data Protection Impact Assessment — a structured risk analysis required before high-risk personal-data processing.

DSA & DMA

Digital Services Act (illegal content & platform transparency) and Digital Markets Act (competition rules for "gatekeeper" platforms).

Algorithmic bias

Systematic unfairness in model outputs, often inherited from skewed training data; "fairness" itself has competing, incompatible definitions.

Explainability

The ability to understand and justify why a model produced a given decision — essential for contesting automated outcomes.

Black box

A system whose internal reasoning is opaque to users and even builders, making oversight and accountability difficult.

Green algorithms / sustainable AI

Designing and running models to reduce their energy, water and carbon footprint, not just maximise accuracy.

Disinformation & deepfakes

Deliberately false content and AI-generated synthetic media that erode trust in what we see and hear online.

Accountability gap

When responsibility for harm is diffused across developers, deployers and platforms, no single actor is clearly answerable.

Neurorights

Proposed human rights protecting mental privacy and cognitive liberty against brain-reading or brain-altering technology.

Asimov's laws

A classic fictional rule set for robots — deliberately too simple, used to show why real machine-safety rules must be far richer.

Robot tax

A proposed levy on automation to offset job displacement and fund affected workers.

Meaningful human control

The principle that a human must be able to understand, override and be accountable for an autonomous system's actions.

Dark patterns

Manipulative interface designs (pre-ticked boxes, confirmshaming, hard-to-cancel flows) that steer users against their own interest.

Ethical hacking

Authorised security testing; the same techniques are lawful with scope and consent and criminal without them.

Responsible disclosure

Reporting a discovered vulnerability privately to the owner first, allowing a fix before any public release.

IoT & nanotechnology ethics

Concerns raised by pervasive connected sensing and molecular-scale systems: invisible data collection, weak security, environmental impact.

Bibliography

Recommended reading

Three core texts framing technology ethics, digital politics and privacy — annotated, with the sessions each best supports.

Technology Is Not Neutral: A Short Guide to Technology Ethics

Stephanie Hare

A compact, practical case that every design decision embeds values — there is no "neutral" tool. The clearest grounding for the course's opening claim and a model for case analysis.

Best for Sessions 1–2 · 6–7

ISBN 9781907999 · Digital

Future Politics: Living Together in a World Transformed by Tech

Jamie Susskind

Argues that code and platforms increasingly govern our liberty, democracy and justice — "code is law." The big-picture frame for why regulation of CS matters at all.

Best for Sessions 3–4 · 13

ISBN 978019255949 · Digital

Privacy Is Power: Why and How You Should Take Back Control of Your Data

Carissa Véliz

Reframes personal data as power and privacy as a collective good, not just an individual preference. The motivating text for the data-protection and surveillance sessions.

Best for Sessions 5 · 11

ISBN 1473583535 · Digital

Key references & instruments by session

Policies. Behavior, attendance and ethics follow IE University's Code of Conduct, Attendance Policy and Ethics Code; the Program Director may provide further indications.