Topic 1 Readings – Discussion on Privacy and Modern Learning

As an aspiring teacher myself, I found these readings extremely useful, as I was previously unaware of many of the ethical drawbacks/blindspots that are arising with EdTech companies/data collection and how this relates to online education. It seems I was previous disproportionately exposed to the positive outlooks that are associated with certain integrations of technology/software. After reading Ethical challenges of edtech, big data and personalized learning: twenty-first century student sorting and tracking, I was shocked! I think I knew, at least on some subconscious level, that student privacy could be at risk and tracking could occur but I hadn’t thought too much about it. Student tracking is not a new concept, but in the face of an ever-evolving teaching landscape, I think we need to have the foresight and critical thinking skills to address the embedded discriminatory nature of certain ‘personalized learning’ structures. In a more traditional sense, many of these ‘ability groupings’ were present even in my elementary education, the most memorable being placed into certain reading groups, based on a previous arbitrary reading performance test with our teacher. This practice was extremely odd in that we were assigned a number on our library passes and were not able to check out books above that graded number!! In no time flat bullying and infighting arose between these different groups and, needless to say, this practice didn’t last long. The ‘invisibility’ of tracking via EdTech and the lack of understanding and vagueness in terminology being used is a part of the greater issue at hand. All of this is not to denounce the idea of individual learning needs and the integration of online learning technologies, but rather to emphasize the problematic and frankly unpredictable nature of these systems as we currently understand and operate them. There are many ways in which EdTech companies and their programs are being used safely and effectively – like this course, for example.

I think it is clear, now more than ever, that there is an increasing gap between the more ‘traditional’ education methods and those that are currently unfolding. Prior to the onset of the Covid-19 pandemic/lockdowns, the University of Victoria hosted only a handful of online/blended courses, whereas now, the integration of both face-to-face and online components is more common. Authors Morris and Stommel (2018), as well as Vaughan et al. (2013), speak to the importance of community engagement fueled learning as opposed to the more traditional lecture structure, that is, instructor-based formats. In my opinion, we are accomplishing this community engagement/student-based learning by way of these discussion forms/blog posts within this course. The Morris and Stommel (2018) reading really cemented this notion for me as well as provided some nice insight into the future of pedagogy. I think to some extent that Morris and Stommel’s work is seeking to answer the questions raised in Regan & Jesse’s paper. It’s important to be aware of the effects and repercussions that are associated with new forms of technology and changing classroom dynamics, thus, finding a way to progress safely and inclusively is paramount. One of the more memorable sections from this reading that I would like to explore in more detail is the analogy from the “Pedagogy of the Oppressed” wherein ‘traditional’ education is described as a transactional, one-sided model and how this is changing.   

As previously mentioned, the integration of various types of technological tools and software has proven useful and engaging in classroom settings but they aren’t without issues. As mentioned in the article by ​​Regan & Jesse (2019), there are unforeseen issues relating to ‘privacy’ and student data usage. Privacy, as the authors note, is a loaded word that is often used in an all-encompassing fashion, leading to the misunderstanding and minimization of the responsibility on behalf of EdTech companies. The problem here is not being able to critically address upcoming issues from these systems, as they are veiled through wordy bureaucracy. To reiterate what I stated above, we must review these processes in order to prevent the implementation of systems that allow and encourage division – often resulting from factors such as race, gender, and socioeconomic status, rather than intelligence (in its various forms). The first step in this process is to ensure that we are as clear as possible with our terminology and Regan & Jesse (2019) break down the term ‘privacy’ into 6 clearly defined concerns: information privacy; anonymity; surveillance; autonomy; non-discrimination; and ownership of information.

Taking all of these readings into account, I think I’m left with more questions than answers! I know a few of us are aspiring teachers, so I’d love to hear your thoughts on these readings. How did you feel about the broad use of the term privacy? What are your feelings about EdTech companies and ‘personalized learning’? Thoughts on a community of inquiry  (COI)?  I’d love to hear from those in other disciplines as well, how does this week’s reading material relate to your field? Are there any interesting conclusions you came to, and how are they similar/different to those in the education faculty? Do you like the format of discussions for community engagement (brightspace, packback, wordpress, blogs, etc)? How do you feel about the changing dynamics of ‘traditional’ classrooms and the transition to ‘teaching’ roles as opposed to teacher-student / lecture-based learning? Did anyone else get a dystopian algorithm ‘vibe’ from the readings, that is, were you prompted to question ‘how hard is too far’? We already have certain aspects of predictive policing algorithms in place, and these are deeply flawed and soaked in racist overtones… Do you think full-fledged biased education will return as a result of what we’ve read about this week? Or is there something we can do to prevent this – without swearing off technology altogether?   

Resources:

Morris, S. M., & Stommel, J. (2018). An urgency of teachers: The work of critical digital pedagogy. Hybrid Pedagogy. [Chapter 1: Praxis]

Regan, P., & Jesse, J. (2019). Ethical challenges of edtech, big data and personalized learning: Twenty-first century student sorting and tracking. Ethics and Information Technology, 21(3), 167-179. DOI: 10.1007/s10676-018-9492-2    

Vaughan, N. D., Garrison, D. R., & Cleveland-Innes, M. (2013). Teaching in blended learning environments: Creating and sustaining communities of inquiry. AU Press. [Chapter 1: Conceptual Framework]

Photo by Chuttersnap on Unsplash