Ethics, Big Data
Universities in the internet age have begun to collect student’s performance data and use it as a metric to measure a student’s ability to keep on a track that has worked for previous students. The universities collect the data from students from many years to help improve the learning experience of future students so that they may determine a students a current progress in a class and how it compares to others that have preceded them to allow the university to counsel the student if they are falling behind. In “Ethics, Big Data, and Analytics: A Model for Application”(Pistilli, Willis, 2013) the author focuses on the ethical consideration that universities and students are responsible for; it considers the fact that students must have some
…show more content…
responsibility to complete their work and they can not rely just on the data giving them their current performance. In “Big Data on Campus”(Parry, 2012) however, the author is very much for the integration of student data with the university’s systems to help determine a student’s performance compared to other students. I feel that it is better for schools to use the students data, but they should allow for an opt-out process for students that wish to keep their data private and for it not to be used by the system.
Article one, “Ethics, Big Data, and Analytics: A Model for Application”(Pistilli, Willis, 2013) , is a peer reviewed article that presents questions then answers them. The article cites research done by institutions and expands what they accomplished and what this means for other universities. The article then begins to discuss the ethical responsibilities of the schools. The article uses The Potter Box as means to discuss the ethics of the problems. He provides an empirical definition, identifies the values, appeals to the ethical principles, and chooses loyalties as required by The Potter Box. This article uses a scientific view on the way in which schools use students performance data, this allows for the writer to more easily understand the ethical difficulties and solve them.
Article two,“Big Data on Campus”(Parry, 2012) , is an article in The New York Times which discusses the use of digital academic performance through software particularly at Arizona State University. This article begins by discussing the use of a specific piece of software at A.S.U. and the ways in which is alerts students that they are off-track. It then transitions to discussing how universities can use students, current and past, data to determine if they are likely to succeed. It then describes software used by another school that shows in a Netflix type style what courses a student should take next based on their and other’s data, history of their success in similar classes, and degree requirements. The article then cites an opposing view, one that believes that the data that is gathered is not necessarily relevant to the students performance. The article mentions students different views on the self teaching of a system and how it can affect students that prefer a lecture based class rather than a self taught class. It is near the end of the article that it truly begins to discuss the possible ethical dilemmas that are created. This article was more focused on the applied use of the data rather than the theoretical ethical aspects of its use.
The eAdvisor at Arizona State University, pictured below, helps students understand if they are on a path towards success in their class and if they are not it will advise them to meet with their counselor so that they may correct their performance.
It may also require them to change their major if they are off track for too long. Article one feels that this is a great thing and that it leads to a greater percentage of overall completion of a course. Article two however, feels that this could lead to babying the students where they do not need to keep track for what they need to accomplish and that they are losing an education in time management. Article two also feels that the students are adults and they should be responsible for their own time management. I feel that although it may coddle the student some, however students may still need some help to make sure that they are on course. Students may not even realize that they are not doing well and that they are on a path to failure. This system would allow a student to realize that they are not doing well and enable them to correct the …show more content…
issue.
I believe that if you allow for a system to be an opt-out it would allow for a larger dataset for the software to analyze. A larger dataset would allow for the program to have a wider range of possible paths that a student could follow therefore it would be more accurate and allow for a more precise prediction by the software. An opt-out system would also allow students that wish to keep their data separate from this software and would help to dissuade any sense of wrong doing. Similar to the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s study at University of Houston which requires that all students that are in classes that could be included in the study to sign a consent form and either opt-in or be removed from the study. This is because some people fear that their data will not be used in a way that is beneficial to them and some people will fear that they will be directly monitored by it and will not remain anonymous. Therefore by allowing people that do not wish to participate to withdraw from the system they are protected from these fears. The reason for having an opt-out over an opt-in would be that if it were an opt-in very few people would know that the program exists, and it is highly possible that those that are aware are the ones that would have opted-out of the program, and therefore if very few people know about the program and even less people sign up for it there would be an insignificantly very small dataset for the program to analyze and therefore the results would very inaccurate and therefore the percentage of people that utilize it would be even less because it is not useful which results in a cycle ending in the software not being used at all.
Article 2 points out a significant worry that many people hold: what are they doing with my data?
Universities are able to track students not academically, but the places they visit, the relationships they have, and other on campus behaviors. They are able to collect student’s location data from phones that are connected to the public wifi and keep trace their location from their card swipes. Companies like Google do similar things. Google maintains a record of all searches you make, all locations that you visit via your phone’s GPS, and through any services that are connected to your Google account. Google uses this information to target ads that are most appealing to you. This is why it is worrisome to many that institutions could have such data. They fear that if the institution could begin to sell the student’s information. Institutions that intend to software that have these capabilities must make it a top priority to secure this information and make the institutions intentions very clear when referring to the private data. Privacy and anonymity should be top priority for any university that intends to utilize these sort of
programs.
In conclusion, universities must make it of utmost importance to keep any data they have secure from any outside entity and must make their intentions with the data extremely clear. The should be used as a device to aid the students and should not be used to monitor the student's’ non-academic activities. Students need to be able to allowed to not participate in the program if they wish, but they should be automatically enrolled in the program so that it is as beneficial as possible to those that choose to use it. By being upfront with the use of the technology and how it may benefit those that choose to utilize it universities and their students can greatly improve the academic performance of all those involved. Finally simply allowing the students to choose to not be included greatly increases the likelihood that the program will be actively be used and will great improve the accuracy and precision with the program’s predictions.
responsibility to complete their work and they can not rely just on the data giving them their current performance. In “Big Data on Campus”(Parry, 2012) however, the author is very much for the integration of student data with the university’s systems to help determine a student’s performance compared to other students. I feel that it is better for schools to use the students data, but they should allow for an opt-out process for students that wish to keep their data private and for it not to be used by the system.
Article one, “Ethics, Big Data, and Analytics: A Model for Application”(Pistilli, Willis, 2013) , is a peer reviewed article that presents questions then answers them. The article cites research done by institutions and expands what they accomplished and what this means for other universities. The article then begins to discuss the ethical responsibilities of the schools. The article uses The Potter Box as means to discuss the ethics of the problems. He provides an empirical definition, identifies the values, appeals to the ethical principles, and chooses loyalties as required by The Potter Box. This article uses a scientific view on the way in which schools use students performance data, this allows for the writer to more easily understand the ethical difficulties and solve them.
Article two,“Big Data on Campus”(Parry, 2012) , is an article in The New York Times which discusses the use of digital academic performance through software particularly at Arizona State University. This article begins by discussing the use of a specific piece of software at A.S.U. and the ways in which is alerts students that they are off-track. It then transitions to discussing how universities can use students, current and past, data to determine if they are likely to succeed. It then describes software used by another school that shows in a Netflix type style what courses a student should take next based on their and other’s data, history of their success in similar classes, and degree requirements. The article then cites an opposing view, one that believes that the data that is gathered is not necessarily relevant to the students performance. The article mentions students different views on the self teaching of a system and how it can affect students that prefer a lecture based class rather than a self taught class. It is near the end of the article that it truly begins to discuss the possible ethical dilemmas that are created. This article was more focused on the applied use of the data rather than the theoretical ethical aspects of its use.
The eAdvisor at Arizona State University, pictured below, helps students understand if they are on a path towards success in their class and if they are not it will advise them to meet with their counselor so that they may correct their performance.
It may also require them to change their major if they are off track for too long. Article one feels that this is a great thing and that it leads to a greater percentage of overall completion of a course. Article two however, feels that this could lead to babying the students where they do not need to keep track for what they need to accomplish and that they are losing an education in time management. Article two also feels that the students are adults and they should be responsible for their own time management. I feel that although it may coddle the student some, however students may still need some help to make sure that they are on course. Students may not even realize that they are not doing well and that they are on a path to failure. This system would allow a student to realize that they are not doing well and enable them to correct the …show more content…
issue.
I believe that if you allow for a system to be an opt-out it would allow for a larger dataset for the software to analyze. A larger dataset would allow for the program to have a wider range of possible paths that a student could follow therefore it would be more accurate and allow for a more precise prediction by the software. An opt-out system would also allow students that wish to keep their data separate from this software and would help to dissuade any sense of wrong doing. Similar to the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s study at University of Houston which requires that all students that are in classes that could be included in the study to sign a consent form and either opt-in or be removed from the study. This is because some people fear that their data will not be used in a way that is beneficial to them and some people will fear that they will be directly monitored by it and will not remain anonymous. Therefore by allowing people that do not wish to participate to withdraw from the system they are protected from these fears. The reason for having an opt-out over an opt-in would be that if it were an opt-in very few people would know that the program exists, and it is highly possible that those that are aware are the ones that would have opted-out of the program, and therefore if very few people know about the program and even less people sign up for it there would be an insignificantly very small dataset for the program to analyze and therefore the results would very inaccurate and therefore the percentage of people that utilize it would be even less because it is not useful which results in a cycle ending in the software not being used at all.
Article 2 points out a significant worry that many people hold: what are they doing with my data?
Universities are able to track students not academically, but the places they visit, the relationships they have, and other on campus behaviors. They are able to collect student’s location data from phones that are connected to the public wifi and keep trace their location from their card swipes. Companies like Google do similar things. Google maintains a record of all searches you make, all locations that you visit via your phone’s GPS, and through any services that are connected to your Google account. Google uses this information to target ads that are most appealing to you. This is why it is worrisome to many that institutions could have such data. They fear that if the institution could begin to sell the student’s information. Institutions that intend to software that have these capabilities must make it a top priority to secure this information and make the institutions intentions very clear when referring to the private data. Privacy and anonymity should be top priority for any university that intends to utilize these sort of
programs.
In conclusion, universities must make it of utmost importance to keep any data they have secure from any outside entity and must make their intentions with the data extremely clear. The should be used as a device to aid the students and should not be used to monitor the student's’ non-academic activities. Students need to be able to allowed to not participate in the program if they wish, but they should be automatically enrolled in the program so that it is as beneficial as possible to those that choose to use it. By being upfront with the use of the technology and how it may benefit those that choose to utilize it universities and their students can greatly improve the academic performance of all those involved. Finally simply allowing the students to choose to not be included greatly increases the likelihood that the program will be actively be used and will great improve the accuracy and precision with the program’s predictions.