User:Leighblackall/An ethical framework for ubiquitous learning



Read the current draft on Google Docs

This is a work in progress, perpetually it would seem... The first draft was completed 31 May 2011, and feedback is always sought openly from anyone with interest. Comments are recorded on the discussion page, and are being incorporated into the work below. For continuing developmental notes, feedback and review, please see the notes below and the the discussion page.

Leighblackall (talk) 00:09, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Abstract
Ubiquitous learning has come to mean learning which is mediated by pervasive computing devices and digital media. This paper considers ubiquitous learning as a deliberate process with or without computing devices or digital media. An ethical framework is offered, for considering ubiquitous learning more holistically, and as a way for technology and other concerns to be determined by ethics. It follows David Holgrem’s format used to popularise Permaculture design, and draws from the theories and critiques of Ivan Illich, Neil Postman, Jean Lave and Etienne Wenger, Christopher Alexander and colleagues, Richard Stallman and others. A range of present day examples of projects and initiatives are used to show how such an ethical approach to ubiquitous learning is being realised.

Keywords: Ubiquitous learning, networked learning, ethics, peripheral participation, situationism, Illich

Developments

 * 9 August 2017 In preparation for a talk in Seoul, where I will try to continue this project into a paper called Humanist technology, I searched "Humanist Technology" and came across a valuable blog post by Michael Sacasas called Humanist technology criticsm compiled in 2015. In it he cites a good number of significant works across a 200 year period that have contributed to the question around technology and humanity. IN the end of the post he attempts a distillation of those works into a set of 5 principles that should be built into my project here:
 * "That said, I would suggest that a humanist critique of technology entails a preference for technology that:
 * (1) operates at a humane scale, 
 * (2) works toward humane ends, 
 * (3) allows for the fullest possible flourishing of a person’s capabilities, 
 * (4) does not obfuscate moral responsibility, and 
 * (5) acknowledges certain limitations to what we might quaintly call the human condition.

Mike Ananny, Kate Crawford] First Published December 13, 2016], notes to follow...
 * 20 July 2017 Connecting Data and Power, as a Learning Analytics CoP forms at RMIT and the possibility of using morphing this Ethical Framework into something relating to Data
 * 21 February 2017 On discovering a range of new features in the web service ResearchGate, I returned to this project to do a quick edit and upload it as a Working Paper and project.
 * 16 December 2016 After Joyce Seitzinger mentioned Paul Prinsloo's work interrogating there ethics of data, I had a brief exchange with Paul on his blog post Decolonising the collection, analyses and use of student data: A tentative exploration/proposal then through Twitter, Paul offered a link to [http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1461444816676645 Seeing Without Knowing: Limitations of the transparency ideal and its application to algorithmic accountability
 * October 2014: I cited this work, along with the Proposal for Intellectual Property Policy and Open Education Practices in a submission to La Trobe University's Future Ready restructure - where they were apparently seeking critical thinkers to help review and shape new operating principles. Because of this submission, I'm picking up the editing after a year or more away.
 * Rick Hayes has introduced me to a number of philosophers that I'll eventually get to look through, but Albert Borgmann is sticking, and his book Technology and the Character of Contemporary Life: A Philosophical Inquiry may need to be incorporated into this work.
 * La Trobe University sends out a communication to all staff referring to the new legislation on data privacy. In that is a reference to an "international benchmark" of 7 principles called Privacy by Design. I need to consider these in this project.


 * 29 June 2013: Work in progress presented to the 2013 IEEE International Symposium on Technology and Society
 * 31 May 2011: Reviewed edit of first draft completed
 * 25 May 2011: Peer review of first draft completed
 * 4 May 2011: (approximate date) First draft seeking peer review