New Brock research and initiatives are helping to ensure educational technology enhances the student experience rather than creating barriers or widening inequities.<\/p>\n
The University’s recently released Ethical Framework for Educational Technologies<\/a> is designed to guide faculty and staff as they procure, develop and deploy digital tools to facilitate learning.<\/p>\n \u201cThis cuts to the core of the purpose of higher education: to aid and lead societal transformation, to inform, to educate, to be driven by evidence-based practice and to steer toward a more just future that builds a better world,\u201d says Vice-Provost, Teaching and Learning Rajiv Jhangiani, who led the development of the framework.<\/p>\n Drawing from the values prioritized within Brock\u2019s Academic Strategic Plan<\/a>, the framework\u00a0includes 11 considerations for assigning a technology to students. Examples of these tools include videos, quizzing or homework platforms, and open educational resources.<\/p>\n \u201cThere\u2019s potential to do real harm with the best of intention and, as a sector, there has been a tendency to be reactive after procuring technologies that are determined to be ableist or that reinforce systemic inequalities and racial biases,\u201d Jhangiani says. \u201cInstead of looking only at compliance when we’re procuring, deploying or renewing technologies, we need to set a higher standard with these parameters being the floor and not the ceiling of ethical considerations related to these technologies.\u201d<\/p>\n Karen Louise Smith, Associate Professor in the Department of Communication, Popular Culture and Film, was recently awarded a 2025 Chancellor\u2019s Chair in Teaching Excellence<\/a> to advance her work on ethical educational technology.<\/p>\n Distributed by the Centre for Pedagogical Innovation, the three-year grants allow chair-holders to undertake projects designed to advance teaching and learning practices.<\/p>\n \u201cStudent voices are incredibly important to move towards raising the bar for ethics in institutions,\u201d she says.<\/p>\n Another dimension of Smith\u2019s project examines what she calls \u201cdata frictions,\u201d or the tensions between different values as data is processed and used for multiple purposes in an educational setting.<\/p>\n \u201cA technology collecting voice data may be very important for accessibility purposes, but instructors may have concerns about intellectual property rights or the potential to be spoofed or turned into a deep fake,\u201d she says. \u201cWe need to consider all of these factors when we think about how data is collected and processed. Success, for this kind of research, involves constructively addressing important needs simultaneously.\u201d<\/p>\n Smith says consumers and organizations have the power to influence practice and policy by making informed choices about educational technologies, such as those recommended in the ethical framework.<\/p>\n \u201cIt\u2019s sometimes a choice faculty members make to either introduce students to a commercially provided product or opt for an open-source version,\u201d she says. \u201cIn my third-year Digital Culture course, for example, I\u2019m making a point to use the Wiki Education platform<\/a> and introduce students to the open community of Wikipedia in the hopes that, in addition to learning about user experience research, they\u2019ll also learn about participatory culture and practice those values in their learning activities.\u201d<\/p>\n