Why ethics?
âąAls PPTX, PDF herunterladenâą
1 gefĂ€llt mirâą814 views
A short presentation outlining ethics and its importance in educational research, especially from the perspective of 'openness'
Empfohlen
Empfohlen
Weitere Àhnliche Inhalte
Was ist angesagt?
Was ist angesagt? (20)
Ăhnlich wie Why ethics?
Ăhnlich wie Why ethics? (20)
Mehr von Robert Farrow
Mehr von Robert Farrow (20)
KĂŒrzlich hochgeladen
KĂŒrzlich hochgeladen (20)
Why ethics?
- 1. Why ethics? Dr. Robert Farrow Institute of Educational Technology The Open University, UK
- 2. Why ethics? Dr. Robert Farrow Institute of Educational Technology The Open University, UK @philosopher1978 @oer_hub
- 5. The field of ethics (or moral philosophy) involves systematizing, defending, and recommending concepts of right and wrong behavior. Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy http://www.iep.utm.edu/ethics/
- 6. What is ethics? We all have moral intuitions and a sense of right and wrong, but can find it hard to explain the basis for these Ethics is the attempt to systematically understand moral experiences; to extract the underlying principles; and to prescribe the rightness or wrongness of actions Essentially, ethics attempts to tell us what we should (or shouldnât) do, but crucially also why we should (or shouldnât) do it Instances of applied ethics (such as professional ethics) can be more like a set of rules that are to be followed
- 7. Ethics has a very long history, beginning with the Ancient Greeks in the Western European tradition. There has been a lot written about it, as you might expect.
- 16. Given this long history, itâs tempting to assume that research ethics also has a long history. But there wasnât really any formal discourse about research ethics until after Word War II.
- 17. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jD-YCDE_5yw Post World War II, war crimes trials produces Nuremberg Code (1947) for research involving human subjects Belmont Report (1979) sets out the principles of ethical research & still acts as basis for experimental research Criticised by Shore (2006) for failure to recognize difference (gender, ethnicity, culture, geography, etc)
- 18. Itâs not just about getting your project signed off by the ethics committee. You have to be constantly thinking about the ethical implications of your practice throughout the research process.
- 19. To find out whether the psychological states of its users can be manipulated Facebook ran a study which involved showing users either only âpositiveâ or ânegativeâ status updates and seeing whether this would affect their mood (it did). Expert opinion is divided over the acceptability of Facebookâs actions. âą What are our expectations of use of online information? âą Can we reasonably consent to our own harm? âą What role is technology playing in the pedagogical situation; of what should we be aware? âą Mirror with ethical responsibilities around distance learning Facebook: âEmotional Contagionâ Study
- 20. So what difference might open be making?
- 21. Increased risk?
- 22. â[T]he information society has been brought about by the fastest growing technology in history [âŠ] No previous generation has ever been exposed to such an extraordinary acceleration of technical power over reality, with corresponding social changes and ethical responsibilitiesâ Prof. Luciano Floridi (Philosopher of Technology)
- 24. The ethics of open education âWhen educational materials can be electronically copied and transferred around the world at almost no cost, we have a greater ethical obligation than ever before to increase the reach of opportunity. When people can connect with others nearby or in distant lands at almost no cost to ask questions, give answers, and exchange ideas, the moral imperative to meaningfully enable these opportunities weighs profoundly. We cannot in good conscience allow this poverty of educational opportunity to continue when educational provisions are so plentiful, and when their duplication and distribution costs so little.â (Caswell, Henson, Jensen & Wiley, 2008)
- 25. Farrow, R. (2016). A Framework for the Ethics of Open Education. Open Praxis, 8(2). http://dx.doi.org/10.5944/openpr axis.8.2.291
- 26. A framework for an ethics of open education
- 27. Principles of ethical intervention Respect for participant autonomy (fair treatment; recognizes human dignity) Avoid harm / minimize risk Full disclosure (interventions should be understood by those affected) Privacy & data security (respect for confidentiality) Integrity (meeting recognized professional standards) Independence (objectivity) Informed consent Extracted from BPS, BERA, ESRC guidance
- 28. Modern philosophers usually distinguish⊠⹠Meta-ethics (the meaning and use of ethical language) ⹠Normative Ethics (principles/standards that regulate conduct) Deontological ethics (duties, rules & obligations) Consequentialist ethics (consequences, outcomes) Virtue ethics (development; personal excellence) ⹠Applied Ethics (analysis of specific moral controversies) WikimediaCommons/NotFromUtrecht
- 29. Modern philosophers usually distinguish⊠⹠Meta-ethics (the meaning and use of ethical language) ⹠Normative Ethics (principles/standards that regulate conduct) Deontological ethics (duties, rules & obligations) Consequentialist ethics (consequences, outcomes) Virtue ethics (development; personal excellence) ⹠Applied Ethics (analysis of specific moral controversies) WikimediaCommons/NotFromUtrecht
- 30. A framework for an ethics of open education
- 31. phronÄsis phronÄsis aristotle ethical, practical reason developed through reflective experience
- 32. Conclusion Philosophical ethics is the attempt to rationalise and make systematic our moral intuitions Research ethics systematises these ethical principles into codes of practice We donât have a choice about whether or not to be ethical: ethical demands are made upon us whether we choose to recognise and act upon them
- 33. Conclusion In a research context we have processes and check and balances to make sure that the work we do meets high ethical standards Working in open contexts (e.g. open research data) can mean that risk becomes harder to assess since complexity and uncertainty increase To develop better judgement itâs important to remain ethically engaged with the work youâre doing and take responsibility for the outcomes
- 34. Further reading Blackburn, S. (2003, 2nd ed.). Being Good: A Short Introduction to Ethics. Cambridge University Press. Farrow, R. & Pitt, B. (2013). OER Research Hub Ethics Manual. https://oerknowledgecloud.org/content/oer-research-hub-ethics-manual National Institutes of Health (undated). Protecting Human Research Participants. https://phrp.nihtraining.com/users/login.php Norman, R. (2003, 3rd ed.). The Moral Philosophers: An Introduction to Ethics. Oxford University Press. Singer, P. (ed.) (1994). Ethics. Oxford University Press. OER Hub (2015). Open Research. https://courses.p2pu.org/en/courses/3230/open-research- 2015/
- 35. âą Research into open education and strategies for building worldwide open education research capacity âą Available for research & consultancy (short & long term) âą Current projects include: oerhub.net
Hinweis der Redaktion
- Shore, Nancy (2006). "Re-conceptualizing the Belmont Report: A community-based participatory research perspective". Journal of Community Practice 14 (4): 5â26. doi:10.1300/J125v14n04_02  Â
- This threshold would be unlikely to be high enough for most institutional review boards âespecially given (i) the intention to cause psychological stress, and (ii) the impossibility of a small research team knowing what impact the study would have on such a large sample. Indeed, though the study involved researchers from Cornell University their IRB covered only the analysis of data and not its collection. Furthermore, because the work was for a private company it was believed that different ethical expectations apply: â[b]ecause this experiment was conducted by Facebook, Inc. for internal purposes, the Cornell University IRB determined that the project did not fall under Cornell's Human Research Protection Programâ (Verma, 2014).Â
- Point to make here is that these principles are widely understood, apply in diverse contexts Not a systematic review but full papers shows shared genealogy of research ethics principles back to WWII through Belmont Report, Declaration of Helsinki, etc.
- DUTIES - Unforced and un-incentivized participation; no compulsory questions; translation of survey into local languages for field work OUTCOMES - Some gaps in data due to unanswered questions PERSONAL DEVELOPMENT - Encouraged reflection on how to encourage participation through effective research design
- DUTIES â Follow all relevant institutional review board requirements, especially important in unfamiliar national contexts with different cultural expectations. Apply equal standards for informal learners. OUTCOMES â All names, contact details and identifiable information removed from open data / Collaboration model meant dozens of separate IRB applications; often extremely impractical PERSONAL DEVELOPMENT - The research team developed a stronger sense of how open sharing could introduce new and unforeseen possibilities for harm and acted accordingly / Open research involving institutions should allow extra time for review board
- DUTIES â Explained nature of open licensed dissemination to participants and give participants (e.g. interviewees) option to add criteria to their recordings being released in open OUTCOMES - Some concerns over whether participants would be as forthcoming if they thought their responses might not be anonymous DEVELOPMENT - Raising openness with participants helped clarify expectations for future work / Consciously developing an âethic of openâ as expected practice
- DUTIES â Data was collected and stored securely according to relevant institutional policies / Research instruments were designed to only collect personal information relevant to hypotheses (e.g. gender, disability were included but sexual orientation was not). OUTCOMES - Some countries, states and provinces exhibit differences in legal expectations around cloud storage of data. It was important to comply with the local expectations / Open dissemination strategy required redacting survey data sets of information, which arguably diminishes their value for re-use DEVELOPMENT - Practical experience of conducting research in different contexts makes it easier to prepare subsequent interventions / Participants may become more used to sharing data openly
- DUTIES â As instruments and data were released openly it was important to ensure that the work could be followed and reproduced OUTCOMES - OER Hub is producing a âresearcher packâ which will encourage intended re-use of instruments. An annual survey will provide a set of comparative data points for those re-using questions, etc. / High quality research into OER impact is needed by developing OER movement for planning and advocacy DEVELOPMENT - Researchers were required to engage closely with validity of the research / Improved sense of awareness of the challenges of using open and mixed methodologies
- DUTIES â Research team had a duty both to be independent and to act responsively to actually existing research needs of diverse organisations OUTCOMES - Collaborative research model involved some compromises over research methodology but in return large data sets were acquired / Occasionally a fine line between research objectivity and advocacy DEVELOPMENT - Use of the framework encourages authentic reflection and ownership rather than âbox-tickingâ risk assessment / Importance of projecting a clear and independent research identity; this was partly achieved through social media
- DUTIES â A duty to ensure that all participants understood the intention to openly disseminate results and redacted data; custom consent form OUTCOMES - Information collected from more than 7,000 participants has been disseminated without incident DEVELOPMENT â Deeper reflection on âinformedâ consent and whether this is even possible