Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Inscribing ethics and values in designs for learning: a problematic

  • Development Article
  • Published:
Educational Technology Research and Development Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The exponential growth in technological capability has resulted in increased interest on the short- and long-term effects of designed artifacts, leading to a focus in many design fields on the ethics and values that are inscribed in the designs we create. While ethical awareness is a key concern in many engineering, technology, and design disciplines—even an accreditation requirement in many fields—instructional design and technology (IDT) has not historically focused their view of practice on ethics, instead relying on a more scientistic view of practice which artificially limits the designer’s interaction with the surrounding society through the artifacts and experiences they design. In this paper, we argue for a heightened view of designer responsibility and design process in an ethical framing, drawing on methods and theoretical frameworks of ethical responsibility from the broader design community. We then demonstrate the frequency of ethical concerns that emerge in a content analysis of design cases that document authentic instructional design practice. We conclude with two paths forward to improve instructional design education and research regarding the nature of practice, advocating for increased documentation of design precedent to generatively complicate our notions of the design process, and for the creation and use of critical designs to foreground ethical and value-related concerns in IDT research and practice.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET). (2015). Criteria for accrediting applied science programs. http://www.abet.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/R001-16-17-ASAC-Criteria-10-19-15.pdf. Accessed 01 Dec 2015.

  • Albrechtslund, A. (2007). Ethics and technology design. Ethics and Information Technology, 9(1), 63–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Association for Educational Communications & Technology (AECT). (2007). Code of professional ethics. http://aect.site-ym.com/members/group_content_view.asp?group=91131&id=309963. Accessed 01 Nov 2015.

  • Bardzell, S., & Bardzell, J. (2011). Towards a feminist HCI methodology: Social science, feminism, and HCI. Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 675–684). New York: ACM Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bardzell, J., & Bardzell, S. (2015). Humanistic HCI. San Rafael: Morgan Claypool Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bardzell, J., Bardzell, S., & Stolterman, E. (2014). Reading critical designs: Supporting reasoned interpretations of critical design. Proceedings of the 32nd annual ACM conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 1951–1960). New York: ACM Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Becker, L. C., & Becker, C. B. (Eds.). (2001). Encyclopedia of ethics (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.

  • Boling, E. (2010). The need for design cases: Disseminating design knowledge. International Journal of Designs for Learning, 1(1), 1–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boling, E., & Gray, C. M. (2015). Designerly tools, sketching, and instructional designers and the guarantors of design. In B. Hokanson, G. Clinton, & M. W. Tracey (Eds.), The design of learning experience: Creating the future of educational technology (pp. 109–126). Switzerland: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-16504-2_8.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Boling, E., & Smith, K. M. (2012). The changing nature of design. In R. Reiser & J. V. Dempsey (Eds.), Trends and issues in instructional design and technology (3rd ed., pp. 358–366). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

  • Borgmann, A. (2010). Reality and technology. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 34(1), 27–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borning, A., & Muller, M. (2012). Next steps for value sensitive design. Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 1125–1134). New York: ACM Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. doi:10.1191/1478088706qp063oa.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cahn, S. M., & Markie, P. (1998). Ethics: History, theory and contemporary issues. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, K. (2015). The feminist instructional designer: An autoethnography. In B. Hokanson, G. Clinton, & M. W. Tracey (Eds.), The design of learning experience: Creating the future of educational technology (pp. 231–249). Switzerland: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, K., Schwier, R. A., & Kenny, R. F. (2009). The critical, relational practice of instructional design in higher education: An emerging model of change agency. Educational Technology Research and Development, 57(5), 645–663. doi:10.1007/s11423-007-9061-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, R. C., Yasuhara, K., & Wilson, D. (2012). Care ethics in engineering education: Undergraduate student perceptions of responsibility. In Frontiers in education conference (FIE). Seattle, WA: IEEE. doi:10.1109/FIE.2012.6462370.

  • Carspecken, P. F. (1996). Critical ethnography in educational research: A theoretical and practical guide. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cockton, G. (2005). A development framework for value-centred design. In CHI ‘05 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1292–1295). New York: ACM Press. doi:10.1145/1056808.1056899.

  • Collins, S. (2015). The core of care ethics. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Corbin, J. M., & Strauss, A. L. (2008). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (3rd ed.). Los Angeles: Sage Publications.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Cross, N. (2001). Designerly ways of knowing: Design discipline versus design science. Design Issues, 17(3), 49–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cross, N. (2007). Designerly ways of knowing. Basel: Birkhäuser.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cultural Research in Technology Group (CRIT). (n.d.). Pee Timer (Austin Toombs and Shad Gross, designers). http://crit.soic.indiana.edu/design. Accessed 01 Nov 2015.

  • Damarin, S. K. (1994). Equity, caring, and beyond: Can feminist ethics inform educational technology? Educational Technology, 34(2), 34–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Detweiler, C., Pommeranz, A., & Stark, L. (2012). Methods to account for values in human-centered computing. CHI’12 extended abstracts on human factors in computing systems (pp. 2735–2738). New York, NY: ACM Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • DiSalvo, C. (2012). Adversarial design. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunne, J. (1997). Back to the rough ground: Practical judgment and the lure of technique. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunne, A. (2005). Hertzian tales: Electronic products, aesthetic experience, and critical design. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunne, A., & Raby, F. (2013). Speculative everything: Design, fiction, and social dreaming. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Faiola, A. (2007). The design enterprise: Rethinking the HCI education paradigm. Design Issues, 23(3), 30–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fallman, D. (2011). The new good: Exploring the potential of philosophy of technology to contribute to human-computer interaction. Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 1051–1060). New York: ACM Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferri, G., Bardzell, J., Bardzell, S., & Louraine, S. (2014). Analyzing critical designs: Categories, distinctions, and canons of exemplars. Proceedings of the 2014 conference on designing interactive systems (pp. 355–364). New York: ACM Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Findeli, A. (2001). Rethinking design education for the 21st century: Theoretical, methodological, and ethical discussion. Design Issues, 17(1), 5–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flanagan, M., & Nissenbaum, H. F. (2014). Values at play in digital games. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freire, P. (1970/2000). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: Continuum.

  • Friedman, K. (2012). Models of design: Envisioning a future design education. Visible Language, 46(1/2), 132–153.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, B., & Kahn, P. H., Jr. (2003). Human values, ethics, and design. In J. A. Jacko & A. Sears (Eds.), The human-computer interaction handbook (pp. 1177–1201). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, B., Kahn, P., & Borning, A. (2002). Value sensitive design: Theory and methods. University of Washington Technical Report, 02–12. http://faculty.washington.edu/pkahn/articles/vsd-theory-methods-tr.pdf. Accessed 01 Nov 2015.

  • Gaver, W. W., Bowers, J., Boucher, A., Gellerson, H., Pennington, S., Schmidt, A., et al. (2004). The drift table: Designing for ludic engagement. CHI’04 extended abstracts on human factors in computing systems (pp. 885–900). New York: ACM Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibbons, A. S. (2013). An architectural approach to instructional design. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibbons, A. S., Boling, E., & Smith, K. M. (2014). Instructional design models. In J. M. Spector et al. (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (pp. 607–615). New York, NY: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-1-4614-3185-5_48.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Giddens, A. (1979). Central problems in social theory: Action, structure, and contradiction in social analysis. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice. Cambridge: Harvard Educational Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. New York: Alpine de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gray, C. M., Dagli, C., Demiral-Uzan, M., Ergulec, F., Tan, V., Altuwaijri, A. A., et al. (2015a). Judgment and instructional design: How ID practitioners work in practice. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 28(3), 25–49.

  • Gray, C. M., & Howard, C. D. (2015). Normative concerns, avoided: Instructional barriers in designing for social change. In R. S. Adams, P. Buzzanell, & J. A. Siddiqui (Eds.), Analyzing design review conversations (pp. 241–260). West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gray, C. M., Yilmaz, S., Daly, S., Seifert, C. M., & Gonzalez, R. (2015b). Idea generation through empathy: Reimagining the ‘cognitive walkthrough’. In Proceedings of the ASEE Annual Conference (pp. 26.871.1–26.871.29), Seattle, WA.

  • Harrison, S., Sengers, P., & Tatar, D. (2011). Making epistemological trouble: third-paradigm HCI as successor science. Interacting with Computers, 23(5), 385–392. doi:10.1016/j.intcom.2011.03.005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hart Research Associates. (2015). Falling short? College learning and career success. Conducted on Behalf of the Association of American Colleges and Universities. https://www.aacu.org/sites/default/files/files/LEAP/2015employerstudentsurvey.pdf. Accessed 01 Nov 2015.

  • Holt, J. E. (1997). The designer’s judgement. Design Studies, 18(1), 113–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huber, A. M. (2015). Diminishing the dread: Exploring service learning and student motivation. International Journal of Designs for Learning, 6(1), 1–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ihde, D. (1993). Philosophy of technology: An introduction. New York: Paragon House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Inouye, D. K., Merrill, P. F., & Swan, R. H. (2005). Help: Toward a new ethics-centered paradigm for instructional design and technology. IDT Record. http://www.indiana.edu/~idt/articles/documents/ethics.htm. Accessed 01 Nov 2015.

  • Knobel, C., & Bowker, G. C. (2011). Values in design. Communications of the ACM, 54(7), 26. doi:10.1145/1965724.1965735.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koepfler, J. A., Stark, L., Dourish, P., Sengers, P., & Shilton, K. (2014). Values & design in HCI education. CHI’14 extended abstracts on human factors in computing systems (pp. 127–130). New York: ACM Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kohlberg, L. (1984). The psychology of moral development: The nature and validity of moral stages (Essays on Moral Development, Volume 2). San Francisco: Harper & Row.

  • Krippendorf, K. (2005). The semantic turn: A new foundation for design. Boca Raton: CRC Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lawson, B., & Dorst, K. (2009). Design expertise. Oxford: Architectural Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Le Dantec, C. A., & Do, E. Y. (2009). The mechanisms of value transfer in design meetings. Design Studies, 30(2), 119–137. doi:10.1016/j.destud.2008.12.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Le Dantec, C. A., Poole, E. S., & Wyche, S. P. (2009). Values as lived experience: Evolving value sensitive design in support of value discovery. Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 1141–1150). New York: ACM Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lin, H. (2007). The ethics of instructional technology: Issues and coping strategies experienced by professional technologists in design and training situations in higher education. Educational Technology Research and Development, 55(5), 411–437.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lloyd, P. (2009). Ethical imagination and design. Design Studies, 30(2), 154–168. doi:10.1016/j.destud.2008.12.004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Louw, M., Ansari, A., Bartley, C., & Sanford, C. (2013). Stories in the rock: A design case of an explorable image viewer in a natural history museum. International Journal of Designs for Learning, 4(2), 56–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marcuse, H. (1991). One-dimensional man: Studies in the ideology of advanced industrial society. Boston: Beacon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McDonagh, D. (2015). Design students foreseeing the unforeseeable: Practice-based empathic research methods. International Journal of Education Through Art, 11(3), 421–431. doi:10.1386/eta.11.3.421_1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McPhail, K. (2001). The other objective of ethics education: Re-humanising the accounting profession–A study of ethics education in law, engineering, medicine and accountancy. Journal of Business Ethics, 34(3–4), 279–298. doi:10.1023/A:1012576631990.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moore, S. L. (2009). Social responsibility of a profession: An analysis of faculty perception of social responsibility factors and integration into graduate programs of educational technology. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 22(2), 79–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moore, S. (2014). Ethics and design: Rethinking professional ethics as part of the design domain. In B. Hokanson & A. Gibbons (Eds.), Design in educational technology (pp. 185–204). Switzerland: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-00927-8_11.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Moore, S. L., & Ellsworth, J. B. (2014). Ethics of educational technology. In J. M. Spector, et al. (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (pp. 113–127). New York: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Mulcahy, R. S. (2011). Bottom line: Defining success in the creation of a business simulation. International Journal of Designs for Learning, 2(1), 1–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, H. G., & Stolterman, E. (2012). The design way: Intentional change in an unpredictable world (2nd ed.). Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nichols, R. G. (1994). Searching for moral guidance about educational technology. Educational Technology, 34(2), 40–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norman, E. (1998). The nature of technology for design. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 8(1), 67–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oxman, R. (1999). Educating the designerly thinker. Design Studies, 20(2), 105–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pantazidou, M., & Nair, I. (1999). Ethic of care: Guiding principles for engineering teaching & practice. Journal of Engineering Education, 88(2), 205–212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Papanek, V. (1995). The green imperative: Ecology and ethics in design and architecture. London: Thames and Hudson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Papanek, V. (2005). Design for the real world: Human ecology and social change (2nd ed.). Chicago: Chicago Review Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Papert, S. (1987). A critique of technocentrism in thinking about the school of the future. http://www.papert.org/articles/ACritiqueofTechnocentrism.html. Accessed 01 Nov 2015.

  • Pardo, A., & Siemens, G. (2014). Ethical and privacy principles for learning analytics. British Journal of Educational Technology, 45, 3. doi:10.1111/bjet.12152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petroski, H. (2012). To forgive design: Understanding failure. Cambridge: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Prestopnik, N., & Foley, A. R. (2012). Visualizing the past: The design of a temporally enabled map for presentation (TEMPO). International Journal of Designs for Learning, 3(1), 52–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Racek, J., & Smith, K. M. (2013). A place to play: Teaching communities how to build playgrounds. International Journal of Designs for Learning, 4(1), 1–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riley, D. (2013). Hidden in plain view: Feminists doing engineering ethics, engineers doing feminist ethics. Science and Engineering Ethics, 19(1), 189–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rowland, G. (1992). What do instructional designers actually do? An initial investigation of expert practice. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 5(2), 65–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rowland, G. (1993). Designing and instructional design. Educational Technology Research and Development, 41(1), 79–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwier, R. A., Campbell, K., & Kenny, R. F. (2007). Instructional designers’ perceptions of their agency: Tales of change and community. In M. J. Keppell (Ed.), Instructional design: Case studies in communities of practice (pp. 1–18). Hershey: Information Science Publishing.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Sengers, P., Boehner, K., David, S., & Kaye, J. (2005). Reflective design. CC’05: Proceedings of the 4th decennial conference on critical computing: Between sense and sensibility (pp. 49–58). New York: ACM Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Shilton, K. (2012). Values levers: Building ethics into design. Science, Technology and Human Values, 38(3), 374–397. doi:10.1177/0162243912436985.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shilton, K., Koepfler, J. A., & Fleischmann, K. R. (2014). How to see values in social computing: Methods for studying values dimensions. In Proceedings of the 17th ACM conference on computer supported cooperative work & social computing (CSCW '14) (pp. 426–435). New York, NY: ACM Press. doi:10.1145/2531602.2531625.

  • Simon, H. A. (1996). The sciences of the artificial (3rd ed.). Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slade, S., & Prinsloo, P. (2013). Learning analytics: Ethical issues and dilemmas. American Behavioral Scientist, 57(10), 1510–1529. doi:10.1177/0002764213479366.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smaldino, S. (2008). Classroom strategies for teaching ethics. New Directions for Higher Education, 2008(142), 87–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, K. M. (2010). Producing the rigorous design case. International Journal of Designs for Learning, 1(1), 10–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, K. M., & Boling, E. (2009). What do we make of design? Design as a concept in educational technology. Educational Technology, 49(4), 3–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stolterman, E. (2016). Herbert Marcuse and the “One-dimensional man”. In J. Bardzell, S. Bardzell, & M. Blythe (Eds.), Critical Theory and Interaction Design. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sunderland, M. E., Ahn, J., Carson, C., & Kastenberg, W. (2013). Making ethics explicit: Relocating ethics to the core of engineering education. Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education Conference (pp. 23–26). Washington: ASEE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Toombs, A. L., Bardzell, S., & Bardzell, J. (2015). The proper care and feeding of hackerspaces: Care ethics and cultures of making. Proceedings of the 33rd annual ACM conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 629–638). New York: ACM Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tracey, M. W., & Unger, K. L. (2010). Cross cultural instruction: An instructional design case. International Journal of Designs for Learning, 1(1).

  • Tronto, J. C. (1993). Moral boundaries: A political argument for an ethic of care. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Verbeek, P.-P. (2006). Materializing morality: Design ethics and technological mediation. Science, Technology and Human Values, 31(3), 361–380. doi:10.1177/0162243905285847.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Warschauer, M., & Ames, M. (2010). Can one laptop per child save the world’s poor? Journal of International Affairs, 64(1), 33–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winner, L. (1980). Do artifacts have politics? Daedalus, 109(1), 121–136.

  • Yanchar, S. C., & Gabbitas, B. W. (2011). Between eclecticism and orthodoxy in instructional design. Educational Technology Research and Development, 59(3), 383–398. doi:10.1007/s11423-010-9180-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yamagata-Lynch, L. C., & Luetkehans, L. M. (2014). Longitudinal design case of a university preservice technology integration curriculum shaped by its sociopolitical context. International Journal of Designs for Learning, 5(1), 25–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yeaman, A. R. J. (2004). Professional ethics: The misuse of technology. TechTrends, 48(5), 16–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yeaman, A. R. J., Koetting, J. R., & Nichols, R. G. (1994). Critical theory, cultural analysis and the ethics of educational technology as social responsibility. Educational Technology, 34(2), 5–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Young, P. A. (2008). Integrating culture in the design of ICTs. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(1), 6–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Young, P. A. (2014). Disclosing the design of an african american educational technology: Bridge: A cross culture reading program. International Journal of Designs for Learning, 5(2), 34–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Young, I. (2015). Practical empathy: For collaboration and creativity in your work. New York: Rosenfeld Media.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yusop, F. D., & Correia, A. (2013). On becoming a civic-minded instructional designer: An ethnographic study of an instructional design experience. British Journal of Educational Technology, 45(5), 782–792.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This study was not funded.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Purdue University, 401 North Grant Street, Room 355, West Lafayette, IN, 47907, USA

    Colin M. Gray

  2. Indiana University, 201 North Rose Ave #2124, Bloomington, IN, 47405, USA

    Elizabeth Boling

Authors
  1. Colin M. Gray
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Elizabeth Boling
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Colin M. Gray.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The author declares that they have no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Gray, C.M., Boling, E. Inscribing ethics and values in designs for learning: a problematic. Education Tech Research Dev 64, 969–1001 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-016-9478-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-016-9478-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation