Skip to main content

Grappling with professional ethics in instructional technology by participating in an online service-learning course

Abstract

In this qualitative study, we engaged in a narrative inquiry to examine what graduate students in an online service-learning course grappled with while learning about professional ethics in instructional technology. This study took place in a service-learning partnership between community partners, students, and the course instructor. Students in the course worked collaboratively to address a design problem identified by community partners. Our research question was: In an online graduate-level instructional technology service-learning course, what do participants grapple with when learning about professional ethics through shared experiences? Eighteen students volunteered to participate in this study from three iterations of the course. Data included student narratives shared in synchronous and asynchronous discussions as well as written reflections. Narrative data was analyzed with the constant comparative method (Charmaz in Constructing grounded theory, SAGE Publications, Thousand Oaks, 2014; Corbin & Strauss in Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory, SAGE Publications, Thousand Oaks, 2014) using NVivo 12, a qualitative research data analysis tool. The findings from this study indicated that, while engaging in authentic ethical problem-solving within the context of an online service-learning course, participants grappled with ethical challenges, leadership, reflecting on experiences, legal issues, and social responsibility.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1

References

  • Adolph, C. (2018, November, 14). Amazon lessons from Seattle [Radio Broadcast]. National Public Radio (NPR). https://www.npr.org/2018/11/14/667699227/amazon-lessons-from-seattle

  • Beever, J. (2016). Teaching ethics ecologically: Decision-making through narrative. Teaching Ethics, 16(2), 195–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bradley, C. L., & Saracino, M. (2013). The case for service-learning: Overcoming the obstacles. Journal of Family & Consumer Sciences, 102(2), 41–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bradshaw, A. C., Keller, C. O., & Chen, C.-H. (2003). Reflecting on ethics, ethical codes, and relevance in an international instructional technology community. TechTrends, 47(6), 12–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02763279

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bridge Rail Foundation. (2019). Stopping suicides on the Golden Gate Bridge and elsewhere. http://www.bridgerail.net/

  • Bringle, R., & Hatcher, J. (1995). A service-learning curriculum for faculty. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, 2, 112–122.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bringle, R., Hatcher, J., & McIntosh, R. (2006). Analyzing Morton’s typology of service paradigms and integrity. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, 13(1), 5–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruner, J. S. (1986). Actual minds, possible worlds. Harvard University Press.

  • Bruner, J. S. (1990). Acts of meaning. Harvard University Press.

  • Bruner, J. S. (1991). The narrative construction of reality. Critical Inquiry, 18(1), 1–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bruner, J. S. (2002). Making stories: Law, literature, life. Harvard University Press.

  • Caulkins, C. G. (2015). Bridge over troubled discourse: The influence of the Golden Gate Bridge on community discourse and suicide. Journal of Aggression, Conflict and Peace Research, 7(1), 47–56. https://doi.org/10.1108/JACPR-03-2014-0115

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Charmaz, K. (2014). Constructing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Colby, A., & Sullivan, W. M. (2008). Ethics teaching in undergraduate engineering education. Journal of Engineering Education, 97(3), 327–338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corbin, J. M., & Strauss, A. (2014). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • D’Anjou, P. (2011). An ethics of freedom for architectural design practice. Journal of Architectural Education, 64(2), 141–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, M., Hildt, E., & Laas, K. (2016). Twenty-five years of ethics across the curriculum: An assessment. Teaching Ethics, 16(1), 55–74. https://doi.org/10.5840/tej201633028

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dean, P. J. (1992). Making codes of ethics ‘real.’ Journal of Business Ethics, 11, 285–290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Denzin, N. K. (1989). The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods (3rd ed.). New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. Macmillan.

  • Ehrlich, T. (1996). Forward. In B. Jacoby, (Ed.), Service-learning in higher education: Concepts and practices (pp. xi-xvi). Jossey-Bass.

  • Ertmer, P. A., Quinn, J., & Glazewski, K. D. (2013). The ID caseBook: Case studies in instructional design (4th ed.). London: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eyler, J., & Giles, D. E., Jr. (1999). Where’s the learning in service-learning? Jossey-Bass.

  • Eyler, J., Giles, D. E., Jr., Stenson, C. M., & Gray, C. J. (2001). At a glance: What we know about the effects of service-learning on college students, faculty, institutions and communities, 1993–2000 (3rd ed.). Nashville: Vanderbilt University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Felten, P., & Clayton, P. H. (2011). Service-learning. In W. Buskist & J. E. Groccia (Eds.), Evidence-based teaching: New directions for teaching and learning, 2011(128), 75–84. https://doi.org/10.1002/tl.470

  • Furco, A. (1996). Service-learning: A balanced approach to experiential education. In B. Taylor (Ed.), Expanding boundaries: Serving and learning (pp. 2–6). Corporation for National Service.

  • Fussell, J., & Louie, M. C. (2008). Golden Gate Bridge and Marin County suicide statistics. Bios, 79(4), 171–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gaver, W. W., Beaver, J., & Benford, S. (2003). Ambiguity as a resource for design. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. https://doi.org/10.1145/642611.642653

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giles, D. E., Jr., & Eyler, J. (1994). The theoretical roots of service-learning in John Dewey: Toward a theory of service-learning. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, 1(1), 77–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • González-Monteagudo, J. G. (2011). Jerome Bruner and the challenges of the narrative turn: Then and now. Narrative Inquiry, 21(2), 295–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grasso, D., & Martinelli, D. (2007, March 16). Holistic Engineering. The Chronicle of Higher Education. https://www.chronicle.com/article/Holistic-Engineering/4982

  • Gray, C. M., & Boling, E. (2016). Inscribing ethics and values in designs for learning: A problematic. Educational Technology Research and Development, 64(5), 969–1001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guthrie, K. L., & McCracken, H. (2010). Making a difference online: Facilitating service-learning through distance education. Internet and Higher Education, 13, 153–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howard, J. (2001). Service-learning course design workbook [Special issue]. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning. Edward Ginsberg Center for Community Service Learning, University of Michigan.

  • Jacoby, B. (1996). Service-learning in today’s higher education. In B. Jacoby & Associates (Eds.), Service learning in higher education: Concepts and practices (pp. 3–25). Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.

  • Jacoby, B. (2015). Service-learning essentials: Questions, answers, and lessons learned. Jossey-Bass.

  • Jonassen, D. H. (2011). Learning to solve problems: A handbook for designing problem-solving learning environments. Routledge.

  • Keen, C., & Hall, K. (2009). Engaging with difference matters: Longitudinal student outcomes of co-curricular service-learning programs. The Journal of Higher Education, 80(1), 59–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, J.-H. (2016). Understanding narrative inquiry: The crafting and analysis of stories as research. California: SAGE.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • LeFever, L. (2013). The art of explanation: Making your ideas, products, and services easier to understand. Wiley.

  • McClam, T., Diambra, J. F., Burton, B., Fuss, A., & Fudge, D. L. (2008). An analysis of a service-learning project: Students’ expectations, concerns, and reflections. Journal of Experiential Education, 30(3), 236–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moely, B. E., McFarland, M., Miron, D., Mercer, S., & Ilustre, V. (2002). Changes in students’ attitudes and intentions for civic involvement as a function of service-learning experiences. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, 90(1), 18–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, S. L., & Ellsworth, J. B., et al. (2014). Ethics of educational technology. In J. M. Spector (Ed.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (pp. 113–127). Berlin: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-3185-5_10

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

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

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Norman, D. A. (2002). The design of everyday things. New York: Basic Books Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Brien, K., Wittmer, D., & Ebrahimi, B. P. (2017). Behavioral ethics in practice: Integrating service learning into a graduate business ethics course. Journal of Management Education, 41(4), 599–616.

    Google Scholar 

  • Plante, T. G. (1998). Teaching a course on psychology ethics to undergraduates: An experiential model. Teaching of Psychology, 25(4), 286–287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pless, N., Maak, T., & Stahl, G. (2011). Developing responsible global leaders through international service-learning programs: The Ulysses experience. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 10(2), 237–260.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ritter, B. (2006). Can business ethics be trained? A study of the ethical decision-making process in business students. Journal of Business Ethics, 68(2), 153–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saltmarsh, J. (1997). Ethics, reflection, purpose, and compassion: Community service learning. New Directions for Student Services, (77), 81–93.

  • Stewart, B. L. (2004). Online learning: A strategy for social responsibility in educational access. Internet and Higher Education, 7, 299–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tracy, S. J. (2010). Qualitative quality: Eight “big-tent” criteria for excellent qualitative research. Qualitative Inquiry, 16(10), 837–851. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800410383121

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waples, E., Antes, P., Murphy, A., Connelly, L., & Mumford, S. (2009). A meta-analytic investigation of business ethics instruction. Journal of Business Ethics, 87(1), 133–151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yeaman, A. R. J. (2004). Professional ethics professional ethics for technology. TechTrends, 48(2), 11–15. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02762537

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yeaman, A. R. J., Eastmond, J. N., & Napper, V. S. (2008). Professional ethics and educational technology. In A. Januszewski & M. Molenda (Eds.), Educational technology: A definition with commentary (pp. 283–326). Routledge: Taylor & Francis Group LLC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yusop, F. D., & Correia, A.-P. (2012). The civic-minded instructional designers framework: An alternative approach to contemporary instructional designers’ education in higher education. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(2), 180–190. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2011.01185.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lisa C. Yamagata-Lynch.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix: Ethical leader statement guide

Appendix: Ethical leader statement guide

Overview

You will write a statement to explore and articulate who you are as an ethical instructional technology leader who is committed to designing, developing, and supporting learning environments that are safe, ethical, and accessible for all learners. You will discuss your beliefs, how those beliefs are enacted in your everyday practice, and how you see you would be balancing your personal beliefs and your commitment for continuing to be an ethical instructional technology leader in your future practice.

Statement requirements

Your statement should include the following sections:

  1. 1.

    Title Page: Provide the title of your statement, your name, date, and the word count of your paper excluding the title page and reference list.

  2. 2.

    Introduction: Provide a clear overview, purpose, and plan for your statement. In this introduction state what you plan to accomplish by preparing the statement and what types of discussions the reader can expect from your statement.

  3. 3.

    Ethical Commitments: Provide a discussion about your ethical commitment to others including yourself, employer, clients/students, stakeholders, community, and any other groups that apply to your work/future work situation. Refer to relevant readings, discussions with other participants, and personal experiences that help clarify your arguments to the reader. In this discussion provide reasons to why these commitments are part of your core values as a professional.

  4. 4.

    Enacting Ethical Commitments: Provide reflections on how you currently are enacting your ethical commitments as a professional, and how you plan to enact them for future professional roles you anticipate to take. How would you balance engaging in ethical practice for all and ensuring that individuals are treated ethically? Refer to personal experiences or cases from class discussions/readings/news appropriately to provide a context for the reader to better understand your arguments.

  5. 5.

    Concluding Remarks: Provide a conclusion that explains what you intended to accomplish in this statement, your assessment of how you accomplished them, and impact on your current and future practice.

  6. 6.

    References: Cite sources you included in your statement.

Your statement should be between 2300 and 3000 words double-spaced using 1-inch margins 12-point Times New Roman font excluding title page and references following APA style guide 6th edition. If you exceed the required word count your work will not be read past that point. On the title page please include the exact word count of your document excluding the title page, reference, and appendices.

Relevance to your future work

As a professional at some point in your career you will be presented with ethical dilemmas. You may even be in a position where you need to interpret why a specific situation is an ethical workplace case and make critical recommendations, decisions, or policies in response to that situation. This assignment is designed to prepare you for such a situation by clarifying your personal beliefs and examine how your personal beliefs are likely to interact with your professional responsibilities.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yamagata-Lynch, L.C., Garty, E.R., Hostetter, S.T. et al. Grappling with professional ethics in instructional technology by participating in an online service-learning course. J Comput High Educ 34, 189–210 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-021-09288-w

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-021-09288-w

Keywords

  • Ethics education
  • Instructional design and technology
  • Online learning
  • Narrative analysis