While ethics has been an under-researched area in educational technology, it is receiving current recognition as a critical focus for inquiry and development. In this chapter, we review the contribution of ethics as part of the history of professionalization of the field, the development of a code of ethics for the profession, and contemporary ethics issues like cultural competence, intellectual property, accessibility and universal design, critical theory in educational technology, system ethics, and social responsibility of professionals. In addition, this chapter presents major theoretical and philosophical models for ethics that pertain specifically to technology in educational systems along with implications of research from other fields exploring the integration of ethics into policy, standards, and higher education curricula. Existing research on ethics in educational technology programs suggests a very low level of integration in such domains at present; findings from a survey of the curricular landscape and implications for future research and development are discussed along with consideration of ethics as a foundational component not only to professional standards, practices, and leadership, but also to education policy, as we highlight the role of faculty and graduate programs, practicing professionals, and scholarly associations in shaping future directions and research in this emerging domain.
- Professional ethics
- Ethics as design
- Ethics across the curriculum
- Social responsibility
- Conative domain
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use onlyLearn about institutional subscriptions
The Smithsonian exhibit “Why Design Now?” as part of their National Design Triennial features a host of examples across disciplines that further reflect this intersection of design and ethics. (McCarty, Lupton, McQuaid, & Smith, 2010)
Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET). (2009). Criteria for accrediting applied science programs. Retrieved online May 11, 2011, from http://www.abet.org/Linked%20Documents-UPDATE/Criteria%20and%20PP/R001%2010-11%20ASAC%20Criteria%2011-9-09.pdf
Alrich, A. (2008). Framing the cultural training landscape: Phase I findings. Alexandria, VA: Institute for Defense Analyses. Retrieved online March 4, 2012, from http://www.deomi.org/CulturalReadiness/documents/IDADoc.pdf
Anderson, R. (1977). The notion of schemata and the educational enterprise: General discussion of the conference. In R. C. Anderson, R. J. Spiro, & W. E. Montague (Eds.), Schooling and the acquisition of knowledge (pp. 415–431). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Andrews, C. J. (2006, Spring). Practicing technological citizenship. IEEE Technology and Society Magazine, 4–5.
*Barbour, I. (1993). Ethics in an age of technology: The Gifford Lectures (Vol. 2). San Francisco, CA: Harper Collins.
Besterfield-Sacre, M., Shuman, L., Wolfe, H., Atman, C. J., McGourty, J., Miller, R., et al. (2000). Defining the Outcomes: A framework for EC 2000. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Education, 43(2), 100–110.
Carlson, W. B. (2005). Technology in world history (Vol. 1–7). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Cuban, L. (1986). Teachers and machines: The classroom use of technology since 1920. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Cuban, L. (2003). Oversold and underused: Computers in the classroom, 1980–2000. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Davies, I. (1978). Educational technology: Archetypes, paradigms and models. In J. Hartley & I. Davies (Eds.), Contributions to educational technology (Vol. 2, pp. 9–29). London: Kogan Page.
Davies, I. (1996). Educational technology: Archetypes, paradigms and models. In D. Ely & T. Plomp (Eds.), Classic writings on instructional technology (pp. 15–30). Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited.
*Davis, M. (1999). Ethics and the university. London: Routledge.
Dean, P. J. (1993). A selected review of the underpinnings of ethics for human performance technology professionals—Part one: Key ethical theories and research. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 6(4), 3–32.
Dean, P. J. (1999). The relevance of standards and ethics for the human performance technology profession. In H. Stolovitch & E. Keeps (Eds.), Handbook of human performance technology (2nd ed., pp. 698–712). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Downey, G., Lucena, J., Moskal, B., Parkhurst, R., Bigley, T., Hays, C., et al. (2006). The globally competent engineer: Working effectively with people who define problems differently. Journal of Engineering Education, 95(2), 107–122.
Ely, D., & Plomp, T. (1996). Classic writings on instructional technology. Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited.
Endicott, L., Bock, T., & Narvaez, D. (2003). Moral reasoning, intercultural development, and multicultural experiences: Relations and cognitive underpinnings. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 27, 403–419.
Ferguson, K. (2012). Everything is a remix, Part 4. Retrieved February 25, 2012, from http://www.everythingisaremix.info/everything-is-a-remix-part-4-transcript/
Finn, J. D. (1953). Professionalizing the audio-visual field. Audio-visual Communication Review, 1(1), 6–18.
Finn, J. D. (1962). A walk on the altered side. Phi Delta Kappan, 44(1), 29–34.
Finn, J. D. (1996a). A walk on the altered side. In D. Ely & T. Plomp (Eds.), Classic writings on instructional technology (pp. 47–56). Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited.
Finn, J. D. (1996b). Professionalizing the audio-visual field. In D. Ely & T. Plomp (Eds.), Classic writings on instructional technology (pp. 231–241). Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited.
Fletcher, V. (2002). Universal design, human-centered design for the 21st Century. http://humancentereddesign.org/resources/universal-design-human-centered-design-21st-century. Accessed April 3, 2013.
Guerra, I. (2001). A study to identify key competencies for performance improvement professionals. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Florida State University.
Guerra, I., & Rodriguez, G. (2005). Educational planning and social responsibility: Eleven years of mega planning at the Sonora Institute of Technology (ITSON). Performance Improvement Quarterly, 18(3), 56–64.
Hammer, M. R., Bennett, M. J., & Wiseman, R. (2003). The intercultural development inventory: A measure of intercultural sensitivity. In M. Paige (Guest Ed.), International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 27, 421–443.
Harrington, S. J. (1991). What corporate America is teaching about ethics. The Executive, 5, 1–12.
Healy, J. (1990). Endangered minds: Why our children don’t think. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.
Healy, J. (1999). Failure to connect: How computers affect our children’s minds—And what we can do about it. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.
Hitchens, H. (1970). Six characteristics in search of a profession: Two. Audiovisual Instruction, 15(4), 120.
INEE Working Group on Education and Fragility. (2011). Understanding education’s role in fragility: Synthesis of four situational analyses of education and fragility: Afghanistan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Cambodia, and Liberia. Paris, France: International Institute for Educational Planning (IIEP).
Jesiek, B., Borrego, M., & Beddoes, K. (2010). Advancing global capacity for engineering education research: relating research to practice, policy and industry. European Journal of Engineering Education, 35(2), 117–134.
Kaufman, R. (1977). Needs assessment: Internal and external. Journal of Instructional Development, 1, 5–8.
Kaufman, R. (1996). Needs assessment: Internal and external. In D. Ely & T. Plomp (Eds.), Classic writings on instructional technology (pp. 111–118). Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited.
*Kaufman, R. (2000). Mega planning: Practical tools for organizational success. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Kaufman, R. (2006). Change, choices, and consequences: A guide to mega thinking and planning. Amherst, MA: HRD Press.
Kaufman, R., Corrigan, R., & Johnson, D. (1969). Towards educational responsiveness to society’s needs: A tentative utility model. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 3, 151–157.
Kohlberg, L. (1969). Stage and sequence: The cognitive-developmental approach to socialization. In D. A. Goslin (Ed.), Handbook of socialization theory and research. Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.
Kolbe, K. (1990). The conative connection: Acting on instinct. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Kuzma, J., & Tanji, T. (2010). Unpackaging synthetic biology: Identification of oversight policy problems and options. Regulation & Governance, 4, 92–112.
Leslie, K. C., Low, R., Jin, P., & Sweller, J. (2012). Redundancy and expertise reversal effects when using educational technology to learn primary school science. Educational Technology Research and Development, 60(1), 1–13.
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.
Mace, R. L., Hardie, G. J., & Plaice, J. P. (1991). Accessible environments: Toward universal design. In W. F. E. Preiser, J. C. Vischer, & E. T. White (Eds.), Design intervention: Toward a more humane architecture (pp. 155–176). New York, NY: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
McDougall, W. (1923). An outline of psychology. London: Methuen.
McCarty, C., Lupton, E., McQuaid, M., & Smith, C. (2010). Why design now? National Design Triennial. New York, NY: Cooper-Hewitt, National Design Museum, Smithsonian Institution.
Moore, S. L. (2005). The social impact of a profession: An analysis of factors influencing ethics and the teaching of social responsibility in educational technology programs. Doctor of Philosophy dissertation, University of Northern Colorado.
Moore, S. L. (2007). Universal design for learning: Presuming competence by design. A tutorial for systems, environment, curricular and materials design in learning systems. Retrieved March 20, 2012, from http://www.unco.edu/cetl/UDL/
*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.
*Moore, S. L. (2010). Ethics by design: Strategic thinking and planning for exemplary performance, responsible results, and societal accountability. Amherst, MA: HRD Press.
Moore, S. L. (in press). Design that matters: Ethics of technology in education (temporary title). New York, NY: Routledge/Taylor & Francis.
Moore, S. L., Ellsworth, J., & Kaufman, R. (2008). Objectives: Are they useful? A quick assessment. Performance Improvement, 47(7), 41–47.
Moore, S. L., Ellsworth, J., & Kaufman, R. (2011). Visions and missions: Are they useful? A quick assessment. Performance Improvement, 50(6), 15–24.
Moore, S., May, D., & Wold, K. (2012). Developing cultural competency in engineering through transnational distance learning. In R. Hogan (Ed.), Transnational distance learning and building new markets for universities (pp. 210–228). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
National Education Association. (1975). Code of ethics of the education profession. Retrieved June 19, 2012, from http://www.nea.org/home/30442.htm
Neeley, K. (2010). Toward an integrated view of technology. In K. A. Neeley (Ed.), Technology & democracy: A socio-technical systems analysis (pp. 37–45). San Diego, CA: Cognella.
Ormrod, J. E. (1999). Human learning (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice Hall.
Pinch, T. J., & Bijker, W. E. (1984). The social construction of facts and artefacts: Or, how the sociology of science and the sociology of technology might benefit each other. Social Studies of Science, 14, 399–441.
Quintilian. (2006). Institutes of oratory. In L. Honeycutt (Ed.), (J. S. Watson, Trans.). Retrieved March 3, 2012, from http://rhetoric.eserver.org/quintilian/. (Original work published 1856).
*Reeves, T. (2006). How do you know they are learning?: The importance of alignment in higher education. International Journal of Learning Technology, 2(4), 294–309.
Reeves, T. C. (2011). Can educational research be both rigorous and relevant? Educational Designer, 1(4), 1–24.
Roberts, S. (2003). Instructional design and accessibility: Cognitive curb cuts. Retrieved March 3, 2012, from http://www.aect.org/Divisions/DDseries.htm
Rose, D., & Meyer, A. (2002). Teaching every student in the digital age: Universal design for learning. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Scharff, R., & Dusek, V. (Eds.). (2003). Philosophy of technology: The technological condition, an anthology. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
Seels, B., & Richey, R. (1994). Instructional technology: The definition and domains of the field. Washington, DC: Association for Educational Communications and Technology.
Slatin, J. M., & Rush, S. (2003). Maximum accessibility: Making your website more usable for everyone. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
Sparrow, R., & Sparrow, L. (2006). In the hands of machines? The future of aged care. Minds and Machines, 16, 141–161.
Stolovitch, H., Keeps, E., & Rodrigue, D. (1999). Skill sets, characteristics, and values for the human performance technologist. In H. Stolovitch & E. Keeps (Eds.), Handbook of human performance technology (2nd ed., pp. 651–697). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Strijbos, S. (1998). Ethics and the systemic character of modern technology. Techne: Journal for the Society for Philosophy and Technology, 3(4), 1–15.
Trevino, L. (1987). The influences of vicarious learning and individual differences on ethical decision making in the organization: An experiment. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Texas A&M University.
Trevino, L. (1992). Moral reasoning and business ethics: Implications for research, education, and management. Journal of Business Ethics, 11, 445–459.
Warschauer, M. (2003). Technology and social inclusion: Rethinking the digital divide. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
*Watkins, R., Leigh, D., & Kaufman, R. (2000). A scientific dialogue: A performance accomplishment code of professional conduct. Performance Improvement, 39(4), 17–22.
Weaver, G. R. (1999). Compliance and values oriented ethics programs: Influences on employee’s attitudes and behavior. Business Ethics Quarterly, 9, 315–335.
Welliver, P. (Ed.). (2001). A code of professional ethics: A guide to professional conduct in the field of educational communications and technology. Bloomington, IN: Association for Educational Communications & Technology.
WestEd. (2002). Investing in technology: The learning return. Retrieved March 3, 2012, from http://www.wested.org/online_pubs/po-02-01.pdf
*Whitbeck, C. (1996). Ethics as design: Doing justice to moral problems. The Hastings Center Report, 26(3), 9–16.
Wiley, D. (2010). The open future: Openness as catalyst for an educational reformation. EDUCAUSE Review, 45(4), 14–20.
Yeaman, A. (2004). Professional ethics for technology. TechTrends, 48(2), 11–15.
*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). New York, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Yeaman, A., Koetting, R., & Nichols, R. (1994). Critical theory, cultural analysis, and the ethics of educational technology as social responsibility. Educational Technology, 34(2), 5–13.
We would like to thank Heather Tillberg-Webb, Lesley University, for conversations about access and the history of evolution around this construct that contributed to the section on access.
Editors and Affiliations
© 2014 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Moore, S.L., Ellsworth, J.B. (2014). Ethics of Educational Technology. In: Spector, J., Merrill, M., Elen, J., Bishop, M. (eds) Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-3185-5_10
Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-1-4614-3184-8
Online ISBN: 978-1-4614-3185-5