Advertisement

Learning Analytics and Its Paternalistic Influences

  • Kyle M. L. Jones
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10296)

Abstract

Learning analytics is a technology that employs paternalistic nudging techniques and predictive measures. These techniques can limit student autonomy, may run counter to student interests and preferences, and do not always distribute benefits back to students–in fact some harms may actually accrue. The paper presents three cases of paternalism in learning analytics technologies, arguing that paternalism is an especially problematic concern for higher education institutions who espouse liberal education values. Three general recommendations are provided that work to promote student autonomy and choice making as a way to protect against risks to student academic freedom.

Keywords

Educational technology Learning Analytics Ethics Autonomy Paternalism Student academic freedom Liberal education 

References

  1. 1.
    Siemens, G.: Learning analytics: envisioning a research discipline and a domain of practice. In: Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge, USA, pp. 4–8 (2012)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Rubel, A., Jones, K.M.L.: Student privacy in learning analytics: an information ethics perspective. Inf. Soc. 32(2), 143–159 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Prinsloo, P., Slade, S.: Student vulnerability, agency and learning analytics: an exploration. J. Learn. Analytics 3(1), 159–182 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sclater, N.: Developing a code of practice for learning analytics. J. Learn. Analytics 3(1), 16–42 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Willis, J.E. III: Learning analytics and ethics: a framework beyond utilitarianism. EDUCAUSE Rev. (2014). http://er.educause.edu/articles/2014/8/learning-analytics-and-ethics-a-framework-beyond-utilitarianism. Accessed 11 Oct 2016
  6. 6.
    Dworkin, G.: Paternalism. Monist 56, 64–84 (1972)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dworkin, G.: Paternalism. Stanf. Encycl. Philos. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/paternalism/. Accessed 11 Oct 2016
  8. 8.
    Svendsen, L.: A Philosophy of Freedom. Reaktion Books, London (2014)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sunstein, C.R., Thaler, R.H.: Libertarian paternalism is not an oxymoron. Univ. Chic. Law Rev. 70(4), 1159–1202 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Thaler, R.H., Sunstein, C.R.: Libertarian paternalism. Am. Econ. Rev. 93(2), 175–179 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Thaler, R.H., Sunstein, C.R.: Nudge: Improving Decisions about Health, Wealth, and Happiness. Penguin, New York (2008)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Thaler, R.H., Sunstein, C.R., Balz, J.P.: Choice architecture. In: Shafir, E. (ed.) The Behavioral Foundations of Public Policy, pp. 428–439. Princeton University Press, Princeton (2012)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Millar, J.: Technology as moral proxy: autonomy and paternalism by design. IEEE Technol. Soc. Mag. 34, 47–55 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hofmann, B.: Technological paternalism: on how medicine has reformed ethics and how technology can refine moral theory. Sci. Eng. Ethics 9(3), 343–352 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Carmen, C., Mizzi, P.J.: The case for nudge analytics. EDUCAUSE Rev. http://er.educause.edu/articles/2010/12/the-case-for-nudge-analytics. Accessed 12 Oct 2016
  16. 16.
    Parry, M.: Big data on campus. New York Times (2012). http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/22/education/edlife/colleges-awakening-to-the-opportunities-of-data-mining.html. Accessed 12 Oct 2016
  17. 17.
    Slade, S., Prinsloo, P.: Learning analytics: ethical issues and dilemmas. Am. Behav. Sci. 57(10), 1509–1528 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ferguson, R.: Learning analytics: drivers, developments and challenges. Int. J. Technol. Enhanced Learn. 4(5/6), 304–317 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Frankfort, J., Salim, K., Carmean, C.: Analytics, nudges, and learner persistence. EDUCAUSE Rev. http://www.educause.edu/ero/article/analytics-nudges-and-learner-persistenc. Accessed 12 Oct 2016
  20. 20.
    Goldstein, P.J., Katz, R.N.: Academic analytics: the uses of management information and technology in higher education. https://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ers0508/rs/ers0508w.pdf. Accessed 12 Oct 2016
  21. 21.
    Picciano, A.G.: The evolution of big data and learning analytics in American higher education. J. Asynchronous Learn. Netw. 16(3), 9–20 (2012)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Bessen, J.: Employers aren’t just whining – the “skills gap” is real. Harv. Bus. Rev. (2014). https://hbr.org/2014/08/employers-arent-just-whining-the-skills-gap-is-real/. Accessed 12 Oct 2016
  23. 23.
    Bienkowski, M., Feng, M., Means, B.: Enhancing teaching and learning through educational data mining and learning analytics: an issue brief (2012). http://tech.ed.gov/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/edm-la-brief.pdf. Accessed 12 Oct 2016
  24. 24.
    Bothwell, E.: US dominance in the World University Rankings 2015–16. Time High. Educ. (2015). https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/big-beasts-strive-to-thrive-in-shifting-environment. Accessed 12 Oct 2016
  25. 25.
    Austin Peay State University: Degree Compass and my future. http://www.apsu.edu/academic-affairs/degree-compass-and-my-future. Accessed 12 Oct 2016
  26. 26.
    Belkin, D.: Cracking down on skipping class. Wall Street J. (2015). http://www.wsj.com/articles/cracking-down-on-skipping-class-1421196743
  27. 27.
    Chen, J., Lin, T.: Class attendance and exam performance: a randomized experiment. J. Econ. Educ. 39(3), 213–227 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Donathan, D.A.: The correlation between attendance, grades, and the nontraditional student. Bus. Educ. Forum 58(1), 45–47 (2003)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Moore, R.: Attendance and performance: how important is it for students to attend class? J. Coll. Sci. Teach. Teaching 32(6), 367–371 (2003)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Macfarlane, B.: The surveillance of learning: a critical analysis of university attendance policies. High. Educ. Q. 67(4), 358–373 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Jantti, M.: Libraries and big data: A new view on impact and affect. In: Atkinson, J. (ed.) Quality and the Academic Library: Reviewing, Assessing and Enhancing Service Provision, pp. 267–273. Chandos Publishing, Cambridge (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Association of College and Research Libraries.: Standards for libraries in higher education. http://www.ala.org/acrl/sites/ala.org.acrl/files/content/standards/slhe.pdf. Accessed 12 Oct 2016
  33. 33.
    Soria, K., Fransen, J., Nackerud, S.: Library use and undergraduate student outcomes: new evidence for students’ retention and academic success. Portal Libr. Acad. 13(2), 147–164 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Wong, S.H.R., Webb, T.D.: Uncovering meaningful correlation between student academic performance and library material usage. Coll. Res. Libr. 72(4), 361–370 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Aspin, D.: Autonomy and education: an integrated approach to knowledge, curriculum and learning in the democratic school. In: Bridges, D. (ed.) Education, Autonomy, and Democratic Citizenship: Philosophy in a Changing World, pp. 248–260. Routledge, New York (1997)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Nussbaum, M.: Liberal education and global community. Lib. Educ. 90(1). https://www.aacu.org/publications-research/periodicals/liberal-education-global-community. Accessed 13 Oct 2016
  37. 37.
    Levinson, M.: The Demands of Liberal Education. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1999)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Bok, D.: Our Underachieving Colleges: A Candid Look at How Much Students Learn and Why they Should be Learning More. Princeton University Press, Princeton (2006)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Indiana University-Indianapolis (IUPUI)IndianapolisUSA

Personalised recommendations