Link to my original topic one blog post: https://jordynbrown.opened.ca/topic-1-post/

‘Showcase’ Blog Post, Week 1:

Before I began in EDCI 339 I had only ever worked in either face-to-face environments or through distributed and closed learning environments both in high school as well as when classes moved online because of the pandemic. During the first week of class, I was not only dealing with personal problems that were stunting my ability to fully participate and grasp concepts that were essential to EDCI 339, but I was also dealing with a range of unknown and new learning environments that I was not confident in, such as Mattermost and building a WordPress blog. As EDCI 339 is only a 4 week course, the first week of learning was imperative, and I found myself struggling to grasp the new concepts and connect with those in my pod project. Because of these challenges, my first weeks blog post was not to the standard I would have liked it. Focusing on the Regan and Jesse (2019) article, I made numerous errors stating that ‘edtech’ was a company rather than a concept relating “to hardware and software designed to enhance teacher-led learning in classrooms and improve students’ education outcomes” (Frankenfield, 2020). I now understand that edtech is a technological concept rather than a company. Luckily I had the support of my amazing pod members who gave constructive criticism on my post so that I could understand these new concepts and learning outcomes in week one more effectively. They provided me with personal knowledge relating to edtech as well as other ways to combat discriminatory practices relating to edtech. I have posted screenshots below of my pod members suggestions to enhance and further my understanding of edtech and the discriminatory practices that can take place within it. 

“As I have been accepted into the post bachelor program for elementary education, learning about digital privacy within schools directly affects my future career. The reading that specifically peaked my interest and that gave me more insight into educational privacy was the Regan & Jesse (2019) article, which discussed the ethical challenges that could arise when working with edtech. One of the most important ethical concerns that does not stop nor start at digital education and privacy is that of discrimination, which is discussed throughout the reading. One of the main concerns with digital learning is that there is no face-to-face way to trace what is happening during each lesson, or each time a child signs in to an edtech program or software. This means that there is huge potential for outside human influence. Unfortunately, with human influence comes human bias, and that can lead to discrimination through tracking children that may have a different “race, ethnicity, gender and class” (Regan & Jesse, 2019, p. 168) background than other students. Whereas my aim in my educational journey is to set and provide a free and equal classroom, there is potential for websites and other online resources to create “more refined, intersectional categories that might discriminate among students in harder to read ways” (Regan & Jesse, 2019, p. 172). What this means is that my ‘aha’ moment during this reading came when I realized that I will one day be responsible for the children that are using edtech. Samuel, another pod member of mine, also brought to my attention that another concern with edtech is the “nuanced ways in which biases and discrimination slip through the cracks.” He continues on to mention that it is extremely hard for educators to be aware of these potential issues because “they are not overt.” That is why it is imperative that we as educators are knowledgeable about ethical concerns that may arise when using edtech. If educators are aware of these potential ethical concerns, they can use “spot check tools” that can bring forward discrimination “against learners, compromise privacy and the learning process.” It is therefore my job and responsibility to be aware of the ethical concerns, such as discrimination, that are associated with online learning. I understand that I need to be the leader and advocate for my classrooms privacy, particularly because “[p]arents do not have adequate information about software packages and tests to ask questions” (Regan & Jesse, 2019, p. 177). I understand that it is my job to attend meetings and understand the policies and politics behind edtech, as being informed is the best and most effective way to ensure that the children in my classroom are safe and protected.

I will take the knowledge that I have learned throughout this reading, as well as what I continue to learn throughout this course, to critically examine various forms of edtech and whether they are the most ethical choice for my classroom. Regan & Jesse (2019) identify major concerns that cause me to question whether such resources have the best interests of the children at heart, and this is something I firmly believe needs to be at the forefront of every educators minds, especially when dealing with a delicate topic such as digital privacy and ethical concerns.”

Further on in week three of EDCI 339, we learned about digital redlining, which also relates to discriminatory and unjust practices that can take place when using edtech. Gilliard and Culik (2016) discuss that redlining began as a way for cities to map out specific areas of land “that efficiently barred specific groups—African-Americans, Eastern Europeans, Arabs—from access to mortgages and other financial resources” (para. 7). This discriminatory practice has now entered edtech spaces, where digital justice is called into question (para. 8). Digital redlining is essentially a way to “regulate and track students’ engagement with information technology” (para. 9) by creating boundaries and limitations to what students have access to online, and what content they are capable of viewing. It is easy to understand that by redlining specific areas of online learning, discriminatory and oppressive practices can take place. If a student is barred from viewing certain areas of the internet that are deemed unessential, unimportant, or uncomfortable, educators can ensure students are only viewing what they want them to, rather than allowing students to explore the expansive lengths the internet has to offer. Digital redlining is “set of education policies, investment decisions, and IT practices that actively create and maintain class boundaries through strictures that discriminate against specific groups” (para. 12).  Digital redlining is therefore a major concern for educators working with edtech, and needs to be carefully considered when teaching students through the use of online technology. It is another way that discrimination can take place within the classroom without the knowledge of the students or guardians, and can heavily impact a students overall learning by selectively choosing what a student is, and is not, allowed to be educated on. 

Frankenfield, J. (2020, December 4). EdTech. Investopedia. https://www.investopedia.com/ terms/e/edtech.asp

Gilliard, C., & Culik, H. (2016, May 24). Digital Redlining, Access, and Privacy. Common Sense Education.

Regan, P., & Jesse, J. (2019). Ethical challenges of edtech, big data and personalized learning: Twenty-first century student sorting and tracking. Ethics and Information Technology, 21(3), 167-179. DOI: 10.1007/s10676-018-9492-2  

 

Screenshots of pod member suggestions for further understanding of Topic 1, specifically relating to edtech: