Background

Research motivation

The emergence of data-driven practices (Cerratto Pargman & McGrath, 2021) and the increasing datafication of the education sector (Williamson, 2017) contribute to new visions of proposed technical solutions to educational problems that make specific discourses and actions (social imaginaries) appear both natural and inevitable (Määttä et al., 2020; Rahm, 2019). In particular, the rise of artificial intelligence (AI) combined with the ongoing pandemic's social restrictions are renewing educational imaginaries of modernity and the power of digitalization and automation in education (Jasanoff & Kim, 2015). However, claims about data-driven practices contributing to ensuring the quality and value of the learning experience raise a series of questions that warrant ethical considerations (Slade & Prinsloo, 2013). Concerns have arisen in connection with inequalities, discrimination, algorithmic authority, accountability, and student well-being, as well as advisors’ moral discomfort and violation of a professional, ethical code (Jones, 2019). These issues are all the more pressing in light of recent protests from students in English cities, bearing placards reading “The algorithm stole my future” and “Fuck the algorithm” due to the use of predictive analytics in calculating grades in the so-called A-level scandal (The Guardian, 2020). In this context, we argue that educational sciences need to pay attention to the values and the ethics associated with emerging sociotechnical imaginaries. Surprisingly, such discussions have been abbreviated, conducted in silos (Cerratto Pargman & McGrath, 2021), and predominantly theoretical (Adejo & Sclater, 2017). The educational research community has yet to provide an understanding of how such aspects are considered in educational sociotechnical imaginaries related to data-driven practices (cf. Slade and Prinsloo, 2013; Daniel, 2019).

Significance and scientific novelty

With the Corona 19, virus outbreak remote learning has become more essential than ever. This situation has accelerated the digitalization of educational practices opening questions not only about the types of data collected but, most importantly, about the impact of the growing datafication trend on educational practices and culture. In this context, various social imaginaries reflecting the envisioned role of novel technologies in education are in the making (Juhl & Buch, 2018). In these circumstances, educational actors and research communities are voicing different values and ethical considerations about the future of education within a datafication paradigm (Cerratto Pargman & Jahnke, 2019). Such plurality of voices and interests causes conceptual and terminological confusion and misunderstandings. The proposed workshops will open a discussion on such differences and contribute to a humanistic-centered discourse in Education. Besides, mainstream research methods applied to identify values and ethical considerations are presently misaligned with the unprecedented pace of technological development and societal transformation. The proposed workshops will produce essential contributions to research on the values and ethics inherent to imaginaries bound to data-driven education in the Nordic countries. The workshops will particularly empower educators to gain agency in current discourses on data-driven education by envisioning a future-oriented profession. By bridging research and practice, this initiative will advance the field by building firmly on past research on sociotechnical imaginaries (Ross, 2017; Rahm, 2019; Jasanoff & Kim, 2015; Selwyn, 2019).

References

Adejo, O., & Connolly, T. (2017). Learning analytics in a shared-network educational environment: Ethical issues and countermeasures. International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications, 8(4), 22–29.

Cerratto Pargman, T. C., & McGrath, C. (2021).Mapping the terrain of ethics in learning analytics: A systematic literature review of empirical research. Journal of Learning Analytics, 1-17.

Cerratto Pargman, T. C., & Jahnke, I. (Eds.). (2019).Emergent practices and material conditions in learning and teaching with technologies. Cham, Switzerland: Springer.

Daniel, B. K. (2019). Big data and data science: A critical review of issues for educational research. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(1), 101–113

Jasanoff, S. & Kim, S.H. (2015) Dreamscapes of Modernity. Sociotechnical Imaginaries and the Fabrication of Power, Chicago: Chicago University Press.

Juhl, J. & Buch, A. (2018): Transforming Academia: The Role of Education, Educational Philosophy and Theory, 1-12..

Jones, K. M. (2019a). Advising the whole student: eAdvising analytics and the contextual suppression of advisor values. Education and Information Technologies, 24(1), 437–458

Lindberg, Y. (2016). La litterature francophone de l’Afrique subsaharienne en Suède : Les Femmes font place à la honte. Parallèles, 28(1), 64-82. doi:10.17462/para.2016.01.04.

Määttä, J., Bodén, D., Godhe, M. (2020). Ett samtal om AI och science fiction.In: AI, robotar och öreställningar om morgondagens arbetsliv, Daniel Bodén; Michael Godhe (editor), Lund: Nordic Academic Press. 219-241

Rahm, L. (2019). Educational imaginaries: a genealogy of the digital citizen (Vol. 214). Linköping University Electronic Press.

Ross, J. (2017) Speculative method in digital education research. Learning, Media and Technology, 42:2, 214-229, DOI: 10.1080/17439884.2016.1160927Siemens & Long, (2011)

Selwyn, N., Pangrazio, L., Nemorin, S., & Perrotta, C. (2020). What might the school of 2030 be like? An exercise in social science fiction. Learning, Media and Technology, 45(1), 90-106.

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

Williamson, B. (2017). Big data in education: The digital future of learning, policy and practice. Sage.

Williamson, B. (2018). Assessment Imaginaries: Methodological Challenges of Future Assessment Machines. In B. Maddox (Ed.), International Large-Scale Assessments in Education: Insider Research Perspectives (1st ed.). Bloomsbury.