New Vistas on Responsible Learning Analytics

A Data Feminist Perspective

Authors

  • Teresa Cerratto Pargman Stockholm University and Digital Futures
  • Cormac McGrath Stockholm University and Digital Futures
  • Olga Viberg KTH Royal Institute of Technology and Digital Futures
  • Simon Knight University of Technology Sydney and Digital Futures https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8709-5780

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18608/jla.2023.7781

Keywords:

data feminism, critical theory, ethical guidelines, learning analytics, responsibility, research paper

Abstract

The focus of ethics in learning analytics (LA) frameworks and guidelines is predominantly on procedural elements of data management and accountability. Another, less represented focus is on the duty to act and LA as a moral practice. Data feminism as a critical theoretical approach to data science practices may offer LA research and practitioners a valuable lens through which to consider LA as a moral practice. This paper examines what data feminism can offer the LA community. It identifies critical questions for further developing and enabling a responsible stance in LA research and practice taking one particular case — algorithmic decision-making — as a point of departure.

References

Adejo, O., & Connolly, T. (2017). An integrated system framework for predicting students’ academic performance in higher educational institutions. International Journal of Computer Science and Information Technology, 9(3), 149–157. https://doi.org/10.14569/IJACSA.2017.080404

Al-Mahmood, R. (2020). The politics of learning analytics. In D. Ifenthaler & D. Gibson (Eds.), Adoption of data analytics in higher education learning and teaching (pp. 21–38). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-47392-1_2

Ames, M. G. (2019). The charisma machine: The life, death, and legacy of one laptop per child. The MIT Press.

Axelsson, P., & Mienna, C. S. (2020). The challenge of indigenous data in Sweden. In M. Walter, T. Kukutai, S. R. Carroll, & D. Rodriguez-Lonerbear (Eds.), Indigenous data sovereignty and policy (pp. 99–111). Routledge.

Baker, R. S., & Hawn, A. (2022). Algorithmic bias in education. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 32, 1052–1092. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-021-00285-9

Bardzell, S. (2010). Feminist HCI: Taking stock and outlining an agenda for design. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ʼ10), 10–15 April 2010, Atlanta, GA, USA (pp. 1301–1310). ACM Press. https://doi.org/10.1145/1753326.1753521

Bardzell, S., & Bardzell, J. (2011). Towards a feminist HCI methodology: Social science, feminism, and HCI. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ʼ11), 7–12 May 2011, Vancouver, BC, Canada (pp. 675–684). ACM Press. https://doi.org/10.1145/1978942.1979041

Beauchamp, T. L., & Childress, J. F. (2001). Principles of biomedical ethics (5th ed.). Oxford University Press.

Benjamin, R. (2019). Race after technology: Abolitionist tools for the new Jim code. Polity Press.

Bowker, G. C., & Star, S. L. (2000). Sorting things out: Classification and its consequences. The MIT Press.

Brown, L. X. (2020). How automated test proctoring software discriminates against disabled students. Center for Democracy and Technology. https://cdt.org/insights/how-automated-test-proctoring-software-discriminates-against-disabled-students/

Buckingham Shum, S. (2012). Policy brief: Learning analytics. UNESCO Institute for Information Technologies in Education. https://iite.unesco.org/files/policy_briefs/pdf/en/learning_analytics.pdf

Buckingham Shum, S. (2018). Keynote: Transitioning education’s knowledge infrastructure: Shaping design or shouting from the touchline? 13th International Conference of the Learning Sciences (ICLS ’18), 23–27 June 2018, London, UK. https://simon.buckinghamshum.net/2018/06/icls2018-keynote/

Buckingham Shum, S. J., & Luckin, R. (2019). Learning analytics and AI: Politics, pedagogy and practices. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(6), 2785–2793. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12880

Capurro, R. (2008). Information ethics for and from Africa. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(7), 1162–1170. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20850

Center for Democracy & Technology. (2019, November 12). Algorithmic systems in education: Incorporating equity and fairness when using student data. https://cdt.org/insights/algorithmic-systems-in-education-incorporating-equity-and-fairness-when-using-student-data/

Cerratto Pargman, T., & McGrath, C. (2021). Mapping the ethics of learning analytics in higher education: A systematic literature review of empirical research. Journal of Learning Analytics, 8(2), 123–139. https://doi.org/10.18608/jla.2021.1

Cerratto Pargman, T., McGrath, C., Viberg, O., Kitto, K., Knight, S., & Ferguson, R. (2021). Responsible learning analytics: Creating just, ethical, and caring. Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge (LAK ’21), 12–16 April 2021, Irvine, CA, USA. ACM Press. https://oro.open.ac.uk/75925/

Chen, B., & Zhu, H. (2019). Towards value-sensitive learning analytics design. Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge (LAK ’19), 4–8 March 2019, Tempe, AZ, USA (pp. 343–352). ACM Press. https://doi.org/10.1145/3303772.3303798

Colonna, L. (2022). Implementing data protection by design in the ed tech context: What is the role of technology providers? Journal of Law, Technology & the Internet, 13(1), 84–106. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4075685

Costanza-Chock, S. (2020). Design justice: Community-led practices to build the worlds we need. The MIT Press.

Crawford, K., & Joler, V. (2018, September 7). Anatomy of an AI system: The Amazon Echo as an anatomical map of human labor, data and planetary resources. AI Now Institute and Share Lab. https://anatomyof.ai/

Deahl, E., & Rhie, C. (2013). Local lotto: Exploring the lottery at the neighborhood level. Center for Urban Pedagogy, Brooklyn College, MIT Civic Data Design Lab. https://www.crowdsourcedcity.com/pdf/2013/local_lotto.pdf

Dietvorst, B. J., Simmons, J. P., & Massey, C. (2015). Algorithm aversion: People erroneously avoid algorithms after seeing them err. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 144(1), 114–126. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000033

D’Ignazio, C., & Klein, L. F. (2020). Data feminism. The MIT Press.

Dourish, P. (2016). Algorithms and their others: Algorithmic culture in context. Big Data & Society, 3(2), https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951716665128

Drachsler, H., & Greller, W. (2016). Privacy and analytics: It’s a DELICATE issue a checklist for trusted learning analytics. Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge (LAK ʼ16), 25–29 April 2016, Edinburgh, UK (pp. 89–98). ACM Press. https://doi.org/10.1145/2883851.2883893

Dye, M., Kumar, N., Schlesinger, A., Wong-Villacres, M., Ames, M. G., Veeraraghavan, R., O’Neill, J., Pal, J., & Gray, M. L. (2018). Solidarity across borders: Navigating intersections towards equity and inclusion. Companion of the 2018 ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing (CSCW ’18), 3–7 November 2018, Jersey City, NJ, USA (pp. 487–494). ACM Press. https://morganya.org/research/cscw_2018_solidarity.pdf

Engelfriet, A., Manderveld, J., & Jeunink, E. (2015). Learning analytics under the (Dutch) personal data protection act. SURFnet. https://www.surf.nl/binaries/content/assets/surf/nl/kennisbank/2015/surf_learning-analytics-onder-de-wet-wpb.pdf

European Commission. (2022). Final report of the Commission expert group on artificial intelligence and data in education and training: Executive summary. Directorate-General for Education, Youth, Sport and Culture. Publications Office of the European Union. https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2766/65087

Ess, C. (2020). Digital media ethics (3rd ed.). Wiley.

Ferguson, R. (2012). Learning analytics: Drivers, developments and challenges. International Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning, 4(5–6), 304–317. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJTEL.2012.051816

Ferguson, R. (2019). Ethical challenges for learning analytics. Journal of Learning Analytics, 6(3), 25–30. https://doi.org/10.18608/jla.2019.63.5

Ferguson, R., & Clow, D. (2017). Where is the evidence? A call to action for learning analytics. Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge (LAK ’17), 13–17 March 2017, Vancouver, BC, Canada (pp. 56–65). ACM Press. https://doi.org/10.1145/3027385.3027396

Figueras, C., Verhagen, H., & Cerratto Pargman, T. (2022). Exploring tensions in responsible AI in practice: An interview study on AI practices in and for Swedish public organizations. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, 34(2). https://aisel.aisnet.org/sjis/vol34/iss2/6

Ford, H., & Wajcman, J. (2017). ‘Anyone can edit’, not everyone does: Wikipedia’s infrastructure and the gender gap. Social Studies of Science, 47(4), 511–527. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312717692172

Gebru, T., Morgenstern, J., Vecchione, B., Wortman Vaughan, J., Wallach, H., Daumé III, H., & Crawford, K. (2021). Datasheets for datasets. Communications of the ACM, 64(12), 86–92. https://doi.org/10.1145/3458723

Gitelman, L., & Jackson, V. (2013). Introduction: Raw data is an oxymoron. In L. Gitelman (Ed.), “Raw data” is an oxymoron (pp. 1–14). The MIT Press.

Green, B. (2022). Escaping the impossibility of fairness: From formal to substantive algorithmic fairness. Philosophy & Technology, 35, 90. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-022-00584-6

Greene, D., Hoffmann, A. L., & Stark, L. (2019). Better, nicer, clearer, fairer: A critical assessment of the movement for ethical artificial intelligence and machine learning. Proceedings of the 52nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS-52), 8–11 January 2019, Grand Wailea, Maui, USA (pp. 2122–2131). IEEE Computer Society. https://hdl.handle.net/10125/59651

Haraway, D. (1988). Situated knowledges: The science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. Feminist Studies, 14(3), 575–599. https://doi.org/10.2307/3178066

Hill Collins, P. (1990). Black feminist thought: Knowledge, consciousness, and the politics of empowerment. Routledge.

Holstein, K., & Doroudi, S. (2019). Fairness and equity in learning analytics systems (FairLAK). Companion Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge (LAK ’19), 23–27 March 2020, Frankfurt, Germany (pp. 1–2). Society for Learning Analytics Research (SoLAR). https://arxiv.org/pdf/2104.12920.pdf

Holstein, K., & Doroudi, S. (2022). Equity and artificial intelligence in education. In W. Holmes & K. Poryaska-Pomsta (Eds.), The ethics of artificial intelligence in education (pp. 151–173). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429329067

Howard, S. K., Swist, T., Gašević, D., Bartimote, K., Knight, S., Gulson, K., Apps, T., Peloche, J., Hutchinson, N., & Selwyn, N. (2022). Educational data journeys: Where are we going, what are we taking and making for AI? Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 3, 100073. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2022.100073

Howell, J. A., Roberts, L. D., Seaman, K., & Gibson, D. C. (2018). Are we on our way to becoming a “helicopter university”? Academics’ views on learning analytics. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 23(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-017-9329-9

Hsu, S., Li, T. W., Zhang, Z., Fowler, M., Zilles, C., & Karahalios, K. (2021). Attitudes surrounding an imperfect AI autograder. Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’21), 8–13 May 2021, Yokohama, Japan (pp. 1–15). ACM Press. https://doi.org/10.1145/3411764.3445424

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. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-018-9781-8

Jones, K. M. (2019b). Just because you can doesn’t mean you should: Practitioner perceptions of learning analytics ethics. Portal, 19(3), 407–428. https://doi.org/10.1353/pla.2019.0025

kanarinka. (2016, March 22). Missing women, blank maps, and data voids: What gets counted counts. Civic Media. https://civic.mit.edu/index.html%3Fp=1153.html

Khan, B. H., Corbeil, J. R., & Corbeil, M. E. (Eds.). (2018). Responsible analytics and data mining in education: Global perspectives on quality, support, and decision making. Routledge.

Kitto, K., & Knight, S. (2019). Practical ethics for building learning analytics. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(6), 2855–2870. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12868

Klein, C., Lester, J., Rangwala, H., & Johri, A. (2019). Technological barriers and incentives to learning analytics adoption in higher education: Insights from users. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 31(3), 604–625. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-019-09210-5

Knight, S., Matuk, C., & DesPortes, K. (2022). Learning at the intersection of data literacy and social justice. Educational Technology & Society, 25(4), 70–79. https://www.j-ets.net/collection/published-issues/25_4#h.lfle3lw90b07

Krause, H. (2019, January 21). An introduction to the data biography. We All Count. https://weallcount.com/2019/01/21/an-introduction-to-the-data-biography/

Ladjal, D., Joksimović, S., Rakotoarivelo, T., & Zhan, C. (2022). Technological frameworks on ethical and trustworthy learning analytics. British Journal of Educational Technology, 53(4), 733–736. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13236

Lawson, C., Beer, C., Rossi, D., Moore, T., & Fleming, J. (2016). Identification of ‘at risk’ students using learning analytics: The ethical dilemmas of intervention strategies in a higher education institution. Educational Technology Research and Development, 64, 957–968. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-016-9459-0

McMillan Cottom, T. (2016). Black cyberfeminism: Intersectionality, institutions and digital sociology. In J. Daniels, K. Gregory, & T. McMillan Cottom (Eds.), Digital sociologies (pp. 211-232). Policy Press. https://ssrn.com/abstract=2747621

Meng, A., DiSalvo, C., & Zegura, E. (2019). Collaborative data work towards a caring democracy. Proceedings of the ACM on Human–Computer Interaction, 3(CSCW), article 42. ACM Press. https://doi.org/10.1145/3359144

Mutimukwe, C., Viberg, O., Oberg, L.-M., & Cerratto-Pargman, T. (2022). Students’ privacy concerns in learning analytics: Model development. British Journal of Educational Technology, 53(4), 932–951. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13234

Noddings, N. (2012). The caring relation in teaching. Oxford Review of Education, 38(6), 771–781. https://doi.org/10.1080/03054985.2012.745047

Ochoa, X., Knight, S., & Wise, A. F. (2020). Learning analytics impact: Critical conversations on relevance and social responsibility. Journal of Learning Analytics, 7(3), 1–5. https://doi.org/10.18608/jla.2020.73.1

Pardo, A., & Siemens, G. (2014). Ethical and privacy principles for learning analytics. British Journal of Educational Technology, 45(3), 438–450. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12152

Prinsloo, P. (2020). Of ‘black boxes’ and algorithmic decision-making in (higher) education: A commentary. Big Data & Society, 7(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951720933994

Prinsloo, P., & Slade, S. (2017a). Big data, higher education and learning analytics: Beyond justice, towards an ethics of care. In B. K. Daniel (Ed.), Big data and learning analytics in higher education: Current theory and practice (pp. 109–124). Springer.

Prinsloo, P., & Slade, S. (2017b). Ethics and learning analytics: Charting the (un)charted. In C. Lang, G. Siemens, A. Wise, & D. Gašević (Eds.), Handbook of learning analytics (pp. 49–57). Society for Learning Analytics Research. https://doi.org/10.18608/hla17.004

Prinsloo, P., & Slade, S. (2018). Mapping responsible learning analytics: A critical proposal. In B. H. Khan, J. R. Corbeil, & M. E. Corbeil (Eds.), Responsible analytics & data mining in education: Global perspectives on quality, support, and decision making. Routledge.

Prinsloo, P., Slade, S., & Khalil, M. (2022). The answer is (not only) technological: Considering student data privacy in learning analytics. British Journal of Educational Technology, 53(4), 876–893. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13216

Quijano, A., & Ennis, M. (2000). Coloniality of power, eurocentrism, and Latin America. Nepentla: Views from South, 1(3), 533–580. https://edisciplinas.usp.br/pluginfile.php/347342/mod_resource/content/1/Quijano%20(2000)%20Colinality%20of%20power.pdf

Reich, J., & Ito, M. (2017). From good intentions to real outcomes: Equity by design in learning technologies. Digital Media + Learning Research Hub. https://clalliance.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/GIROreport_1031.pdf

Roberts, L. D., Howell, J. A., Seaman, K., & Gibson, D. C. (2016). Student attitudes toward learning analytics in higher education: “The Fitbit version of the learning world.” Frontiers in Psychology, 7 https://doi.org/10.3339/fpsyg.2016.01959

Sarmiento, J. P., & Wise, A. F. (2022). Participatory and co-design of learning analytics: An initial review of the literature. Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge (LAK ’22), 21–25 March 2022, Online (pp. 535–541). ACM Press. https://doi.org/10.1145/3506860.3506910

Sclater, N. (2016). Developing a code of practice for learning analytics. Journal of Learning Analytics, 3(1), 16–42. https://doi.org/10.18608/jla.2016.31.3

Sclater, M., & Lally, V. (2016). Technology enhanced informal learning, interdisciplinarity, and cultural historical activity theory. Proceedings of the 9th International Conference of Education, Research and Innovation (ICERI2016), 14–16 November 2016, Seville, Spain (pp. 860–867). International Academy of Technology, Education and Development (IATED). https://doi.org/10.21125/iceri.2016.1198

Scott, J., & Nichols, T. P. (2017). Learning analytics as assemblage: Criticality and contingency in online education. Research in Education, 98(1), 83–105. https://doi.org/10.1177/0034523717723391

Siemens, G. (2013). Learning analytics: The emergence of a discipline. American Behavioral Scientist, 57(10), 1380–1400. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764213498851

Slade, S., & Prinsloo, P. (2013). Learning analytics: Ethical issues and dilemmas. American Behavioral Scientist, 57(10), 1510–1529. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764213479366

Slade, S., & Tait, A. (2019). Global guidelines: Ethics in learning analytics. International Council for Open and Distance Education. https://www.learntechlib.org/p/208251/

The New York Times. (2019, March 14). College admissions scandal: Your questions answered. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/14/us/college-admissions-scandal-questions.html

Tronto, J. C. (1998). An ethic of care. Generations: Journal of the American Society on Aging, 22(3), 15–20. http://www.jstor.org/stable/44875693

Tsai, Y.-S., Scheffel, M., & Gašević, D. (2018). Enabling systematic adoption of learning analytics through a policy framework. Proceedings of the 13th European Conference on Technology Enhanced Learning (EC-TEL 2018), 3–5 September 2018, Leeds, UK (pp. 556–560). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-98572-5_44

West, D., Huijser, H., & Heath, D. (2016). Putting an ethical lens on learning analytics. Educational Technology Research and Development, 64, 903–922. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-016-9464-3

Whittlestone, J., Nyrup, R., Alexandrova, A., Dihal, K., & Cave, S. (2019). Ethical and societal implications of algorithms, data, and artificial intelligence: A roadmap for research. Nuffield Foundation.

Williamson, K., & Kizilcec, R. (2022). A review of learning analytics dashboard research in higher education: Implications for justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion. Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge (LAK ’22), 21–25 March 2022, Online (pp. 260–270). ACM Press. https://doi.org/10.1145/3506860.3506900

Willis, J. E., Slade, S., & Prinsloo, P. (2016). Ethical oversight of student data in learning analytics: A typology derived from a cross-continental, cross-institutional perspective. Educational Technology Research and Development, 64, 881–901. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-016-9463-4

Wise, A. F., Sarmiento, J. P., & Boothe Jr., M. (2021). Subversive learning analytics. Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge (LAK ’21), 12–16 April 2021, Irvine, CA, USA (pp. 639–645). ACM Press. https://doi.org/10.1145/3448139.3448210

Wong, P.-H. (2012). Dao, harmony and personhood: Towards a Confucian ethics of technology. Philosophy & Technology, 25, 67–86. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-011-0021-z

Wood, J. T. (2009). Feminist standpoint theory. In S. W. Littlejohn & K. A. Foss (Eds.), Encyclopedia of communication theory (pp. 397–399). SAGE Reference Online. https://edge.sagepub.com/system/files/77593_2.2ref.pdf

Downloads

Published

2023-03-12

How to Cite

Cerratto Pargman, T., McGrath, C., Viberg, O., & Knight, S. (2023). New Vistas on Responsible Learning Analytics: A Data Feminist Perspective. Journal of Learning Analytics, 10(1), 133-148. https://doi.org/10.18608/jla.2023.7781

Issue

Section

Special Section on Fairness, Equity, and Responsibility in Learning Analytics

Most read articles by the same author(s)

1 2 > >>