As digital technology is increasingly a natural part of our 'normal' education system, and students' access to the wider world at technology increases, we as educators are exposed to more and more ethical dilemmas. To reflect on a past ethical dilemma, I have used a reflective model by Rolfe, Freshwater, and Jasper (2001).
This was one of those times.
Background
At the point in time of this situation I was the school's e-Learning Coach. Part of my job description was supporting and guiding teachers when students were not using their digital devices appropriately.This was one of those times.
Step One: What?
Earlier this year, a teacher approached me with a situation that involved students in her class. A student came to her and reported that a fellow student was being using the comments facility in Google Slides inappropriately by posting mean comments and using inappropriate language. The student informed her that another student in the same classroom had been shared to her and her friend.
The teacher investigated the allegation along with her co-teacher, as she works in an ILE situation. They looked at: who the owner of the document was, who had access to the document, the revision history and during which part of the school day this happened.
The evidence showed that the comment had been created by the very student who had reported the incident and her friend that had the comment 'shared' to. At this point in time, they confessed that they had made it up to get the other student in trouble. Upon further discussion, it became obvious that the two students had written the message together to get the other student in trouble and they were only 'joking'.
The teacher investigated the allegation along with her co-teacher, as she works in an ILE situation. They looked at: who the owner of the document was, who had access to the document, the revision history and during which part of the school day this happened.
The evidence showed that the comment had been created by the very student who had reported the incident and her friend that had the comment 'shared' to. At this point in time, they confessed that they had made it up to get the other student in trouble. Upon further discussion, it became obvious that the two students had written the message together to get the other student in trouble and they were only 'joking'.
Step Two: So What?
Through using Hall's (2001) suggested guiding questions on the ethical process. I am able to form a clearer picture to support my decision making:
Which stake holder should be given priority? Why?
The innocent student, who had no idea what was going on. He was our first priority as this incident could have caused him unnecessary consequences and his reputation & mana be affected.
Which courses of action are possible?
- 'Suspend' their google accounts for a predetermined set of time.
- Contact whānau
- Restrict their access while using digital technologies.
- Focused learning times using the capability on Hapara Teacher Dashboard.
- Place students in another Google Organisation, through Google Management console. This organisation will give them no access to writing comments, limited or no emailing facilities. This does not have to be indefinitely, scaffolding trust back into using digital technologies as part of learning.
- Collaboration skills as a DAT - Deliberate Act of Teaching.
Step Three: Now What?
After looking at the evidence, talking to the teachers involved, guiding them through talking to their students and reviewing our school policies on digital technology and digital citizenship, it was decided that both students:
- Would have the Google accounts suspended for a set time
- After the suspension was lifted, they would be placed into a limited usage organisation through the Google Management console.
- The teachers would plan to teach collaboration skills both physically and digitally.
These decisions were made to maintain the safety for all students. Whānau were contacted and informed of the situation and their support was given.
The innocent student was not informed of what had happened. This was to minimise distress to him, however he was closely monitored so no other ramifications were directed to him. This decision came from the guidelines that Netsafe published in 2017. In particular the guiding principles for when responding to digital incidents within schools; "minimise student / staff distress or harm, maintain student / staff safety, focus on the behaviours - not the technology, follow school procedures."
At this point in time, a review was undertaken of our school policies and procedures using Netsafe (2017) guidelines.
References
Hall, A. (2001). What ought I to do, all things considered? An approach to the exploration of ethical problems by teachers. IIPE Conference for Ethics, Law, Justice and Governance, Griffith University, Nathan Campus, Brisbane, 8 April, (April) Retrieved from
Netsafe. (2017). Responding to Online Incidents. Retrieved from
Rolfe, G., Freshwater, D., Jasper, M. (2001) Critical reflection in nursing and helping professions: a user's guide. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan
No comments:
Post a Comment