{"title":"教师的技术伦理框架","authors":"Catherine Adams, Sean Groten","doi":"10.1080/17439884.2023.2280058","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACTA TechnoEthical Framework for Teachers (TEFT) is introduced to aid educators in selecting and employing educational technologies in ethically sound and pedagogical sensitive ways in their classrooms. TEFT views technology through three key technoethical lenses or perspectives: instrumental, sociomaterial and existential. The instrumental lens is most familiar to teachers and focuses on the policies and laws governing teachers’ and students’ uses of technology. The sociomaterial perspective attends to technology’s built-in biases and how it translates behaviour in prescribed or circumscribed ways. The existential lens considers how students’ and teachers’ entanglements with technology condition how they experience the world and transform their ways of knowing, doing, being and becoming. Taken together, these three approaches provide teachers with a theoretically robust view of the ethical implications of using technology in the classroom.KEYWORDS: Technology biaseducational technologyposthumanteacher ethicsK-12 education Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Notes1 The classroom examples are selected from a postphenomenological study of elementary school teachers using ClassDojo in several Western Canadian urban centres (Yuen Citation2021) and supervised by one of the authors (Adams).2 CommonSense Privacy Program (Citation2022) recently gave ClassDojo a rating of 82% or ‘Warning’ for its privacy and data protection policies. CommonSense routinely assesses and scores popular educational applications across multiple ‘concern categories’ including child safety, privacy and data security. It also rates an app’s compliance with key statutes and regulations such as the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA), Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), and General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).Additional informationFundingThis work was supported by a Vargo Teaching Chair grant, University of Alberta.","PeriodicalId":47502,"journal":{"name":"Learning Media and Technology","volume":" 14","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A TechnoEthical Framework for Teachers\",\"authors\":\"Catherine Adams, Sean Groten\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/17439884.2023.2280058\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACTA TechnoEthical Framework for Teachers (TEFT) is introduced to aid educators in selecting and employing educational technologies in ethically sound and pedagogical sensitive ways in their classrooms. TEFT views technology through three key technoethical lenses or perspectives: instrumental, sociomaterial and existential. The instrumental lens is most familiar to teachers and focuses on the policies and laws governing teachers’ and students’ uses of technology. The sociomaterial perspective attends to technology’s built-in biases and how it translates behaviour in prescribed or circumscribed ways. The existential lens considers how students’ and teachers’ entanglements with technology condition how they experience the world and transform their ways of knowing, doing, being and becoming. Taken together, these three approaches provide teachers with a theoretically robust view of the ethical implications of using technology in the classroom.KEYWORDS: Technology biaseducational technologyposthumanteacher ethicsK-12 education Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Notes1 The classroom examples are selected from a postphenomenological study of elementary school teachers using ClassDojo in several Western Canadian urban centres (Yuen Citation2021) and supervised by one of the authors (Adams).2 CommonSense Privacy Program (Citation2022) recently gave ClassDojo a rating of 82% or ‘Warning’ for its privacy and data protection policies. CommonSense routinely assesses and scores popular educational applications across multiple ‘concern categories’ including child safety, privacy and data security. It also rates an app’s compliance with key statutes and regulations such as the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA), Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), and General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).Additional informationFundingThis work was supported by a Vargo Teaching Chair grant, University of Alberta.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47502,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Learning Media and Technology\",\"volume\":\" 14\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Learning Media and Technology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2023.2280058\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Learning Media and Technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2023.2280058","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
ABSTRACTA TechnoEthical Framework for Teachers (TEFT) is introduced to aid educators in selecting and employing educational technologies in ethically sound and pedagogical sensitive ways in their classrooms. TEFT views technology through three key technoethical lenses or perspectives: instrumental, sociomaterial and existential. The instrumental lens is most familiar to teachers and focuses on the policies and laws governing teachers’ and students’ uses of technology. The sociomaterial perspective attends to technology’s built-in biases and how it translates behaviour in prescribed or circumscribed ways. The existential lens considers how students’ and teachers’ entanglements with technology condition how they experience the world and transform their ways of knowing, doing, being and becoming. Taken together, these three approaches provide teachers with a theoretically robust view of the ethical implications of using technology in the classroom.KEYWORDS: Technology biaseducational technologyposthumanteacher ethicsK-12 education Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Notes1 The classroom examples are selected from a postphenomenological study of elementary school teachers using ClassDojo in several Western Canadian urban centres (Yuen Citation2021) and supervised by one of the authors (Adams).2 CommonSense Privacy Program (Citation2022) recently gave ClassDojo a rating of 82% or ‘Warning’ for its privacy and data protection policies. CommonSense routinely assesses and scores popular educational applications across multiple ‘concern categories’ including child safety, privacy and data security. It also rates an app’s compliance with key statutes and regulations such as the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA), Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), and General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).Additional informationFundingThis work was supported by a Vargo Teaching Chair grant, University of Alberta.
期刊介绍:
Learning, Media and Technology aims to stimulate debate on digital media, digital technology and digital cultures in education. The journal seeks to include submissions that take a critical approach towards all aspects of education and learning, digital media and digital technology - primarily from the perspective of the social sciences, humanities and arts. The journal has a long heritage in the areas of media education, media and cultural studies, film and television, communications studies, design studies and general education studies. As such, Learning, Media and Technology is not a generic ‘Ed Tech’ journal. We are not looking to publish context-free studies of individual technologies in individual institutional settings, ‘how-to’ guides for the practical use of technologies in the classroom, or speculation on the future potential of technology in education. Instead we invite submissions which build on contemporary debates such as: -The ways in which digital media interact with learning environments, educational institutions and educational cultures -The changing nature of knowledge, learning and pedagogy in the digital age -Digital media production, consumption and creativity in educational contexts -How digital media are shaping (and being shaped by) educational practices in local, national and global contexts -The social, cultural, economic and political nature of educational media and technology -The ways in which digital media in education interact with issues of democracy and equity, social justice and public good. Learning, Media and Technology analyses such questions from a global, interdisciplinary perspective in contributions of the very highest quality from scholars and practitioners in the social sciences, communication and media studies, cultural studies, philosophy, history as well as in the information and computer sciences.