OK, let's unpack this. Have you ever really paused
to consider the quiet yet incredibly powerful
impact of the data collected about you, especially
in a place as formative and influential as school?
It's everywhere, isn't it? It really is. From
those early report cards that felt like destiny
to the assessments that subtly nudge your academic
path. Today, we're taking a deep dive into some
truly profound insights from Gary Ackerman, specifically
his thoughts on the ethics of data collection
in education. What's so compelling is that this
material, written a few years back, still resonates
so strongly with our modern world. I mean, data
is collected on us almost constantly now. Yeah,
sometimes without us even realizing the full
implications. Exactly. So our mission for this
deep dive is to extract the most important nuggets
of knowledge about what it truly means to ethically
gather information within any learning environment.
Why does this matter to you listening right now?
Well, it matters because you're navigating a
world increasingly shaped by algorithms, profiles,
data points, and understanding the ethical bedrock
beneath all this can give you a powerful new
lens, a way to interpret what you see, what you
share, maybe what's being done with your information.
Yeah, this isn't just for researchers. It's really
for anyone living in the 21st century. Definitely.
So to kick things off, when Gary Ackerman discusses
data collection and education, What are the absolute
non -negotiable ground rules he insists on? It's
like right from the start. What does he lay out
as the core responsibilities that simply cannot
be bypassed? What's truly fascinating here, I
think, is how Ackerman begins. He emphasizes
this fundamental responsibility that goes beyond
just compliance. It's about proceeding in a manner
that respects not just the individuals involved,
the subjects, but also the entire process. The
processes. Yeah, the data collection process
and, crucially, the broader community that those
individuals come from. It's not just about avoiding
harm, which is obviously key. Sure. It's about
an active, conscious respect, you know, a holistic
respect for everyone involved. importantly, for
the integrity of the information being gathered.
Okay, active respect. So what does that look
like in practice? What are the tenets he lays
out? Well, he outlines several key ones, and
they're quite specific. Firstly, ethical researchers
absolutely do not endanger the physical or emotional
health of subjects. Seems basic, but... Probably
more complex than it sounds. Especially the emotional
health part, right? In a school setting that's
incredibly fragile and maybe easily overlooked
sometimes. Secondly, they have to take concrete
proactive steps to ensure the privacy of subjects.
We're talking about incredibly sensitive personal
data here, particularly for students. Yeah, absolutely
paramount. Right. And thirdly, and this is crucial,
they preserve subjects' right to withdraw from
participation at any point without facing any
penalty whatsoever. That right to just walk away,
no questions asked. Exactly. It ensures participation
is always truly voluntary. Autonomy is key. That
makes perfect sense. That right to withdraw is
so vital in ensuring people aren't coerced. But
you mentioned another point, one that's maybe
a bit less intuitive. about incentives. He says
rewarding subjects should be avoided. Ah, yes.
Can you elaborate on why that's so critical?
It feels kind of counterintuitive, doesn't it?
Like a small gift card. What's the harm? It absolutely
does feel counterintuitive for many people, but
it's a really critical rule for maintaining objective,
unbiased information. Ackerman makes it clear.
Rewarding subjects for participating actually
poses a significant threat to the data's integrity.
A threat? How so? Well, imagine you're a student,
right? And a researcher offers you, say, a gift
card or maybe extra credit to fill out a survey
about your study habits. OK. Even if you're trying
your best to be honest, there's a kind of subconscious
pressure there. You might subtly skew your answers.
Like say what you think they want to hear. Exactly.
Or maybe exaggerate positive behaviors, downplay
negative ones simply because you want to earn
that reward, or you perceive a desired outcome
from the person offering it. Ah, I see. This
creates what's known in research as response
bias. The data you collect no longer truly reflects
the natural state or opinion of the subject.
While it's a version influenced by the incentive,
it contaminates the purity of the data. So it
makes the data less trustworthy? Precisely. Less
reliable, less representative of reality. So
while offering a reward feels like a nice thing
to do, it can corrupt the very information you're
trying to gather. It's not about being stingy.
It's about methodological rigor. That's a really
provocative point about incentives. Definitely
challenges intuition. It does. So if we can't
offer rewards, how then do researchers ethically
encourage participation? especially in a busy
school environment without, you know, accidentally
coercing people. That's where clear communication
and really demonstrating the value of the research
become paramount. Okay. Instead of external rewards,
ethical researchers focus on explaining the purpose
of the study clearly. How might the findings
actually benefit the participants or the school
or the wider community? Why is their honest input
genuinely important? It becomes about intrinsic
motivation. So understanding the why. Exactly.
Understanding their contribution rather than
getting an extrinsic Prize. It means building
trust, ensuring anonymity or confidentiality
is rock solid, and respecting participants' time.
Which sounds much harder than just offering a
carrot. It is more challenging, definitely, but
it leads to far more credible and ethically sound
data in the end. Okay, we've laid the groundwork
with these core ethical rules, respect, privacy,
withdrawal, no rewards. But then Gary Ackerman
introduces a concept that takes this discussion
to an entirely different level. maybe even a
bit unsettling. He describes education itself
as a wicked problem. What does that profound
idea even mean? And how does it radically redefine
our understanding of the data we collect within
a learning environment? This feels like a major
shift. It is a major shift in thinking. So connecting
this to the bigger picture, the term wicked problem,
it isn't just about something being difficult
or complex, like a really hard math equation.
Okay, not just hard. No. It's a specific type
of problem, often found in social policy or planning,
where there are no simple right or wrong solutions.
Every solution or intervention you implement
has profound, often irreversible, and permanent
effects, and can also reveal new problems you
didn't anticipate. Can you give an example? Sure.
Think about climate change or poverty. These
are often cited as classic wicked problems. There's
no single fix, right? And every attempt to solve
them creates new consequences, new challenges.
Got it. So how does education fit that mold?
Well, for education, this means that every single
interaction, every lesson, every assessment,
and yes, every piece of data collected, it isn't
just a fleeting moment. It becomes a lasting
and indelible part of an individual's experience
and their identity. Indelible. it can't be erased.
In a sense, yes. It's not like solving a simple
math problem where you get an answer and move
on. The answer here, the data point about a student,
impacts their life trajectory, their self -perception,
their future choices in deeply personal ways.
Wow. That truly raises an incredibly important
question, doesn't it? It does. When it comes
to data collection in such a sensitive environment,
if every interaction has these potentially permanent
effects, what does this tell us about the grades
or labels we get, you know, from online learning
platforms today or even just a teacher's casual
comment. Are they also leaving these indelible
marks maybe without us realizing it? That's the
implication, yes. And Ackerman emphasizes that
this influence can be significantly exaggerated
when that data isn't just collected quietly.
but then it's actively reported back to the subjects
themselves. Reported back, you mean like getting
a report card or seeing a dashboard? Exactly.
The source makes it clear that when data is collected
from a population and then reported back to them,
it inherently influences data collected later
on. How does that work, like a feedback loop?
Precisely. You get a data point about yourself,
say a grade or a performance rating. That data
point shapes your self -perception or maybe your
behavior, and then your new behavior, influenced
by that data, generates new data, potentially
re - reinforcing that initial perception. It
can become a kind of self -fulfilling prophecy.
Okay, now I have to ask about the example he
gives. It sounds really striking and something
maybe many of us can relate to on a gut level.
Ah, the math grade story. He talks about wondering
if his own perception of himself, like not being
a strong math student, was the direct result
of a D he got on a report card way back in fourth
grade. Hmm, fourth grade. Yeah. It's such a small,
almost insignificant seeming piece of data from
decades ago, right? Yeah. Yet it evidently had
this profound lingering effect on how he saw
himself in that area. It really makes you stop
and think. It does. Yeah. How can one small grade
from when you were, what, nine or 10 years old
stick with you so powerfully, even when later
evidence completely contradicts it? He mentions
that later in life his own students perceived
him as a good math teacher, actual real world
proof of his capability. Right. But that early
piece of data reported back to him on that report
card clearly left a very deep, very personal
mark. Precisely. And that anecdote just powerfully
illustrates how a single data point, especially
one presented early in life during those formative
years, it can create a deeply ingrained narrative
that persists, sometimes for a lifetime. regardless
of later evidence or even contrary personal experience.
Wow. Think about how many students get labeled,
maybe subtly, as not good at X very early on.
Exactly. And how that can limit their ambitions
or their self -belief for years to come. It highlights
the deeply personal, potentially long -lasting
impact of how we collect and share information.
Especially about someone's developing identity
and their learning journey. It really underscores
the profound responsibility that comes with grading,
assessing, reporting, particularly in education,
where we are literally shaping lives. Yeah, it's
not just a number. No. Every time we assign a
grade or give feedback, we're not just providing
a score, we're potentially contributing to a
child's lifelong narrative about themselves.
Okay, so given how incredibly impactful, maybe
even permanent, this data can be on an individual,
who are the gatekeepers? Who ensures these ethical
standards are actually met? Right. Is there a
formal process for review? Or is it just, you
know, left up to individual conscience? Seems
like really high stakes. Absolutely. There are
crucial mechanisms in place, thankfully. In larger
research universities, a foundational and absolutely
crucial mechanism is the Institutional Review
Board, the IRB. The IRB. Heard of that. Right.
Before any data collection begins for any research
project involving human subjects, detailed proposals
for that research must be submitted to this board.
Their role is incredibly meticulous. They scrutinize
every step of the proposed methods. What are
they looking for, specifically? Well, not just
ensuring subjects aren't endangered physically
or emotionally, though that's primary. They also
confirm the research design is robust enough
to actually gather valid data ethically. They
ask questions like, is the consent process truly
informed and voluntary? Are the privacy measures
sufficient? Is the potential benefit of the research
worth any minimal risk involved? So they really
weigh the pros and cons. They do. And without
their conviction that their research is appropriate
and ethical, that it meets all these rigorous
standards, it simply cannot proceed. They are
essentially the ultimate ethical safeguard in
that academic research setting. So the IRB is
kind of the ethical bouncer at the door, making
sure no questionable data collection gets through.
That's a good way to put it. Yes. Sounds like
a tough gig. It does. But okay, that's for the
big formal university research studies. What
about, say, individual educators? Like a classroom
teacher doing a small project in their own class.
Or those action researchers. You mentioned people
applying research methods to their own practice
within their own schools. They might not have
access to a formal IRB. Right, or the resources
that come with a large institution. Are they
just on their own then? How do they ensure they're
being ethical? That's a very practical and important
question, because you're right, not everyone
has the luxury of an IRB. While action researchers,
as you point out, are unlikely to have access
to such rigorous formal review processes, the
source strongly advises them to seek out equally
vital alternative forms of oversight. Alternative
oversight, like what? Well, it's not about cutting
corners. It's about adapting the principle of
ethical review to their specific context. This
includes having a knowledgeable outsider. An
outsider. Yeah, someone external to the immediate
project, maybe a colleague from another school,
a retired educator, perhaps a community leader
with relevant expertise, someone who can look
at it with fresh eyes. They should have that
person review their methods. And crucially, they
should involve school administrators in this
review as well. OK, so getting a second opinion.
Exactly. It serves as a vital check and balance.
For instance, an action researcher might ask
a colleague, a critical friend, to review their
consent forms. To make sure they're clear for
parents and students. Precisely. Or to look over
interview questions to make sure they aren't
leading or overly personal. They might present
their data collection plan to their principal,
outlining how anonymity will be maintained, how
data will be stored securely. So it provides
that layer of accountability. It does. It ensures
the approach is appropriate, ethically sound,
and respects all the principles we discussed,
even without a dedicated board overseeing it.
It's about self -regulation, but with external
eyes providing that check. OK, that makes a lot
of sense. So bringing this all together, what
does this mean for you, our listener, as you
navigate this world just brimming with data?
This deep dive into the ethics of data collection,
especially in education, has really underscored
a few key things for me. First, those fundamental
ethical responsibilities. Respect, ensuring privacy,
the right to withdraw their non -negotiable foundations
for any data collection. Absolutely. Bedrock
principles. Second, we've seen how powerful,
and maybe sometimes permanent, the influence
of data can be, especially when it's reported
back to us. How it subtly shapes our self -perception,
potentially our future paths, whether it's that
fourth grade grade or a performance metric at
work today. That lasting echo. Yeah. And finally,
the vital role of review processes. Whether it's
a formal IRB in a big institution or those informal
external reviews for individual educators, they're
crucial for safeguarding these principles. And
it really reminds us, doesn't it, that data isn't
just abstract information or numbers on a spreadsheet.
No, definitely not. It's deeply interwoven with
individual experiences, perceptions, even identities,
particularly within the sensitive context of
education. Understanding these ethical layers
helps us all engage with information both when
we receive it and maybe when we create it with
greater awareness. And critical thinking. And
critical thinking, yes. And a much needed sense
of responsibility. It transforms data from just
being a commodity into something that demands
really profound ethical consideration. It influences
how we see ourselves and others. So here's a
final thought for you to mull over as you go
about your day. When you reflect on your own
educational journey or maybe even your professional
life now. Can you identify a single piece of
data, perhaps a grade, a specific comment from
a teacher or a manager, maybe an assessment result,
something that was reported back to you? And
how might that information, looking back, have
subtly shaped your self -perception, your beliefs
about your own abilities, or even your path forward
in life? That's a powerful question. It really
is. A question about the quiet, sometimes hidden,
but very real echoes of data in all our personal
histories.