Week 14 Article Reflections (April 28th)

Hello everyone! I apologize for the delay in my posting on this topic. This semester has been very beneficial to my learning, and I look forward to bringing what I learned from this course into my career. Below you will find my thoughts for week 14! 

This image was created using ChatGPT. It perfectly depicts the ideas from this week!

Article 1: Technology integration in higher education and student privacy beyond learning environments: A comparison of the UK and US perspective 

This study by Giuffrida and Hall (2023) shows how differently the US and UK approach student data privacy. The UK’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) creates a stricter legal framework around student information. This framework helps provide tighter protections and clearer institutional responsibilities. On the other hand, the US relies more on sector-specific laws like FERPA, which can leave gaps as universities adopt more sophisticated technologies. Giuffrida and Hall argue that as higher education institutions increasingly use tech that collects vast amounts of personal data, both countries must rethink policies to safeguard students within the classroom and in broader digital environments. This comparison made me wonder if a global standard for student privacy could eventually emerge, or whether local political values will always shape national privacy laws.

Article 2: The role of design ethics in maintaining students' privacy: A call to action to learning designers in higher education 

Lachheb et al. (2023) focus on a more human-centered solution of ethical learning design. Rather than just depending on compliance with regulations, the authors call on instructional designers to embed privacy principles into every course and platform creation. They emphasize concepts like data minimization, informed consent, and transparency. I appreciated how this article positioned privacy as a legal issue and a design responsibility. It’s a great reminder that technology can either protect or exploit users depending on the choices designers make. Especially in higher ed, where power imbalances between institutions and students exist, ethical design becomes an act of justice.

Article 3: An exploration of instructors' perceptions about online proctoring and its value in ensuring academic integrity

In this final article, Gribbins and Bonk (2023) explore the controversial aspect of technology use, which is online proctoring. The authors found mixed feelings among instructors. Many believe proctoring tools help deter cheating, but they also recognize the significant downsides: student anxiety, privacy violations, and accessibility challenges. Some instructors expressed concern that surveillance-based methods could harm trust between students and faculty. This article reinforced for me the idea that technology should never be a substitute for strong pedagogy. Students who feel respected and engaged are less likely to cheat, without needing to be constantly watched. This study also made me think of my 4th graders as we are gearing up for state testing, all of which is done entirely online nowadays. I know my students will not try to cheat during these exams, but I do worry their actual knowledge may not be shown because it is a computer-based test, while the rest of the assessments they took this year were pencil and paper. 

Across all three readings, there is a common thread that technology in higher education offers powerful opportunities and serious ethical responsibilities. Student privacy and trust must be central considerations. Universities, designers, and faculty need to proactively create learning environments where students can feel safe, respected, and fairly treated. 

References

Giuffrida, I., & Hall, A. (2021). Technology integration in higher education and student privacy beyond learning environments—A comparison of the UK and US perspective. British Journal of Educational Technology, 52(5), 1945–1960.

Lachheb, A., Abramenka-Lachheb, V., Moore, S., & Gray, C. M. (2022). The role of design ethics in maintaining students' privacy: A call to action to learning designers in higher education. British Journal of Educational Technology, 53(6), 1444–1458. 

Gribbins, M., & Bonk, C. J. (2023). An exploration of instructors' perceptions about online proctoring and its value in ensuring academic integrity. Online Learning, 27(1), 163–186.

OpenAI. (2025). Cartoon illustration of student privacy, online proctoring, and technology in higher education [AI-generated image]. ChatGPT.