• What We Do
  • Our Team
  • Our Associates
  • Portfolio
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
  • Gender Digital Divide Course
  • About
Menu

Panoply Digital

Sustainable development through appropriate technology
  • What We Do
  • Our Team
  • Our Associates
  • Portfolio
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
  • Gender Digital Divide Course
  • About

Blog

  • November 2018 1
  • October 2018 1
  • August 2018 2
  • June 2018 2
  • May 2018 1
  • April 2018 3
  • March 2018 3
  • February 2018 3
  • January 2018 2
  • December 2017 4
  • November 2017 2
  • October 2017 3
  • September 2017 7
  • August 2017 3
  • July 2017 5
  • June 2017 4
  • May 2017 3
  • April 2017 4
  • March 2017 5
  • February 2017 4
  • January 2017 3
  • December 2016 2
  • November 2016 3
  • October 2016 2
  • September 2016 5
  • August 2016 4
  • July 2016 4
  • June 2016 4
  • May 2016 5
  • April 2016 4
  • March 2016 3
  • February 2016 4
  • January 2016 4
  • December 2015 2
  • November 2015 4
  • October 2015 4
  • September 2015 4
  • August 2015 4
  • July 2015 4
  • June 2015 5
  • May 2015 4
  • April 2015 4
  • March 2015 5
  • February 2015 2
  • January 2015 1
  • November 2014 1
research-1024x1024.png
By Michael Gallagher

Ethics in Mobile for Development (M4D): My Take at Panoply

March 8, 2015

As my particular focus in mlearning both in the developing and developed contexts, I tend to extend the inviolability of the teacher-student relationship into other aspects of my work here at Panoply, namely research, evaluation, and development projects. I take it seriously as do my colleagues. That teacher-student relationship is sacred to me; as such, I tend to apply that same weight to my research relationships, my evaluation relationships, or any relationship that I have within the work at Panoply Digital. There are things you can and cannot ethically do in this context. Corporate maxims like Don't Be Evil don't extend nearly as far as I would like when dealing with actual people in development contexts. Do no harm, while instructive, feels incomplete. So, we are left with the evolving role of ethics. The ethics of dealing with live people in live contexts where participation can reasonably provide both benefit and harm. Linda Raftree has written convincingly about this (and with much more nuance than I am able to present here) in the context of open development;  John Traxler has further written extensively on ethics in the mobile context. Tim Unwin and Matt Haikin have all proven instructive in my work as well. I refer often to BERA’s Ethical Guidelines for Research or the AERA’s Research Ethics. As I am based, I follow closely Korea’s research ethics developments. There are many more writers and resources I could point to, but ultimately, ethics involves the practical application of idea into activity. So this post is about essentially the preliminary steps as I see them towards establishing a baseline for ethical research in the development context that apparently was a lot cloudier than I had realized. Many of the following are more a wishlist than an actual recommendation, but bear with me.

Systems & Organizations

  1. Stop avoiding the ethical discussion. It is upon us and we can’t, nor shouldn’t, be trying to avoid it. Address it head on as a community. Negotiate a more robust ethical framework as a community. Demand that it be used as a community. At the organizational level, have the conversation and invest in the time to let it evolve. Ethics is an active negotiation of context, an active discussion. Putting the teacher hat on for a second, ethics is an ongoing reflection of right action in a particular context. Set aside time for it.
  2. Invest in tools, systems, and platforms with great caution. Again with the teacher hat on, for open learning I point to the Courseras of the world here (or any tool with fuzzy data collection policies), whose privacy policy is relatively clear about what types of data they collect. Distinguishing between non-personal and personally identifiable information feels like legalese for saying we collect all information. And saying they value confidentiality and privacy highly and then listing all the ways they share this information is standard legal copy, but it is copy we should be aware of as educators, researchers, and the like. No excuses for us to be ignorant of its existence. We should know they collect and use a lot of data that we provide. Whether that is wrong or ethically unsound is for us to decide. We shouldn’t claim ignorance after the fact, though.
  3. By all means work with tools, applications, or organizations if you feel that provides an opportunity for you as an organization to extend the impact of your education. These are tools in a toolkit. But they are also aggregations of more than just code or machinery. They are tangible aggregations of values, intent, and purpose. Sometimes these values and intentions will merge with yours; sometimes they won't. But in this instance, the ethics involved isn't as much about us as development professionals as it is about the environments or people we are, for lack of a better word, trying to help 'develop'. Who is speaking for them?
  4. Dictate to the technology providers what you want ethically. Let the technology become a breathing extension of your ethical policy. Don't slam the square peg of your ethical policy into the technological circle hole. At the end of the day, these platforms cannot exist without your explicit approval, either in terms of use, content, and reputation. In short, don’t invest in platforms that aren’t bound by your ethics. There are plenty of options to get behind, who provide a relatively transparent structure. FrontlineSMS, the tools developed by Ushahidi, etc. There are many examples. Just do the research to see if these tools, and the values they represent, mesh with your ethical policy.
  5. Be pragmatic, but responsible. Yes, we are working towards pragmatic ends in development, but that doesn't equate to some sort of free pass in terms of data collection, in terms of anonymity or confidentiality, in terms of informed consent just for a perceived greater good. We implicitly signal in each shortcut or ethical breach our disrespect, our value judgment as to who deserves what treatment.

Individually

  1. Working with commercial platforms/vendors/options/technology does involve entering a domain where you, an ethical practitioner, won’t have full control over the data being collected or made visible to parties other than the individual who created it. It is a fact. However, that doesn’t mean you wave your rights to input ethics into the discussion. It doesn’t mean you wave your responsibility to investigate the tools being used, to understand what risks that poses to the individuals involved, to understand what data is being collected and by whom is it being seen. We don’t live in a world any longer where we can play dumb on these technology issues. I might not know how to code as well as I should, but I sure am going to know what I am exposing participants to if I ask them to use a particular application or technology. Ethics begins right here. Evaluate the tools you are going to use.
  2. Evaluate the potential for full and absolute disclosure when using mobile or educational technology (or both). Is it possible to receive informed consent from the participant? If not, truly ask if you should be doing it. Others might find the ambiguity in this issue and come to a different conclusion (and that might make more sense in other fields). Ethics are made visible in applied activity. Informed consent is a mandate and not a suggestion. Sure there is response bias and sure it colors the results, but that is a response cost worth paying. Your desire as a researcher or teacher or practitioner to get an answer does not trump an individual’s right not to be manipulated without their consent. If someone is in your study, they need to know and agree to being in your study. If someone is participating in your development project, make sure they know.
  3. Beyond do no harm, we need to reorient our research and development focus to protection. We establish guidelines, we generate projects that enact those guidelines, we get informed consent. This is good, but there is a step beyond this. We need to protect our participants as journalists protect sources. By taking these research or development projects on, we assume, implicitly, this role. We champion their right to privacy; we expose, very publicly, attempts to thwart their right to confidentiality. We protect them at every turn. If my work depended on doing something I felt was exposing my participants, I would stop doing that work. It really isn’t integrity if it isn’t tested, is it? This will never be the case for the vast majority of us, but we should consider this the potential outcome of any research we undertake.

All of these are places to start. The ethical discussion can't be avoided, so consider having it now.

In News Tags ethics, ICT4D, m4d, mlearning
← Strange bedfellows: Uber + UN Women unite for... what?!Mobile Learning Week 2015: learning from successes (and failures) →

Recent Posts

Featured
SDGs accelerating mobility and massification in (higher) education
Nov 30, 2018
SDGs accelerating mobility and massification in (higher) education
Nov 30, 2018

A few caveats at the onset here. This reads a bit more like an academic piece which it largely is. It is drawn from something larger I wrote a bit ago for another paper. It might also read like an attack on the SDGs, which is not my point. The point here is that the SDGs have generated some incredible results and I sincerely support them, but we must be mindful of what is being mobilised in our pursuit of them. My focus is education and I suggest that the provisions of the SDGs related specifically to that field suggest particular scaled interventions (or at least make those approaches particularly attractive). Scale exacts pressure on particular types of education.

Read More →
Nov 30, 2018
Digital education, Syrian displaced academics, and mushrooms: report from a recent workshop in Turkey
Oct 5, 2018
Digital education, Syrian displaced academics, and mushrooms: report from a recent workshop in Turkey
Oct 5, 2018

As part of my association with the Centre for Research in Digital Education at the University of Edinburgh (a version of this post appears there as well), I recently traveled with colleagues to deliver a three day workshop on digital education for Syrian academics who have been displaced by the conflict. The University has worked for a long time with the Council for At-Risk Academics (CARA), a great organisation providing urgently-needed help to academics in immediate danger, those forced into exile, and many who choose to work on in their home countries despite serious risks.

Read More →
Oct 5, 2018
Five things to consider for improving our ICT4D interventions
Aug 29, 2018
Five things to consider for improving our ICT4D interventions
Aug 29, 2018

We seem to have endless ideas on how to use Information and Communication Technologies for Development (ICT4D). From job creation to women’s empowerment to civic participation, a number of ICT4D interventions have been developed and implemented over the years. Common question asked in my work is “what type of technology that might have biggest impact in our society in the coming years?”. As we have learned, ICTs in itself aren’t sufficient. While factors contributing to the success of ICT4D have become apparent, and many have written about them, I feel there's still a need to highlight some of them.

Read More →
Aug 29, 2018
Aug 20, 2018
How Relevant was Bridge International Academies' EdTech Intervention in Liberia?
Aug 20, 2018

We have been some of the most vocal critics of Bridge International Academies (BIA), largely because most investigations and evaluations of their edtech impact to improve schooling in sub-Saharan Africa have been less than spectacular (many would say the impact is non-existent). So imagine our surprise to see Wayan Vota's latest ICTworks™ post highlighting the successes of BIA in Liberia.

Read More →
Aug 20, 2018
Stories of innovation and gender imbalance: in conversation with Tanya Accone
Jun 8, 2018
Stories of innovation and gender imbalance: in conversation with Tanya Accone
Jun 8, 2018

We need to make women in innovation more visible, and correct the gender imbalance in the stories we tell. We need to tell more stories about the women working at the top of humanitarian innovation, and so today I sat down with Tanya Accone, Senior Advisor at UNICEF Innovation, to tell the story of a woman working at the top of a very visible humanitarian innovation team for a very visible humanitarian agency.

Read More →
Jun 8, 2018
Surfacing local practice, placelessness, and digital education
Jun 4, 2018
Surfacing local practice, placelessness, and digital education
Jun 4, 2018

We do a lot of work on open learning as well and it was clear there was tension between these open educational platforms (like Coursera, edX, etc.) and their use in local contexts, particularly in emerging economies. There is tension there. Open educational technologies are too often framed as a transparent instrument for educational export, keeping (specifically Western or Global North) curricula, pedagogy, and educational values intact whilst they are broadcast to a global population in deficit.

Read More →
Jun 4, 2018
May 22, 2018
Got bots? A beginners guide to Facebook (chat)bots 4 good
May 22, 2018

I remember when I first started hearing the buzz about bots. My first thought? 'Here we go again...' - a reaction to the endless cycles of hype followed by business-as-usual that typifies the digital sector. However, over the past few months I've had the opportunity to design a few 'bots 4 good', and I'd like to share what I've learned: how they work, what they could be useful for, and where to start if you'd like to get one. I believe that done well, they could be really useful add-ons to your digital strategy as they provide a rich 'in-between' space for mobile users who aren't fully digitally literate.

Read More →
May 22, 2018
How can we ensure that the citizens, government and civil society work together?
Apr 25, 2018
How can we ensure that the citizens, government and civil society work together?
Apr 25, 2018

Last week, I was at TICTeC 2018 where researchers, activists and practitioners discussed the impact of civic technology, or civic tech. This blogpost summarises the discussion of Two heads are better than one: working with governments.

Read More →
Apr 25, 2018
Apr 15, 2018
The Nexus of ICT4D and Environmental Justice: A US Perspective
Apr 15, 2018

Well, as a Black American woman from a low-income background, I constantly say that "development" not only takes place in Africa, Asia, and any other place typically associated with the Global South. There are several places even in the world's "richest" country that reflect not only deprivation but what happens when environmental justice is not served. In light of this and in honor of Earth Day on Monday April 22, in this post I will focus on the nexus of ICT4D and environmental justice in the US.

Read More →
Apr 15, 2018
AI in ICT4D: Accumulated Advantage, Data Driven Bias and Invisibility, and Ethical Care
Apr 10, 2018
AI in ICT4D: Accumulated Advantage, Data Driven Bias and Invisibility, and Ethical Care
Apr 10, 2018

With artificial intelligence (and perhaps with all things technological), we as humans seem to run the gamut between dystopian visions of complete AI takeover and dysfunction (think HAL) and utopian daydreams of gracious ubiquity where personal assistants attend to the less pleasant aspects of daily life (think every edtech advertisement ever, and an increasing portion of Amazon’s advertising budget it would seem). AI is pervasive, regardless of how you critique it.

Read More →
Apr 10, 2018

© 2018 Panoply Digital Ltd. Incorporated at Companies House as Company Number 938241.