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

Maintaining students' privacy in higher education, an integral aspect of learning design and technology integration, is not only a matter of policy and law but also a matter of design ethics. Similar to faculty educators, learning designers in higher education play a vital role in maintaining students' privacy by designing learning experiences that rely on online technology integration. Like other professional designers, they need to care for the humans they design for by not producing designs that infringe on their privacy, thus, not causing harm. Recognizing that widely used instructional design models are silent on the topic and do not address ethical considerations such as privacy, we focus this paper on how design ethics can be leveraged by learning designers in higher education in a practical manner, illustrated through authentic examples. We highlight where the ethical responsibility of learning designers comes into the foreground when maintaining students' privacy and well-being, especially in online settings. We outline an existing ethical decision-making framework and show how learning designers can use it as a call to action to protect the students they design for, strengthening their ethical design capacity.

Practitioner notes

What is already known about this topic

• Existing codes of ethical standards from well-known learning design organizations call upon learning designers to protect students' privacy without clear guidance on how to do so.
• Design ethics within learning design is often discussed in abstract ways with principles that are difficult to apply.
• Most, if not all, design models that learning design professionals have learned are either silent on design ethics and/or do not consider ethics as a valid dimension, thus, making design ethics mostly excluded from learning design graduate programs.
• Practical means for engaging in ethical design practice are scarce in the field.

What this paper adds

• A call for learning designers in higher education to maintain and protect students' privacy and well-being, strengthening their ethical design capacity.
• A demonstration of how to use a practical ethical decision-making framework as a designerly tool in designing for learning to maintain and protect students' privacy and well-being.
• Authentic examples—in the form of vignettes—of ethical dilemmas/issues that learning designers in higher education could face, focused on students' privacy.
• Methods—using a practical ethical decision-making framework—for learning design professionals in higher education, grounded in the philosophy of designers as the guarantors of designs, to be employed to detect situations where students' privacy and best interests are at risk.
• A demonstration of how learning designers could make stellar design decisions in service to the students they design for and not to the priorities of other design stakeholders.

Implications for practice and/or policy

• Higher education programs/institutions that prepare/employ learning designers ought to treat the topics of the designer's responsibility and design ethics more explicitly and practically as one of the means to maintain and protect students' privacy, in addition to law and policies.
• Learning designers in higher education ought to hold a powerful position in their professional practice to maintain and protect students' privacy and well-being, as an important aspect of their ethical design responsibilities.
• Learning designers in higher education ought to adopt a design thinking mindset in order to protect students' privacy by (1) challenging ideas and assumptions regarding technology integration in general and (2) detecting what is known in User Experience (UX) design as “dark patterns” in online course design.

     

Examining Instructional Design Principles Applied by Experienced Designers in Practice

There has been ongoing debate regarding the efficacy of teaching instructional design models to novice designers given that experienced instructional designers often use principles and adapted models when they engage in the instructional design problem‐solving process. This study utilized the Delphi technique to identify a core set of guiding principles used by designers in their practice. The purpose of this study was (1) to examine and describe the principles that guided instructional designers’ practice and (2) to identify the extent to which participants’ frames of reference included components of the ADDIE instructional design model. Sixty‐one principles were ultimately identified (reached consensus among the Delphi panel members). Thirty‐two of the principles aligned with the primary components of the design process (e.g., analysis, design, development, and evaluation). Additional principles (n = 29) related to other characteristics of design such as communication, project management, and design characteristics.     

Empathy in Distance Learning Design Practice

The notion of designer empathy has become a cornerstone of design philosophy in fields such as product design, human-computer interaction, and service design. But the literature on instructional designer empathy and learner analysis suggests that distance learning designers are generally quite removed from the learners with whom they could be empathizing. We describe a qualitative study conducted with practicing distance learning designers across the United States. We selected designers in varying sectors within the workforce, and interviewed our participants via videoconferencing. Our inquiry uncovered important tensions designers live with regarding empathy in practice. Designers struggle to know how much learner analysis is sufficient, which of many stakeholders to empathize with, and navigating constraints. Future work in this area could help designers practice more empathically and, in doing so, improve the learning environments they create for learners.     

“There’s got to be a better way to do this”: a qualitative investigation of informal learning among instructional designers

This study employed a qualitative research design to investigate informal learning among practicing instructional designers. Prior research has examined how instructional designers spend their time, make decisions, use theory, solve problems, and so on, but no published research has explored the nature and role of informal learning in instructional design work. Based on intensive interviews of practitioners in the field, this study produced eight themes organized according to two metathemes: (a) the nature of informal learning in instructional design practice and (b) instructional design as informal learning. Specific themes concerned what instructional designers learn through informal practical experience, how they learn it, and the meaning of this kind of learning for various aspects of their work. Overall, these results suggest that informal learning is a vital part of instructional design practice and that design itself can be thought of as a specialized type of informal learning. Other conclusions regarding informal learning in design are discussed and future directions for research are offered.     

网络课程建设中移情式设计的应用

移情式设计是一种对学生进行感受进入,对学生世界进行移情性体验的新型设计方式。移情式网络课程设计要求设计人员融入学生和教师中去,站在他们的角度去思考问题、分析问题,同时师生共同参与到网络课程设计中来,通过不断地多次移情全面深入地了解学生的需求,从而设计出切合学生个性需求的网络课程。     

The Use of Task Analysis Procedures by Instructional Designers

The purpose of this study was to learn about the use of task analysis procedures by instructional designers. Task analysis is regarded by many to be the most integral part of the instructional design process and the most technical aspect of the instructional designer's job. It is also thought to be the most ambiguous of the instructional design, processes. A questionnaire was developed that surveyed 164 members of the International Society for Performance Improvement (ISPI) and the Association for Educational Communications and Technology (AECT) with instructional design responsibilities. This research learned what instructional design activities designers associate with task analysis and the percentage of time instructional designers devote to task analysis. It also learned what task analysis methods are most and least often used by instructional designers and identified those task analysis methods not known by instructional designers. Finally, this study determined how instructional designers learn to conduct task analyses and the factors that impact task analysis practices.     

Bodystorming Mobile Learning Experiences

Bodystorming is a technique used by designers to better understand how the settings where interactive systems are deployed might affect their intended uses. The articulation of design concepts “in the wild” and using forms of performance and improvisation are intended to help designers become more aware of contextual issues that may not be revealed in traditional brainstorming exercises. Bodystorming can be a useful technique for designers of mobile learning experiences, as it helps make interactions between learners, devices, and locations more explicit. The general method is described in this paper and followed by two case studies of its use in the design of mobile learning experiences.     

An examination of the decision-making process used by designers in multiple disciplines

Design-thinking is an inductive and participatory process in which designers are required to manage constraints, generate solutions, and follow project timelines in order to complete project goals. The researchers used this exploration study to look at how designers in various disciplinary fields approach design projects. Designers were asked to describe a project and a decision that they had to make previously. Decisions were analyzed to determine whether they were ready-made versus custom-made solutions. The process by which the designers arrived at the decisions was categorized as idea-imposition or discovery. Results indicated that designers work with multiple constraints while designing, and the majority used a custom-made solution following a discovery process.     

Designer Thinking: How Novices and Experts Think About Instructional Design

Instructional design can be characterized as a complex problem-solving task, yet little is known about what cognitive processes it requires. This research sought to identify differences in the thinking of expert and novice instructional designers given the same design task. A talk-aloud procedure was used to capture their problem-solving procedures and representations while designing instruction for a computer simulation. A coding scheme based on design principles, strategies, and subtasks was applied to the verbal protocols. Quantitative and qualitative analyses indicated that expert and novice instructional designers do appear to use divergent design paths. These design paths were further analyzed using design trees.     

Enhancing instructional design efficiency: Methodologies employed by instructional designers

Instructional systems design (ISD) has been frequently criticised as taking too long to implement, calling for a reduction in cycle time—the time that elapses between project initiation and delivery. While instructional design research has historically focused on increasing learner efficiencies, the study of what instructional designers do to increase efficiency during the design of instruction, including web‐based training, has not yet been fully examined. The purpose of this qualitative developmental study was to identify and understand the methodologies used by experienced instructional designers to increase the efficiency of the instructional design process. Data were gathered from 11 instructional designers working within two business and industry consulting firms that provide learning solutions to global clients. Results revealed 47 efficiency methodologies found within the four categories of design model, instructional design team member roles, instructional design processes and instructional design tools. Additionally, 14 supporting instructional designer competencies were found within the category of instructional designer knowledge, skills and attitudes.     

How Expert Designers Design

Two studies were carried out with expert educational designers at Arthur Andersen and the Open University of the Netherlands to determine the priorities they employed when designing competence‐based learning environments. Designers in a university context and in a business context agree almost completely on what principles are important, the most important being that one should start a design enterprise from the needs of the learners, instead of the content structure of the learning do main. The main difference between the two groups is that university designers find it extremely important to consider alternative solutions during the whole design process; something that is considerably less important by business designers. University designers also tend to focus on the project plan and the desired characteristics of the instructional blueprint whereas business designers were much more client‐oriented and stressed the importance of “buying in” the client early in the process.     

Preparing Instructional Designers for Game-Based Learning: Part III. Game Design as a Collaborative Process

In this three part series, four professors who teach graduate level courses on the design of instructional video games discuss their perspectives on preparing instructional designers to optimize game-based learning. Part I set the context for the series and one of four panelists discussed what he believes instructional designers should know about instructional game design. In Part II, two faculty members who teach courses on instructional game design presented their perspectives on preparing instructional designers for game-based learning. Part III presents a fourth perspective along with conclusion that contrasts the four views posited in Parts I-III.     

中国画笔墨元素在招贴设计中的运用研究

笔墨元素是中国画重要的语言形式,也是中国文化重要的传承载体,以其富有意象性和民族性的特点赢得了招贴设计者的青睐,也是群众所乐于接受的招贴形式。招贴设计要善于借鉴和运用中国画笔墨元素,使笔墨语言与设计主题相协调,形成中国招贴设计自己独特的审美思想和设计风格,创造更多的优秀作品,这也是中国招贴设计走向现代化和全球化的重要途径。     

How do instructional designers evaluate? A qualitative study of evaluation in practice

This study employed a qualitative research design to investigate how instructional designers use evaluation in everyday design practice. While past research has examined how designers spend their time, how they generally make decisions, and expert-novice differences, little attention has been paid to use of context, input, process, or product evaluation, from the perspective of practicing designers. Based on interviews of practitioners, our findings included ten themes regarding how designers use evaluation to improve their products. While these results substantiate to some degree the claim that practitioners believe clients will not pay for formal evaluations, they also suggest that practitioners use evaluation in important but less formal ways. Other conclusions regarding the role of evaluation in design are provided and future directions for training and research are discussed.     

Teaching Instructional Design: An Apprenticeship Model

Several cognitive psychologists have written about the importance of placing instruction within “authentic” contexts that mirror real-life situations. They argue that knowledge learned in academic settings does not necessarily transfer to non-academic settings. Whether preparing performance technologists or instructional designers, educators must strive to create meaningful problem-solving contexts that enable students to define, and subsequently solve, real-world problems. In an attempt to address this issue we have modified the way we teach instructional design. This paper discusses a cognitive apprenticeship approach to teaching design, which incorporates elements of modeling, coaching, reflection, articulation, and exploration. We describe how these features are embedded within three phases (orientation, situated training/learning, and exploration) of an introductory instructional design course designed to move our novice designers along a continuum of expertise as they develop and refine their own professional design skills. Although the apprenticeship model described here specifically addresses concerns within the context of preparing instructional designers, we believe that this model can be adapted to address similar issues in the education of performance technologists.