Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

While universities routinely use student data to monitor and predict student performance, there has been limited engagement with student and staff views, social and ethical issues, policy development, and ethical guidance. We reviewed peer-reviewed and grey-literature articles of 2007 to 2018 describing the perspectives of staff and students in tertiary education on the use of student-generated data in data analytics, including learning analytics. We used an ethics framework to categorize the findings. There was considerable variation but generally low awareness and understanding amongst students and staff about the nature and extent of data collection, data analytics, and use of predictive analytics. Staff and students identified potential benefits but also expressed concerns about misinterpretation of data, constant surveillance, poor transparency, inadequate support, and potential to impede active learning. This review supports the contention that consideration of ethical issues has failed to keep pace with the development of predictive analytics in the tertiary sector.

Keywords

data analytics big data tertiary education ethics perspectives

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

*Adejo

Connolly

(2017). Learning analytics in a shared-network educational environment: Ethical issues and countermeasures. Learning, 8(4), 22–29. https://doi.org/10.14569/IJACSA.2017.080404

Aitken

Cunningham-Burley

Pagliari

(2016). Moving from trust to trustworthiness: Experiences of public engagement in the Scottish Health Informatics Programme. Science and Public Policy, 43(5), 713–723. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scv075

Allen

Holman

C. D.

Meslin

E. M.

Stanley

(2013). Privacy protectionism and health information: Is there any redress for harms to health? Journal of Law and Medicine, 21(2), 473–485.

Andrejevic

(2014). Surveillance in the big data era. In Pimple

(Ed.), Emerging pervasive information and communication technologies (Vol. 11, pp. 55–69). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6833-8_4

Arksey

O’Malley

(2005). Scoping studies: Towards a methodological framework. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8(1), 19–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/1364557032000119616

*Arnold

K. E.

Pistilli

M. D.

(2012). Course signals at Purdue: Using learning analytics to increase student success. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge (pp. 267–270). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/2330601.2330666

*Arnold

K. E.

Sclater

(2017). Student perceptions of their privacy in leaning analytics applications. In Proceedings of the Seventh International Learning Analytics & Knowledge Conference (pp. 66–69). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/3027385.3027392

Arras

(1991). Getting down to cases: The revival of casuistry in bioethics. Journal of Medicine & Philosophy, 16(1), 29–51. https://doi.org/10.1093/jmp/16.1.29

*Atif

Bilgin

Richards

(2015). Student preferences and attitudes to the use of early alerts [Paper presentation]. Twenty-first Americas Conference on Information Systems, Puerto Rico. http://aisel.aisnet.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1297&context=amcis2015

10.

Baert

Shipman

(2005) University under siege? European Societies, 7(1), 157–185. http://doi.org/10.1080/1461669042000327063

11.

Barocas

Nissenbaum

(2014). Big data’s end run around procedural privacy protections. In Lane

Stodden

Bender

Nissenbaum

(Eds.), Privacy big data and the public good: Frameworks for engagement (pp. 44–75). Cambridge University Press.

12.

Baruh

Popescu

(2017). Big data analytics and the limits of privacy self-management. New Media & Society, 19(4), 579–596. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444815614001

13.

Beauchamp

T. L.

(2019). The principle of beneficence in applied ethics. In Zalta

E. N.

(Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Spring 2019 ed.). Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2019/entries/principle-beneficence/

14.

Beauchamp

T. L.

Childress

J. F.

(2008). Principles of biomedical ethics (6th ed.). Oxford University Press.

15.

Berry

Gold

Ryan

Duszynski

Braunack-Mayer

(2012). Public perspectives on consent for the linkage of data to evaluate vaccine safety. Vaccine, 30(28), 4167–4174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2012.04.056

16.

*Bischel

(2012). Analytics in higher education: Benefits, barriers, progress and recommendations [Research report]. EDUCAUSE Center for Applied Research. http://www.educause.edu/ecar

17.

*Brooker

Corrin

Fisher

Mirriahi

. (2017). Defining “data” in conversations with students about the ethical use of learning analytics. In Partridge

Davis

Thomas

(Eds.), Me, us, it! Proceedings Ascilite 2017: 34th International Conference on Innovation, Practice and Research in the Use of Educational Technologies in Tertiary Education (pp. 27–31). University of Southern Queensland. http://2017conference.ascilite.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Concise-BROOKER.pdf

18.

Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, & Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. (2014, December). Tri-council policy statement: Ethical conduct for research involving humans. Government of Canada. https://ethics.gc.ca/eng/documents/TCPS_2-2014_FINAL_Web.pdf

19.

Christman

(2018). Autonomy in moral and political philosophy. In Zalta

E. N.

(Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Spring 2018 ed.). Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2018/entries/autonomy-moral/

20.

Clouser

Gert

(1990). A critique of principlism. Journal of Medicine & Philosophy, 15(2), 219–236. https://doi.org/10.1093/jmp/15.2.219

21.

Colvin

Rogers

Wade

Dawson

Gašević

Buckingham Shum

Fisher

(2015). Student retention and learning analytics: A snapshot of Australian practices and a framework for advancement: Final report 2015. Australian Government Office for Learning and Teaching. https://www.research.ed.ac.uk/portal/files/21121591/Final_Report_190615.pdf

22.

*Corrin

De Barba

(2014). Exploring students’ interpretation of feedback delivered through learning analytics dashboards. In Hegarty

McDonald

Loke

S.-K.

(Eds.), Rhetoric and Reality: Critical perspectives on educational technology. Proceedings of ASCILITE Dunedin 2014 (pp. 629–633). Ascilite. http://www.ascilite.org/conferences/dunedin2014/files/concisepapers/223-Corrin.pdf

23.

*Corrin

Kennedy

Mulder

(2013). Enhancing learning analytics by understanding the needs of teachers. In Carter

Gosper

Hedberg

(Eds.), Electric dreams: 30th Ascilite conference (pp. 201–205). Macquarie University. http://www.ascilite.org/conferences/sydney13/program/papers/Corrin.pdf

24.

Culnan

Carlin

(2009). Online privacy practices in higher education: Making the grade? Communications of the ACM, 52(3), 126–130. https://doi.org/10.1145/1467247.1467277

25.

Daniel

B. K.

(2019). Big Data and data science: A critical review of issues for educational research. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(1), 101–113. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12595

26.

Darwin

(2017). Harnessing the potential of the student voice to enhance curriculum (re)formation. In Walker

R. G.

Bedford

S. B.

(Eds.), Research and development in higher education: Curriculum transformation. Refereed papers from the 40th HERDSA annual international conference (Vol. 40, pp. 141–152). Higher Education Research and Development Society of Australasia. https://www.herdsa.org.au/research-and-development-higher-education-vol-40-141

27.

Davis

F. E.

(1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–339. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008

28.

Degeling

Rychetnik

Street

Thomas

Carter

S. M.

(2017). Influencing health policy through public deliberation: Lessons learned from two decades of citizens’/community juries. Social Science & Medicine, 179, 166–171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2017.03.003

29.

*Dobozy

(2017). University lecturer views on pedagogic lurking. In Proceedings of the IEEE 17th international conference on advanced learning technologies, ICALT 2017 (pp. 1–2). Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICALT.2017.26

30.

Drachsler

Greller

(2012). The pulse of learning analytics understandings and expectations from the stakeholders. In Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on learning analytics and knowledge (pp. 120–129). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/2330601.2330634

31.

Economic and Social Research Council. (2015). Framework for research ethics. https://esrc.ukri.org/files/funding/guidance-for-applicants/esrc-framework-for-research-ethics-2015/

32.

Enders

(2013). The university in the audit society: on accountability, trust and markets. In Engwall

Scott

(eds.), Trust in universities (pp.53–68). Wenner-Gren International Series; No. 86, Portland Press.

33.

Engelhardt

T. R.

(1986). The foundations of bioethics. Oxford University Press.

34.

Faden

R. R.

Beauchamp

T. L.

(1986). A history and theory of informed consent. Oxford University Press.

35.

Feinberg

(1986). Harm to self: The moral limits of the criminal law (Vol. 3). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/0195046641.001.0001

36.

Ferguson

(2012). Learning analytics: Drivers, developments and challenges. International Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning, 4(5/6), 304–317. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJTEL.2012.051816

37.

Gasevic

Mirriahi

Long

Dawson

(2014). Editorial: Inaugural issue of the Journal of Learning Analytics. Journal of Learning Analytics, 1(1), 1–2. https://doi.org/10.18608/jla.2014.11.1

38.

Gómez-Vírseda

de Maeseneer

Gastmans

(2019). Relational autonomy: What does it mean and how is it used in end-of-life care? A systematic review of argument-based ethics literature. BMC Medical Ethics, 20, Article 76. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-019-0417-3

39.

Greller

Drachsler

(2012). Translating learning into numbers: A generic framework for learning analytics. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 15(3), 42–57.

40.

Gutmann

(1987). Democratic education. Princeton University Press.

41.

Hart

H. L. A.

(1961). The concept of law. Clarendon Press.

42.

*Havergal

(2016, February 25). Students favour use of learning analytics: Jisc. Times Higher Education. https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/jisc-finds-most-students-happy-share-data-learning-analytics

43.

Heath

(2014). Contemporary privacy theory contributions to learning analytics. Journal of Learning Analytics, 1(1), 140–149. https://doi.org/10.18608/jla.2014.11.8

44.

*Heath

Fulcher

(2017, July 2–5). Learning analytics—Hearing the student voice [Paper presentation]. Students Transitions Achievements Retention and Success (STARS) conference, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. http://unistars.org/papers/STARS2016/11B.pdf

45.

*Heath

Leinonen

(2016). An institution wide approach to learning analytics. In Anderson

Gavan

(Eds.), Developing effective educational experiences through learning analytics (pp. 73–87). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-4666-9983-0.ch003

46.

Hill

E. M.

Turner

E. L.

Martin

R. M.

Donovan

J. L.

(2013). “Let’s get the best quality research we can”: Public awareness and acceptance of consent to use existing data in health research: A systematic review and qualitative study. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 13, Article 72. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-13-72

47.

*Howell

J. A.

Roberts

L. D.

Seaman

Gibson

D. C.

(2018). Are we on our way to becoming a “helicopter university”? Academics’ views on learning analytics. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 23(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-017-9329-9

48.

Huntington

S. P.

(1991). Clash of civilizations (6th ed.). Simon & Schuster.

49.

Ienca

Ferretti

Hurst

Puhan

Lovis

Vayena

(2018). Considerations for ethics review of big data health research: A scoping review. PloS One, 13(10), Article e0204937. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0204937

50.

*Ifenthaler

Schumacher

(2016). Student perceptions of privacy principles for learning analytics. Educational Technology Research and Development, 64(5), 923–938. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-016-9477-y

51.

Ioannidis

J. P. A.

(2013). Informed consent, big data, and the oxymoron of research that is not research. American Journal of Bioethics, 13(4), 40–42. https://doi.org/10.1080/15265161.2013.768864

52.

Ipsos MORI. (2016). The one-way mirror: Public attitudes to commercial access to health data. Wellcome Trust. https://wellcome.ac.uk/sites/default/files/public-attitudes-to-commercial-access-to-health-data-wellcome-mar16.pdf

53.

Jantti

(2016). Libraries and big data: A new view on impact and affect. In Atkinson

(Ed.), Quality and the academic library (pp. 267–273). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-802105-7.00026-9

54.

*Jones

(2016). Ethical considerations in the use of student data: International perspectives and educators’ perceptions. In Barker

Dawson

Pardo

Colvin

(Eds.), Show me the learning: Proceedings ASCILITE 2016 Adelaide (pp. 300–304). University of South Australia. http://www.2016conference.ascilite.org/wp-content/uploads/ascilite2016_jonesh_concise.pdf

55.

Kalkman

van Delden

Banerjee

Tyl

Mostert

van Thiel

(2019). Patients’ and public views and attitudes towards the sharing of health data for research: A narrative review of the empirical evidence. Journal of Medical Ethics. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2019-105651

56.

*Kammer

(2015). Fudging the data: Student responses to data use in the LMS. In iConference 2015 proceedings. https://www.ideals.illinois.edu/bitstream/handle/2142/73681/242_ready.pdf?sequence=2&isAllowed=y

57.

Kaplan

(2016). How should health data be used? Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics, 25(2), 312–329. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0963180115000614

58.

*Khan

(2017, October 18–20). Learners’ and teachers’ perceptions of learning analytics (LA): A case study of Southampton Solent University (SSU) [Paper presentation]. International Association for Development of the Information Society 14th international conference on cognition and exploratory learning in digital age, Vilamoura, Algarve, Portugal. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED579477

59.

Kirchhoffer

D. G.

Richards

B. J.

(Eds.). (2019). Beyond autonomy limits and alternatives to informed consent in research ethics and law. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108649247

60.

*Knight

D. B.

Brozina

Novoselich

(2016). An investigation of first-year engineering student and instructor perspectives of learning analytics approaches. Journal of Learning Analytics, 3(3), 215–238. https://doi.org/10.18608/jla.2016.33.11

61.

Korn

H. A.

(1969). Higher education programs and student development. Review of Educational Research, 39, 155–171. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543039002155

62.

Larson

E. B.

(2013). Building trust in the power of “big data” research to serve the public good. JAMA Journal of the American Medical Association, 309(23), 2443–2444. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2013.5914

63.

Lipworth

Mason

P. H.

Kerridge

Ioannidis

J. P. A.

(2017). Ethics and epistemology in big data research. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry, 14(4), 489–500. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11673-017-9771-3

64.

*Maghrabi

L. A.

(2014). The threats of data security over the Cloud as perceived by experts and university students. In World symposium on computer applications and research, WSCAR 2014. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers. https://doi.org/10.1109/WSCAR.2014.6916842

65.

*Mahroeian

Daniel

Butson

(2017). The perceptions of the meaning and value of analytics in New Zealand higher education institutions. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 14, Article 35. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-017-0073-y

66.

*May

Iksal

Usener

C. A.

(2017). The side effect of learning analytics: An empirical study on e-learning technologies and user privacy. In Costagliola

Uhomoibhi

Zvacek

McLaren

B. M.

(Eds.), Computers supported education (Vol. 739, pp. 279–295). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-63184-4_15

67.

Metcalf

Crawford

(2016). Where are human subjects in Big Data research? The emerging ethics divide. Big Data & Society, 3(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951716650211

68.

Metcalfe

Martin

R. M.

Noble

Lane

J. A.

Hamdy

F. C.

Neal

D. E.

Donovan

J. L.

(2008). Low risk research using routinely collected identifiable health information without informed consent: Encounters with the Patient Information Advisory Group. Journal of Medical Ethics, 34(1), 37–40. https://doi.org/10.1136/jme.2006.019661

69.

Mittelstadt

B. D.

Floridi

(2016). The ethics of big data: Current and foreseeable issues in biomedical contexts. Science and Engineering Ethics, 22(2), 303–341. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-015-9652-2

70.

Munn

Stern

Aromataris

Lockwood

Jordan

(2018). What kind of systematic review should I conduct? A proposed typology and guidance for systematic reviewers in the medical and health sciences. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 18, Article 5. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-017-0468-4

71.

National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research. (1978). Ethical guidelines for the protection of human subjects of research (DHEW Publication No. (OS) 78-00). Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. https://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/regulations-and-policy/belmont-report/read-the-belmont-report/index.html

72.

National Health and Medical Research Council. (2018). National statement on ethical conduct in human research. https://www.nhmrc.gov.au/file/2056/download?token=ocKdQbL

73.

NEC Media Release. (2019, May 20). NEC Australia helps tackle examination fraud through facial recognition. https://www.nec.com.au/insights/media/nec-australia-helps-tackle-examination-fraud-through-facial-recognition

74.

Newland

Trueman

(2017). Learning analytics in UK HE 2017. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/188257811.pdf

75.

*Newman

Beetham

(2017, June 26). Student digital experiences tracker 2017: The voice of 22,000 UK learners. Jisc. https://digitalstudent.jiscinvolve.org/wp/2017/06/26/student-digital-experience-tracker-2017-the-voice-of-22000-uk-learners/

76.

Oxagile. (2016, April 12). History and trends of learning management systems [Infographic]. https://www.oxagile.com/article/history-and-trends-of-learning-management-system-infographics/

77.

Papoutsi

Reed

J. E.

Marston

Lewis

Majeed

Bell

(2015). Patient and public views about the security and privacy of Electronic Health Records (EHRs) in the UK: Results from a mixed methods study. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, 15, Article 86. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12911-015-0202-2

78.

Pardo

Siemens

(2014). Ethical and privacy principles for learning analytics. British Journal of Educational Technology, 45(3), 438–450. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12152

79.

Parent

(1983). Privacy, morality, and the law. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 12(4), 269–288.

80.

Pellegrino

E. D.

Thomasma

D. C.

(1988). For the patient’s good: The restoration of beneficence in health care. Oxford University Press.

81.

Pieper

Thomson

C. J. H.

(2013). Justice in human research ethics: A conceptual and practical guide. Monash Bioethics Review, 31(1), 99–116. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03351345

82.

Polonetsky

Tene

(2014). The ethics of student privacy: Building trust for ed tech. International Review of Information Ethics, 21, 3–10. https://fpf.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Ethics-of-Student-Privacy_Polonetsky-Tene.pdf

83.

Presser

L., M.

Hruskova

Rowbottom

Kancir

. (2015, August 10). Care.data and access to UK health records, patient privacy and public trust. Technology Science, 2015081103. https://techscience.org/a/2015081103/

84.

Productivity Commission. (n.d.). Data availability and use. Australian Government. https://www.pc.gov.au/inquiries/completed/data-access#report

85.

*Reimers

Neovesky

(2015). Student focused dashboards. In Helfert

Restivo

M. T.

Zvacek

Uhomoibhi

(Eds.), Proceedings of the 7th international conference on computer supported learning (Vol. 1, pp. 399–404). SciTePress. https://doi.org/10.5220/0005475103990404

86.

Richards

N. M.

King

J. H.

(2014). Big data ethics. Wake Forest Law Review, 49, 393–432. https://ssrn.com/abstract=2384174

87.

Riordan

Papoutsi

Reed

J. E.

Marston

Bell

Majeed

(2015). Patient and public attitudes towards informed consent models and levels of awareness of Electronic Health Records in the UK. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 84(4), 237–247. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2015.01.008

88.

Roberts

L. D.

Chang

Gibson

(2017). Ethical considerations in adopting a university- and system- wide approach to data and learning analytics. In Daniel

B. K.

(Ed.), Big data and learning analytics in higher education. Springer International. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-06520-5_7

89.

*Roberts

L. D.

Howell

J. A.

Seaman

(2017). Give me a customizable dashboard: Personalized learning analytics dashboards in higher education. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 22(3), 317–333. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-017-9316-1

90.

*Roberts

L. D.

Howell

J. A.

Seaman

Gibson

D. C

. (2016). Student attitudes toward learning analytics in higher education: “The fitbit version of the learning world.” Frontiers in Psychology, 7, Article 1959. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01959

91.

Ross

W. D.

(1930). The right and the good. Clarendon Press.

92.

Rubel

Jones

K. M. L.

(2016). Student privacy in learning analytics: An information ethics perspective. Information Society, 32(2), 143–159. https://doi.org/10.1080/01972243.2016.1130502

93.

Salz

J. S.

Dewar

(2019). Data science ethical considerations: A systematic literature review and proposed project framework. Ethics and Information Technology, 21(3), 197–208. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-019-09502-5

94.

Scholes

(2016). The ethics of using learning analytics to categorize students on risk. Educational Technology Research and Development, 64(5), 939–955. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-016-9458-1

95.

Sclater

Bailey

(2015). Code of practice for learning analytics. Joint Information Systems Committee. https://www.jisc.ac.uk/guides/code-of-practice-for-learning-analytics

96.

Sclater

Peasgood

Mullen

(2016, April 19). Learning analytics in higher education: A review of UK and international practice. Jisc. https://analytics.jiscinvolve.org/wp/2016/04/19/learning-analytics-in-higher-education-a-review-of-uk-and-international-practice/

97.

Selingo

(2017, April 11). How colleges use big data to target the students they want. The Atlantic. https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2017/04/how-colleges-find-their-students/522516/

98.

Shacklock

(2016, January 26). From bricks to clicks: The potential of data and analytics in higher education. A report for the Higher Education Commission, UK. Inquiry Chairs: Lord Norton, Sarah Porter. https://www.policyconnect.org.uk/hec/research/report-bricks-clicks-potential-data-and-analytics-higher-education

99.

Siemens

(2011). Call for papers for the First International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge. https://tekri.athabascau.ca/analytics/call-papers

100.

Slade

Prinsloo

(2013). Learning analytics: Ethical issues and dilemmas. American Behavioral Scientist, 57(10), 1510–1529. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764213479366

101.

*Slade

Prinsloo

(2014). Student perspectives on the use of their data: Between intrusion, surveillance and care. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-learning, 18(1), 291–300.

102.

Solomon

W. D.

(1978). Ethics II: Rules and principles. In Reich

W. T.

(Ed.), Encyclopedia of bioethics (1st ed., 407–413). Macmillan and Free Press.

103.

Sterckx

Rakic

Cockbain

Borry

(2016). “You hoped we would sleep walk into accepting the collection of our data”: Controversies surrounding the UK care.data scheme and their wider relevance for biomedical research. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy, 19(2) 177–190. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11019-015-9661-6

104.

Street

J. M.

Duszynski

K. M.

Krawczyk

Braunack-Mayer

A. J.

(2014). The use of citizens’ juries in health policy decision-making: A systematic review. Social Science & Medicine, 109, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2014.03.005

105.

Thomas

Hill

O’Mahoney

Yorke

(2017). Supporting student success: Strategies for institutional change. What works? Student Retention & Success program. Higher Education Academy. https://www.phf.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/Full-report-Final.pdf

106.

Toulmin

(1981). The tyranny of principles. Hastings Center Report, 11(6), 31–39. https://doi.org/10.2307/3560542

107.

van Barneveld

Arnold

K. E.

Campbell

J. P

. (2012). Analytics in higher education: establishing a common language (ELI Paper 1). Educause. https://library.educause.edu/resources/2012/1/analytics-in-higher-education-establishing-a-common-language

108.

van Rooij

S. W

. (2009). Adopting open-source software applications in U.S. Higher Education: A cross-disciplinary review of the literature. Review of Educational Research, 79(2), 682–701. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654308325691

109.

Vayena

Blasimme

(2017). Biomedical Big Data: New models of control over access, use and governance. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry, 14(4), 501–513. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11673-017-9809-6

110.

Waller

M. A.

Fawcett

S. E.

(2013). Data science, predictive analytics and big data: A revolution that will transform supply chain design and management. Journal of Business Logistics, 32(2), 77–84. https://doi.org/10.1111/jbl.12010

111.

*West

Huijser

Heath

(2016). Putting an ethical lens on learning analytics. Educational Technology Research and Development, 64(5), 903–922. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-016-9464-3

112.

Wintrup

(2017). Higher education’s panopticon? Learning analytics, ethics and student engagement. Higher Education Policy, 30(1), 87–103. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41307-016-0030-8

113.

Woelert

Yates

(2015). Too little and too much trust: performance measurement in Australian higher education. Critical Studies in Education, 56(2), 175–189. https://doi.org/10.1080/17508487.2014.943776

114.

*Wook

Yusof

Z. M.

Nazri

M. Z. A.

(2015). The acceptance of educational data mining technology among students in public institutions of higher learning in Malaysia. International Journal of Future Computer and Communication, 4(2), 112–117. https://doi.org/10.7763/IJFCC.2015.V4.367

115.

*Wook

Yusof

Z. M.

Nazri

M. H. A.

(2017). Educational data mining acceptance among undergraduate students. Education and Information Technologies, 22(3), 1195–1216. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-016-9485-x

116.

The World Today. (2016, August 12). University of Melbourne defends wi-fi tracking of students as planning move amid privacy concerns. ABC News. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-08-12/university-of-melbourne-tracking-students-through-wifi/7723468

117.

Xafis

Schaefer

G. O.

Labude

M. K.

Brassington

Ballantyne

Lim

H. Y.

Lipworth

Lysaght

Stewart

Sun

Laurie

G. T.

Tai

E. S.

(2019). An ethics framework for big data in health and research. Asian Bioethics Review, 11(3), 227–254. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41649-019-00099-x

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.03 MB

0.04 MB

Student and Staff Perspectives on the Use of Big Data in the Tertiary Education Sector: A Scoping Review and Reflection on the Ethical Issues

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References

Supplementary Material