LinkedIn

 آمار

تعداد نشریات20
تعداد شماره‌ها1,149
تعداد مقالات10,518
تعداد مشاهده مقاله45,415,585
تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله11,291,403
Mehrfar, Abdollah, Zolfaghari, Zahra, Hejazi, Yamin, Zarifsanaiey, Nahid. (1402). Ethical Principles in E-Learning; Investigating Key Issues in Instructional Design and Teaching Methods: A Narrative Review. سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی, 14(4), 251-262. doi: 10.30476/ijvlms.2023.100458.1261
Abdollah Mehrfar; Zahra Zolfaghari; Yamin Hejazi; Nahid Zarifsanaiey. "Ethical Principles in E-Learning; Investigating Key Issues in Instructional Design and Teaching Methods: A Narrative Review". سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی, 14, 4, 1402, 251-262. doi: 10.30476/ijvlms.2023.100458.1261
Mehrfar, Abdollah, Zolfaghari, Zahra, Hejazi, Yamin, Zarifsanaiey, Nahid. (1402). 'Ethical Principles in E-Learning; Investigating Key Issues in Instructional Design and Teaching Methods: A Narrative Review', سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی, 14(4), pp. 251-262. doi: 10.30476/ijvlms.2023.100458.1261
Mehrfar, Abdollah, Zolfaghari, Zahra, Hejazi, Yamin, Zarifsanaiey, Nahid. Ethical Principles in E-Learning; Investigating Key Issues in Instructional Design and Teaching Methods: A Narrative Review. سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی, 1402; 14(4): 251-262. doi: 10.30476/ijvlms.2023.100458.1261

Ethical Principles in E-Learning; Investigating Key Issues in Instructional Design and Teaching Methods: A Narrative Review

Interdisciplinary Journal of Virtual Learning in Medical Sciences
مقاله 1، دوره 14، شماره 4 - شماره پیاپی 55، اسفند 2023، صفحه 251-262    اصل مقاله (549.04 K)
نوع مقاله: Review Article
شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.30476/ijvlms.2023.100458.1261
نویسندگان
Abdollah Mehrfar1؛ Zahra Zolfaghari* 1، 2؛ Yamin Hejazi1؛ Nahid Zarifsanaiey1
1Virtual School, Comprehensive Center of Excellence for E_ Learning in Medical Sciences, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran
2Student Research Committee, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran
چکیده
Background: The expansion of E-learning has brought about new ethical challenges concerning academic integrity, privacy, inclusivity, technological impacts, and power dynamics, necessitating careful examination. This article reviews the literature related to ethical issues in online education to prioritize considerations for instructors and educators. 
Methods: A review of 49 articles on E-learning ethics published during 2005-2022 was conducted. Manuscripts were retrieved via Google Scholar, ERIC, and Education Source databases utilizing “online learning ethics,” “e-learning ethics,” “academic integrity,” and “learner privacy keywords. The articles were analyzed using qualitative synthesis.
Results: Key ethical priorities in this study include preserving academic integrity through comprehensive policies, safeguarding learner privacy via data security mechanisms, enhancing inclusivity through design considerations, evaluating technological impacts, and exercising responsible instructor power. 
Conclusion: Actively addressing ethical complexities enhances academic integrity in digital classrooms, but sustainable engagement with the evolution of e-learning requires continuous participation. The findings shed light on the responsibilities of online educators in empowering diverse learners.
کلیدواژه‌ها
Distance؛ E-learning ethics؛ Academic integrity؛ Learner privacy؛ Inclusivity
مراجع
  1. Bower BL, Hardy KP. From correspondence to cyberspace: Changes and challenges in distance education. New directions for community colleges. 2004;2004(128):5-12.
  2. Casey DM. A journey to legitimacy: The historical development of distance education through technology. TechTrends. 2008;52(2):45.
  3. Peters O. Distance education in transition: Developments and issues: BIS-Verlag der Carl-von-Ossietzky-Univ.; 2010.
  4. Kentnor HE. Distance education and the evolution of online learning in the United States. Curriculum and teaching dialogue. 2015;17(1):21-34.
  5. Larreamendy-Joerns J, Leinhardt G. Going the distance with online education. Review of educational research. 2006;76(4):567-605.
  6. Harasim L. Learning theory and online technologies: Taylor & Francis; 2017.
  7. Dhawan S. Online learning: A panacea in the time of COVID-19 crisis. Journal of educational technology systems. 2020;49(1):5-22.
  8. Ali W. Online and remote learning in higher education institutes: A necessity in light of COVID-19 pandemic. Higher education studies. 2020;10(3):16-25.
  9. Sangrà A, Vlachopoulos D, Cabrera N. Building an inclusive definition of e-learning: An approach to the conceptual framework. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning. 2012;13(2):145-59.
  10. Rapanta C, Botturi L, Goodyear P, Guàrdia L, Koole M. Online university teaching during and after the Covid-19 crisis: Refocusing teacher presence and learning activity. Postdigital science and education. 2020;2:923-45.
  11. Hodges CB, Moore S, Lockee BB, Trust T, Bond MA. The difference between emergency remote teaching and online learning. 2020.
  12. Ossiannilsson E, Landgren L. Quality in e‐learning–a conceptual framework based on experiences from three international benchmarking projects. Journal of Computer assisted learning. 2012;28(1):42-51.
  13. Kennedy K, Nowak S, Raghuraman R, Thomas J, Davis SF. Academic dishonesty and distance learning: Student and faculty views. College Student Journal. 2000;34(2).
  14. Ifenthaler D, Schumacher C. Student perceptions of privacy principles for learning analytics. Educational Technology Research and Development. 2016;64:923-38.
  15. Butcher N. Basic guide to open educational resources (OER). 2015.
  16. Sutherland-Smith W. The tangled web: Internet plagiarism and international students’ academic writing. Journal of Asian Pacific Communication. 2005;15(1):15-29.
  17. Levmore SX, Nussbaum MC. The offensive Internet: privacy, speech, and reputation. (No Title). 2011.
  18. Morgan H. Online instruction and virtual schools for middle and high school students: Twenty-first-century fads or progressive teaching methods for today’s pupils? The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas. 2015;88(2):72-6.
  19. Muilenburg LY, Berge ZL. Student barriers to online learning: A factor analytic study. Distance education. 2005;26(1):29-48.
  20. Gikas J, Grant MM. Mobile computing devices in higher education: Student perspectives on learning with cellphones, smartphones & social media. The Internet and Higher Education. 2013;19:18-26.
  21. Dixson MD. Creating effective student engagement in online courses: What do students find engaging? Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning. 2010:1-13.
  22. O’Rourke J. Tutoring in open and distance learning: A handbook for tutors: Commonwealth of Learning, Vancouver; 2003.
  23. Darabi AA, Sikorski EG, Harvey RB. Validated competencies for distance teaching. Distance Education. 2006;27(1):105-22.
  24. Baran E, Correia A-P, Thompson A. Transforming online teaching practice: Critical analysis of the literature on the roles and competencies of online teachers. Distance Education. 2011;32(3):421-39.
  25. Rogerson AM, Basanta G. Peer-to-peer file sharing and academic integrity in the internet age. 2016.
  26. Esposito A. Research ethics in emerging forms of online learning: issues arising from a hypothetical study on a MOOC. Electronic Journal of e-Learning. 2012;10(3):pp286‑96-pp‑96.
  27. Anderson B, Simpson M. Ethical issues in online education. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning. 2007;22(2):129-38.
  28. Toprak E, Ozkanal B, Aydin S, Kaya S. Ethics in e-learning. Turkish online journal of educational technology-tojet. 2010;9(2):78-86.
  29. Tzimas D, Demetriadis S. Ethical issues in learning analytics: a review of the field. Educational Technology Research and Development. 2021;69:1101-33.
  30. Eaton SE. Academic integrity during COVID-19: Reflections from the University of Calgary. International Studies in Educational Administration. 2020;48(1):80-5.
  31. Harmon OR, Lambrinos J. Are online exams an invitation to cheat? The Journal of Economic Education. 2008;39(2):116-25.
  32. Watson GR, Sottile J. Cheating in the digital age: Do students cheat more in online courses? 2010.
  33. Moten Jr J, Fitterer A, Brazier E, Leonard J, Brown A. Examining online college cyber cheating methods and prevention measures. Electronic Journal of E-learning. 2013;11(2):pp139‑46-pp‑46.
  34. Eaton SE. Plagiarism in higher education: Tackling tough topics in academic integrity: ABC-CLIO; 2021.
  35. Lee-Post A, Hapke H. Online learning integrity approaches: Current practices and future solutions. Online Learning. 2017;21(1):135-45.
  36. Coren A. Turning a blind eye: Faculty who ignore student cheating. Journal of Academic Ethics. 2011;9:291-305.
  37. Dee TS, Jacob BA. Rational ignorance in education: A field experiment in student plagiarism. Journal of Human Resources. 2012;47(2):397-434.
  38. Youmans RJ. Does the adoption of plagiarism-detection software in higher education reduce plagiarism? Studies in Higher Education. 2011;36(7):749-61.
  39. Rolfe V. Can Turnitin be used to provide instant formative feedback? British Journal of Educational Technology. 2011;42(4):701-10.
  40. Ladyshewsky RK. Post-graduate student performance in ‘supervised in-class’ vs.‘unsupervised online’multiple choice tests: implications for cheating and test security. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. 2015;40(7):883-97.
  41. Fask A, Englander F, Wang Z. Do online exams facilitate cheating? An experiment designed to separate possible cheating from the effect of the online test taking environment. Journal of Academic Ethics. 2014;12:101-12.
  42. Crews KD. Copyright law for librarians and educators: Creative strategies and practical solutions: American Library Association; 2020.
  43. Guibault L, Angelopoulos C. Open content licensing: from theory to practice: Amsterdam University Press; 2011.
  44. Bissell AN. Permission granted: Open licensing for educational resources. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning. 2009;24(1):97-106.
  45. Elander J, Pittam G, Lusher J, Fox P, Payne N. Evaluation of an intervention to help students avoid unintentional plagiarism by improving their authorial identity. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. 2010;35(2):157-71.
  46. Gullifer JM, Tyson GA. Who has read the policy on plagiarism? Unpacking students’ understanding of plagiarism. Studies in Higher Education. 2014;39(7):1202-18.
  47. Rubel A, Jones KM. Student privacy in learning analytics: An information ethics perspective. The information society. 2016;32(2):143-59.
  48. Prinsloo P, Slade S, editors. Student privacy self-management: Implications for learning analytics. Proceedings of the fifth international conference on learning analytics and knowledge; 2015.
  49. Drachsler H, Greller W, editors. Privacy and analytics: it’s a DELICATE issue a checklist for trusted learning analytics. Proceedings of the sixth international conference on learning analytics & knowledge; 2016.
  50. Burgstahler S. Universal design of distance learning. Information Technology and Disabilities. 2002;8(1).
  51. Dolan R, Hall TE, Banerjee M, Chun E, Strangman N. Applying principles of universal design to test delivery: The effect of computer-based read-aloud on test performance of high school students with learning disabilities. The Journal of Technology, Learning and Assessment. 2005;3(7).
  52. Schelly CL, Davies PL, Spooner CL. Student perceptions of faculty implementation of Universal Design for Learning. Journal of postsecondary education and disability. 2011;24(1):17-30.
  53. McGuire JM, Scott SS, Shaw SF. Universal design for instruction: The paradigm, its principles, and products for enhancing instructional access. Journal of postsecondary education and disability. 2003;17(1):11-21.
  54. Glazier RA. Building rapport to improve retention and success in online classes. Journal of Political Science Education. 2016;12(4):437-56.
  55. Garrison DR, Cleveland-Innes M, Fung TS. Exploring causal relationships among teaching, cognitive and social presence: Student perceptions of the community of inquiry framework. The internet and higher education. 2010;13(1-2):31-6.
  56. Coy K, Marino MT, Serianni B. Using universal design for learning in synchronous online instruction. Journal of Special Education Technology. 2014;29(1):63-74.
  57. Fichten CS, Ferraro V, Asuncion JV, Chwojka C, Barile M, Nguyen MN, et al. Disabilities and e-learning problems and solutions: An exploratory study. Journal of Educational Technology & Society. 2009;12(4):241-56.
  58. Luckin R, Holmes W. Intelligence unleashed: An argument for AI in education. 2016.
  59. Henderson M, Selwyn N, Finger G, Aston R. Students’ everyday engagement with digital technology in university: exploring patterns of use and ‘usefulness’. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management. 2015;37(3):308-19.
  60. Mikropoulos TA, Natsis A. Educational virtual environments: A ten-year review of empirical research (1999–2009). Computers & education. 2011;56(3):769-80.
  61. Bayne S. Teacherbot: interventions in automated teaching. Teaching in Higher Education. 2015;20(4):455-67.
  62. Goel A, Polepeddi L. Jill Watson: A virtual teaching assistant for online education. Georgia Tech Library. 2016.
  63. Fadel C, Holmes W, Bialik M. Artificial intelligence in education: Promises and implications for teaching and learning. The Center for Curriculum Redesign. 2019.
  64. Radianti J, Majchrzak TA, Fromm J, Wohlgenannt I. A systematic review of immersive virtual reality applications for higher education: Design elements, lessons learned, and research agenda. Computers & Education. 2020;147:103778.
  65. Roberts LD, Howell JA, Seaman K. Give me a customizable dashboard: Personalized learning analytics dashboards in higher education. Technology, Knowledge and Learning. 2017;22:317-33.
  66. Macfadyen LP, Dawson S, Pardo A, Gaševic D. Embracing big data in complex educational systems: The learning analytics imperative and the policy challenge. Research & Practice in Assessment. 2014;9:17-28.
  67. Natale SM, Doran C. Marketization of education: An ethical dilemma. Journal of business ethics. 2012;105:187-96.
  68. Dixson MD, Greenwell MR, Rogers-Stacy C, Weister T, Lauer S. Nonverbal immediacy behaviors and online student engagement: Bringing past instructional research into the present virtual classroom. Communication Education. 2017;66(1):37-53.
  69. Baker JD. An investigation of relationships among instructor immediacy and affective and cognitive learning in the online classroom. The Internet and higher education. 2004;7(1):1-13.
  70. Vallade JI, Kaufmann R. Investigating instructor misbehaviors in the online classroom. Communication Education. 2018;67(3):363-81.
  71. Lapadat JC. Written interaction: A key component in online learning. Journal of computer-mediated communication. 2002;7(4):JCMC742.
  72. Wise A, Chang J, Duffy T, Del Valle R. The effects of teacher social presence on student satisfaction, engagement, and learning. Embracing Diversity in the Learning Sciences: Routledge; 2012. p. 569-75.
  73. Collis B. Tele-learning in a digital world: The future of distance learning. 1996.
  74. Jaggars SS, Xu D. How do online course design features influence student performance? Computers & Education. 2016;95:270-84.
  75. Bali S, Liu M, editors. Students’ perceptions toward online learning and face-to-face learning courses. Journal of Physics: conference series; 2018: IOP Publishing.
  76. Suskie L. Assessing student learning: A common sense guide: John Wiley & Sons; 2018.
  77. Bearman M, Dawson P, Boud D, Bennett S, Hall M, Molloy E. Support for assessment practice: developing the Assessment Design Decisions Framework. Teaching in Higher Education. 2016;21(5):545-56.
  78. Sclater N. Developing a code of practice for learning analytics. Journal of Learning Analytics. 2016;3(1):16-42.
  79. Jaggars SS. Choosing between online and face-to-face courses: Community college student voices. American Journal of Distance Education. 2014;28(1):27-38.
  80. McCroskey JC, Richmond VP. Power in the classroom I: Teacher and student perceptions. Communication Education. 1983;32(2):175-84.
آمار
تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 293
تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 556


سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی. قدرت گرفته از سیناوب