Wendy Shapiro, Boston associate dean of Learning, Design and Technology at the University of Massachusetts, led the discussion on internet privacy. According to Shapiro, as society becomes increasingly reliant on logging onto the internet, just about every website tracks browsing information or shopping habits to some degree. Society, however, must decide on how much weight they place on either side of the tricky balance between privacy and convenience, such as how much one wants search information to be tailored to their preferences or if personal information should auto-fill on websites. The potential of being connected to the internet in regards to learning is huge when it comes to adaptive technologies and immersive learning experiences, but it is important that students don’t become mere analytic data to the point that they aren’t making decisions about their own learning, she explained.
In the utopian sense, explained Shapiro, the information collected by machines via learning analytics would allow students to take an active part in their learning, help them with retention, and ensure that material would adjust accordingly to help bring them the greatest success. If education was truly tailored to every individual student, learning would be more efficient for the student both financially and in terms of time. Furthermore, Shapiro speculated that in a perfect world, students could connect their information to a school’s LMS and every other service on the campus, while still being able to manage their own data and decide how it was used.
In her vision of a worst-case reaction to this black swan, Shapiro warned that as more and more education happens online, traditional methods of monitoring assessments are turning towards anti-cheating surveillance technologies (for example, software that monitors facial expressions, personal identifications, internet browsing, and even knuckle movements), which could have a negative effect on the learner. Such an invasion of privacy could even turn learners away from the joy of education all together. Furthermore, when it comes to the issue of privacy on the net, Shapiro reiterated the importance of realizing how important personal identity is, as well as establishing boundaries to protect this identity from the Internet of Things.
Ed-tech consultant Bryan Alexander described machine learning, a combined enterprise between artificial intelligence and robotics, as the “boldest of the black swans.” As devices continue to push the boundaries of processing speed, Alexander stated that there really was no telling how much machine learning could evolve in the next 10 years. However, Alexander identified personalized tutoring software in the form of readily available and quickly downloadable apps as likely becoming extremely popular in higher education in the future. These apps could lead to broader intellectual engagement for students, as they would feature an equal meeting of minds where the tutoring software remembers the learner.
Alexander’s view of a utopian future hinged upon machines assisting and complementing human endeavors. In other words, machines and humans could complement each others’ weaknesses. For example, machines could assist with repetitive tasks (writing form letters, etc.), allowing humans to expand random creativity; machines would then need to push the expectations of their programming and lead them to an appreciation of human style and eccentricities. Finally, with unlimited access to tutorship and knowledge, it is possible that scholarship could undergo another renaissance stemming directly from technologically advanced higher education campuses.
For his dystopian vision of the future, Alexander warned that artificial intelligence must be designed with a hard limit to ensure it never becomes better than, or attempts to replace, humanity. For instance, when machines are used to completely supplant the need for human labor, both physical and mental, what happens to humans? Does a horrific class system emerge where the 1 percent owns the machines and makes all of the money while the rest of the population can barely get by? Or worse, does a scenario like the one in the film The Terminator emerge? Of course these are extreme examples of where things could go on a societal level, but the same ideas about limiting artificial intelligence are important on college campuses as well. If personalized tutoring became too advanced, all faculty members would be reduced to adjuncts paid by the hour or minute–if students went to physical campuses at all.
Tom Haymes, director of Technology and Instructional Computing for the Houston Community College System, summed up his thoughts on all of these issues by noting that humans don’t always move at the speed of technological changes when black swans emerge, and instead fall back on what they know out of fear of change. Haymes advised that training for all involved in the institution was vitally important to take full advantage of new ideas or technology. Higher education leaders were advised to keep their eye on the direction of trends to best lead smooth transitions for students, faculty, and society at large.
Additionally, Haymes identified transparency as a key component for avoiding fear-based responses to black swans, as well as their dystopian futures. An opt-in culture should also be championed when it comes to machines using personal data. As long as machines are regulated and taught to respect human learning and privacy rather than utilized as a replacement for human functions, the utopian futures imagined by the panelists seem possible, he said.
“Collective, collaborative thinking is our best way forward,” Alexander concluded.
- 4 reinvention best practices from across the pond - August 29, 2016
- New tool plays admissions matchmaker - August 15, 2016
- New tech to revolutionize studying abroad education - July 5, 2016