This week’s theme revolves around accessibility, inclusion, privacy, and ethics, but what surprised me was that even ‘open education’ can lead to exclusion and harm.

In Funes and Mackness’s article, they make the subversive point that ‘inclusion can sometimes become exclusion.’ The article recounts the experience of a learner who was excluded from course interactions because she did not want to give her real name or reveal her identity. This made me realize that not everyone is able or willing to participate in the same way. Instead, uniform standards may oppress learners with marginalized identities.

Downes’s article brings a more technical perspective. He talks about how the future of OER is not just about open content, but also about open platforms, transparency of data, and respect for privacy. He warned that many “open platforms” are in fact embedded with algorithmic control and commercial motives, such as extracting learners’ privacy, which poses a threat to learners’ rights.

At the same time, I learned about CAST’s concept of Universal Design for Learning (UDL) and the Inclusive Design Research Center’s definition of inclusive design. I was most inspired by the fact that true inclusion is not about providing a program designed for all, but about creating environments that allow for differences.

These materials explored an important issue that made me begin to re-examine the seemingly positive terms of education, such as “openness,” “accessibility,” and “inclusion.” We often talk about “making learning accessible to everyone,” but if we ignore the differences in people’s identities, languages, technological skills, and cultural backgrounds, then resources can hurt the learners.

Funes’ article in particular made me reflect on how I used to think that “real-name interactions are more genuine and safer,” but for marginalized learners (e.g., transgender, immigrants, people with anxiety disorders), such a rule can be a barrier to participation.

I’m also beginning to understand that ethics is not an ancillary issue to be thought about after the technology goes live, but rather a learning environment that should inform the design of the technology and allow for differences to exist.

After this week’s learning, I hope to do the following in my future learning and instructional design:

  • Respect learners’ choices and boundaries: no mandatory participation, no default disclosure, no evaluation of learning input based on how much interaction there is.
  • Use a variety of ways to present content: text, video, etc., so that everyone can find a way to engage with the knowledge that works for them;
  • Thinking ahead about privacy and security, especially when designing open platform activities, it is clear what data will be disclosed and whether there is an opt-out option; for example, when setting up opened.ca, the site allows you to set whether or not to disclose the content to protect the learner’s personal rights.