This post is a very timely one for me as I have recently had to deal with an incident that involved a balancing of my ethical responsibilities towards two affected parties who were not mutually exclusive of each other.
The ethical dilemma
In our BYOD classroom. children are free to choose desktop backgrounds for their own devices.
Last term, I spotted a background on one of my student's laptop that seemed inappropriate to me. It looked like an art work or a photo of a sculpture that was an unclothed human form in detail.
It took me a few minutes to ponder over whether to move on or whether to investigate further. At this point, it wasn't a dilemma but more of a decision making process.
I decided to ask the child concerned quite frankly why she had chosen that background for her desktop. She appeared uncomfortable, looked sheepish and said that she 'liked it'. Further questioning revealed that the desktop background was a stock image that her device had come loaded with. This device wasn't a standard BYOD chrome book but an adult's laptop that the parents had passed on to the child.
Now began my dilemma. This was a class of 8 and some almost 9 year olds in their pre -puberty stages. Books about the human body were quite popular library items to be issued out by these kids. Smiles and self conscious looks were exchanged at any mention of the human anatomy by anyone.
All this was perfectly natural but what repercussion would leaving that desktop background unchanged have on her, her classmates, on me and our school's BYOD policy?
Our parents were still getting their head around BYOD in Year 3 / 4 classrooms. As stated by
Hall(2001) 'the families we teach hold varied beliefs, live by different values, and practices and hold varied expectation of their schools.'
Addressing the dilemma
Would this image cause talk amongst other students? Would that reach the ears of parents? Would I have a disgruntled parent demanding to know why his child had to be exposed to this image? Would our BYOD policy be blamed or I would have to defend my implementation ( or lack there of ) of the clauses in the policy which categorically states that 'inappropriate content' is not to be viewed by children on their devices.
On the other hand, would asking this child to change the image add fuel to the fire and make it the proverbial forbidden fruit amongst all the students? Discretion would be the key, but the child in question wasn't particularly discrete in nature. Moreover, 'stories' of school were often relayed at home by this student with 'bells and whistles' added to them!!
My decision and action
I ensured that the conversation between the student in question and myself had no audience. Then explained to her in brief but precise words that the image, though of an art work ,might cause silly reactions amongst children who were less mature than her. I praised her on her developed artistic sense ( the buy in from her that she was the one making the right decision was imperative ) but asked her to change the background to something less controversial.
Her reaction ( she was expecting to be admonished it would seem ) was one of surprise, then delight and even a sense of pride! And the desk top background was changed immediately.
This whole matter, though dealt with very unobtrusively, had caught the eyes of some of the children in the class.
So, I decided to follow up with a general discussion that afternoon about how successful our use of devices were in the classroom, inviting comments and observations from the students. It was a good opportunity to reiterate the main clauses of our BYOD policy especially that of 'responsible' use and 'appropriate content' being viewed.
Critical Reflection on my handling of the ethical dilemma
Did I use the "six components of the morally educated"( Wilson 1967 ) in dealing with the dilemma?
1. Moral deliberation- In this case, there wasn't that big a moral conflict amongst the parties. It was more of a whether to consider the situation as something that needed to be dealt with. I believe that keeping the main stakeholders' or all learners best interest in mind, my decision to deal with the issue was justified.
2.Empathy and 3.Interpersonal skills- I had to keep the social standing of the child in question in mind and make sure her position was not being compromised amongst her peers for her ( however silly or inappropriate) choice. Discretion was a key. So was ensuring that her own sense of self or her 'mana' was intact.
She was insecure and easily disheartened, as her teacher I knew this and worded my conversation accordingly.
4. Knowledge- A good understanding of the basic tenets of our BYOD policy defintely helped me in this situation. As did my knowledge of the ethical responsibility I had towards all the children in my class as 'loco parentis' as also of the personality of the student I was dealing with.
5.Reasoning- I had to consider and weigh out the main stakeholders, the student in question and my other learners carefully. I decided to act in the best interest of all which was not actually excluding the interest of the one student by any means.
6. Courage- This particular dilemma did not present a situation where my courage to approach the issue was called upon. However, tact and very careful choice of words was needed and I am happy with how I had the crucial one on one discussion including the follow up with the whole class.
Reference:
1.An approach to the exploration of ethical problems by teachers- Alan Hall
2.The commitment to parents/Guardians and family video link
3. My school's BYOD policy
No comments:
Post a Comment