Ethical Severity of E-Learning Systems Security Attacks, Coursework Example

The Learning Environment

The environment of the classroom has changed drastically over the years. No longer does attending college mean sitting in a classroom. Attending classes at a university can be accomplished by sitting at one’s computer. However, there are many responsibilities that go along with ensuring that students are fulfilling their responsibilities, as well as ensuring that the facility is providing the student with a quality education. Wagner, N., Hassanein, K., & Head, M 2008, pose the question of who is responsible for the success of e-learning. The authors noted that one concern that many faculty members have is that e-learning is inferior to face to face learning because there is always that possibility that integrity has been breached. Also, that genuine learning is taking place because online programs often do not address various learning styles. For example:

“Many industry experts attribute the shortcomings of e-learning to technological issues. It is argued that many products are not developed on proven educational principles and thus do not take the different ways that people learn into consideration. Similar to content providers, technology providers should provide provisions for personalizing the learning experience based on the context of learning and the characteristics of the student” (Wagner, Hassanein, & Head, 2008).

So, in essence, the authors are conveying that the institution is responsible for the type of learning opportunities they provide, but the student is responsible for being ethical in their leaning process. Finally, they go on to point out that if employers and professors are to take e-learning seriously, proper actions must be taken. Alternative designs for courses must be implemented to ensure that all learning styles are being addressed and a system of evaluating learning must also be designed. They concluded with the fact that the success of e-learning is the responsibility of all stakeholders. They say, “When all stakeholders fulfill their responsibilities to create effective and meaningful e-learning experiences, positive outcomes extend beyond success in specific courses and programs to facilitate lifelong learning and discovery”(Wagner, Hassanein, & Head, 2008).

Quality of Learning

Masoumi &Lindstrom (2012), address the issues that many are pondering when it comes to e-learning-is the quality of e-learning equivalent to that of traditional learning. There have been many models and frameworks established to ensure the quality of education e-learning students are receiving. The framework used to assess e-learning is also evaluates socio-culture. In other words, a part of the e-learning student’s education is collaboration and community practice. The goal of e-learning institutes is to provide an academically equivalent education to that of traditional colleges and universities. There are many categories that the framework evaluates to determine if a quality education is being delivered. Some of those factors are: reputation, accessibility, research, and organizing learning resources. First, having a good reputation is important to ensure that the institution receives proper recognition from students and employers. A good reputation is achieved through adequate implementation of the institution’s visions and mission. High expectations must be enforced and any breaches in integrity must be dealt with harshly. Then, there is access to what is needed by e-learning students. Students want to be able to talk with their professors or classmate to collaborate on assignments. Next, research is very important because it is the foundation of all higher education. Consequently, the institutions research topics and polices must be aligned with the goals and objectives of the school. Although there are many categories for the e-quality framework, the authors concluded that the purpose of the framework is to enhance quality and assurance. Masoumi & Lindstrom concluded by saying, “Using this e-quality framework in virtual institutions can offer institutions the capacity to enhance and assure quality. Further, the framework can provide a basis of determining the minimum requirements for institutions to be viable when providing a virtual program or course” (Masoumi & Lindstrom, 2012).

Myths of Technology

Nienga &Fourie (2010) believe that technology has advanced at such a fast rate that there has been little time to adequately access e-learning. They introduce what they call the technopositivist ideology, which they define as a compulsive enthusiasm about e-learning in higher education. They believe these people propagate students to e-learning because they stand to profit. They believe this is accomplished by propagating by ten myths about e-learning.

1. E-Learning is a savior; its redemptive power is overreaching and every educational institution should adopt it. The authors believe that e-learning has been so widely adopted because it is a virtual fashion, not so much that it will improve teaching and learning. This is misleading to students because many who have been unable to achieve in traditional classrooms feel they will easily succeed in virtual classrooms. Essentially, this has not been the case. Many believe that virtual classrooms prove more difficult than traditional ones because the student is held accountable.
2. E-Learning can replace human interaction. With e-learning the premise is that one teacher can reach many students at the same time. In other words, differentiated learning can take place. However, e-learning does not take the place of human interaction. Likewise, even an excellent teacher can only reach a certain number of students at one time.
3. E-Learning cuts the cost of education for institutions. Again, this is also untrue according to the authors. They insist that when the cost of trainings, hardware, and system upgrades, and maintenance is accounted for the cost quickly surpass that of traditional education.
4. Providing numerous courses and an abundance of information is beneficial and can enhance learning. The authors believe the concept that more is better is not accurate in this case because many novice students need the support of a teacher to guide them. The information may be provided, but it is not beneficial when the student do not know how to use it.
5. ICTs should become the primary medium of learning in higher education. The authors agree that technology is important, but will never be able to replace human experts and the interaction they provide.
6. Leisure (including playing and entertainment) and learning are separate activities.In the traditional classroom, a teacher can present a lesson in such a way that the students do not even realize they are learning. When a student has an assignment to complete via internet it is just work and completion.
7. E-Learning will make HEIs more competitive and they must seize it or be declared institutionally redundant. Many students are attracted to e-learning because of its flexibility. E-learning alone will not make a graduate more appealing to a company.
8. Establishing the infrastructure in e-learning is the most difficult part. In fact, resistance to change is the most difficult part of e-learning.
9. E-Learning will see the demise of traditional campuses. This notion challenges the Deweyan model that conveys that education for the purpose of further education. Technology will never be able to replace human expertise because programs and technological advances are first envisioned by humans.
10. E–Learning can decrease absenteeism and lower dropout rates among students. Very little research has been conducted to determine if this is true. Actually, studies have proven that academically stronger students are the ones who benefit most from e-learning. It is very difficult to determine absenteeism in e-learning because students must just complete the assignments by a given date.

To conclude, the authors believe that e-learning is lacking because it does not address ways to enhance the educational experience of weaker students.

Ethics in E-Learning

Security and ethics have been a major concern for e-learning institutions. A study was conducted that examined the most common cyber-security attacks. In 2005, the FBI reported that cyber-attacks cost about 67.2 billion dollars in damages (Levy, Ramim, & Hackey, 2013). The study surveyed 519 students taking a business course. According to the study, females seem to be more ethical than males, but overall both male and female understand the severity of ethical issues in e-learning. However, the study did raise questions about unethical individuals; although the group was small it still raised concerns among the e-learning environment. It was found that several factors lead to an individual’s risk taking behaviors. Often students participated in unethical behaviors when they were nearing graduation and certain assignments determined if they would graduate or not. Also, new students were more unethical as they attempted to set their GPA early in their academic careers. Of the students surveyed, the majority felt that their classmates for the most part were unethical.To conclude, the authors felt that all higher education institutions must have strict, yet clear and concise guidelines about what is deemed as unethical behavior.

Non-Traditional Students

Miller & Mei-Yan (2003) E-learning has been geared towards a variety of students; however, how well are non-traditional students actually doing as compared to traditional students. Traditional college student is defined as someone between the ages of 18-24 and has enrolled in school soon after completing high school. Non-traditional students bring along with them a great deal of other responsibilities. The authors feel that e-learning institutions need to find ways to reach the needs of non-traditional students by accommodating their many responsibilities. About 89 percent of the non-traditional students agreed that the interaction they had with their professors was very important to the success they maintained. Professors were flexible with deadlines and allowing more time to complete assignments. Nontraditional students also said that when professors made online workshops and how to webinars available to them it was very helpful to them

References

Levy, Y., Ramim, M. M., & Hackney, R. A. (2013). Assessing ethical severity of e-learning systems security attacks. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 53(3), 75-84.

Masoumi, D., & Lindstrom, B. (2012). Quality in e-learning: a framework for promoting and assuring quality in virtual institutions. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 28(1), 27-41.

Miller, M.T., & Mei-Yan, L. (2003). Serving non-traditional students in e-learning environments: Building successful communities in the virtual campus. Educational Media International, 40(1/2), 163.

Njenga, J. K., & Fourie, L. H. (2010). The myths about e-learning in higher education. British Journal of Education Technology, 4(2), 199-212.

Wagner, N., Hassanein, K., & Head, M. (2008). Who is responsible for E-Learning Success in Higher Education? A Stakeholders’ Analysis. Educational Technology & Society, 11 (3), 26-36.