Abstract:

The context of this paper is a H2020 project called TeSLA which targets to develop an adaptive trust-based e-assessment system for distant learning. This framework consists of a set of biometric tools that would allow to authenticate learners remotely. In this project, our team is in charge of the ethical and sociological assessment of the system to be developed. To make this assessment, we have defined a three steps analysis. This paper will be based on the first two steps.

The first step is inspired by the Actor Network Theory and the M.AKRICH method in particular to de-script technology. The aim of this method is to understand the “initial script” of the project by focussing on the meaning of the creators given to the object as well as the narratives deployed to ‘sell’ the object. It also aims to analyse the hidden norms and values that are responsible in sustaining their vision of learning and assessment. This step concerns the genealogy of the project and is based on project’s documents analysis.

The second step regards the “making of the script“ and questions the various partners of the project on their roles into the project’s development and on their representation of what they are building together. It aims at exploring the coherence of their respective narratives of the project and at pointing out the critical ethical issues raised by the technological choices at work for the learning concept and actors.
The third step aims at “deliberating the script” by organizing public deliberation on the script and on the ethical issues it raised for the concerned stakeholders. This will be done using a methodology that focuses on groups gathering representatives of the various stakeholders concerned with the project. The results of this deliberating process are requirements formulated by the public to the partners of the project in order to make it socially and ethically acceptable.

Based on the two first steps, our observations and interviews show that the organization of the project does not allow a shared vision of the project and a deliberation about the social responsibilities implied by the design of the technologies. Indeed, the organization of the project is fragmented in different workpackages, each being in charge of one biometric technology or of the design of one pilot. This specialization and fragmentation of work is leading to a lack of questioning about the deep social implications of the potential influence of TeSLA system on future educational paradigm.

This specialization has two major consequences. The first is systemic and consists of a feeling of de-responsibilization towards the influence each partner has on the final framework. The second is ideological and regards their ‘’attachment’ to a set of commonly accepted vision of the script embarked in the narrative developed to ‘sell’ the project. But this script finds no space into the project to be deliberated and elaborated regarding its educational and ethical issues.
Every partner acts in accordance with a sort of intersubjective consensus : they adapt themselves by foreseeing what other partners are thinking.

This organizational layout results in a superficial consensus about what they are building together and what it means for the educational and learning process and actors.