Digital
Technology - how would one address the issue of responsibility and appropriate
behaviour with technology usage online?
It is surmised that before one can address how, we must
first address what is the desired outcome that the initiative is to achieve. In
an academic sense, desired ‘student’ outcomes are geared to assessment standards
applicable to a course or programme. One applicable standard in relation to distance
learning is our participation within AUT’s ‘Blackboard’ system. By the act of logging
into Blackboard, we each agree to the terms and conditions of use. As a student body, we agree to conduct
ourselves responsibly and appropriately within the AUT online domain which
produces the first set of online constraints (constraints).
Now add to the mix the use of Web 2.0 technologies. The
world has leaped way beyond the borders of AUT from the view of potential audience.
By definition the technologies are communication points for users to create and
share information globally. The choice is whether that is publically or
privately achieved in relation. Wrap on a second set of constraints pertinent
to the Web 2.0 technology selected and its ownership. What now of responsibility and appropriateness
related to the originator of the chosen Web 2.0 technology? Logically there
would be an intersecting area where there are commonalities between the two
sets of constraints. The adjoining areas would be unique due to their separate
exception criteria. Therefore the more Web 2.0 technologies a participant agrees
to be involved in, the greater and more complex the area of exceptions for analysis.
It’s believed that participants of Blackboard and Web 2.0 technology
exist within the intersecting area to create and share online information at
will. Wrap on a third set of constraints relating to personal standards online.
For example, the act of creating a profile within a Blog implies dual ownership
(theirs and yours) of the information. Such is the implication of a ‘Submit’
button as a design object and the ramifications of agreement, copyright and
intellectual property rights initially. What now of responsibility and
appropriateness related to the participant within a chosen Web 2.0 technology?
Consider a current news item concerning Facebook, inappropriate
information displayed by a participant and Facebook’s apparent lack of company action
to the content in question. The definitions of responsibility and
appropriateness then become filtered by a desired ‘owner’ outcome and its preferred
achievement standard. Web 2.0 technologies exist by public demand. The public
as an entity can be mindlessly indulgent so in answer to the original question we
as humans (using our many views) determine ‘how’ online technology is utilised…
