Showing posts with label EthicalCS. Show all posts
Showing posts with label EthicalCS. Show all posts

Tuesday, May 1, 2018

What Ethical standards SHOULD be in place - EthicalCS Day 3

After the weekend, I wanted to put a bow on everything we had talked about.  Going back to this tweet, and more specifically, the whole thread...


... I asked students to develop their own code of ethics for computer scientists.

First, we warmed up with this 60 Minutes video on The Coming Swarm which raises the issues of AI in the military.  It is very different from the data story we were talking about before, but it still (explicitly) raises some ethics questions around computer science.

I asked students to consider "Is automation a good thing or bad thing for wars?".  For the most part, students saw the challenge in this question - it is a "good thing" if we are the ones with the automation, but as more and more people get the technology... it gets iffy.  Through the video and the tweet, I talked about how the atomic bomb was a "good thing" until we saw how horrible it is.  The people who helped create the atomic bomb have some ethical obligation to society, once again, we didn't recognize the monster we were creating.  Cold that be happening right now?

From there we transitioned into talking about ethical oaths.  I gave students this hand out which we read together to connect ethical oaths to something students are already familiar with a bit in the Hippocratic oath.



Students were then tasked with writing their own set of ethical laws for computer scientists.  I walked the room while they had this discussion.  It was FASCINATING to watch privilege pop up in these discussions.  One student was adamant that this could be solved if we instead have people pay Facebook to keep their data private.  This started a good conversation around thinking about who all has your data - are you willing to pay all of them?  What does that mean for people who cannot afford to pay to keep their data private?  Is privacy a privilege and not a right?

I could have had 38 different conversations about what students were thinking, but at the end here were some of their more interesting "oaths for computer scientists"



Here were some common themes:

  • As we shared them out, it was clear that a lot of the "oaths" were at odds with core business ideas.  They weren't bad rules to live by, but they were also unsustainable for tech companies.
  • It was interesting that a lot of students put down something about making terms and conditions easier to read.  This seems do-able and there are precedents for this sort of thing.  Nutritional information was standardized to be easier to read and understand in the US.  Looking at the labeling of cereal boxes gives you the big picture of how "healthy" the food is.  There is also a movement to do this on medication that you get from the pharmacy.  They have labels that are easier to read and again have symbols that show the most important information on it.  There is some movement in this direction with the Creative Commons License labeling. 
  • Many students recognized the need to diversify the industry.  It was encouraging for students of all backgrounds (including the white male students) to recognize this.  I realize actually DOING something about it is different than recognizing it, but I think it is a solid first step.
  • Students seemed to hold three different stakeholders responsible: corporations, individuals and the government.  It strikes me that this is pretty similar to the financial industry too.  It was a bit surprising that some students placed more responsibility on the individual/consumer.  I wonder if that is the easy way out a bit - to blame the individual, rather than question the system that has led that individual to put be put into that situation.

We shared out some of these ideas and poked at them a bit together.  I had them turn in their sheets so I could read them a bit more.

Finally, after hearing from the Twittersphere, I asked students to complete the following sentance on their sheet of paper:

Ethics in computer science is...

Here were some of their responses:









Next Time Around
If I were to do this again, I think I need to slow down a bit and tell a story and consider a final product.  I thought of the ethics rules as a final product, but students weren't as motivated as I had hoped.  I am wondering if consolidating these into one code of ethics would have helped students fight a bit harder for or against some of these regulations.  I wonder if I could even have them send a letter to a representative, a consumer protection bureau, a researcher, or company to try to convince them to adopt a ethics rule that they came up with.  Perhaps that would make the audience more authentic.

I also think I could down portions of this mini detour.  Having students read the medical ethics and then go straight into developing their own code was a bit abrupt.  I was hoping to prime them a bit for the activity, but I think I should have slowed down and asked students "why do you think this rule was put into place?".  There is a great amount of history behind the rules, and many of them are in reaction to a societal issue, perhaps I could have teased that out of them a bit more.  Then they might be ready to consider what societal issues technology (or the industry) might cause.  I gave them a bit of a list of "things to consider" but some students relied solely on that list.

Another detour of the detour could have been looking at the ethics of the scientists that build the atomic bomb.  Students seem to get the need for ethics in CS, but I think this story might make them see it as imperative rather than a "nice to have" type of thing.

I am curious as to what others do out there!  How do you make ethics come alive in a high school computer science class?  What is fair to expect of students? 

There were certainly times that students expressed frustration that they would rather be programming during this time.  At the same time, I know this is good for students (and perhaps society-at large) to consider as well.

Tuesday, March 27, 2018

Looking at Facebook's perspective - EthicalCS - Day 2

Continuing on what we did yesterday, I had students turn in their research.  Students had a good range of different articles they read from their options.  I tried to give them a mix of topics for different interest areas.  I was concerned they would find the 3 shortest articles and call it a day, but for the most part students seemed to pick questions that interested them.

Here were their choices:


Students filled out this reading guide that asked them to raise their own ethical questions from what they read and also think about who was at fault and who had responsibility to build off what we talked about yesterday.

From there, we listened The Daily podcast of the day which reported on an interview with Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg. 

It was a nice complement to the previous day's podcast which talked about the Cambridge Analytica side of things more.  

Once again, I created a listening guide to help students stay engaged.  It worked.  It is so clear that you need to put a relevant question that is in the last 15 seconds of what you want students to listen to - as soon as they "get" the last question, they tune out.




One thing I realized is that I listened to these podcasts multiple times to make the reading guide and just to preview them.  Students only heard them once, and while I made the listening guide to help them through the story, it is a complicated story.  At the end of the listening guide, students needed to create a list of "players" or "characters" in this story.  They were eager to put down Mark Zuckerberg, which was fair, but I wanted them to think about who was the individual AT Facebook who actually did something in this story - what types of job titles did they have?

From there we made a character web with how people are connected.  Here was my rough draft.



I wanted student to think about what ethical responsibilities/roles each of these people played.  While I think I talked a bit too much here, I think there would have been an opportunity to have students think about this more themselves.  The tricky thing is that it is a bit of a creative writing exercise - they don't know how companies are typically organized - that there are thousands of departments in Facebook and most likily several of them played a part in this (from sales, to legal, to ad revenue, to the engineers who decide how much data developers have access to... it's a lot).

Finally, I wanted students to see that "using data" has happened forever - in fact, the wise use of data is how Obama was able to put together such amazing campaigns.  They got their data legally, but they used it in similar ways to Cambridge Analyitca.  There is this great MIT Technology Review issue that talks about how big data has "put the soul back into politics" from 2013 after Obama got re-elected.  I showed it to students to A) make the story a bit more balanced, and B) drive home that this has been brewing for a while.  While we were praising big data before, now we are questioning if it is the right thing to do.



On Day 3, I am going to pull away from the data side of ethics and try to put a nice end on the #EthicalCS detour. 

Friday, March 23, 2018

An EthicalCS Attempt - Day 1

Inspired by this tweet (which, BTW, the whole thread is worth reading)...



...and by Saber Khan's #EthicalCS chats on Twitter, I decided to take on a "EthicalCS" detour.  I think it ties directly into AP CSP's global impact piece and seems super timely with the Cambridge Analytica thing going on.

My goals were as follows:
  • Bring in real-world situations
  • Challenge students' assumptions about ethics in computing
  • Show how programmers (and others) are responsible for privacy
  • Demonstrate trade-offs with technology

To be honest, I could have made this go in 100 different directions.  There are SO MANY connections to be made here.

Big picture, over the course of 3 days, it ended up looking like this:

  1. Listsen to a podcast (then discuss)
  2. Have students read articles related to ethics in CS
  3. Listen to another podcast (then discuss)
  4. Watch a video (then discuss)
  5. Develop a "Code of Ethics" of Computer Scientists

I have been listening to The Daily podcast and they had an episode about the Cambridge Analyica story that was concise and, I thought, engaging.  Also learning from videos I have shown, I needed to have a way to hold students accountable to listening.  I gave them a "Listening Guide" where I came up with questions which could be directly answered from listening to the podcast.  We did this in class too which helped with actual completion.

SO... here is how it went.

Day 1: Introduce the Ideas of Ethical CS

On day 1 we listened to The Daily podcast from 3/21.  It talks a bit more about the logistics of the story.  Specifically, it covers how the news broke and who the key players are.  Listen to it, if you don't know the story!

I also had students fill out this reading guide (shown below).  The first questions are all directly answerable from the podcast but I also wanted to give students some lingering questions to think about.





I talked a bit about the difference between "fault" and "responsibility" at the beginning of class.  This was actually something that was raised in my church one week and it really resonated with me.  Will Smith also has a bit on it too, but they take it in more of a personal direction, which, while still good, isn't the direction I wanted to take it.  I described it as, if I find a baby in the middle of a street, it is not my fault the baby is there, but it is my responsibility to do something about it.  I suppose if I knew more about laws I could talk about legal fault, but... I don't.  I asked students to keep in mind "Who is at fault and who has responsibility?" in this story.

For the most part the listening went well with the guide.  After it was done, students discussed the last two questions:

  • What was Facebook’s “fault” in this story?
  • What was/is Facebook’s “responsibility” in this story?
When reading student responses, it was fascinating to see that most students felt like the only thing Facebook did wrong was not tell the public immediately when the learned that someone had this information that shouldn't have that information.  From most students' perspectives, had Facebook just said "hey, this happened" right away, then they would be in the clear. 

This reminds me a lot of student thinking.  "If I am honest about a bad thing I did, I won't have any consequences".  They were applying that same logic to this situation.  I needed to push back more on this idea of what "bad thing" happened. So, I asked, what was "bad" about this story.  Here were their responses in order:
  • Not alerting people their data was stolen
  • Selling data after it had been used for academic purposes 
  • Not being clear about how the data was going to be used
  • Playing on people's fears 
    • Note: This was an interesting side conversation about would "playing on people's hopes be any better" - we decided no.
So, we were getting closer to some important ideas. 

That took about 30 minutes total and then I had students take a test.

After the test, students had to choose from 8 different CS-ethics-related articles and fill out a short worksheet on them.

NEXT... reviewing what students researched...