Take Another Look . . .

What looks like a great service at first glance proves to be something else on second look . . . .

Following is a letter sent to Christopher Rice (UK Online Community Manager), copied to Lee Todd, the Provost, and Ryan Alessi (Lexington Herald-Leader) regarding the Big Blue Network. It is reprinted here with the permission of the author, Dr. Krish Muralidhar, Gatton Research Professor, School of Management.

-----------

Dear Professor Rice,

This is in reference to the story in the Lexington Herald regarding the Big Blue Network. I am very happy that UK is using technology to make it easy for incoming students. However, I was somewhat disturbed by the following statements in the article:

He and a team will catalog students' exchanges and discussions to track how participation in the Big Blue Network might affect freshmen retention rates, although most of the incoming students using the site haven't been told that their comments will be collected.

Rice said they didn't broadcast the cataloging of content because they wanted to avoid "creepy treehouse syndrome."

"Nobody wants to hang out in the treehouse with Dad," Rice said. "We didn't want the research to get in the way of aspects students find useful."

He and a team will keep track of how many times each student posts something on the network as well as the quality of the discussions, Rice said. For instance, there's a big difference between starting a debate over an academic issue and posting a mundane update, such as "my cat just threw up," he said.

It is clear from the above statements that the research team not only intends to monitor usage, but actually evaluate the content of the comments. Even if you will be analyzing only de-identified (anonymized) data, I believe that every student must be informed that such information is being collected. And, in situations such as this, it is very easy to (re)identify the individual posting a comment even if the data has been de-identified.

Your statements above make it very clear that you are aware that the students are not necessarily comfortable sharing some comments with researchers (the treehouse syndrome that you discuss). If this is the case, then to analyze the comments when the students have not explicitly “opted in” is inappropriate. The article also does not provide any information whether some students can use the network but “opt out” of participating in the research study. The students have a right to be informed as to how the administrators of the network will use the data.

The article mentions that “student leaders” were informed, but not the individual students. I think this is inappropriate. As a leading research institution we should attempt to be a leader in appropriate research practices. Not providing the participating students with a clear indication that the individual comments will be analyzed is, in my opinion, not appropriate research practice. It is irrelevant that “no one has expressed that fear”. They should have been provided a choice to “opt in” or “opt out”.

In addition, as educators, one of our responsibilities is to educate our students regarding the dangers of participating in networks and posting information that could potentially have adverse consequences. By gathering data without (what I consider to be) informed consent, we not only fail to educate the students, we are contributing to the problem.

At the very least, I strongly suggest that you immediately inform all students that their comments will be used for research purposes and allow them to “opt in” if they want to participate in the study and “opt out” if they do not wish to. I clearly understand that this may have a detrimental effect on the data that is being collected. But that is a small price to pay for the loss of trust that would result from the current practice.

Sincerely,

Krish

-----------

We don't know about you, but we're not joining a network with no opt out.