Entry 3: Ethical Oversight in Adaptive Learning Systems

Date: May 21, 2025
Quotation: "Adaptive learning systems require teachers to rethink their roles, shifting from content delivery to facilitation and ethical oversight" (Moltudal et al., 2022, p. 2).
Reference:
Moltudal, S. H., Krumsvik, R. J., & Høydal, K. L. (2022). Adaptive learning technology in primary education. Frontiers in Education, 7, 1-18. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.830536

Why I Included This:
This reading built on the ideas I explored in Entry 2 by highlighting how technology doesn’t just change what we teach but also how we define our role as educators. In my LINC classroom, we use Avenue (a platform that includes adaptive quizzes and feedback tools). While it’s helpful, this reading made me consider the ethical dimensions of relying on algorithms to guide instruction.

This entry connects to my earlier reflections about access and autonomy. Entry 1 emphasized building digital fluency, and Entry 2 introduced structured independence. Here, I realized that autonomy without guidance can risk learner disorientation or dependency on tech outputs. Moltudal et al. pushed me to think critically: if a platform adjusts difficulty based on student responses, am I still actively interpreting learner needs, or passively accepting algorithmic decisions?

I began questioning the limits of personalization: does adapting content based on quiz scores consider learners’ emotional readiness or cultural context? Not always. As I facilitate tech-supported learning, my role includes monitoring ethical implications. This is a  reflection on how to balance support with professional judgment.

It shows my evolving perspective: from tech adopter to critical evaluator. I’m no longer just integrating tools. I’m interrogating them. Adaptive learning offers efficiency, but it must be grounded in equity and ethics, especially for vulnerable learners like newcomers.