aram ,
@aram@aoir.social avatar

It's time for us professors who study to start hassling our university IT departments whenever they integrate extractive platforms into our professional workflow.

Feel free to repurpose my verbiage in your own emails.

@academicchatter @academicsunite

This “enhanced” experience, per Ellucian’s own privacy policy, doesn’t in any way benefit me. Instead, what it does is increase the amount of personal data the company is allowed to harvest from me, and share with third parties, including sponsors, government agencies, and unnamed “third parties” whose intentions, and data security practices, are not specified, and who therefore have no accountability to me whatsoever. This is bad data security. It makes me personally vulnerable, and more importantly, it makes my sensitive data vulnerable in a way that might compromise my own data sources, to whom I have made my own data security pledges (in some cases, per the legal requirements of AU and other institutions, such as informed consent for human subjects research). In the best world, Ellucian would NEVER ask me for these personal data. In a better world, they would ask ONCE and take “no thanks” as a permanent answer. I research data security as a scholar, so I understand what’s at stake, and am willing to take the extra energy and effort to click “No thanks” a hundred times per semester (and to email administrators like yourself about it). But most AU employees don’t have my level of expertise, self-efficacy, and willingness to take on the extra labor of pushing back against this extractive darta regime. Especially when data surveillance is described in vague and bogus terms like “enhanced experience.” That’s both unfair and unsafe, and we should change those policies...
ALT
  • Reply
  • Expand (5)
  • Collapse (5)
    • + claudius
  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • random
  • academicchatter@a.gup.pe
  • test
  • worldmews
  • mews
  • All magazines
    •