| 1,065 | 3 | 236 |
| 下载次数 | 被引频次 | 阅读次数 |
数智时代的教育研究正面临技术滥用引发的伦理失范挑战。近年来国际学界针对数智化教育研究伦理规范达成系列共识,推动包括英国教育学会《教育研究伦理指南》在内的规则体系变革。最新教育研究伦理规范确立了数智化科研条件下对数字人格、知情同意、自愿参与、隐私保护和充分融入的保障原则,并规范数智技术在数据收集、存储分析和写作发表等阶段的全过程运用。上述变革回应了研究伦理保障对象的数字属性变化,并确立了数智化条件下的制度化伦理安排,其实质是以研究伦理规则调整撬动教育科研范式变革。从文明互鉴角度审视,上述规范在数智技术迅猛迭代形势下仍存在时滞性,且西方契约型伦理观与东方道德本位伦理观存在底层逻辑冲突。我国的教育研究伦理规则建构应立足于国家教育数字化基础优势与本土文化基因,探寻兼具制度刚性、技术理性和人文柔性的中国方案。
Abstract：Educational research in digital intelligence is facing the challenge of ethical misconduct caused by the misuse of technology. In recent years, the international academic community has reached a consensus on the code of ethics for digitalized educational research, which has led to changes in the system of rules, including the Ethical Guidelines for Educational Research of the British Educational Research Association. The latest code of ethics for educational research establishes the principles of digital personality, informed consent, voluntary participation, privacy protection,and full integration under the conditions of digitalized scientific research, and regulates the use of digital technologies in the whole process of data collection, storage and analysis, and writing and publication. The above changes have responded to the changes in the digital attributes of the object of research ethics and established institutionalized ethical arrangements under the conditions of digitalization, which in essence is to pry the paradigm change of education and scientific research by adjusting the rules of research ethics. From the perspective of mutual understanding of civilizations, the above norms are still time-lagged under the rapid iteration of digital technology, and there is an underlying logical conflict between the Western contractual ethical outlook and the Eastern moral-based ethical outlook. The ethical construction of educational research in China should be based on the advantages of the digital foundation of national education and local cultural genes, and should explore a Chinese solution that combines institutional rigidity, technical rationality, and humanistic flexibility.
[1]王竹立,吴彦茹等.数智时代的育人理念与人才培养模式[J].电化教育研究,2024,(2):13-19.
[2]Bengio Y,et al.Managing extreme AI risks amid rapid progress[J].Science,2024,384:842-845.
[3]赵哲,曲波.我国教育研究伦理审查制度的缺失及建构[J].高校教育管理,2021,(3):61-69.
[4]杨伟鹏,罗丽等.国际早期教育研究伦理规范的发展与启示[J].学前教育研究,2020,(8):31-41.
[5]British Educational Research Association.Ethical guidelines for educational research (5th ed.)[R].London:British Educational Research Association,2024.1.
[6]Fitria T N.Quill Bot as an online tool:Students’alternative in paraphrasing and rewriting of English writing[J].Englisia:Journal of Language,Education,and Humanities,2021,9(1):183-196.
[7]和鸿鹏.生成式人工智能学术应用引发的伦理问题及其应对[J].伦理学研究,2025,(2):115-122.
[8]Nordling L.How Chat GPT is transforming the postdoc experience[J].Nature,2023,622(7983):655-657.
[9]周濛.AIGC论文检测系统的技术缺陷与学术期刊因应[J].出版与印刷,2024,(4):20-30.
[10]Bethencourt-Aguilar A,Castellanos-Nieves D,et al.Use of generative adversarial networks (GANs) in educational technology research[J].Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research,2023,12(1):153-170.
[11]袁子晗,靳彤.高影响力国际科技期刊撤稿论文特征分析及启示---以Cell、Nature和Science为例[J].中国科技期刊研究,2024,35(2):216-225.
[12]Osman R,Qutayan S M S B.Overcoming data fabrication in scientific research[J].Journal of Science,Technology and Innovation Policy,2023,9(1):26-31.
[13]Freijedo-Farinas F,Ruano-Ravina A,et al.Biomedical retractions due to misconduct in Europe:Characterization and trends in the last 20 years[J].Scientometrics,2024,129(5):2867-2882.
[14]Huang L.Ethics of artificial intelligence in education:Student privacy and data protection[J].Science Insights Education Frontiers,2023,16(2):2577-2587.
[15]兰天.数字人格:数字智能时代的人格研究[J].全球传媒学刊,2023,10(3):47-65.
[16]Goncharov L,Suominen H,Cook M.Dynamic consent and personalised medicine[J].The Medical Journal of Australia,2022,216(11):547.
[17]Teare H J A,Prictor M,Kaye J.Reflections on dynamic consent in biomedical research:The story so far[J].European journal of human genetics,2021,29(4):649-656.
[18]Facca D,Smith M J,et al.Exploring the ethical issues in research using digital data collection strategies with minors:A scoping review[J].Plos one,2020,15(8):e0237875.
[19]Qadhi S M,Alduais A,et al.Generative AI,research ethics,and higher education research:Insights from a scientometric analysis[J].Information,2024,15(6):325.
[20]Chen P,Wu L,Wang L.AI fairness in data management and analytics:A review on challenges,methodologies and applications[J].Applied sciences,2023,13(18):10258.
[21]Oduro S,Moss E,Metcalf J.Obligations to assess:Recent trends in AIaccountability regulations[J].Patterns,2022,3(11):100608.
[22]郑玉双.数据伦理的法理构造与治理模式[J].甘肃社会科学,2024,(4):130-139.
[23]Ogiela L,Ogiela M R,Ko H.Intelligent data management and security in cloud computing[J].Sensors,2020,20(12):3458.
[24]Wang Y,Zhang X,et al.Security enhancements for data-driven systems:Ablockchain-based trustworthy data sharing scheme[J].Security and Communication Networks,2022,2022(1):1317626.
[25]Stocˇes M,Vaněk J,et al.Agriculture data platform-institutional data repositoryselected aspects[J].AGRIS on-line Papers in Economics and Informatics,2023,15(4):127-133.
[26]Conroy G.How ChatGPT and other AI tools could disrupt scientific publishing[J].Nature,2023,622(7982):234-236.
[27]Stansfield C,Stokes G,Thomas J.Applying machine classifiers to update searches:Analysis from two case studies[J].Research Synthesis Methods,2022,13(1):121-133.
[28]荆洲,杨启光.生成式人工智能赋能教育研究范式变革:机理、风险与对策[J].中国电化教育,2024,(3):68-75.
[29]Ansari A N,Ahmad S,Bhutta S M.Mapping the global evidence around the use of Chat GPT in higher education:A systematic scoping review[J].Education and Information Technologies,2024,29(9):11281-11321.
[30]Vetter M A,Lucia B,et al.Towards a framework for local interrogation of AIethics:A case study on text generators,academic integrity,and composing with Chat GPT[J].Computers and composition,2024,71:102831.
[31]Wohlfarth B,Streit S R,Guttormsen S.Artificial intelligence in scientific writing:a deuteragonistic role?[J].Cureus,2023,15(9):e45513.
[32]梁钰,林丹.脑机接口教育应用:三重场景、潜在风险及伦理边界[J].教育科学研究,2025,(3):38-45.
[33]吴龙凯,程浩等.技术伦理视角下人机协同教育评价的运行机制与实践策略[J].中国电化教育,2025,(1):8-16.
[34]吴砥,吴河江.通用大模型教育应用的潜在风险及其规避---基于技术伦理的视角[J].华东师范大学学报(教育科学版),2024,42(8):64-75.
[35]Parker J L,Richard V M,Becker K.Guidelines for the integration of large language models in developing and refining interview protocols[J].The Qualitative Report,2023,28(12):3460-3474.
[36]Chong S W,Bond M,Chalmers H.Opening the methodological black box of research synthesis in language education:Where are we now and where are we heading?[J].Applied Linguistics Review,2024,15(4):1557-1568.
[37]Guillemin M,Gillam L.Ethics,reflexivity,and"Ethically important moments"in research[J].Qualitative Inquiry,2004,10(2):261-280.
[38]吴冠军.健康码、数字人与余数生命---技术政治学与生命政治学的反思[J].探索与争鸣,2020,(9):115-122.
[39]Florea D,Florea S.Big data and the ethical implications of data privacy in higher education research[J].Sustainability,2020,12(20):8744.
[40]Nelson M,Beauchamp T,et al.The concept of voluntary consent[J].The American Journal of Bioethics,2011,11(8):6-16.
[41]Von Kriegstein H,Macdonald C.The ethics of voluntary ethics standards[J].Business and Society Review,2024,129(1):50-71.
[42]Ellersgaard H,Ditlevsen K,Larsen G.Say my name?Anonymity or not in elite interviewing[J].International Journal of Social Research Methodology,2022,25(5):673-686.
[43]Salway S,Chowbey P,et al.Researching health inequalities with community researchers:practical,methodological and ethical challenges of an‘inclusive’research approach[J].Research Involvement and Engagement,2015,1(9):1-21.
[44]Guess A M,Malhotra N,et al.How do social media feed algorithms affect attitudes and behavior in an election campaign?[J].Science,2023,381(6656):398-404.
[45]Tenopir C,Rice M,et al.Data sharing,management,use,and reuse:Practices and perceptions of scientists worldwide[J].PLOS ONE,2020,15 (3):e0229003.
[46]Smit B,Scherman V.Computer-assisted qualitative data analysis software for scoping reviews:A case of ATLAS.ti[J].International Journal of Qualitative Methods,2021,20:1-3.
[47]Ibrahim H,Liu F,et al.Perception,performance,and detectability of conversational artificial intelligence across 32 university courses[J].Scientific Reports,2023,13:12187.
[48]Holmes W,Miao F.Guidance for generative AI in education and research[M].Paris:UNESCO Publishing,2023.
[49]刘盛.美国一流大学在教育教学实践中应用Chat GPT的划界及其启示[J].高等教育研究,2023,(10):89-98.
[50]Office of the Provost.Guidelines for Using Chat GPT and Other Generative AITools at Harvar[EB/OL].https://provost.harvard.edu/guidelines-usingchatgpt-and-other-generative-ai-tools-harvard,2024-09-08.
[51]Lund B,Wang T,Mannuru,et al.Chat GPT and a new academic reality:Artificial Intelligence-written research papers and the ethics of the large language models in scholarly publishing[J].Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology,2023,74(5):570-581.
[52]Stahl B,Eke D.The ethics of Chat GPT:Exploring the ethical issues of an emerging technology[J].International Journal of Information Management,2024,74:1-14.
[53]Ravi S,Climent-perez P,Florez-revuelta F.A review on visual privacy preservation techniques for active and assisted living[J].Multimedia Tools and Applications,2024,83:14715-14755.
[54]Bjork B,Korkeamaki T.Adoption of the open access business model in scientific journal publishing:a cross-disciplinary study[J].College&Research Libraries,2020,81(7):1080.
[55]British Educational Research Association.Ethical guidelines for educational research (5th ed.)[R].London:British Educational Research Association,2024.9.
[56]徐辰烨,彭兰.从“人”到“赛博格”:技术物如何影响日常交往行为?---以耳机为例[J].新闻界,2023,(4):34-46.
[57]Bengio Y,Hinton G,et al.Managing extreme AI risks amid rapid progress[J].Science,2024,384(6698):842-845.
[58]Franzke A,Bechmann A,et al.Internet research:Ethical guidelines 3.0.[R].Chicago:Association of Internet Researchers,2020.12-22.
[59]中国教育科学研究院.全球数字教育发展指数报告2024---世界图景与中国方位[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2025.3.
[60]王方.网友们气炸了!著名社交网站竟一直是AI聊天实验室[N].中国科学报,2025-05-09(02).
[61]陈秀萍.契约的伦理内核---西方契约精神的伦理解析[J].南京社会科学,2006,(8):47-53.
[62]陈向明.质的研究方法与社会科学研究[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2000.428.
[63]鄯爱红.儒家诚信伦理的现代诠释与整合[J].中国人民大学学报,2002,(5):26-33.
[64]李伦.科研伦理:科学研究的道德基础[J].人民论坛·学术前沿,2023,(11):96-102.
(1)实际上“研究对象”所对应的英文原词为“Research Participants”,意指“研究参与者”。本文之所以将其译为“研究对象”是基于中英文语境的差异,因为“研究参与者”一词在中文语境下的内涵更宽泛,既包括研究对象群体也包括研究团队自身的成员。
基本信息:
中图分类号:G434
引用信息:
[1]余晖,尤宏淼.数智时代教育研究伦理的挑战应答与规则建构[J].中国电化教育,2025,No.462(07):131-141.
基金信息:
国家社会科学基金2023年度重大项目“促进高等教育与科技创新、经济发展更好结合研究”(项目编号:23ZDA059)研究成果
2025-07-10
2025-07-10