Cleveland State University should adopt the student tracking program

 Cleveland State University should adopt the student tracking program

Introduction

A student data tracking program helps institutions define the best educational approaches that work best for their students. Cleveland University has developed initial efforts to monitor the institution’s retention and graduation efforts as outlined by the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS). The university has embarked on close monitoring of their students’ progress through their respective advisors. Similarly, Cleveland University has kept a close monitor on enrollment patterns relative to learner’s graduation outcomes as a strategic approach to improve its graduation and retention rates. The implementation process of the students tracking program will play a vital role in the ongoing institutional effectiveness process. Therefore, Cleveland State University should adopt the student tracking program to improve its student retention and graduation rates.

Major claims

Student tracking programs are critical to improving student engagement initiatives needed to achieve their educational endeavors. By improving student retention and graduation rates, a wide campus approach would be developed to engage each student from their freshman years. As such, the program stands to improve retention rates by engaging students to make better choices on their preferred academic choices (Sar & Saggaf, 2014). As such, standardized records would be developed through the use of aboriginal services aimed at tracking student outcomes. As a result, Cleveland state University would be in a position to develop a formal review based on its positive outcomes on student retention.

Moreover, the program serves to improve student responsibility and progress towards graduation through the use of self-monitoring tools. Hence, graduation plans at the university would be enhanced through the use of the degree audit software. The university is undergoing a crisis in regard to student retention and graduation performance, which compels the university to prioritize the development of the tracking program (Prinsloo & Rowe, 2015). Thus, a specific framework needs to be developed to spearhead the enactment of future programmatic initiatives towards learner’s retention and graduation rates. The university needs to retain more than 90% retention rates for its summer classes to gradually increase its graduation numbers in every academic year.

However, the student tracking program is not sustainable since it does not articulate measures facing most of the undergraduate students, which negatively impact on the graduation and retention rates.  The program lacks the ability to scrutinize student’s Satisfactory Academic Progress (SAP) for learners having a GPA greater or equal to 2.5. Hence, the tracking program fails to outline failures and withdrawals based on the learner’s records to exemplify their retention and graduation rates (Sar & Saggaf, 2014).  So, the program should not be implemented due to its failure to fully account for CSU undergraduates, not in their first-time, full-time freshmen.

Ethical principles

Confidentiality ethical principle refers to the set of rules enacted to limit access to restricted information. As such, Cleveland State University must apprehend to ensure that the school representatives mandated to carry out the student tracking system are responsible. The representatives are only allowed to use the information to improve student retention and graduation without infringing on the individual right (Prinsloo & Rowe, 2015). Moreover, the ethical principle is supposed to reduce risks posed by cybersecurity concerns hence compelling the institution to handle the collected data with utmost care. Consequently, confidentiality must be highly apprehended to ensure students’ data is secure from unauthorized access from external sources.

Also, informed consent ethical principles must be adhered to to ensure the learners are aware that the university uses the tracking program to improve student retention and graduation rates. The students would, therefore, be aware that assessment tools used by the tracking systems keep a tab of their learning process to promote the continuous nature of education (Prinsloo & Rowe, 2015). As such, the ethical principle ensures the university develops a competent database on their students’ progress on campus based on their enrollment numbers to graduation rates.

Contextual integrity framework

The contextual integrity framework is a privacy theory developed by Nissenbaum, which evaluates information flow between different stakeholders. However, contextual integrity is breached whenever the norms governing information sharing are violated during social relationships with involved stakeholders (Sar & Saggaf, 2014). As such, Cleveland State University is therefore required to integrate its SAP compliance procedures into Starfish to effectively improve student retention and graduation rates. The context in which the student tracking program should be implemented should align with the outlined course of action stipulated by the institution. Contextual integrity must be developed before initiating the program due to privacy threats posed by pervasive surveillance of such databases by unscrupulous personnel (Sar & Saggaf, 2014). Hence, the engineers mandated to develop the program must respect students’ privacy. Therefore, the institution is required to promote the overall benefits of the tracking program while addressing loopholes leading to information leakage. Furthermore, contextual integrity creates room for determining privacy violations that adhere to the software engineering code of ethics. So, the student tracking program is obligated to maintain the privacy of the students’ information relative to guidelines stipulated by the engineering code of ethics.

The moral reason for privacy

Encroachment of human dignity serves as a critical moral reason to protect the students’ information from unrestricted access. Lack of privacy would expose students’ information to third parties hence going against the learners’ rights confidentiality (Hoven, Blaauw & Warnier, 2014). Thus, the university’s initiatives to track and improve learners’ retention and graduation rates should be subject to mass surveillance by software engineering experts. So, the moral reason stands to eliminate the chilling effect, which would be characterized by a violation of students’ critical rights in a move to improve graduation rates. Software engineering tools should, therefore, be utilized to prevent violation of the apprentices’ human dignity due to massive data accumulation.

Besides, the prevention of harm plays a vital role as a moral reason for privacy. Cleveland State University should, therefore, develop restricted access to the student tracking program to limit loopholes, which lead to malicious activities due to the information’s availability. Data protection laws have developed regulations governing the handling, exchange, and transmission of information on restricted data to prevent harm to the university’s stakeholders (Hoven, Blaauw & Warnier, 2014). As a result, strong systems must be developed to ensure the information is secure to enable the university to articulate student retention and graduation rates.

Conclusion

The major claims support the idea of developing the student tracking program aimed at improving the university’s retention and graduation rates. However, the counterargument provides some of the hindrances which would halt the implementation process. The ethical principles provide moral guidelines that must be adhered to to ensure the student tracking program achieves its stipulated overall purpose. Furthermore, the contextual framework outlines privacy concerns that must be followed to ensure it is secure from cybercrimes. Hence, software engineers should develop privacy measures to prevent information sabotage.

References

Van den Hoven, J., Blaauw, M., Pieters, W., & Warnier, M. (2014). Privacy and information technology.

Sar, R. K., & Al-Saggaf, Y. (2014). Contextual integrity’s decision heuristic and the tracking by social network sites. Ethics and Information Technology, 16(1), 15-26.

Prinsloo, P., & Rowe, M. (2015). Ethical considerations in using student data in an era of ‘big data.’