Vol. 37 No. 1 (2022)
Research Articles

Towards Safeguarding Users’ legitimate rights in Learning Management Systems (LMS): A case study of the Blackboard LMS at Sorbonne University, Abu Dhabi (SUAD).

Victor Kabata
Sorbonne University, Abu Dhabi
Bio
Published April 5, 2022
How to Cite
Kabata, V. (2022). Towards Safeguarding Users’ legitimate rights in Learning Management Systems (LMS): A case study of the Blackboard LMS at Sorbonne University, Abu Dhabi (SUAD). International Journal of E-Learning & Distance Education / Revue Internationale Du E-Learning Et La Formation à Distance, 37(1). https://doi.org/10.55667/ijede.2022.v37.i1.1214

Abstract

This paper sought to establish the extent to which users’ legitimate rights are safeguarded in Learning management systems (LMS), specifically, on the Blackboard system, used for teaching at Sorbonne University, Abu Dhabi (SUAD).

Firstly, users’ legitimate rights that must be protected were identified. Subsequently, the security and privacy guarantees afforded by Blackboard were assessed.  Lastly, policy gaps and technological deficiencies undermining protection of users’ legitimate rights were identified.  

The study adopted a qualitative research approach and a case study research design. Data was collected through content analysis, document review and interviews.

The research revealed that to a large extent Blackboard, LMS safeguarded most of the users’ legitimate rights. However, the system is silent on some legitimate rights such as storage limitation and data sharing arrangements.  Further, it emerged that Blackboard’s privacy practices are to a large extent informed by educational institutions using its products. The study concludes that safeguarding user’s legitimate rights is a collective responsibility between the learning management services providers and the educational institutions. As such, there is need for educational institutions using Blackboard and other learning management systems to craft robust data protection regimes.

Keywords: Learning Management Systems, Privacy, Users' legitimate rights 

References

  1. Alabsi, K. (2021) Personal communication.
  2. Ali, R. & Zafar, H. (2017). A security and privacy framework for e-Learning. International Journal for e-learning security (IJeLS), 7(2). https://digitalcommons.kennesaw.edu/facpubs/4137
  3. Banisar, D. & Davies, S. (1999). Global trends in privacy protection: An international survey of privacy, data protection and surveillance laws and developments. John Marshall Journal of Computer and Information Law, 18(1). https://repository.law.uic.edu/jitpl/vol18/iss1/1/
  4. Blackboard Corporation (2020). Blackboard privacy policy; Blackboard terms of use | Blackboard Help. https://help.blackboard.com/Terms_of_Use
  5. Boyd, D. (2007). Why youth (heart) social networking sites: The role of networked publics in teenage social life. In D. Buckingham (Ed.). Youth, identity and social media (pp. 119–142). MIT Press.
  6. Capurro, R. (2010). Global intercultural information ethics from an African perspective. Keynote address presented at the Second African Information Ethics Conference, University of Botswana, Gaborone, 6−7 September.
  7. Dutta, A. K., Mosley, A. A., & Akhtar, M. M. (2011). E-learning in higher education: Design and implementation. International Journal of Computer Science Issues (IJCSI), 8(4), 509. http://www.ijcsi.org/articles/E-learning-in-Higher-Education-Design-and-Implementation.php
  8. El-Khatib, K., Korba, L., Xu, Y. & Yee, G. (2003). Privacy and security in e-learning. International Journal of Distant Education, 1(4), 1–19. http://doi.org/10.4018/jdet.2003100101
  9. European Union (EU). (2016). General Data Protection Regulations: Art. 5 GDPR - Principles relating to processing of personal data. Proton Technologies AG. https://gdpr.eu/article-5-how-to-process-personal-data/
  10. Giles, D. (2006). Constructing identities in cyberspace: The case of eating disorders. British Journal of Social Psychology 45(3), 463–477. https://doi.org/10.1348/014466605X53596
  11. Graf, F. (2002). Providing security for eLearning. Computers & Graphics, 26(2), 355–365. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0097-8493(02)00062-6
  12. International Organisation Standard (ISO) 9000. (2015). Quality Management Systems. Available at: https://www.iso.org/iso-9001-quality-management.html
  13. International Organisation Standard, ISO/IEC 27001. (2018). Information Security Management. Available at: https://www.iso.org/isoiec-27001-information-security.html
  14. Kaplan, A. & Haenlein, M. (2010). Users of the world unite: The challenges and opportunities of social media. Business Horizons, 53(1), 59–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2009.09.003
  15. Mason, R. (1986). Four ethical issues of the information age. Management Information Systems (MIS) Quarterly, 10(1), 5–12. https://doi.org/10.2307/248873
  16. Mutula, S. (2013). Policy gaps and technological deficiencies in social networking environments: Implications for information sharing. South Africa Journal of Information Management 15(1). https://doi.org/10.4102/sajim.v15i1.542
  17. Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR). (1966). International covenant on civil and political rights (ICCPR). United Nations. http://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/CCPR.aspx
  18. Solove, D. (2006). A Taxonomy of Privacy. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 154(3), 477 https://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/penn_law_review/vol154/iss3/1
  19. Stapić, Z., Orehovacki, T. & Danié, M. (2008). Determination of optimal security settings for LMS Moodle. Proceedings of 31st MIPRO International Convention on Information Systems Security, vol. 5, Opatija, 2008, 84–89. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/224930654_Determination_of_optimal_security_settings_for_LMS_Moodle
  20. Subramanian, P., Zainuddin, N., Alatawi, S., Jarabdeh, T. & Che Hussin, A. (2014). A study of comparison between Moodle and Blackboard based on case studies for better LMS. Journal of Information Systems Research and Innovation (6). https://seminar.utmspace.edu.my/jisri/Volume6.html
  21. United Nations General Assembly. (1948, 10 December). Resolution adopted by the General Assembly, 217 (III). International Bill of Human Rights. 183rd Plenary Meeting (Geneva: United Nations, 71–9. http://www.un-documents.net/a3r217.htm
  22. World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) (2005). Plan of action: C10. Ethical dimensions of the information society. International Telecommunication Union (ITU). http://www.itu.int/wsis/docs/geneva/official/poa.html#c10