In the race to generate ‘data-driven’ solutions, we run the risk of sidelining human experiences. AI and digital data are having a massive impact on work and learning. Efforts to utilise data in ways that empower people, like making data open and FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable), tend to focus on technical areas such as the scalability, sustainability, user experience, interoperability, overlooking social and cultural concerns. While these technical areas are all important, they only work well when humans are fully engaged.

Making use of data is more than just technical work, it involves an important social dimension. Use of data changes how people work together, what roles they take on, and how power is shared. These changes can create tensions that change the dynamics of work. One of the biggest challenges is that different groups of people think about and use data in different ways. Knorr Cetina’s research emphasises that different professional groups have distinct “epistemic cultures” (Knorr-Cetina, 2005). They each have their own tools, ways of thinking, and social rules. Because of this, sharing tasks across diverse groups can be beset by tensions such as lack of trust, poor communication or even feelings of vulnerability (Littlejohn et al, in press). These experiences impact agency – the response of each individual to transformations to the workplace (Knorr-Cetina, 2005). To ensure agency is employed productively,  it’s important that professionals are able to negotiate how they work  (Eteläpelto et al, 2014).  This calls for a repositioning of professional learning, moving beyond learning about knowledge, skills and literacies towards enabling professionals to negotiate the ways AI and digital data are designed and used by them (Littlejohn et al, in press).

In this presentation, I’ll share stories from people who work with data and how changes in their work affect them. These stories are based on recent research with colleagues from UCL and the Open University: Dr Francisco Duran del Fierro (UCL), Prof Eileen Kennedy (UCL), Dr Louise Chisholm (UCL) and Dr Koula Charitonos (OU). I’ll talk about their concerns, their agentic responses and how we might address these tensions they experience. As a former member of the Institute of Educational technology and lifelong supporter of the Open University, I look forward to hearing about your own experiences and thoughts and to talking with you.

Cetina, K. K. (2005). How are global markets global? The architecture of a flow world. The sociology of  financial markets, 38-61.

Eteläpelto, A., Vähäsantanen, K., Hökkä, P., & Paloniemi, S. (2014). Identity and agency in professional learning. In International handbook of research in professional and practice-based learning (pp. 645-672). Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.