Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Teaching Human Rights and Digital Technology

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Human Rights and Digital Technology

  • 774 Accesses

Abstract

The preceding chapters have examined the intersection between human rights and digital technology for a variety of stakeholders. This chapter presents a comprehensive approach, one that integrates the lessons learned in the four preceding chapters and brings this knowledge into the university classroom. Educational curricula offer an ideal platform for exploring the relationship between our rights and our use of technology, encouraging a rigorous examination of their complex interstice as part of either a general education programme or a specialized degree. Of particular interest is the blended classroom: this hybrid of the physical and virtual space allows students and teachers to learn by doing, to utilize technology in creative and singular ways that privilege the tangible classroom space, while providing digitized access to materials, people and discussions that are physically out of reach. This chapter examines the potential for blended, interdisciplinary learning through (1) a discussion of the right to access education and to enjoy the benefits of scientific progress, rights that the digital divide calls into question, (2) an analysis of human attention in digital environments and the consequences for higher education, (3) the presentation of a curriculum that blends the traditional classroom and the Internet, and (4) a viewpoint on the future of blended learning in an increasingly digitized university environment.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Bibliography

  • Adler, R. F., & Benbunan-Fich, R. (2012). Juggling on a high wire: Multitasking effects on performance. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 70(2), 156–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adler, R. F., Benbunan-Fich, R. (2014, March 9). The effects of task difficulty and multitasking on performance. Interacting with Computers. First published online.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alcock, S. E., Dufton, J. A., & Durusu-Tanriöver, M. (2015). Archaeology and the MOOC: Massive, open, online, and opportunistic. Journal of Social Archaeology, 16(1), 3–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2015). Grade level: Tracking online education in the United States. Babson park, MA: Babson Survey Research Group.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aoun, J. (2012). A shake-up of higher education. Boston Globe. Retrieved March 25, 2016, from https://www.bostonglobe.com (home page).

  • Baethge, A., & Rigotti, T. (2013). Interruptions to workflow: Their relationship with irritation and satisfaction with performance, and the mediating roles of time pressure and mental demands. Work & Stress, 27(1), 43–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bailey B., Konstan J., Carlis J. (2001) The effects of interruptions on task performance, annoyance, and anxiety in the user interface, In M. Hirose (Ed.) Human-Computer Interaction - INTERACT 2001 Conference Proceedings. Amsterdam: IOS Press, 593–601.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bain, K. (2004). What the best college teachers do. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beiter, K. D. (2005). The protection of the right to an education by international law. Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bulling, A. (2016). Pervasive attentive user interfaces. Computer, 49(1), 94–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carver, L., & Harrison, L. M. (2013). Moocs and democratic education. Liberal Education, 99(4), 20–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Charle, C., & Verger, J. (2015). Histoire des universités XIIe au XXIe siècle. Paris: Presses universitaires de France.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conard, M. A., & Marsh, R. F. (2014). Interest level improves learning but does not moderate the effects of interruptions: An experiment using simultaneous multitasking. Learning and Individual Differences, 30, 112–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crary, J. (1999). Suspension of perception: Attention, spectacle, and modern culture. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davenport, T., & Beck, J. (2001). The attention economy. Cambridge: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Destemberg, A. (2009). Un système rituel? Rites d’intégration et passages de grades dans le système universitaire médiéval (XIIIe-XVe siècle). Cahiers de Recherches Médievales et Humanistes, 18, 113–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drews, F. A., & Musters, A. (2015). Individual differences in interrupted task performance: One size does not fit all. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 79, 97–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • European Union Agency for Network and Information Security. (2014). Roadmap for NIS Education Programmes in Europe. ENISA. Retrieved March 25, 2016, from https://www.enisa.europa.eu (home page).

  • Dux, P. E., Tombu, M. N., Harrison, S., Rogers, B. P., Tong, F., & Marois, R. (2009). Training improves multitasking performance by increasing the speed of information processing in human prefrontal cortex. Neuron, 63, 127–138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foroughi, C. K., Werner, N. E., Barragán, D., & Boehm-Davis, D. A. (2015). Interruptions disrupt reading comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 144(3), 704–709.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frank, G. (2014). Économie de l’attention. In Y. Citton (Ed.), L’économie de l’attention: Nouvel horizon du capitalisme? Paris: La Découverte.

    Google Scholar 

  • Franke, J. L., Daniels, J. J., & McFarlane, D. C. (2002). Recovering context after interruption. Proceedings 24th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society. Cognitive Science Society, 2002, 310–315.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gillie, T., & Broadbent, D. (1989). What makes interruptions disruptive? A study of length, similarity and complexity. Psychological Research Policy, 50, 243–250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole & J. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and semantics: Vol. 3. Speech Acts. New York: Academic Press, 41-58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayles, N. (2007). Hyper and deep attention: The generational divide in cognitive modes. Profession, 13, 187–199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hembrooke, H., & Gay, G. (2003). The laptop and the lecture: The effects of multitasking in learning environments. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 15, 46–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hilbert, M. (2011). Digital gender divide or technologically empowered women in developing countries? Women’s Studies International Forum, 34(6), 21–22. 479–489.

    Google Scholar 

  • van den Hoven, J. (2012). Fact Sheet-Ethics Subgroup IoT—Version 4.0. Chair Ethics Subgroup IoT Expert Group. Delft University of Technology. 6–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • International Telecommunication Union. (2016). The World in 2015: ICT Facts and Figures. Retrieved March 5, 2016, fromhttp://www.itu.int/en/ITU-D/Statistics/Documents/facts/ICTFactsFigures2015.pdf http://www.itu.int (home page).

  • Jolly, C. (1989). Histoire des bibliothèques françaises. In A. Vernet (Ed.), Les bibliothèques médiévales, du VIe siècle à 1530. Paris: Promodis-Éditions du Cercle de la librairie.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kant, I. (1781/1997). Critique of practical reason (M. Gregor, Ed. & Trans.). London: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirchberg, D., Roe, R., & Van Eerde, W. (2015). Polychronicity and multitasking: A diary study at work. Human Performance, 28(2), 112–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lanham, R., & Merkoski, D. (2008). The economics of attention. Moderated by Kaplan, M., The Norman Lear Center, USC Annenberg School of Communication. Retrieved March 25, 2016, from http://learcenter.org/pdf/EconofAttention.pdf

  • Lee, B. C., & Duffy, V. G. (2015). The effects of task interruption on human performance: A study of the systematic classification of human behavior and interruption frequency. Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing & Service Industries, 25(2), 137–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, H., Young, T., Roda, C. (2013, April 10). E-books usability: Reading time and comprehension. Abstract for The Tablet Symposium: Examining new media objects. University of Sussex.

    Google Scholar 

  • Le Goff, J. (1964). Quelle conscience l’université médiévale a-t-elle eue d’elle-même ? Miscellanea Mediaevalia, 3, 15–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luker, K. (2008). Salsa dancing into the social sciences: Research in the age of info-glut. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mack, A., & Rock, I. (1998). Inattentional blindness. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McFarlane, D. C., & Latorella, K. A. (2002). The scope and importance of human interruption in human-computer interaction design. Human-Computer Interaction, 17(1), 1–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morin, D., Thomas, J. D. E., & Saade, R. G. (2012). Deep learning and virtual environment. International Journal of Social, Behavioral, Educational, Economic, Business and Industrial Engineering, 6(11), 3163.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nagata, S. F. (2003). Multitasking and interruptions during mobile web tasks. Proceedings 47th Annual Meeting of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society (pp. 1341–1345).

    Google Scholar 

  • Nissenbaum, H. (2011). A contextal approach to privacy online. Daedalus, 140(4), 32–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norman, D., & Shallice, T. (1986). Attention to action: Willed and automatic control of behavior. In R. J. Davidson, G. E. Schwartz, & D. Shapiro (Eds.), Consciousness and self-regulation. New York: Plenum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pedro, F. (2010). Educational research and innovation: Are the new millennium learners making the grade? Technology use and educational performance in PISA 2006. Center for Educational Research and Innovation. Paris: OECD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perrin, A., & Duggan, M. (2015). ‘Americans’ internet access: 2000–2015. Pew Research Center. Retrieved March 25, 2016, from http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/06/26/americans-internet-access-2000-2015

  • Philbeck, I. (2016). Working together to connect the world by 2020. International Telecommunications Union. Retrieved March 25, 2016, from http://www.itu.int (home page).

  • Rhoads, R., Camacho, M., Toven-Lindsey, B., Berdan Lozano, J. (2015). The massive open online course movement, MOOCs, and faculty labor. The Review of Higher Education, 38(3), 397–424.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roda, C. (2010). Attention support in digital environments, nine questions to be addressed. New Ideas in Psychology, 28(3), 354–364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roda, C. (2014). Économiser l’attention dans l’interaction homme-machine. In Y. Citton (Ed.), L’économie de l’attention: révolutions à venir? Paris: La Découverte.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roda, C. (2011). Human attention in digital environments. Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosen, L. D., Lim, A. F., Carrier, M., & Cheever, N. A. (2011). An examination of the educational impact of text message-induced task switching in the classroom: Educational implications and strategies to enhance learning. Psicologia Educativa, 17, 163–177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roux, S. (1992). La Rive gauche des escholiers (XVe siècle). Paris: Éditions Christian.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmid, L., Manturuk, K., Simpkins, I., Goldwasser, M., Whitfield, K. (2015). Fulfilling the promise: Do MOOCs reach the educationally underserved? Educational Media International, 52(2), 116–128.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simons, D. J., & Chabris, C. F. (1999). Gorillas in our midst: Sustained inattentional blindness for dynamic events. Perception, 28(9), 1059–1074.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. A. (1971). Designing organizations for an information-rich world. In M. Greenberger (Ed.), Computers, Communications, and the Public Interest (pp. 38–52). Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Speier, C., Vessey, I., & Valacich, J. (2003). The effects of interruptions, task complexity, and information presentation on computer-supported decision-making performance. Decision Sciences, 34(4), 771–797.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tucker, L. (2014). 7 Reasons to take a MOOC. QS Top Universities, August 29. http://www.topuniversities.com/blog/7-reasons-take-mooc

  • United Nations Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. (1999). General Comment No.13: The Right to Education (Art. 13). Adopted at Twenty-first session, in document E/C.12/1999/10. Office of the High Commissioner on Human Rights.

    Google Scholar 

  • United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. (2015). Draft Preliminary Report concerning the preparation of a global convention on the recognition of Higher Education Qualifications. UNESCO. Retrieved March 25, 2016, from http://www.unesco.org/new/en/education/themes/strengthening-education-systems/higher-education

  • West, D. M. (2015). Connected learning: How mobile technology can improve education. Center for Technology Innovation at Brookings. Retrieved March 25, 2016 from https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/west_connected-learning_v11.pdf

    Google Scholar 

  • Zijlstra, F. R. H., Roe, R. A., Leonova, A. B., & Krediet, I. (1999). Temporal factors in mental work: Effects of interrupted activities. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 72, 163–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. American University of Paris, Paris, France

    Susan Perry & Claudia Roda

Authors
  1. Susan Perry
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Claudia Roda
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Copyright information

© 2017 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Perry, S., Roda, C. (2017). Teaching Human Rights and Digital Technology. In: Human Rights and Digital Technology. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-58805-0_6

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation