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.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
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.
Adler, R. F., Benbunan-Fich, R. (2014, March 9). The effects of task difficulty and multitasking on performance. Interacting with Computers. First published online.
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.
Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2015). Grade level: Tracking online education in the United States. Babson park, MA: Babson Survey Research Group.
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.
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.
Bain, K. (2004). What the best college teachers do. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Beiter, K. D. (2005). The protection of the right to an education by international law. Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.
Bulling, A. (2016). Pervasive attentive user interfaces. Computer, 49(1), 94–98.
Carver, L., & Harrison, L. M. (2013). Moocs and democratic education. Liberal Education, 99(4), 20–25.
Charle, C., & Verger, J. (2015). Histoire des universités XIIe au XXIe siècle. Paris: Presses universitaires de France.
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.
Crary, J. (1999). Suspension of perception: Attention, spectacle, and modern culture. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Davenport, T., & Beck, J. (2001). The attention economy. Cambridge: Harvard Business School Press.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Frank, G. (2014). Économie de l’attention. In Y. Citton (Ed.), L’économie de l’attention: Nouvel horizon du capitalisme? Paris: La Découverte.
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.
Gillie, T., & Broadbent, D. (1989). What makes interruptions disruptive? A study of length, similarity and complexity. Psychological Research Policy, 50, 243–250.
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.
Hayles, N. (2007). Hyper and deep attention: The generational divide in cognitive modes. Profession, 13, 187–199.
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.
Hilbert, M. (2011). Digital gender divide or technologically empowered women in developing countries? Women’s Studies International Forum, 34(6), 21–22. 479–489.
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.
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.
Kant, I. (1781/1997). Critique of practical reason (M. Gregor, Ed. & Trans.). London: Cambridge University Press.
Kirchberg, D., Roe, R., & Van Eerde, W. (2015). Polychronicity and multitasking: A diary study at work. Human Performance, 28(2), 112–136.
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.
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.
Le Goff, J. (1964). Quelle conscience l’université médiévale a-t-elle eue d’elle-même ? Miscellanea Mediaevalia, 3, 15–29.
Luker, K. (2008). Salsa dancing into the social sciences: Research in the age of info-glut. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Mack, A., & Rock, I. (1998). Inattentional blindness. Cambridge: MIT Press.
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.
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.
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).
Nissenbaum, H. (2011). A contextal approach to privacy online. Daedalus, 140(4), 32–48.
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.
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.
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.
Roda, C. (2010). Attention support in digital environments, nine questions to be addressed. New Ideas in Psychology, 28(3), 354–364.
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.
Roda, C. (2011). Human attention in digital environments. Cambridge University Press.
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.
Roux, S. (1992). La Rive gauche des escholiers (XVe siècle). Paris: Éditions Christian.
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.
Simons, D. J., & Chabris, C. F. (1999). Gorillas in our midst: Sustained inattentional blindness for dynamic events. Perception, 28(9), 1059–1074.
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
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
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-58805-0_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-137-58804-3
Online ISBN: 978-1-137-58805-0
eBook Packages: Political Science and International StudiesPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)