Identity in a Hyperconnected Society: Risks and Educative Proposals 3030857875, 9783030857875

Citation preview

José Manuel Muñoz-Rodríguez   Editor

Identity in a Hyperconnected Society Risks and Educative Proposals

Identity in a Hyperconnected Society

José Manuel Muñoz-Rodríguez Editor

Identity in a Hyperconnected Society Risks and Educative Proposals

Editor José Manuel Muñoz-Rodríguez Faculty of Education University of Salamanca Salamanca, Spain

ISBN 978-3-030-85787-5    ISBN 978-3-030-85788-2 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-85788-2 © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland

Preface

To paraphrase a Spanish poem, ‘the truth is never sad, what it has is no remedy’. And that is true. For some time now we have insisted on saying how sad it is to see children glued to a screen, forgetting about free and spontaneous play; young people together but not looking at each other, each staring at their screen; and entire families online while sharing a meal. I don’t know whether it’s sad or not, but it’s real; it has happened and is happening. Today’s society and humanity, almost as a whole, are a digitalised society and humanity, which in many cases leads to permanent disconnect. And the idea is not to be on the sad side of the plot, but the real side, and take it seriously from scientific fields than can and should have something to say. Then we have pedagogy, which must think and implement education in this reality that has been with us for a considerable time, but about which we do not think properly, nor propose convincing approaches according to reality and what research is constantly telling us. All types of innovation in human capacity to relate and communicate, by vital necessity, affects culture and, therefore, our relationship with people and things. Nowadays, human communication and action are largely justified by the so-called hyperconnected society, in other words, they are protected by a society that allows us to move around different places at great speed and in a grid, associated by complex, interconnected social networks and which helps the human species to be permanently connected. The capacities of social relationships are enhanced, but access to knowledge is reduced. Everything is at our fingertips, on the other side of the window, but we don’t always know what to take, what to see, who to get together with and how to move. We can, and know how to, get all kinds of information, which has probably led us to regress in the creation of knowledge. Human nature, small and large, from here or there, from this or that culture, is almost constantly connected to a screen, to the digital world. The main cultural reference of humanity is gradually becoming technology, perhaps relegating historical reference to the background and bringing to the forefront what is instantaneous, ephemeral or liquid, discontinuous, fragmented, accelerated and disjointed, no matter how connected we are. What counts is the here and now, what we have within reach, which translates into a new ontological condition of humankind. v

vi

Preface

The emergence of mobile devices, social networks, virtual platforms or interactive games has meant a significant change not only in human behavioural habits but, above all, in changes in conduct, and how we communicate and relate. Everyday human life revolves around the screen, being connected to the Internet, the centre of our interests is what happens, is done and you can be online. The world therefore manifests itself on screens. Society is technologised and human beings are hyperconnected, and as we move forward in this new ontological situation, human reality becomes more novel and changing. The digital world, what we see, what we feel, mediated by technology, is real. What’s more, for many it is the only reality to the point that we can see our idol walking past and our biggest concern is to get a photo to be able to show it off online. It is hyperconnected society; it is the era of digital humanism, in some cases dependent but seeking to be independent, where technology affects human nature, forcing it to make decisions so as not to be overwhelmed by technology, but on the contrary, to control it and leverage it for comprehensive and sustainable human development. Neither dominant nor dependent on technology, rather belonging to this new world of life, interconnected and interrelated. From an educational perspective, this phenomenon is difficult to manage. The emergence of technology as a mediator in our actions has meant that education and educators experience the positive and negative consequences of this phenomenon from a place of perplexity. Educators, families, live between astonishment and fear, between the opportunities and risk, between the benefits this technology is bringing to society and fears for the dangers it can entail, especially for children. Furthermore, the education system specifically  – in general terms managers, teachers, actions, schools, etc. – cannot find the right way and mechanisms to not only use technology in positive and edifying terms, but also find a correct interpretation of this technology as a space for coexistence and relationship. In the everyday reality of education, of family environments, in school corridors, technology is more a disruptive element that an optimum and significant contribution in the process of building identities. And this is because we have not accepted that the basic concepts of education have changed: communication, relationship, affectivity, autonomy, creativity, etc. We cannot continue to think about them from the classic pre-digital concept, but rather from enclaves of an education which understands technology as a primary stage of training– insofar as technology is culture – and not just a didactic tool. Our life scenario is dominated by technology, society is a digital society, and education processes must include conceiving technology as something that is already inherent to the human condition, which affects and crosses human development and the building of identity. In other words, it affects and marks our practices and ways of living, how we understand ourselves and those around us, and how we understand that which it does not welcome, reality. This book sheds light on many of the questions still being asked. It aims to answer the question of what education should do  – and how  – in relation to the demands, opportunities and challenges of technology. It responds to the ways and means in which human identity is affected by technology, and the grooves in which

Preface

vii

the chain of thought and educational action should travel so as not to get muddy and stuck. Technology, connectivity and digital society have changed how we see and interpret reality, how we do things and think about ourselves, about others and about the reality around us, ultimately, in the processes of personal and social construction of human identity. Among other arguments, because technology is culture, it creates ways of being, of doing and getting along in hyperconnected society. It has deployed new ways of living, of relating, of friendship. In short, in Habermasian terminology, it has generated new worlds of life and new ways of communicating as a basis for thought and human actions, which often clash with the traditional system of coexistence and with the modern conception of society. This has resulted, in turn, in unprecedented ways of perceiving and creating realities, including human reality and its identity. The book focuses on the core principle of education: identity. It studies how identity is affected by the permanent connectivity humans are subject to. It develops the processes of construction and reconstruction of identity, mainly of young people, analysing how and to what extent this is impacted by hyperconnectivity. It presents the pedagogical foundations to address the training vacuum that is the root of problems associated with connection times, highlighting the need for education – beyond mere literacy  – on use of screen time. It develops essential educational actions needed to address the challenge of connectivity and defines screen-use habits, or identifies responsibilities or undesired behaviour when using screens. The human-screen binomial is also covered, and its repercussions on most aspects of connected social life, onlife, with a clear social and educational interest. It shows a life approach to education from an onlife perspective, and identifies and describes mechanisms for the online construction of oneself, challenges to society and possible responses from education. Because if one thing characterises this hyperconnected society, it is that the traditional differentiation between the online and offline worlds is losing meaning, and that other conception of human life linked to an onlife conception is gaining strength. The so-called ‘triangle of knowledge’ – research, education and innovation – is developed. On one hand, it presents guidelines for citizen training on screen – education – on the other, it presents with some basic and applied research on perception of technology usage time at different ages and in different digital spaces – research, and finally, it attempts to improve the situation of people in terms of social and cultural inclusion, gender equality, affective balance, nature deficit, etc., as well as policies on standards and regulations on the use of technology – innovation. This book is interesting for readers as it studies the challenges and possible risks of hyperconnectivity in basic human elements such as freedom, self-determination, emotion, affection, responsibility or critical thinking, among others. Numerous risks are associated with the Internet that we need to know more about every day: sexting, abuse, harassment, gambling, etc., which require pedagogy to study the phenomenon as the risks are an increasing everyday concern in our society. In turn, it presents educational strategies and responses to possible human problems when in and interacting in different digital spaces (content platforms, social media, interactive games, etc.). Regulatory, research, philosophical,

viii

Preface

anthropological and pedagogical studies that offer the reader a series of strategies to understand how to establish a positive and constructive, ultimately edifying, relationship between technology and human beings. It offers a pedagogical perspective of the extent to which identity is affected – damaged or empowered, normalised or distorted, orderly or disorderly, located or misplaced, meaningful or meaningless, sociable or sullen – by the phenomenon of hyperconnectivity, analysing the effect of hyperconnectivity, possibilities or restrictions, and main risks. Readers can understand the elements necessary for comprehensive and sustainable human development in front of screens. And offers visible digital active leisure models as well as guidelines to associate them with sociability practices. In summary, it provides guidelines for technological education, exceeding the well-known digital literacy mechanisms that have proven insufficient, based on affective, relational and communicational processes and not so much on uses or abuses of technology. Therefore, the aim of this book is not to explain digital skills and competences interpreted and limited to handling this ‘tool box’. Rather, it aims to gain in-depth knowledge of how to work this technology, digital grammar and digital infrastructure, as that is where cultures and subjectivities are created and shaped, where individual identity processes are configured, where thought, action and socialisation processes take place. The topic of the book, hyperconnectivity and identity, is not therefore a technological problem, but an educational challenge that requires pedagogical approaches such as the one we present. And I’m almost done. In order to be honest with history and with reality, we cannot end this preface without mentioning that this book is the result of a line of research we have been working on for over two decades. We have analysed how the Internet, the virtual education space and social networks are transforming our societies, our notion of being human, the definition of identity and vision of education. The reader has in their hands a text that brings continuity to a line of research we began over 20 years ago by pedagogically characterising virtual education spaces; we studied and analysed social space and time on the Internet, as vital references for humans, also when they are connected. So, with more concerns than certainties, we highlighted the educational potential of the Internet for training and educating. Here and now, in this polyphonic and plural text, perhaps with more evidence thanks to the numerous research projects that endorse the work of the participating research groups, we reflect on hyperconnected society, its needs and expectations for a world—of education—that reflects on the advantages and risks, problems and challenges posed, as well as their influence on building identity. Salamanca, Spain

José Manuel Muñoz-Rodríguez

Acknowledgements

To the various authors participating in publishing this book; to their research groups and researchers who endorse the studies presented. Special mention must go to the research group ‘CONECT-ID. Hyperconnected youth identity and their perception of time in digital leisure’. Ministry of Science, Innovation and Universities. Reference: PGC2018-097884-B-I00. (2019-2022).

ix

Contents

Part I Pedagogical, Anthropological, and Political Underpinnings  Shaping Identities in a Hyperconnected World: Notes for the Refutation of ‘Pedagogical Levity’������������������������������������������    3 Antonio Bernal-Guerrero  Digital Natives or Digital Castaways? Processes of Constructing and Reconstructing Young People’s Digital Identity and Their Educational Implications�����������������������������������   15 José Manuel Muñoz-Rodríguez, Arsenio Dacosta, and Judith Martín-Lucas  The Challenge of Developing One’s Own Identity in ICT Contexts: The Apparent Need to Share Everything ������������������������   33 Alberto Sánchez-Rojo  “Don’t Be Your Selfie”: The Pedagogical Importance of the Otherness in the Construction of Teenagers’ Identity ����������������������   49 Tania Alonso-Sainz  Truth in a Hyperconnected Society: Educate, an Outlandish Answer to the Post-truth Phenomenon ��������������������������������   61 Bianca Thoilliez  Adolescence and Identity in the Twenty-­First Century: Social Media as Spaces for Mimesis and Learning��������������������������������������   75 David Reyero, Daniel Pattier, and David García-Ramos  Online Identity Construction in Younger Generations via Identification with Influencers: Potential Areas of Vulnerability����������   95 Belén González-Larrea, María José Hernández-Serrano, and Noelia Morales Romo

xi

xii

Contents

Collaborative Digital Governance: Pseudo-­Educational Identities on the International Political Agenda?������������������������������������������  109 L. Belén Espejo Villar, Luján Lázaro Herrero, Gabriel Álvarez López, and Juan García Gutiérrez Part II Educational Processes, Practices and Challenges  Students with Disabilities in the Digital Society: Opportunities and Challenges for Inclusive Education��������������������������������  127 Antonio Jiménez-Lara, Agustín Huete-García, and Eduardo Díaz-Velázquez  Hyperconnected Identities and Educational Relationships from an Intercultural Perspective������������������������������������������������������������������  139 Eduardo S. Vila Merino and Victoria E. Álvarez Jiménez  Social Networks and Their Influence on Building Gender Identity: Design of a Mobile App as a Social and Educational Resource Targeting the Family Context����������������������������  155 Gabriel Parra-Nieto, Jesús Ruedas-Caletrio, and Sara Serrate-González  Digital Identity and Quality of Life Technologies in the Older Adults ������  167 Antonio Víctor Martín-García, Alicia Murciano-Hueso, Patricia Torrijos-­Fincias, and Bárbara Mariana Gutiérrez-Pérez  From a Deficit of Nature to a Surplus of Technology: The Search for Compatibility in Education��������������������������������������������������  185 Raúl De Tapia-Martín and Manuela Salvado Muñoz  Learn and Entertain: The Invisible Learning Processes of the Younger Generations in Social Networks��������������������������������������������  199 Paula Renés-Arellano, Francisco Javier Lena-Acebo, and María José Hernández-Serrano  The Highs and Lows of a Hyperconnected University Identity������������������  213 Francisco Esteban Bara Index������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  225

Part I

Pedagogical, Anthropological, and Political Underpinnings

Shaping Identities in a Hyperconnected World: Notes for the Refutation of ‘Pedagogical Levity’ Antonio Bernal-Guerrero

1  Introduction Under the fiction of being accompanied by perpetual connectivity, individuals generate instantaneous virtual identities, multiple and unconnected but capable of providing the gratification of immediate response, a satisfaction that languishes as it is experienced, waiting for instant reconfirmation. It is as if the identities of the world, as it is lived today, are projected into oblivion, as if they definitively renounce any portion of eternity. Is there any chance of surviving the shaping predominance of the ephemeral? Can the art of living in a fast-paced, accelerated, fragmentary and vaporous world be learned? Potentially, yes, but it requires, along with an awareness of the problem of dehumanisation brought about by practices related to technological gadgets, new procedures that favour an understanding of the scope of the phenomenon and open up new horizons of humanisation in a highly technological world. The proliferating pedagogies focused on the continuous improvement of technological applications, in an incessant and never-ending process (consonant with the dominant orthodoxies in the regulation and evaluation of training processes), enjoy a valuable and fleeting usefulness, forming a slippery and provisional argumentative constellation. Against such ‘pedagogical levity’, typical of contemporary liquid societies, it is urgent to propose new ways of counteracting its effects, if we want to provide consistency to the flourishing of subjects and the communities that they integrate.

A. Bernal-Guerrero () University of Sevilla, Sevilla, Spain e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 J. M. Muñoz-Rodríguez (ed.), Identity in a Hyperconnected Society, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-85788-2_1

3

4

A. Bernal-Guerrero

2  An Over-accelerated World Prophetically, Ortega y Gasset [1] announced almost a century ago the dissolution of individuals into ‘masses’ and the unlimited manipulation of them by the media forces that identified ‘modern times’. With the same title, Charles Chaplin’s unforgettable film was released in 1936, in which he criticised the depersonalising threat of ‘developed societies’. The ‘taken-for-granted world’ [2], as a precondition for the practice of thought and action by any human being, is breaking down. Forgetting history and ignoring cultural traditions lead to the emergence of a generation devoid of roots [3], predisposed to a perpetual immaturity guided by the appetite of the moment that, once satisfied, withers away to make way for the next. That given world shatters among the multiple interpretative versions of reality. That is dramatic in the least, because world contains the cultural heritage that makes up our tradition and, therefore, delimits our primordial social and affective warp. All interpretations are elevated to the same rank of value, while any reference to truth, to any version of it, susceptible to discussion and contrast, is discredited. With reliability undermined, the process of modernisation has been accompanied by the fracturing of confidence in finding common sense in reality as a whole [4]. The Enlightenment idea of ‘progress’, associated with development, was proclaimed and expanded in modernity until it was challenged by the postmodern thought [5]. As Peter Sloterdijk has asserted [6], the project of modernity is founded on a ‘kinetic utopia’, the greatest relevance being acquired by the rhythms and impetus of the origin and end of the world where people figure. Speed has become associated with modernity and progress: ‘it has become an end in itself, often with strange and disturbing links to prestige, fashion systems, the most shameless exhibitionism and the exaltation of superficiality and economic arrogance’ [7]. Settled in the rush of life, in the midst of vibrant everyday life, our existence seems to glide by at a speed that barely gives us time to reflect on it. In this volatile society, agitation and movement prevail and blur the sense of waiting, of stillness, of rest. Zygmunt Bauman [8] graphically expressed this sign of our times: ‘walking is better than sitting, running is better than walking, and surfing is better than running’. Lack of time has become a social circumstance conditioning our individual and collective well-being. The interconnections between speed, technology and the different spheres of reality have ended up accelerating the rhythm of life, as if we aspired to outline the multiplicity of the guaranteed world, upon which Western culture had settled itself [9]. The Eastern philosopher Byung-Chul Han states that the current acceleration is due to the general inability to finish and conclude. The acceleration of time reveals that the temporal levees have been broken. There is no regulation or guidance of the flow of time, and thus time is atomised, all moments become similar, indistinguishable from each other: ‘The fragmentation of time is accompanied by increasing massification and homogeneity (…) The acceleration of the life process prevents divergent forms from being forged, things from distinguishing themselves, independent forms from developing’ [10].

Shaping Identities in a Hyperconnected World: Notes for the Refutation of ‘Pedagogical…

5

It is difficult to foster in this world, in which contours are delimited by presentism, the search for purpose, for meaning, capable of bringing together the different temporal dimensions in a balanced way. This lack of memory and horizon, this absence of context, hinders the unfolding of personal identity, as it lacks the substratum that allows for the construction of a meaningful autobiographical narrative with a projection into the future [11]. As is proverbially known, Benjamin Franklin [12] warned a young merchant that time is money. Although the ideas of one of the forgers of the American ethos belong to the eighteenth century, his famous advice is of throbbing relevance (how many times we hear the same thing or something similar…). But we are persuaded that time is much more: it is simply all that we have.

2.1  Volatile Identities Devoid of the scaffolding of prescriptive rules or codes of what is to be done, the human beings of today have to make determinations for themselves. The postmodern distrust of precision is not an intellectual ‘pose’ but the recognition that reality is imprecise. Abandoning the modern belief in determinism, the postmodern condition assumes the ambiguity of the real. The construction of the self is at the same time the ultimate source of rootedness. In liquid modernity, identities are like a volcanic crust that hardens, melts again and permanently changes shape [13]. Identities seem stable from an external point of view, but when contemplated by subjects themselves, fragility and the threat of unravelling appear. The only external reference value, in the postmodern condition, seems to be the need to achieve a flexible and versatile identity capable of facing the various mutations that subjects have to adopt throughout their lives. In this way, identity is configured as a reflexive responsibility that seeks autonomy, being doomed to continuous inconclusion. Like the face of the Roman god Janus, identity has several dimensions. Identities are shaped by contrasting possibilities which, to some extent, we can select or are attributed to us by our circumstances. Thus, depending on our own cultural traits, the variety of activities we carry out and the relationships we maintain with others, we configure our identities, dynamically, full of differential nuances, among multiple possible combinations. From this it follows that an open society is one in which the majority of people can choose from a range of preferred identity possibilities without being subjected to extortion, coercion or persecution of any kind. But it only takes a fleeting glance at our world to realise that for many people today this is an ideal rather than a reality. Exclusion, if not reduction to a particular religious, nationalist or ethnic quality, for which there is no shortage of guardians or commissioners defending its ‘unique value’, can, as is well known, turn the process of identity construction into a phenomenon of violence, where the different is not seen as the other but as an enemy to be eliminated from the human landscape, as an unbearable threat to our preferences, whether chosen or imposed. Beneath this cruel reductionism, ‘there is a great conceptual confusion about people’s identities, which

6

A. Bernal-Guerrero

turns multidimensional human beings into one-dimensional creatures’ [14]. The Anglo-Ghanaian philosopher, Kwame Anthony Appiah [15], has recently shown that there is no essence associated with a given social identity that provides arguments as to why people are the way they are. The manipulation of personal identity-­ shaping processes has grown exponentially due to the power of technology with its multiple and seductive tentacles, encouraging us to follow the accelerating course of events that follow one after the other in the digital world [16]. In this way, while narcissism advances with its various manifestations, individuals are progressing in their defoliation, the loss of relevance of their inner life, although paradoxically, unthinkable levels of absence of modesty have been reached in the never-ending parade of procuring exhibitions of intimacy in the voracious and varied digital showcases. The decline of the cultivation of the inner world of the person is a patent sign of a social body seriously afflicted by the proliferation of sameness, of the search under various labels, of the equalisation of everything. The absence of originality, of the uniqueness that lies in the depths of each person, reveals the devastating effect of growing depersonalisation at the dizzying pace of the search for shortcuts to be ‘authentic’. Indeed, the excesses of commodification reach the individual, considered as a ‘brand’, and thus differences are restricted to the realm of marketable distinctions, multiplying the plurality of commodities with which ‘authenticity’ is made material. As Han states: ‘The imperative of authenticity engenders narcissistic coercion. Narcissism is not the same as healthy self-love, which has nothing pathological about it. It does not exclude love of the other. The narcissist, on the other hand, is blind to the other. The other is twisted until the ego recognises itself in him/her. Narcissistic subjects only perceive the world in the nuances of themselves. The fatal consequence of this is that the other disappears’ [17]. Our constitutive slowness contrasts with this global scenario prone to complete uniformity and the exponential increase of the fragmentary and of a false autonomy. Only reflection, waiting [18], makes it possible for us to become aware of our temporal perspective, to realise that true growth requires both an appreciation of the past and an ideation of the future, trying to integrate the different perspectives as harmoniously as possible. As we have the capacity to reason, remember and imagine, our good depends on a vision broad enough to be able to shape our identity, irreducibly, through the integrated narration of the different moments. Our personal identity is closely linked to time, to its various dimensions. It is not the only factor that shapes us, but it is a fundamental axis. The temporal orientation we adopt, our awareness of and attitude towards time, has a profound influence on our lives and our environment [19].

3  Technological Gadgets and Socio-Cultural Practices Günther Anders [20, 21] called the mismatch between human beings and their products a ‘Promethean mismatch’, to the extent that human beings themselves are considered an ‘outdated’ product in relation to the products generated by them. The

Shaping Identities in a Hyperconnected World: Notes for the Refutation of ‘Pedagogical…

7

sophistication of technological progress has outstripped the possibilities and consequences of the biological and cultural evolution of humans. In this way, the world has been unified, globalised, by technology and not by any anthropological ideal. As Duch distinguishes, while as ‘homo technicus’ humankind remains a subject of history, beings capable of imagining, designing, producing and using multiple artifices, when we refer to technology we enter a different sphere, in which we cede our secular protagonism: ‘The technological system, because it has a negative impact on human memory, imposes finalities, cancels the past and the projects for the future’ [7]. Depersonalisation and anonymity thus exponentially increase their chances. But technological gadgets enjoy a high power of seduction, continually renewed, progressively reaching greater heights of attraction. These gadgets have become part of our daily lives; they have invaded our work and leisure spaces, our homes, our cities. In short, they have significantly modified our socio-cultural practices. These artefacts change our minds by offering us some gratifying fantasies: to have constant attention, to always be listened to in some forum and the feeling of not being alone. In nurturing the relationships which we control, the digital ones, more hope is often placed in the technological system than in people. MIT professor Sherry Turkle [22], a specialist in the study of the relationship between technology and the self, has turned her initial optimism in the possibilities of identity construction through technologies towards a more sceptical position, affected by the irrepressible power of the technological system to mould the practices that shape us. The uncritical acceptance of new habits brought about by the new technologies is changing the way we relate with each other. We relegate the discomfort of relating to people, the full manifestations of face-­ to-­face communication, gestures or tones of voice, in order to live ‘hidden’ in communication through the network. Along with the tyranny of the immediate response, imposed by the instantaneousness of the circulation of information, this flight from a face-to-face interpersonal relationship is overlaid with fictions, the concealment of emotions, a certain mutual objectification. This denaturalises the communicative flow, more geared towards the care of the image that one wants to give to the preservation of one’s own ‘brand’, than to the genuine flow of the personal encounter. While today’s young people have grown up with the expectation of a permanent connection, even during sleep time, they feel the deep emptiness of the lack of human communication, which always reserves a space for checking and reflection. To be connected is not to be in real conversation. Being on the net, with other people, who become units, does not eliminate a certain sense of loneliness. Being in permanent contact with everyone, perpetual connectivity, does not prevent suffering due to a lack of authentic interpersonal communication. However, solitude is necessary for self-knowledge, reflection, meditation, imagination, etc. If we consider that adolescence is the liminal space for the configuration of personal maturity, the threat of immaturity, as a disease of our time [23], becomes greater as the fatal attraction of the new technological gadgets increases. With his vision of consumer society in terms of the political economy of the sign, the analyses of Jean Baudrillard [24] form a point of reference for the study of contemporary technological society. The reorganisation of products in a system of signs

8

A. Bernal-Guerrero

involves shifting the centre of gravity of the capitalist system of production from material goods to the signs that represent them. To the Marxist concepts of ‘use value’ (utility of objects) and ‘exchange value’ (commercial or monetary value), Baudrillard added ‘sign value’, which confers prestige and represents the social position of people. When buying a product, one does not so much acquire the product itself as its differential value, the value of the sign that differentiates it from other products. Thus, consumer goods constitute a system of classification that in turn codifies the behaviour of consumer society. For the analysis of such system, Baudrillard found the differential semiotic approach as a privileged way, over and above classical political economic analysis. Objects, insofar as they are signs organised in systems of signification, are what decide the motives, fantasies and behaviour of subjects. Particularly interesting is the analysis of the orders of the simulacra that make up society. Baudrillard distinguishes three orders. Until the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, society functioned with first-order simulacra, that is, through copies of things, which had a natural basis. The second order of simulacra, following the commercial law of exchange value, was originated with the possibility of the mechanical reproduction of copies of things. With the post-industrial society, with technological change, the third order of simulacra is established, for which simulation is guided by a media code that transforms the real into the hyperreal. In the information society, the media generate, according to Baudrillard, a phantasmagorical world in which the frontiers of the real and the fictitious cannot be distinguished. This annulment of borders between the real and the simulated gives rise in society to a schizophrenic process of loss of reality. And the problem is exacerbated by the fact that simulation is not limited to the production of unreal objects but manufactures objects and experiences that pretend to be more real than reality itself, that is, hyperreal. It is not a matter of imitation nor of parody but of the supplanting of the real by the signs of the real. For the French philosopher, simulacrum is obviously not the same as sign. The simulacrum is a kind of repressive sign, tending to cover up its incapacity to be the real or to reproduce it. The fatal theory of which Baudrillard [25] involves assuming that the object is smarter, more ingenious than the subject, contrary to what happened in the trivial theory, where subjects always believe themselves to be smarter than the object. Letting oneself be seduced by the object is at the core of the ‘fatal strategies’ announced by Baudrillard, since this is what true postmodern liberation is all about. In his conversations with Hans-Jürgen Heinrichs, Peter Sloterdijk laments that ‘the discrepancy between the media form of the world and the psychic capacity to have a world is increasingly striking’ [26]. As the meaning-producing devices of solid modernity are diluted, their symbolic efficacy is also diluted [27]. If we assume the consequences of the ‘fatal strategies’ announced by Baudrillard, there is no room for concern, events follow the correct course, since the capacity that increases is the one of the media power of the world which we have produced. But if we do not resign ourselves to its triumph, we must vindicate the full value of the symbolic

Shaping Identities in a Hyperconnected World: Notes for the Refutation of ‘Pedagogical…

9

capacity of human beings and their expressive possibilities given the predominant socio-cultural practices in today’s hyper-technological societies.

4  Against the Levity of Philo-Technological Reductionism Is there any way to survive the empire of transience, with all that it implies, in the midst of this over-accelerated world? Umberto Eco answers us: ‘There is, and it consists precisely in being aware that we live in a liquid society which, in order to be understood and perhaps overcome, requires new instruments. The problem is that politics and, to a large extent, the intelligentsia have not yet grasped the extent of the phenomenon’ [28]. Henry David Thoreau had three chairs in his house: one for solitude, one for friendship and one for society. This is how the American poet and philosopher narrates it in Walden [29], the proverbial essay in which he recounts his experience, in the mid-nineteenth century, next to Lake Walden during the more than 2 years that he lived there in a cabin he built himself. His communion with nature was a form of resistance to the bondage of industrial society. All imaginary visits to Thoreau’s cabin would today be mediated by virtual interactions. Private life, family, friendship, education and work are today mediated by virtual social interactions. Sherry Turkle adds a fourth chair, asking: who do we become when we talk to machines, what do we forget and what do we remember? For the most expansive conversations, Thoreau went out into nature. Now, to nature we must add the virtual world which we have created. In it we find machines that lend themselves to communication, machines that harbour the power to mediate interactions between people. This is not about rejecting the social advances and benefits that technology can bring us in different areas but rather about reconciling us with ourselves. These are the ‘simple salvations’ Turkle refers to, related to the impossibility of machines ever understanding what things mean to us, as they are only programmed to pretend to understand. In the effort to feed the fantasy that they understand us, machines are ironically treated as if they were almost human, while mechanical behaviours are developed to treat human beings. But, beyond the gadgets encompassed by so-­ called artificial intelligence, human interactions in networks seem to combine the enquiry of personal identity with its expression, in a chain of unconnected fragments. In these interactions, the approach mediated by words is replaced by the mediation of screens, which make discussion possible without the emergence of improvisation, indeterminacy and equivocation. Although the technological system itself is not lacking in those who hasten to offer innumerable applications to compensate for the deficiencies detected, which are predominantly emotional, the solutions do not seem to come from the system itself. This is why Turkle proclaims the imperative need for conversation: ‘This is our time to improve the opportunities before us, this is our challenge: to recognize the unintended consequences of the

10

A. Bernal-Guerrero

technologies to which we are vulnerable and to rely on the resilience that characterizes us as human beings. We have time to make the necessary corrections. And to remember who we are: creatures of history, deep psychology and complex relationships’ [30]. Beyond the standardisation of educational processes, particularly justified for basic questions of citizenship training and for the achievement of professional foundations, participation in conversation means recovering the face-to-face encounter, with its risks and possibilities. It means opening up to the search for meaning with those who do share with us, not falsely, the real experience of life, with its greatness and miseries, with its prose and its poetry. Michel Desmurget, from the field of neuroscience, warns against the disproportionate use of information and communication technologies (computers, tablets, smartphones, etc.) by the new generations – perhaps extensible, we think, to the not so young, too  – which leads to physical and mental health problems and affects overall development. Three basic pillars of development are affected by screens, according to Desmurget: human interaction, language and concentration. The director of research at the French National Institute for Health and Medical Research points out that ‘the hours taken away from the hegemony of screens must be made available for life’ [31]. Human reality is an expressive reality. Precisely, the noise of the colossal amounts of data and information that flow through the digital world makes it impossible to access what is singular, what is different. This mass of information makes its contents seem uniformly discoloured, making the task of ‘separating the wheat from the chaff’ [27] a titanic one. All cats are black in the eternal electronic night. As information loses relevance, due to its unlimited and unapproachable growth, knowledge gains importance. Trying to bring order, never exhaustively and once and for all, is both unrenounceable and impossible to fully achieve challenge. It is not an easy mission, since the digital illusion, the belief that it is not necessary to learn because everything is in the devices that we handle, spreads at the speed that bits travel through the circuits that support the virtual world. Edgar Morin, when he calls for the regeneration of Eros, directs us to our core as people, to the place where the equal is interrupted, to that inner call that drives us to live creatively: ‘We cannot advance on the basis of an average opinion, which is not democratic, but mediocratic. One moves forward on the basis of a creative passion’ [32]. All the proposals, not without a certain dose of naivety, formulated from the pedagogical redirection of the technological system itself, in an attempt to alleviate its pernicious effects, aspire to provisional solutions while awaiting new problematic emergencies. Rather, it is necessary to innovate from a full awareness of the origin of the problems, which invites us to re(think) education at this crucial moment. Each person, individually and in their relationship with the world of work, with other people and with society, in their cultural links, may or may not imply a partial suspension of some of the pathogens of this era: information overload, hyper-­ communication and hyper-consumption. This interruption affects the need to open up to a better linking of personal time with the different spheres of life [33], showing us the way towards goals of greater fulfilment. It is up to us to ensure that the

Shaping Identities in a Hyperconnected World: Notes for the Refutation of ‘Pedagogical…

11

demands of today’s lifelong learning are not limited to mere survival, giving way to the deployment of the capacity to inquire into the meaning of our own lives and to achieve a joyful and empathetic life. Are we ready?

5  Conclusion The hyperconnected society opens up a range of benefits for humanity that can hardly be denied, but at the same time the material and moral progress advocated by well-meaning enlightened minds, as is well known, never happened. The configuration of identities today cannot be understood without the virtual world produced by humankind, which has been overwhelmed by it. Meanwhile, there is a generation that has already grown up surrounded by gadgets that feed permanent connectivity to a virtual reality, shaping itself with volatile identities, subjected to the tyranny of speed and the experience of the instant. The education system, as a social system, has been subject to the same influences of the technological system as the rest of the social systems. In general, we cannot appreciate symptoms capable of giving people the confidence to cultivate their inner selves and to meet others. It is necessary to call for the problem to be recognised and for the necessary measures to be taken to ensure that people have at their disposal the circumstances inherent to their human condition for the construction of their identities. With the universal Spanish poet Antonio Machado, through the mouth of his Juan de Mairena, we understand that among the bundle of possibilities of (re) humanisation, we do not find today, as we did yesterday, the dissolution of the subject in any social category: ‘Even if the concept of mass can be properly applied to everything that reaches volume and matter, it is not useful to help us define humankind (...) because those who defend human agglomerations against their most abominable exploiters, have taken the concept of mass and turned it into a social, ethical and even aesthetic category. And this is frankly absurd. Imagine what a pedagogy for the masses could be: the education of the mass-child! It would be, in truth, the pedagogy of Herod himself, something monstrous’ [34].

References 1. J. Ortega y Gasset, La rebelión de las masas [The Revolt of the Masses] (RBA, Barcelona, 2004) 2. A. Schütz, T. Luckmann, Las estructuras del mundo de la vida [The Structures of the Life-­ world] (Amorrortu, Barcelona, 1973) 3. F. Bellamy, Los desheredados. Por qué es importante transmitir la cultura [The Disinherited: Why Transmitting Culture Is Urgent] (Encuentro, Barcelona, 2018) 4. A.  Giddens, Modernidad e identidad del yo. El yo y la sociedad en la época contemporánea [Modernity and Self-identity. Self and Society in the Late Modern Age] (Península, Barcelona, 1997)

12

A. Bernal-Guerrero

5. J.L.  Pinillos, El corazón del laberinto [The Heart of the Labyrinth] (Espasa Calpe, Barcelona, 1997) 6. P. Sloterdijk, Extrañamiento del mundo [World-estrangement] (Pre-Textos, Barcelona, 1998) 7. Ll. Duch, Vida cotidiana y velocidad [Everyday Life and Speed] (Herder, Barcelona, 2019) 8. Z.  Bauman, 44 cartas desde el mundo líquido [44 Letters from the Liquid Modern World] (Paidós, Barcelona, 2011) 9. P.L. Berger, T. Luckmann, Modernidad, pluralismo y crisis de sentido [Modernity, pluralism and the crisis of meaning] (Paidós, Barcelona, 1997) 10. B.-Ch. Han, El aroma del tiempo. Un ensayo filosófico sobre el arte de demorarse [The scent of time. A philosophical essay on the art of lingering] (Herder, Barcelona, 2020) 11. M.G. Amilburu, «Presentismo digital», tradición y educación [«Digital Presentism», Tradition and Education]. In C. Naval, A. Bernal-Guerrero, G. Jover, J.L. Fuentes (coords.) Perspectivas actuales de la condición humana y la acción educativa [The Present Prospects of Human Condition and Educational Action] (Dykinson, Barcelona, 2020) 12. B. Franklin, Autobiographical Writings (Viking, Barcelona, 1945) 13. Z. Bauman, La posmodernidad y sus descontentos [Postmodernity and Its Discontents] (Akal, Barcelona, 2001) 14. A. Sen, Identidad y violencia. La ilusión del destino [Identity and Violence. The Illusion of Destiny] (Katz, Barcelona, 2007) 15. K.A. Appiah, The Lies That Bind Rethinking Identity: Creed, Country Color, Class, Culture (Penguin Random House, Barcelona, 2019) 16. R.  Morduchowicz, Los adolescentes y las redes sociales: La construcción de la identidad juvenil en internet [Adolescents and Social Networks: The Construction of the Youth Identity on the Internet] (Fondo de Cultura Económica, Barcelona, 2012) 17. B.-Ch. Han, La expulsión de lo distinto [The Expulsion of the Other] (Herder, Barcelona, 2019) 18. A. Köhler, El tiempo regalado. Un ensayo sobre la espera [Passing time: An Essay on Waiting] (Libros del Asteroide, Barcelona, 2018) 19. A. Bernal-Guerrero, M.A. Valdemoros, A. Jiménez, Tiempo, poder y educación. Repensando la construcción de la identidad personal y las decisiones de la política educativa [Time, power and education. Rethinking the construction of personal identity and educational policy decisions]. Revista Española de Pedagogía 78(277) (2020) 20. G. Anders, La obsolescencia del hombre. Sobre el alma en la época de la segunda revolución industrial. Vol. I. [The Obsolescence of Man, Volume I: The Soul in the Epoch of the Second Industrial Revolution] (Pretextos, Barcelona, 2011) 21. G. Anders, La obsolescencia del hombre. Sobre la destrucción de la vida en la época de la tercera revolución industrial. Vol. II. [The Obsolescence of Man, Volume II: On the Destruction of Life in the Epoch of the Third Industrial Revolution] (Pretextos, Barcelona, 2011) 22. S. Turkle: Alone Together: Why We Expect More From Technology and Less From Each Other (Basic Books, Barcelona, 2011) 23. F.M. Cataluccio, Inmadurez. La enfermedad de nuestro tiempo [Immaturity: Disease of Our Time] (Siruela, Barcelona, 2006) 24. J. Baudrillard, L’échange symbolique et la mort [Symbolic Exchange and Death] (Gallimard, Barcelona, 1976) 25. J. Baudrillard, Las estrategias fatales [Fatal Strategies] (Anagrama, Barcelona, 1991) 26. P.  Sloterdijk, H.J.  Heinrichs, El sol y la muerte [Neither Sun Nor Death] (Siruela, Barcelona, 2004) 27. Z. Bauman, Los retos de la educación en la modernidad líquida [Educational Challenges of the Liquid-Modern Era] (Gedisa, Barcelona, 2007) 28. U. Eco, De la estupidez a la locura. Crónicas para el futuro que nos espera [From Stupidity to Insanity. Chronicles for the Future That Awaits Us] (Lumen, Barcelona, 2016) 29. H.D. Thoreau, Walden (Cátedra, Barcelona, 2005)

Shaping Identities in a Hyperconnected World: Notes for the Refutation of ‘Pedagogical…

13

30. S.  Turkle, En defensa de la conversación. El poder de la conversación en la era digital [Reclaming Conversation: The Power of Talk in a Digital Age] (Ático de los Libros, Barcelona, 2019) 31. M. Desmurget, La fábrica de cretinos digitales. Los peligros de las pantallas para nuestros hijos [Digital Cretin Factory. The Dangers of the Screens for Our Children] (Península, Barcelona, 2020) 32. E. Morin, Enseñar a vivir. Manifiesto para cambiar la educación [Teaching How to Live: A Manifesto to Change Education] (Paidós, Barcelona, 2020) 33. K.  Livingston, C.  Doherty, A counter-narrative of curriculum enrichment in performative times. Curr. J. 31(4) (2020) 34. A. Machado, Juan de Mairena (Espasa-Calpe, Barcelona, 1973)

Digital Natives or Digital Castaways? Processes of Constructing and Reconstructing Young People’s Digital Identity and Their Educational Implications José Manuel Muñoz-Rodríguez, Arsenio Dacosta, and Judith Martín-Lucas

1  Introduction Within a techno-cultural scenario such as the present one, young people look upon their access to the Internet as a right and as a “natural” setting for socialising. Within this context, young people’s identification processes, which involve the production of subjectivities, are profoundly influenced by technology. From an educational perspective, this is a mediating perspective and not a mere instrumental medium in which a young person develops their capabilities and sociability. This techno-­ cultural framework – an arena for relating, a social landscape – is far from being a coherent place due to different positions and practices on/with/in the technology that young people adopt within it and as the outcome of misconstrued views of the alleged digital nativity of youth. From the perspective of education, these complex processes are part of a young person’s adjustment to a new context, to a new spatial reality consisting of social media and communities that are defined by a double virtuality: technological mediation and non-material practices in social relationships (in theory). Young people are gradually being shaped and developing online, in front of the screen, accumulating episodes, actions, and social practices that inform their life story and mould their identity, practices that steadily define a person and which are not so fleeting or ephemeral nor depend solely on switching off a screen, which now never happens, because if it is put on standby it becomes a mirror [1]. Screens reveal a universe that is unstable, fluid, contingent, where young people browse, skipping from one page to another, a porous environment, as they navigate places  – websites, apps, windows, etc. – that enable them to move in spaces of collective privacy, of intimacy in many cases, while in turn sharing their own spaces, displaying them. This dynamics

J. M. Muñoz-Rodríguez () · A. Dacosta · J. Martín-Lucas University of Salamanca, Salamanca, Spain e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 J. M. Muñoz-Rodríguez (ed.), Identity in a Hyperconnected Society, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-85788-2_2

15

16

J. M. Muñoz-Rodríguez et al.

of observation and self-exposure defines their interactions with others, as well as the plural and fragmented processes of personal and group identification they entail, and which have been defined as an “onlife” world [2]. Within this context, one that is theoretical and practical, anthropological and educational, this study focuses on the concept of identity and identity-building practices, on young people’s construction and reconstruction processes in these hypermediated and hyperconnected times, and their implications for education. Initially, from an anthropological perspective and without exhausting the complex world of processes actually in place, we identify and analyse the deconstruction that the concept of identity has undergone in recent years. An exploration that will enable us to understand the processes through which young people’s identitybuilding practices are now presented. Our aim in this first section is to shed light on the traditional mechanisms and processes that give meaning to the concept of “identity”, as a prior step to the analysis of the basic stages of constructing and reconstructing a youth identity in these hyperconnected times. We end by setting out a number of pathways that education should follow in order to deal with these challenges.

2  Processes for Deconstructing the Concept of Identity No substitute has yet been found for the process of deconstructing the concept of “identity” [3]. To use a simile, it is like the ice in a drink: it melts in the glass, and although it has not made any substantial difference to the taste, it has cooled it down. The image of stability that the concept of “identity” had in the past has been abandoned, although it still receives a passing nod, without finding alternatives other than the purely functional ones such as “identification processes” or “feelings of belonging”. There are numerous factors involved. Brubaker and Cooper adopt a pragmatic approach to affirm that “identity” is a term that is called upon to fulfil numerous roles, from a categorical and social localisation nature to the “evanescent product of multiple discourses” reflecting the “fragile, fragmented and fluctuating nature of the contemporary self”, passing through its identification with a fundamentally collective phenomenon (or, quite the opposite, almost on a psychoanalytical level), or which “is invoked to highlight the processual, interactive development of the kind of collective self-understanding, solidarity, or “groupness” that can make collective action possible” [4] (p. 6–8). Like the ice in our drink, the concept of “identity” is taking its time to disappear, melting away as a result of a long postmodernity, of understanding reality in terms of fracture or fluidity. For the time being, we should uphold two notions regarding the concept of crisis and the processes of deconstruction: fracture and agency.

Digital Natives or Digital Castaways? Processes of Constructing and Reconstructing…

17

2.1  Fracture as a Scenario of Identification In terms of fracture, identity acts as a refuge in times of personal or social crisis: “One thinks of identity whenever one is not sure of where one belongs” [5] (p. 19) and, we may add, when a supposed identity is put in doubt. Bauman addresses it is as follows: “identity is a critical projection of what is demanded and/or sought upon what is; or, more exactly still, an oblique assertion of the inadequacy or incompleteness of the latter” [5] (p. 19). This is evident with the national identities outflanked by the advance of alternative forms to those that were hegemonic and which correspond to the transnational feelings of half of the world’s communities [6] – particularly urban ones [7]. One of the areas where “identity” is most clearly expressed in terms of fractures is within the heart of migrant communities in the aforementioned transcultural contexts, from the management of that essence that is believed lost through to integration processes [8, 9]. It is no surprise therefore that “identities” have been studied in terms of conflict and consequently in terms of negotiation [10]. In turn, any identity is subject to an individual’s experiences in relation to the changes taking place in their life – their inevitable existential fractures – and to the perception they have of their relationship with the group they think they belong to, that is, they are subject to all nature of contingencies, as well as to the discursive reformulation prompted by experience itself. Coinciding with the theoreticians of alterity, “identity” is based on a (self) recognition of a specular construction that simultaneously operates from the inside and from the outside: identity is not only a story, a narrative which we tell ourselves about ourselves, it is stories which change with historical circumstances. And identity shifts with the way in which we think and hear them and experience them. Far from only coming from the still small point of truth inside us, identities actually come from outside, they are the way in which we are recognized and then come to step into the place of the recognitions which others give us. Without the others there is no self, there is no self-recognition [10] (p. 8).

This notion, based on Bakhtin, Gramsci and Derrida, underpins our current understanding of cultural and ethnic identity within the field of anthropology. Thus, instead of referring to “ethnic identities”, we now focus on analysing the nature of the discourses, the normative frameworks, and the specific action that, according to a binary arrangement, articulate the difference. This is also the case involving the powerful notion of nation, championed by states over a long period of time [11], and it also occurs, as numerous theoretical and empirical studies have shown, in contexts of ethnic interaction [12, 13]. The analysis of ethnicity has taught us several things. The first is that the double meaning of inclusion and exclusion generated at the heart of ethnic identity – as well as in racial or national identities, among others – is manifested in contexts of social interaction. Another certainty is its socially situational nature. A further aspect of interest is the dimension that identity gives to social relationships in terms of power [14, 15]. We are also relatively clear about the intricate meaning of identity in terms of intersectionality and incorporation [embodiment] [16]. Furthermore, we

18

J. M. Muñoz-Rodríguez et al.

may affirm that the workings of what we think we mean by “identity” are largely discursive and based on the mechanism of alterity [17] or, as reported by Stuart Hall, it is the effect of the “discursive practices construct for us” [3] (p. 6). Similarly, albeit with an even slightly more constructivist nuance if anything, there is the notion that these discursive practices are arranged as a kind of room full of mirrors that alterity provides [4]. Nonetheless, it is clear that whatever these identities may be, (including cultural identities) are not solid and pure substances that must be preserved from contamination, they are always already complex and hybrid compositions of narratives, discourses, practices, and representations built over time – a constant response to the presence of others, to alterity [18] (p. 22).

2.2  Agency as the Framework for Identification Practices The second of the aforementioned practices involves the concept’s genealogy and the agency of those upholding it. “Identity” has been perceived – and still is – as something that stays with us like a fragrance, that is imbued in us according to the natural belonging to a group. Nevertheless, as Stuart Hall explained in a posthumous study, there is nothing less natural than identifying with that identity triangle that has dominated the history of the world over the past three hundred years: race, ethnicity, and nation [15]. In fact, when this rationale has been transferred to the ambit where the self is expressed in the most extreme manner, autobiography, that supposedly intrinsic “identity” ends up evolving into the narrator’s (self)portrayal, as well as to the need to shed light on a social issue [19]. Moreover, “identity” is simply the product of the objectification of social subjects over themselves, albeit with apparently unexpected results: “the way in which one internally contributes to an objectification of oneself is a profound mistake in the recognition of one’s own identity” [10] (p. 8). Finally, and this is Hall’s main contribution to this matter, “identity” is, above all, a negotiating process – meaning the negotiation of feelings of identification in certain contexts – where the “identity’s specific roots” are to be found: No cultural identity is produced out of thin air. It is produced out of those historical experiences, those cultural traditions, those lost and marginal languages, those marginalized experiences, those peoples and histories which remain unwritten. Those are the specific roots of identity [10] (p. 14).

It is worth returning to the idea of negotiation, particularly when “identity” refers to categorical attributes [4]. The problem appears when mistaking the medium – for example, a national sentiment – for the underlying social process, the identification of a real or imagined community. The interesting aspect of the proposal made by Brubaker and Cooper is, firstly, that it is based on the notions of contingency and contextuality that we have already seen in Hall. Secondly, any identification process involves a sense of groupness. We do not mean that these scholars ignored the

Digital Natives or Digital Castaways? Processes of Constructing and Reconstructing…

19

matter of alterity, that is, the specular construction of an identity, but rather that they focused on the group’s own processes of referentiality, which are sometimes overlooked when dealing with alterity. “This is the emotionally laden sense of belonging to a distinctive, bounded group, involving both a felt solidarity or oneness with fellow group members and a felt difference from or even antipathy to specified outsiders” [4] (p. 19). The agency perspective or, if one prefers, the socially situational identity allows us to negate, together with Jorge Larraín, those categories attributed to identity: not to a kind of soul or essence we are born with, not to a series of inner dispositions that remain largely unchanged throughout life, regardless of the social medium in which someone finds themself, but instead to a construction process in which individuals steadily define themselves in a close symbolic relation with other people [20] (p. 31–32).

Accordingly, the alternative proposed by Brubaker and Cooper refers to the concept of identification as a process and an activity [4]. For these scholars, in fact, the notion is fluid, albeit in a social sense: “How one identifies oneself - and how one is identified by others  - may vary greatly from context to context; self- and other-­ identification are fundamentally situational and contextual” [4] (p. 14).

3  I dentity-Building Processes and Mechanisms Measured Digitally In the sense expressed, at least in terms of anthropology, a distinction needs to be made between the processes and mechanisms of identification. Brubaker and Cooper have grouped the processes into three dimensions specific to identification practices: commonality, connectedness, and groupness [4]. There now follows a brief description of each one of these according to certain ethnographic evidences in the matter in hand here, namely, the digitality of young people. Communality refers to the – material or perceived – sharing of a common attribute. There is empirical evidence to show that this is a premise that is reproduced within the heart of social media, either because of the channel or because of the concentration of peers [21]. This is also revealed, for example, in a study on a broad sample of Australian secondary school pupils in which the categorical community appears as an identity builder in a deeply intimate way and which involves the condition both of being young and as a participant in different online and offline contexts [22]. Connectedness refers to the relational ties that bring people together. It may well be a mistake to try to separate the online and offline worlds, as already stated by Floridi [2]. To what extent, in any young person’s experience, are they disconnected worlds? As is the case with other ambits referring to social identification, a major influence is exerted by the prejudice that those who despite being immersed in an onlife world are viewed as detached from that material space  – although no less laden with symbols – in which we were educated. That world’s transformation does

20

J. M. Muñoz-Rodríguez et al.

not respond to the nature of young people as the digital natives that Prensky [23] believed to have identified but as the effect of a “greater continuity between teens’ online and offline worlds” regarding past generations, that is, the emergence of social practices that belong to both worlds [24] (p. 38). Finally, groupness refers to what Brubaker and Cooper strictly define as a shared feeling of belonging, something that is now beginning to be explored from an ethnographic perspective in digital environments. For example, the social diversity of young people aged between 14 and 25 on the island of Mauritius has been explored through their interaction on Facebook. Irrespective of the study’s possible limitations, it reveals that the vectors of gender and ethnicity are significant in terms of self-representation and participation in this social medium. In short, digital environments are now the primary environments in which young people socialise and negotiate their identities [25]. When this study has been conducted for the same social medium among adolescents in Colombia and Spain, the findings also point to the idea of negotiation, although in this latter case it is related to the privacy and the overexposure of the self in personal profiles [26]. If the above processes refer us to the field of social action, the mechanisms of identification move, according to our perspective, within the domain of discursivity. This is based on the precedents specified that, all together, indicate that identity’s main attributes are built and feed off this level. More specifically, if the processes of identification are basically discursive, why not analyse them in grammatical terms? This appears to be fulfilled in the case of ethnic identification and do so on the profound fundaments of alterity [13]. In our case, the main difficulty we perceive is how to adopt an analytical approach to an infinitive discursivity that is immediately reflected in a hypermedia room full of mirrors. What are the mechanisms of identification being referred to in the case that concerns us here? With no attempt to be exhaustive, we shall explore some of them: narrativity, performativity, and the embodiment of young people’s identity practices in hypermedia contexts. (a) The question of narrativity is central to our core approach: how is a personal experience processed in terms of particular grammars? These grammars would be the way in which in discursive terms we construct ourselves through the chosen virtual arenas. These spaces are where everyone is or should be in order to exist socially. If these virtual spaces are diverse, how can we not fail to consider the apparent diversity or fragmentation of a young person’s “identity”? A recent study on young Argentineans reports that users perceive these spaces as “constellations of meaning attributed to each platform” [27]. The argument seems proven and, furthermore, its logic is beyond doubt. Is it not the case that our social behaviour varies depending on the context? As noted, “Individuals will self-categorise themselves differently according to the contexts in which they find themselves, and the contingencies with which they are faced” [28] (p. 90). In this latter case: is it not also true that our sense of belonging varies according to the circumstances? Although we tend to perceive them as essential, the manifestations of a “social identity” are contingent. Hence the reason that it is logical that young people “speak” different languages in the various social

Digital Natives or Digital Castaways? Processes of Constructing and Reconstructing…

21

media they frequent and reveal a range of profiles depending on the different audiences they address. Their “identity”, like our own, is just as adaptive in the material settings of social interaction (school, home, etc.) as in the virtual ones. This is what has been referred to as the user’s agenda in sundry cultural contexts [29]. What we refer to as “identity” is reconstituted into numerous facets depending not only on the channels – not in vain referred to as social networks – but also on the message to be conveyed and to the goals to be achieved. All this is what makes up the aforesaid agenda. It is fair to say that the self portrayed on a social medium designed to arrange sexual contacts is not the same as the one – or better still, the “we” – revealed for political purposes on Twitter. They are much more than imagined audiences to which one projects the best version of oneself (largely, but not only, physical among younger people) [24]. (b) Performativity, as a mechanism of identification, is closely linked to the above. Particular mention has been made, for example, of the part that image plays in the construction of the self, particularly among young people. It is true that today’s social media, and especially their use among the younger generation, basically involves an image, yet this does not mean it is a new language but instead that it suits the users’ communication needs. There are channels such as Snapchat, Instagram, and TikTok, where image lies at the heart of the construction of the self, but this is not independent of the communicational process. One seeks to interact with audiences made up of specific or potential “friends” – and followers. Such images are rendered meaningless if they do not receive likes and are not tagged, which once again refers us to the notion of connectivity. What is important, as revealed by a study involving adolescent pupils in the UK, is that an image acts as an eliciting tool [30]. It is no surprise that the image we use to condense and project our self-concept on social media is referred to as a “profile”, an expressive simile for that material and virtual elicitation of the self. One may well wonder to what extent this is true in terms of authenticity by considering, for example, those types of online interplay that we could call “soft”. Such is the case of more innocuous games, the creation of consciously misleading profiles and messages, and sarcastic texts in a humorous vein [31]. On Facebook, but above all on Twitter, there are phenomena in which the self is multiplied, even in terms of the collective building – metahistorical and viral – of the messages posted and shared online [32]. Like Judith Butler, we can also accept the notion that all “identity” is performative, that is, “each one’s discursively variable constitution (actor and act) in and through the other” [33] (p. 65). Once again, the building of profiles and the coherence of the messages informed by them are major fields for the negotiation of identity. (c) Incorporation (embodiment), like the above, is a common mechanism in all possible contexts. By this, we do not mean that social practices in digital environments are free of cultural diversity. We should consider the notion that the human experience of postmodernity is a side effect of our society’s t­ echnological

22

J. M. Muñoz-Rodríguez et al.

capability, in which it is assumed that we are all constantly and instantly connected. There are not enough empirical studies to conclude that such hyperconnectivity, if it does indeed exist, is experienced equally [34]. It is therefore clear the body features in digital practices as a setting for negotiation (mainly social and gender, but not only). The body, particularly in young people’s case, is both a rationale and product, a mechanism of socialisation, and also, therefore, a means of aggression and exclusion. It is worth questioning the aforesaid notion of diversity: how far does it manifest itself or, by contrast, to what extent is it being lost? Are technological mediations herding young people towards the standardisation of practices and feelings of identification? Or, by contrast, might not breaking through that unifying tendency ultimately be revealing our natural tendency toward diversity? Indeed, some of the examples already provided suggest this may be the case. A significant issue involves the multiplication of profiles in the different media used or even within the same social network. This latter practice is very common, for example, on Instagram, involving the creation of different preferential communities. A particular profile opens the door to a restricted area in which its members are chosen because of an accumulation of potential affects or interests. “Identity” is used here as a kind of passkey, as a filter, and as a marker of sociality. One may therefore wonder how far these practices are simply a spontaneous response to the risks perceived for one’s own privacy. Young people are aware of the dangers of digitisation, of cases of cybercrime, although perhaps less so than they should be. As from a certain age, they realise that the games and media they use fulfil business interests that specifically make money by processing and disclosing their personal data. Nonetheless, in our view, the greatest threat to a young person’s education does not lie in these or other mediations but instead in the over-dimensioning of the self prompted by digitality. Further still, as on the basis of an exacerbated individualism, social communities tend to be increasingly fluid and unstable. A young person’s body hovers in the virtuality of changing communities, in permanent flux. This may explain why young people multiply their profiles, both to respond to the different communities they either belong to or aspire to and to protect themselves in “screened” groups where it is precisely the “profile” – that is, their own image associated with a user name or alias – which acts both as a spyhole and a lock.

4  R  e-construction Processes: From the Concept of Identity to Online Identification Practices Any individual identification process reflects a person’s life experiences, the changes that these have brought about, their inevitable existential fractures, and the perception they have of their relationship with the groups they think they belong to. In keeping with scholars on alterity, any identity-building process begins with ­(self)

Digital Natives or Digital Castaways? Processes of Constructing and Reconstructing…

23

recognition, a specular construction process that simultaneously operates from inside and outside the self [20]. Today, we can break this process down into three interdependent subprocesses. Firstly, there is the construction of the self in relation to one’s own being (“personal identity”), secondly, one’s own configuration in relation to others (“social identity”), and finally, we are dealing with the creation of an identity that is both individual and multiple at the same time, based on the model of relationship enforced by the digital environment (“interdependent and dialogical identity”). We analyse each one of these subprocesses separately in order to further our theoretical understanding of each one’s implications. Nevertheless, as already noted, there is no real possibility of disassociating them from each other, as they are all part of the same process.

4.1  Process for Building a “Personal Identity” The processes of individual action in the construction of the self are shifting, and from our perspective and based on the results in some studies [27, 35–37], according to different mechanisms, which obviously do not exhaust the discourse, but instead give it meaning. Its more salient aspects are anonymity; display of the self; privacy; reputation and authenticity, in terms of self-concept; and relationality. The individual, basically a young person wholly immersed in their own development process, finds mechanisms of identification in the virtual world in a language that is largely visual and immediate and with permanent effects. This is what we understand as hypermediated identity in performative power. A profile is different to an “identity” that is always concealed in the action that enables the individual to become visible “in a manner that is continuous, accumulated, fragmented, storable and not controlled, which may lead to adverse situations that today are impossible to erase from the digital memory” [38] (p. 107). Young people realise that if they are not online, they do not exist. What comes into play here is the narrativity of publicity-privacy-intimacy. Depending on the type of social media or game they frequent, a young person manages their privacy in one way or another, using one profile or another to protect their privacy and, ultimately, their intimacy. At the same time, for the young person, it is important to be visible, to be on the Internet, to know what others are doing and for others to know what they are doing, which leads to the ratification of their self by others, based on what they see, which makes this more important than the actual inner development of that self. Furthermore, as they learn to handle that visibility, the young person begins to construct their self through mechanisms of individualisation stemming from an intentional or unintentional action. Most of the things a young person does have a reason, as there is intention to communicate, to influence. A young person handles their self through photos, images, likes, comments, expressions, or signs of approval or negotiation that enable them to intentionally reveal themselves to others. The

24

J. M. Muñoz-Rodríguez et al.

mechanism of individualisation is an array of identity practices with a clear purpose [39]. Yet besides intentional actions, there are others that are compulsive, which are out of control in front of the screen. It is one thing to go online and create a “personal identity” and quite another to become hooked. The virtual context urges them on, prompting them to act in a certain way that may lead to a quasi-programmed action: look, play, and face the screen without any control. It is a roleplay that is part of the personality being cobbled together, part of the development of their identity to become someone on the Internet, which is not always an intentional move. They are the result of the individualisation mechanisms linked, more often than intended, to dependent processes. It is argued that technology is designed to make life easier for young people, yet it may also complicate it or even compromise it. It has facilitated youth emancipation processes, although at the same time it has created and triggered mechanisms of dependence. The online society envelops them, leading more often than they would like to a kind of identity crisis, which they are not always conscious of, which in turn has the knock-on effect of ontological insecurity. The self is being formed in a life that is more contingent, fragile, and uncertain. The process of subjectivation and construction of the self falls in step with a greater hybridisation that is not always intended. These are individualisation processes that are highly orchestrated from the outside, in which the youthful self faces few real options. This means that individualisation processes are reticular, as there tends to be a multiplication of online relationships through media and games, developing less rigid and more dynamic identification mechanisms. The self accepts extending its relationships as it assumes a lower degree of commitment than offline, as it does not involve demands that sometimes require a physical presence or an immediate response. This process has been termed reticular individualism [40]. One may refer to oneself through different situations, through plural and fluid self-regulation processes of building an identity in the offline/analogue world. In the virtual environment, these are based on permanent adjustments and adaptations of the circumstances of this medium [41]. A process of self-realisation and self-regulation is expressed in the following: once young people have covered their most basic needs, they resort to stabilising processes and routines to develop more complex processes, such as needs for privacy, ownership, new goals, experiences, and dreams other than those found in the physical world, or even as a continuation of them. It is the deployment of the right they have, or claim to have, to singularity, to be unique through the screen, without realising that in many cases all they are doing is obediently following processes of self-realisation to the rhythm and pace of the collective tune. They do achieve autonomy, self-awareness, etc., but do so while dancing to the music of collective processes and compliances.

Digital Natives or Digital Castaways? Processes of Constructing and Reconstructing…

25

4.2  Processes of Building “Collective Identity” The building of an “identity” is not only the outcome of individual processes; it is a phenomenon that “is formed from the dialectics between the individual and society” [42] (p. 240). If there is one thing that defines the digital environment, it is precisely its social nature. Social media and networks are not technology per se but rather settings created for establishing communities represented mainly by social media, online games, and support platforms [29, 43]. They all permit the youthful self to relate, communicate, and share information. The fact is that technology has prompted an extension of places, and therefore of the mechanisms for the development of the processes for building a social identity, which have more to do with the search for relationships, consensus, subordinations, and power. Elements and factors such as the different ways of expressing oneself in each environment, the topics favouring interaction in each case, the interests in the use that each young person expresses, and even the time spent online inform some of the mechanisms for the building of an online identity [44]. Young people in any social media or interactive games have an avatar to enable others to interact with them; they introduce mechanisms of social expression. An image stands in for a person [45], and this is the way they decide how other people see and know them, choosing to reveal capabilities, physical traits, even humour, or sociability, among other possibilities, accepting a certain amount of discordance between reality and the image shown. The selfies posted on Instagram, the likes added on Facebook, and the emojis sent via WhatsApp are a series of signs of expression of the self in the search for the you. Those images and messages, all at the service of narrativity, likewise feed back to the building of the digital self. The purpose of a profile or status photo, for example, is to show oneself to others, send a message that the other will respond to, and connect with them. The profile photo of an internationally famous football player is not the same as a family snapshot; the aim is to gradually build up a given social reality based on either how they are or how they would like to be seen. They are, continuing with the example of the footballers, photos that are posed, emotive, fan pages, staged, illustrative, etc. Their aim, however, is to shift from an individual reality to one that is social and interactive, a role that involves being online, existing on the screen, which means a way of identifying as part of a group, leaving the self and reaffirming one’s existence on an equal footing with others [46]. Together with the capacity for social expression, another significant mechanism is the management of impressions, according to the term used by Goffman, that a young person wants to gain from the other. This is a visual process, although it is sometimes accompanied by verbal expression [47]. The kind of sociability that is typical of the digital environment, self-expression, sometimes acquires features of self-promotion. That management of impressions contains lasting elements such as age or nationality and others that fluctuate according to the context. This helps education to see the possibility of socialising with others in different scenarios without their self having to be consistent either with their true selves or across the different

26

J. M. Muñoz-Rodríguez et al.

settings in which it is presented [31]. The technological environment involves the extension of the criteria of social demarcation. We are no longer one household or another, one group of friends or another; the Internet enables us to personally identify ourselves in myriad other spheres of life. It provides more avenues of identification that allow a young person to display a greater array of distinctive traits in their mechanisms of interplay and socialisation [41]. Technology therefore generates new ways of socialising and relating, albeit with the possibility of introducing those aspects we consider to be representative of these processes, with futile fantasies of socialisation and interaction among young people whose nature is more isolated than ever. What’s more, there is a risk of the social saturation of the self because of the glut of relationships that technology provides, either directly or indirectly, for enlarging the circle of relationships and bringing to the fore a plethora of languages of the self that are incoherent and unconnected. What is therefore important for a digital social identity, in sum, is communication; in other words, what counts and matters for young people is the flow of communications, communicative interaction rather than the actual content, the mundane nature of the discourse instead of its historicity. The communication is valid as long as it is validated by the other and is accepted regardless of its truthfulness, insofar as the things said are of interest in the here and now, which reveals changes in the educational coding made of those communicational processes [47, 48].

4.3  P  rocesses of Building an “Interdependent and Dialogical Identity” All relationships and communication, in other words socialisation processes, culminate when we refer to dialogue in which the context, the other, combines with the self and the us. There are no frontiers or, better still, there is an uninterrupted relationship between the self and the us, thanks to the humanism of belonging to a place that paves the way for the real possibility for a young person to build an online identity [46]. Online communication, action, and social relationships are immediate, in-mediated and mediated for their incorporation or embodiment in a technological context. There are no frontiers or boundaries for the social variable because the intent is not solely with the other but instead with the other, with the community identified [49]. “Online communication reactivates another long-standing dream, a dialogical one – talking to the machine– to convert it into the other, into the multiplicity of others created by the internet. As we have already noted, the separation is only theoretical, as the individual connects the identity-building processes indistinctly, whether personal or social” [50] (p. 129). The platform for the identity-building process is not only the ego, nor even the alter ego, but instead the alterum, the other, which does not exist in a specific place but which permits the ego and the alter ego to feel, think, project, and act through

Digital Natives or Digital Castaways? Processes of Constructing and Reconstructing…

27

dialogue with the environment. It is an identity full of affinities, of collective projections, which refer us to localised identifications rather than static identities [51]. It is an identity built from a desire for the place, for the things located there, and for the locals themselves rather than for the obligation. The medium, the alterum, activates identifications on the basis of the creation of the sensitivities that young people share, which are sometimes nothing more than exchanges. Posting a comment on a social medium means manifesting a sense of belonging or identification with the other within a specific place or location, sharing a system of values, which is not always explicit in the ego or alter ego, as the virtual representation of the self entails irrational processes, which are not always intended, and much less so explicit [52]. It is the activation of binding processes; it is the creation of ties over and above mere relationships. Social media do not involve young people in sharing street corners or indoor premises, but they do behave in a similar manner, as they manifest a belonging to a place; further still, they show loyalty to the location and its people; they mutually accept codes, just as they do when they congregate outside in the street: they share an array of social manifestations that favour those ties and define them there and now, albeit through the fragility and transience of the visual communication of a socio-digital chronotope [53]. They are connected in the here and now out of necessity and willingness, emphasising their momentary and mundane nature as basic mechanisms of binding processes. They do not seek consequences nor are there commitments beyond being connected at that time and in that place. The feeling of belonging implies sharing hobbies, encounters, readings, sports, sexual tastes, and a raft of other possibilities based on links that are not directly established, visualised, or found. They are ecosystems formed on the basis of links with no stable form, shapeless, often forged through transitory relationships, because situations in life are themselves temporary and mutable. It is the mechanism that enables a young person to complete the building of their self, as part of the other, together with the other, based on processes of semantic and cultural transfiguration, in other words, of enculturation [54]. The concept of public space is rebranded as an expression of identity, of the nature of the self, of what the self experiences, based on how it assimilates and displays it in a new public setting, prompting a feeling of independence and freedom among young people. An “identity” is not, therefore, the reflection of each human being’s own particular essence but instead a cultural tool that enables us to orchestrate our online life, encounters with the other, participation, values, ideologies, uses of time, forms of communication, to situate ourselves and belong, in short, in a new environment of action and interaction in which cultural values are assimilated in relation to others [17]. The screen is not simply another accessory in a young person’s hands, as it is the scenario and content that allow the inclusion of enculturation processes, because communication, action, and interaction take place both within and through it. It is therefore a cultural tool for identity-building among young people, new ways of accumulating social and cultural capital.

28

J. M. Muñoz-Rodríguez et al.

5  R  ecovering and Opening Perspectives for Pedagogy Through the Digital Non-nativity of Young People Pedagogy is taking its time to come up with the strategies, procedures, and even rules for dealing with these new identity-building processes, which as we have seen present new nuances, conflicts, and palpable risks [48, 55]. A youth that is rounded and active requires a technological education, which goes further than the already familiar mechanisms of technological literacy that have proven to be insufficient, progressing beyond recommendations on the use of social media and reaching young people’s affective, relational, and communicational processes. It is not a technological issue but rather an educational challenge that requires pedagogical and anthropological approaches [56, 57]. Pedagogical studies overcome educational instrumentalisation and penetrate education’s anthropological roots. We have to supersede education in digital competencies, in technological languages, in the production and dissemination of languages, in better and increasingly more diverse uses, in technological consumptions, and in technology-related didactic outputs and curricula; by contrast, we need to adopt technological approaches that favour a young person’s autonomy, their responsibility, their scope for self-regulation, and, above all, their capacity for critically adapting to the Internet’s social space-time [58]. We began referring to what seems obvious, but which is not so much so on the screen. Educating and learning involve the whole body and all the senses. One might think that because they are online, the feelings of belonging that are generated in social media have nothing to do with corporality, or as if they have entered and left the receptacle that is our body. If there is one area where identification processes come to light, it is in the body. After referring, at the start of this article, to race and gender, we do not intend to dwell upon this theoretical dimension but instead on the heuristic and educational possibilities of embodiment. This is a key aspect of studies into young people’s construction of their own self-image, as is only to be expected within a context, such as the digital world, that subjects the body, and more specifically a young body, to the judgement of supposed social paradigms. This involves an education in the management of that time and space that allows us to achieve a humanism of belonging to the digital world, neither dominating it, as is obvious, nor dependent on it, as is the case, but instead belonging, but not entrapped, to a new environment in which young people need to know and learn to be and act [58]. We may formulate a hypothesis over young people’s digital non-­ nativity and the ensuing doubt over the excessive cognitive value given to technology in learning. There are already several studies that question the concept of digital native, as it lacks empirical backing and is overvalued [59, 60]. There is even a systematic study on the concept which reports that young people do not have that status, mainly because they lack the critical sense regarding what they are looking for and how they are doing so [61]. The lack of criteria among young people, the required critical approach for working with data, the non-personalisation of learning, and the dysregulation of the space-time young people experience online are the

Digital Natives or Digital Castaways? Processes of Constructing and Reconstructing…

29

basis for doubting the so-called digital nativity as the fundament of the learning process. It is the argument that prompts a rethinking of pedagogical approaches from a critical and post-critical pedagogy. Far from seeing it as a problem, we should face it for what it is, a new dimension of human groupness, on our road to the generation of forms of sociality that, despite the channel’s novelty, continue to be articulated in terms of life transit, that is, in terms of affirmation, assimilation, and integration that require educational guidelines [44]. If we approach this from an educational perspective, parents’ concern might become a tool for transgenerational recognition through the mediography of the family group [47], and we can teach ourselves and others to handle our status as consumers and generators of meaning in hypermedia contexts, and we can learn to work with young people to tackle the absence of a critical approach online, their digital non-nativity. We may furnish them – and ourselves – with tools for minimising the distress of the castaway adrift in the digital ocean. A challenge for education. Young people need to realise that some things should not be posted online, that they do they have to involve all and sundry in everything, and that not all the information is true in any virtual arena. Young people feel the need to be online, but they also have to learn what data to post, what role to play, what to believe, how long to be and where. Their growing-up process should involve discovering the boundaries between what is and should be public and what is and should be private and intimate. Intimacy, through processes of managing the visibility-­privacy that we noted earlier, undergoes a reconceptualisation in the sense and scope it has for young people’s self. They have to be aware of the risks that advertising entails – scamming, phishing, sexting, grooming, cyberbullying, etc. – and opportunities through an education based on, among other aspects, an ethics of responsibility. The possibilities for edifying young people are extended through the heterogeneity of online practices and behaviours, through the countless array of channels and languages. This potential advantage – the multiplication of communicational and relational resources  – poses major challenges for education, which needs to be based on the management of young people’s autonomy and responsibility. Take the following example: a young person may conceal their virtual identity; they may change their name, their age, and their physical features; and they may create false identities. Adopting “profiles” that, a priori, only affect the individual may seem innocuous, but this is not always the case because the other legitimises them, often without taking any responsibility for their consequences, their suffering, and their isolation in the complex processes of personal and social identification. This is a challenge for the educational process, as young people cannot always distinguish between what is real and what is not; they are not capable of weighing up opinions and accepting values from a critical perspective and through rational argumentation, often agreeing with what other people think and say without any kind of filter whatsoever, without adopting their own personal approach. We need to consider a critical mediatic education that develops a free and responsible identity, with critical and civic autonomy online. To do so, we will probably have to forget pessimism and educational acrimony and become edifying educators [62],

30

J. M. Muñoz-Rodríguez et al.

grounding our education in such basic concepts as trust, responsibility, positive affect, and experience and, above all, avoiding the contradictions in which we are constantly incurring. Over and above the need for an authoritarian culture linked to a controlling pedagogy of limits that is overly regulated, there is a need to establish a teaching model that is engaging, constructive, positive, linked to post-critical approaches [63], and founded on the principle of pedagogical complementarity regarding the pedagogy we have been promoting, through longitudinal studies that flag the paths to be followed accordingly [36].

References 1. J. Vlieghe, Education and world disclosure in the age of the screen, in Education in the Age of the Screen, ed. by N. Vansieleghem, J. Vlieghe, M. Zahn, (Routledge, London, 2019) 2. L.  Floridi, The Onlife Manifesto: Being Human in a Hyperconnected Era (Springer, London, 2015) 3. S. Hall, Who needs `identity´? in Questions of Cultural Identity, ed. by S. Hall, P. Du Gay, (SAGE, London, 1996) 4. R.  Brubaker, F.  Cooper, Más allá de la «identidad» [Beyond “Identity”], in Repensar los Estados Unidos: Para una sociología del hiperpoder, ed. by L.  Wacquant, (Anthropos, Barcelona, 2005) 5. Z. Bauman, From pilgrim to tourist - or a short history of identity, in Questions of Cultural Identity, ed. by S. Hall, P. Du Gay, (SAGE, London, 1996) 6. A.  Brah, Cartographies of Diaspora. Contesting Identities (Routledge, London/New York, 1996) 7. S. Sassen, Sociology of Globalization (W.W. Norton, New York, 2007) 8. S. Sayad, La double absence. Des illusions aux souffrances de l’immigré (Seuil, Paris, 1999) 9. M.  Veikou, E.  Siapera, Rethinking belonging in the era of social media: Migration and presence, in Crossroads in New Media, Identity and Law, ed. by W. de Been, P.  Arora, M. Hildebrandt, (2015) 10. S. Hall, Negotiating negotiating caribbean identities. New Left Review, (209) (1995) 11. B. Anderson, Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism (Verso, London, 1983) 12. T.H. Eriksen, Ethnicity versus nationalism. J. Peace Res. 28(3), 263–278 (1991) 13. G. Bauman, A. Gringrich, Grammars of Identity/Alterity: A Structural Approach (Berghahn Books, New York, 2004) 14. R. Jenkins, Rethinking Ethnicity. Arguments and Explorations (SAGE, London, 2008) 15. S.  Hall, The Fateful Triangle. Race, Ethnicity, Nation (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 2017) 16. L.M.  Alcoff, Visible Identities: Race, Gender, and the Self (Oxford University Press, London, 2006) 17. A. Gringrich, Conceptualising identities: Anthropological alternatives to essentialising difference and moralizing about othering, in Grammars of Identity/Alterity: A Structural Approach, ed. by Z. Bauman, A. Gringrich, (Berghahn Books, New York, 2004) 18. E. Lechner, L. Renault, Migration experiences and narrative identities: Viewing alterity from biographical research. Crit. Hermenutics 2(1), 1–25 (2018) 19. R. Baena, Narrativas y emociones: el auge del género autobiográfico, in Emociones y estilos de vida: Ragiografía de nuestro tiempo, ed. by L. Flamarique, M. D’Oliveira-Martins, (Biblioteca Nueva, Madrid, 2013)

Digital Natives or Digital Castaways? Processes of Constructing and Reconstructing…

31

20. J. Larraín, The concept of identity, in National Identities and Socio-Political Changes in Latin America, ed. by M. F. Durán-Cogan, A. Gómez Moriana, (Routledge, New York, 2000) 21. U. Gündüz, The effect of social media on identity construction. Mediterr. J. Soc. Sci. 8(5), 85 (2017) 22. K. Mallan, B. Ashford, P. Singh, Navigating iScapes: Australian youth constructing identities and social relations in a network society. Anthropol. Educ. Q. 41(3), 264–279 (2010) 23. M.  Prensky, Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon. NCB University Press 9(5) (2001) 24. D. Boyd, It’s Complicated. The Social Lives of Networked Teens (Yale University Press, New Haven, 2014) 25. K. Rambaree, I. Knez, Young people’s identity & Facebook behaviour: The role of gender and ethnicity. Cogent Social Sci. 3(1), 1359895 (2017) 26. A.  Almansa-Martínez, Ó. Fonseca, A.  Castillo Esparcia, Redes sociales y jóvenes. Uso de Facebook en la juventud colombiana y española. Comunicar 20(40) (2013) 27. P.J. Boczkowski, M. Matassi, E. Mitchelstein, How young users deal with multiple platforms: The role of meaning-making in social media repertoires. J.  Comput. Mediated Commun. 23(5), 245–259 (2018) 28. R. Jenkins, Social Identity (Routledge, London, 2004) 29. E. Costa, Affordances-in-practice: An ethnographic critique of social media logic and context collapse. New Media Soc. 20(10), 3641–3656 (2018) 30. R. Croghan, C. Griffin, J. Hunter, A. Phoenix, Young people’s constructions of self: Notes on the use and analysis of the photo-elicitation methods. Int. J.  Social Res. Methodol. Theory Pract. 11(4), 345–356 (2008) 31. A. Georgakopoulou, Sharing the moment as small stories: The interplay between practices & affordances in the social media-curation of lives. Narrative Inquiry 27(2), 311–333 (2004) 32. A.  De Fina, B.  Toscano Gore, Online retellings and the viral transformation of a Twitter breakup story: New challenges. Narrative Inquiry 27(2), 235–260 (2017) 33. C. Briones, Teorías performativas de la identidad y performatividad de las teorías. Tabula Rasa (6) (2007) 34. A. Kalawski, D. Serra, Las cosas que no pasan: Relato de una transmigración. J. Iberian Latin Am. Res. 22(2), 187–203 (2016) 35. F. Awan, D. Gauntlett, Young people’s uses and understandings of online social networks in their everyday lives. Young Nordic J. Youth Res. 21(2), 111–132 (2013) 36. C. Hu, H. Zhao, J. Huang, Achieving self-congruency? Examining why individuals reconstruct their virtual identity in communities of interest established within social networks platforms. Comput. Hum. Behav. 50, 465–475 (2015) 37. A. Vannucci, E.J. Simpson, S. Gagnon, C.M. Ohannessian, Social media use and risky behaviors in adolescents: A meta-analysis. J. Adolesc. 79, 258–274 (2020) 38. M. Ruiz- Corbella, A. De Juanas-Oliva, Redes sociales, identidad y adolescencia: nuevos retos educativos para la familia. ESE: Estudios Sobre Educación 25 (2013) 39. M. Wängqvist, A. Frisén, Who am I online? Understanding the meaning of online context for identity development. Adoles. Res. Rev. 1(2), 139–151 (2016) 40. B. Wellman, A. Quan-Haase, J. Boase, W. Chen, K. Hampton, I. Díaz, K. Miyata, The social affordances of the Internet for networked individualism. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 8(3), JCMC834 (2006) 41. J.C. Yau, S.M. Reich, It’s just a lot of work: Adolescents’ self- presentation norms and practices on Facebook and Instagram. J. Res. Adoles. 29(1), 196–209 (2019) 42. P.  Berger, T.  Luckman, La construcción social de la realidad [The Social Construction of Reality] (Amorrotu, Buenos Aires, 1988) 43. P. Hodkinson, Bedrooms and beyond: Youth, identity and privacy on social network sites. New Media Soc. 19(2), 272–288 (2017) 44. L. Thomas, P. Briggs, A. Hart, F. Kerrigan, Understanding social media and identity work in young people transitioning to university. Comput. Hum. Behav. 76, 541–553 (2017)

32

J. M. Muñoz-Rodríguez et al.

45. E.  Illouz, Intimidades congeladas. Las emociones en el capitalism (Katz Editores, Buenos Aires, 2007) 46. J. Marlowe, A. Bartley, F. Collins, Digital belongings: The intersections of social cohesion, connectivity and digital media. Ethnicities 17(1), 85–102 (2017) 47. N.  Vanisieleghem, J.  Vlieghe, M.  Zahn, Possibilities and Transformations in Technology (Routledge, London, 2019) 48. A. Gobbi, F. Rovea, Distance teaching and teaching “as” distance. A critical reading of online teaching instruments during and after the pandemic. Teoría de la Educación. Revista interuniversitaria 33(1) (2020) 49. C. Camic, H. Joas, The Digital Turn (Rowman and Littlefield, New York, 2004) 50. G. Imbert, La tribu informática: identidades y mascaras en Internet. Revista de Estudios de la Juventud 92, 123–131 (2011) 51. L. Pangrazio, Technologically situated: the tacit rules of platform participation. J. Youth Stud. 22(10), 1308–1326 (2019) 52. I.  Montiel, J.T.  Agustina, Retos educativos ante los riesgos emergentes en el ciberespacio claves para una adecuada prevención de la cibervictimización en metnores. Revista Española de Pedagogía 77(273), 277–294 (2019) 53. J. Blommaert, A. De Fina, Chronotopic identities. On the timespace organización of who we are, in Diversity and Super-Diversity. Sociocultural Linguistic Perspectives, ed. by A. De Fina, J. Wegner, D. Ikizoglu, (Georgetown University Press, Washington, 2016) 54. A. Loveless, B. Williamson, Learning Identities and Social Relations in a Network Society (Narcea, Madrid, 2017) 55. R. Mace, Refrafming the ordinary: Cyberspace and education. Teoría de la Educación. Revista Interuniversitaria 32(2) (2020) 56. A.  Case, Calm Technology: Principles and Patterns for Non-Intrusive Design (O’Reilly, Sebastopol, 2016) 57. J.M. Muñoz-Rodríguez, P. Torrijos Fincias, S. Serrate González, A. Murciano Hueso, Digital environments, connectivity and education: Time perception and management in the construction of young people’s digital identity. Revista Española de Pedagogía 78(277), 457–475 (2020) 58. Á. García del Dujo, J.  Vlieghe, J.M.  Muñoz-Rodríguez, J.  Martín-Lucas, Thinking of (the theory of) education from the technology of our time. Teoría de la Educación. Revista interuniversitaria 33(2) (2021) 59. I. Rowlands, D. Nicholas, P. Williams, The Google generation: The information behaviour of the researcher of the future. Aslib Proc. 60(4) (2008) 60. A. Escofet, M. López, G. Álvarez, Una mirada crítica sobre los nativos digitales: Análisis de los usos formales de TIC entre estudiantes universitarios. Revista Q. Tecnología. Comunicación. Educación, 9(17) (2014) 61. P. Kirschner, P. De Bruyckere, The myths of the digital native and the multitasker. Teaching Teacher Educ. 67, 135–142 (2017) 62. B. Thoilliez, When a teacher’s love for the world gets rejected. A post-critical invitation to become an edifying educator. On Educ. J. Res. Debate 3(9) (2020) 63. N. Hodgson, J. Vlieghe, P. Zamojski, Manifestaciones de lo postcrítico: de principios compartidos a nuevos caminos pedagógicos. Teoría de la Educación. Revista Interuniversitaria 32(2) (2020)

The Challenge of Developing One’s Own Identity in ICT Contexts: The Apparent Need to Share Everything Alberto Sánchez-Rojo

1  Introduction The first edition of À la recherche du temps perdu [In Search of Lost Time], first published by Marcel Proust in 1913, starts with the author, as the protagonist, telling of his sleeping habits. He says that he usually goes to bed early and often dreams of something related to the book he is reading before bedtime. His dreams sometimes stay there, and others take him to matters of his past life that he thought forgotten. He highlights that, unlike most people, when he wakes up he often needs a second to realise who he is and where he is. Despite sleeping in his usual bed, a sufficiently profound sleep can leave him feeling truly disorientated upon waking. Then, when he sees all the things around him, he is not reminded of the room he is in but all those he has been in before. Images from his past crowd his mind until he finally returns to the present. The past has a great weight for him, and this is shown through the images of his bedrooms throughout his life, in other words, the places of solitude that have helped to shape his identity and personality. After describing some of these rooms, he ends by stating: ‘Habit! That skilful but slow-moving arranger who begins by letting our minds suffer for weeks on end in temporary quarters, but whom our minds are none the less only too happy to discover at last, for without it, reduced to their own devices, they would be powerless to make any room seem habitable’ [1]. Space is important, but it is habit and nothing else that makes a room habitable, habitability that, according to Proust, will be essential as an element to shape personal identity. From this point, he narrates a long life based on certain habits, located in three specific places, and which together introduce us to Marcel, the main character in his story.

A. Sánchez-Rojo () Complutense University of Madrid, Madrid, Spain e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 J. M. Muñoz-Rodríguez (ed.), Identity in a Hyperconnected Society, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-85788-2_3

33

34

A. Sánchez-Rojo

One hundred years after publishing the first edition of À la recherche du temps perdu, another novel is published which, save for the differences, has a similar approach. The main character in Taipei by Tao Lin, published in 2013, is Paul, a 30-something writer who also narrates his habits and how he uses his time, time which, in some way, he also feels has been lost and he wants to find. As with Marcel, the story helps us get to know the character, to understand who he is, and to decipher his subjectivity. However, one has nothing to do with the other and not simply because of the different eras. Rather, it is because they live in apparently incommensurable worlds that lead to essentially different subjectivities. Marcel’s self is analogue, while Paul’s is digital. According to Katherine Hayles, ‘the analog subject implies a depth model of interiority, relations of resemblance between the interior and the surface that guarantee the meaning of what is deep inside, and the kind of mind/soul correspondence instantiated by and envisioned within the analog technologies of print culture. The digital subject implies an emergent complexity that is related through hierarchical coding levels to simple underlying rules, a dynamic of fragmentation and recombination that gives rise to emergent properties, and a disjunction between surface and interior that is instantiated by and envisioned within the digital technologies of computational culture’ [2]. Towards the beginning of the novel, the main character of Taipei also tells us about his rooms, but the sensation is totally different. He says, ‘most mornings, with decreasing frequency, probably only because the process was becoming unconscious, he wouldn’t exactly know anything until three to twenty seconds of passive remembering, as if by unzipping a file—newroom.zip—into a PDF, showing his recent history and narrative context, which he’d delete after viewing, thinking that before he slept again he would have memorized this period of his life, but would keep newroom.zip, apparently not trusting himself’ [3]. Paul is interested in knowing where he is simply to gain a minimum orientation to allow him to move to the next space he must occupy, but the past is indifferent to him. Paul’s past neither weighs on nor defines him. It tells us nothing of his subjectivity. What shows us who he is, is his present, a present with an eye to the future and that is fully controlled as there are many stimuli to respond to. Throughout the novel, Paul describes the spaces he passes through, sometimes alone, somethings accompanied. They are simple spaces and not places because he passes through them but never inhabiting them, and, therefore, they leave no mark on him. Following Augè, we could also classify them as non-places. This author states that ‘if a place can be defined as relational, historical and concerned with identity, then a space which cannot be defined as relational, or historical, or concerned with identity will be a non-place’ [4]. The spaces Paul travels through are like this, unlike those that Marcel inhabits throughout his life. Paul’s world is overinformed, where one has no time to intimate and set roots, only to interact. This gives him a great freedom for experimentation but, at the same time, leads him to nothing, to emptiness. His life is fragmentary, as is cyberspace. He has intense, profound experiences, but they do not reach his inner self; they remain superficial. Deep down he is missing something that he clearly cannot obtain outside materiality. The physical intimacy he acquires with Erin, his partner, will lead him to realise

The Challenge of Developing One’s Own Identity in ICT Contexts: The Apparent Need…

35

this and the importance of creating a story and give certain continuity to his existence. This does not mean that his life is no longer digital; that would be impossible, but it will start to show some features that would be more typical of a life like Marcel’s: analogue life. Thus, according to Shou, ‘the advent of ubiquitous digitality, Taipei seems to suggest in both substance and style, incites not the death of the analogue but a new synthesis of analogue and digital’ [5]. Analogue subjectivity, fixed, rigid and subject to a tradition that sometimes weighs too much, could even drown those who cannot adapt. In À la recherche du temps perdu, we see Marcel suffer on several occasions because of this. Digital subjectivity, on the other hand, superficial and fragmentary, can lead the self—as in the case of the protagonist of Taipei during much of the novel—to a lack of meaning, to emptiness and nothing. However, the advantage of the digital world is that, as it is fragmentary, it is permeable. Thus, as in the case of the protagonist of Taipei, recovering certain aspects of the analogue world can curb some of the negative elements of the digital world. This is precisely what this chapter will aim to show with a detailed study of the action of sharing secrets. We will first analyse the role of secrets in developing analogue subjectivity, showing to what extent it held a prominent position. Second, following some precedents, we will describe the situation of secrets in a digital world that tends to demand constant public exposure to others, and we will highlight the associated dangers. Finally, we will show how it is possible—and even pedagogically necessary—to instil secrets in their lives to developing children and young people today, without therefore having to abandon the digital nature of their subjectivity.

2  T  he Importance of Secrets in Configuring Analogue Subjectivity The term ‘secret’ comes from the Latin sēcrētus, past participle of sēcernō which, comprised of the particles se and cernō, means separate, isolated, particular, special or different. Meanwhile, cernō—from which the verb ‘to discern’ comes directly— is a transitive verb that also means to distinguish, separate or isolate but also to perceive clearly both with the senses and with intellect [6]. This last meaning, lost in sēcernō, brings it closer to the Greek term from which both stem, κρινω, that apart from to separate and clearly perceive also meant to value, appreciate, decide, judge and consider [7]. Words such as ‘crisis’ or ‘critic’ also stem from this verb. Thus, the original meaning of the word ‘secret’ comes from the action of dividing what has true value from what does not. This division may be because it is something we greatly appreciate or because we consider that it should not be part of what we deem in any way superior, such is the case of how we usually use the verb ‘to segregate’, or its noun form, ‘segregation’. In order to judge, we need to separate, classify and individualise; a secret is the result of this process. This is what we are most interested in highlighting from its

36

A. Sánchez-Rojo

etymological origin. A secret points to something that is special, highly unique. Now, when we use the word ‘secret’ in our daily lives, it is when this unique quality cannot or must not be revealed. Put another way, when having detected a uniqueness, we do not have the cognitive capacity to define it more specifically, or also when we can do so but prefer to hide it. If we can and/or want to point out something unique, as we know it and do not care about communicating it, we simply do so; we do not say that it is a secret. It is when we cannot or do not want to do so, while pointing to its existence, that we resort to this term. And, as linguists Algirdas J. Greimas and Joseph Courtés defined in their well-known square of veridiction, a secret points to something that is and does not appear, unlike what is true, which points to something that is and appears; something false, which neither is nor appears; and from delusion, which refers to something that is not but yet appears [8]. That fact that we know that it exists and that, at the same time, it does not appear makes it attractive from the human standpoint. Aristotle said that all humans ‘by nature are actuated with the desire of knowledge’ [9]. Knowing is nothing other than deciphering secrets. From the time we are born, the world around us captures our attention, pushing us to discover it, to reveal it. What is hidden, unknown, unsettles us. However, once we have revealed it, we either find new chinks of mystery or our interest decreases. Think, for example, about how a baby usually interacts with an unknown object. First, the novelty attracts it. Then it takes the object, puts it in different positions, feels it, smells it, licks it and drops it on the floor. Once the baby has experimented all these sensations several times and in every way possible, it lets it go. The baby knows it and, therefore, it is no longer interesting. Nevertheless, if we take that object the baby dropped on the floor and use it to make a noise against another surface, causing a different sound, the baby will probably want the object back. We will have shown the baby that there are still more things to discover about that object. We will have brought its attention back to the object. What we observe with the baby can be projected to all ages and all spheres of human life. So in the field of research, for example, an object is attractive until we discover how it works. Once we know about it, we move onto something else, unless for whatever reason the object shows us that it still hides some secrets and that it is worth revealing them. In politics, the most complex and problematic aspects of our coexistence interest us most, as it is not clear whether we can resolve them. Aspects where the solution in case of conflict is clear end up becoming merely administrative procedures and are much less interesting. At work, monotony is one of the main reasons we get fed up; and the same can be said of personal relationships: in order to want to maintain them, we must continue seeing them with some kind of mystery. As stated by Georg Simmel, one of the first to research secrets from a sociological viewpoint, ‘one may say (with reservations which easily suggest themselves) that in all relations of a personally differentiated sort, intensity and nuance develop in the degree in which each party, by words and by mere existence, reveals itself to the other’ [10]. This is true, as all human interactions involve a relationship between well-differentiated individuals. Interaction always entails an encounter between two or more distinguishable people and who are worth more for what they hide than for what they reveal. When they manifest themselves, without revealing what they are

The Challenge of Developing One’s Own Identity in ICT Contexts: The Apparent Need…

37

hiding but rather honouring it, we tend to get closer. However, where everything is transparent or where everything is such that it could invariably be any other, the relationship has no interest. This can be observed in the most intimate to the most superficial human relationships. For example, let’s say an insurance salesperson calls us to offer us a change in company. If we know how the sector or that company works, or we are simply happy with our insurance company and do not want to change, our attitude towards the salesperson will be clear from the outset; what they say will not represent a secret for us, so we will probably hang up. If, on the other hand, we are not happy with our insurance company and somebody has spoken well of the salesperson’s company, we will likely decide to listen; we are interested in the information they are hiding and want them to reveal their secret to us. Although more intimate relationships, such as family, friends or couples, are much more complex, they all follow the same model. Every relationship is about unique individuals who create and maintain their bonds by sharing more or less secrets and, at the same time, representing a greater or lesser secret for each other. However, despite having a certain relationship, being a secret is not the same as having secrets. Secrets are ours, they belong to us, and sharing them with some people or others makes us distinguish between relationships of friendship, camaraderie, neighbours, etc. We know them, organise them and control them at will. Our secrets shape us, and they do so in such a way that they configure us as embodied secrets. They configure our subjectivity and make us appear to others in a unique way. However, as we live more, our experiences increase and we are not aware of all our secrets nor capable of describing in detail the mark each of them has left on us. Thus, when we speak of the secret that we are, in other words, the personality formed by secrets may even have already been forgotten, it is better to refer to it as a mystery, to differentiate it from the quantifiable nature of secrets. According to Maillard, ‘unlike a secret, mystery keeps itself. It does not need to be protected by those who have it or have knowledge of it. Why? Simple: mystery has not descended to the logos; a secret, on the other hand, is always logos’ [translated from Spanish, 11]; or what is the same, while a secret can be communicated, translated into words, a mystery cannot ever. There cannot be a sufficiently complete discourse that can express a specific subjectivity. Insofar as it is defined as eternally perfectible and educable, it is an unsolvable mystery. However, it is also true that configuring oneself as a mystery depends on the capacity to know how to keep specific verbalizable secrets. Thus, those who are used to revealing absolutely everything are inevitably losing their ability to be and appear to be a mystery. If we are someone, it is because we have secrets that others do not have, and that marks the difference between who we are and who others are. Secrets are kept in our innermost selves. We think about them in the solitude of our room, especially when nothing else is on our mind, when we are bored. They are our most inherent subjectivity, which reaches its most accomplished state during adulthood. As expressed by Van Manen and Levering, ‘when the child learns that thoughts and ideas can be kept inside and are not accessible to others, then the child realizes that here is some kind of demarcation between his or her world, which is “inner”, and that which is “outer”. In the literature of psychotherapy, this is commonly referred to as the “self-­boundary

38

A. Sánchez-Rojo

formation”’ [12]. Knowing how to keep a secret is undoubtedly a sign of maturity. In fact, ‘the betrayal of trusted secrets is a detestable thing that bespeaks a person’s immature nature’ [12]; in other words, it defines somehow who does not know how to distinguish what must be revealed from what is better to keep quiet or, what is the same, who does not yet understand the difference between inner and outer, therefore lacking the capacity to distinguish themselves from others. As mentioned above, the secrets someone keeps with a certain person make their relationship with that person special or not. Likewise, the secrets a person keeps for themselves, those that are only that person’s concern and they do not share, shape them as a differentiated private individual, something that, in one way or another, will be noticed wherever they must manifest themselves in public. The level of secret life we share with some people or others will never be the same. If we truly come to understand their value, we will know how to use this to distinguish who are our friends and who are not, and, even more so, of these, we will know how to differentiate each one by their unique character. Each person hides a particular mystery that attracts us and which, even though we do not want to exhaust it, we want to know. A secret is therefore a fundamental element in our personal and social development as it helps us to distinguish between people, contexts and people in contexts. As stated by Vila Merino, ‘handling secrets means articulating and interpreting codes, representations and meanings, generating symbolic and linguistic skills, learning relational forms of the self and the alter, identifying, recognising and feeling that we are part of the realities around us’ [translated from Spanish, 13]. It has long been demonstrated that from the age of 5 a child can keep a secret [14]; however, it is not until approximately 9 or 10 when secrets become a specific mark of friendships [15]. In their empirical study Secrecy in Middle Childhood [16], Watson and Valtin study several children aged between 5 and 12 in order to find out at what time they understand secrets and to what extent this causes significant changes in an individual at both personal and social level. This study shows how most 5-year-old children who took part valued their interiority more and practically all of them refused to hypothetically tell a secret. In contrast, as age increased, children began to be more inclined to tell them. Thus we can state that during childhood, secrets are discovered at two well-differentiated moments: a first moment in which the child discovers that it is possible to keep information to themselves, which differentiates them from the rest of their own individuality, and a second moment when they realise that they can share this information and, in this way, use it to foster some interpersonal relationships more than others. When children reach school age—when sharing secrets is essential for their development—is when we can clearly see whether or not the child has learned to value secrets and their own subjectivity. Sharing secrets is important during adolescence. Friendships are based precisely on the fact of sharing more or less secrets. The promise of not being revealed to external agents is what creates bonds, based on trust. However, when someone shares something that is not their own with another person, what they share is no longer just theirs. From ‘mine’ it becomes ‘ours’, an important and necessary step. Even though autonomy and independence are outstanding values, especially in today’s Western societies, humans are

The Challenge of Developing One’s Own Identity in ICT Contexts: The Apparent Need…

39

essentially dependent and vulnerable [17], so it is good for us to learn to support and trust each other. However, revealing ourselves to the point of not keeping anything to ourselves can be problematic. It need not be this way if we were to live in a society where community was paramount, where all ties were so strong that we would never feel isolation, abandonment or loneliness, but this is not the case. If we reveal ourselves completely, if we commit fully, if we abandon the possibility of existing independent from others, our self will be so fragile that it will be incapable of facing up to many experiences our globalised, unstable and individualistic world will force it to face. A dangerous example of fully committing to the community in an individualistic and unstable world can be found in hikikomori [引きこもり]. This phenomenon is originally Japanese, although it is increasingly more widespread around the world [18]. It points to the existence of people in ‘a state [...] that involves cooping oneself up in one’s own home and not participating in society for six months or longer, but that does not seem to have another psychological problem as its principal source’ [19]. Although there is not a clear reason to explain why these people decide to isolate themselves and step away from society, some studies show that a high percentage of these people decide to lock themselves away after failing, in some way, in their relationship with one of their communities. Divorce, breakup, lost friendship or losing a job usually come before confinement. In other words, the person commits to their relationship, whether family, sentimental, friendship or employment, to such an extent that if the relationship fails for any reason, the person freezes up and locks themselves away. There is no self that is independent from the community they belong to, so when the person is expelled, they become incapable of action; they do not have enough tools [20]. For this reason, it is essential for individuals to never stop cultivating their individual self, independent from their relationship and from their communities. To find out how to achieve this, it is interesting to observe how the nineteenth-century Western bourgeoisie did it. Historian Peter Gay says that even though ‘no other class at any other time was more strenuously, more anxiously devoted to appearances, to the family and to privacy, [it was also true that] no other class has ever built fortifications for the self quite so high’ [21]. According to this author, families encouraged their children to acquire a strong self and their own personality to enable them to observe the world in a unique and critical manner. To do this, they were urged to carry out solitary activities that would help them to value their own subjectivity. Thus, they fostered in them the pleasure of individual reading; they were made to learn to play an instrument, requiring hours of solitude; and they were initiated in the habit of personal writing. It was common for children from young people to be gifted with a diary to express all their experiences. Writing a diary allowed them to gain a personal sense of experiences and to in some way materialise the fact that each individual had their own existence independent from others. In encounters with others, whether friends, family, work colleagues or simply acquaintances, one could often feel forced to be and act in a certain way contrary to one’s wishes, but knowing that no matter how many social obligations were imposed, one was an independent subject and that individuality in itself was worthwhile.

40

A. Sánchez-Rojo

According to early twentieth-century Spanish philosopher Manuel García Morente, ‘private life, which is nourished by what is not common to all, nourishes the authentic personal being, it is not something one finds conveniently, without having looked for it. Private life has to be created, has to be conquered. Having it is not enough’ [translated from Spanish, 22], and for this reason, education in solitude was so important for bourgeois tradition. This type of education encouraged caring for and valuing secrets: not only shared secrets but also fundamentally personal secrets, secrets shared with nobody but oneself. Although the material well-being of the bourgeoisie gradually reached a larger part of the population and led to the emergence of the middle class, its educational and cultural model was not democratised in the same way. Mass or consumer society would tend to reduce an individual’s life to material enjoyment, making the individual a less critical, less authentic and also more manipulable subject [23, 24]. Furthermore, focusing on material aspects would be accompanied by the development of information media and audiovisual communication, which helped to strengthen this society focused on material well-being even more, doing so by conveying images clearly showing a specific ideal of public and also private life. However, this would require making it possible for certain private lives to reach general public interest, to somehow expose models publicly. Thus, mass and consumer society gave way to the society of the spectacle, and that is how, as we will see in the section below, secret first began to be devalued, at least as they had been understood until then.

3  F  rom the Society of the Spectacle to Configuring the Digital World: The Gradual Loss of the Value of Secrets We could say that nowadays, with no time to get bored, with no space to do so and always in the presence of others who prevent us from being alone in many ways, developing the practice of secrets as described in the previous section is extremely complicated, in other words, creating memories experienced but not told to anyone, beliefs, tastes, sensations and personal objects that allow us to be more aware of ourselves precisely because they are our own and not shared. From this perspective, the holder of a secret knows that they have something to hide, to protect. By keeping their secrets away from others, they can relate to them without losing their personality. They therefore become an independent self, a self that can never be transformed into a complete story. On the possibility of being absolutely exposed publicly in a world that seemed to value this, in the late 1960s author Clarice Lispector stated that: ‘So many want projection. Without knowing how it limits life. My little projection hurts my modesty. Even what I wanted to say, I can’t anymore. Anonymity is smooth like a dream. [...]. There are things I will never write, and I will die without having written them. Those in exchange for no money. There is a great silence within me. And that silence

The Challenge of Developing One’s Own Identity in ICT Contexts: The Apparent Need…

41

has been the source of my words. And from silence has come what is most precious of all: silence itself’ [translated from Portuguese, 25]. Lispector’s writing is highly personal; we could even say that it is intimate, but not private. In her words she is able to share feelings, thoughts and a unique take on the world, without providing a single detail of her private life [26]. In fact, she says that protecting her privacy has enabled her to write in such a unique way. Her silences, full of secrets, are what have shaped her subjectivity, and she seems unable to understand how some people expose themselves and give this up. In this author’s work, we can easily differentiate between privacy, which is one’s own and unique, and intimacy, which is more concerned with sensations and feelings than with possessions and can therefore be described universally. However, she was clear that to be intimate, to feel in such a personal way, it was essential to have a subjectivity formed by secrets. The everyday nature of publicly projecting privacy today makes it difficult to detect this nuance between private and intimate, despite its importance. We can say that the generalised desire to publicly project private life Clarice Lispector points to originated in post-World War II society. It is from the late 1940s when image began to replace written text and information began to lose relevance compared to entertainment, which was to be focused on the daily lives of people. The goal was to attend the most fundamental concerns which, after a period of misery and hunger, became basically about survival in the best possible way, as well as personal relationships with others: love, friendship, neighbourhood, etc. The 1950s and especially 1960s would bring about fictional television programmes about personal and family lives; they would define ideals and develop advertising based on complying with certain models. One had to lead that lifestyle in order to be someone. Private life, as Guy Debord pointed out in the late 1960s, would become a spectacle. He said, ‘spectacle [was] not a collection of images but a social relation among people mediated by images’ [27]. These came from television, from newspapers and from the multiple forms of expression acquired by advertising. These media established a certain way of being and of doing, a specific way of living that removed individuals from the possible satisfaction of a fully human life, as, according to Debord, ‘the spectacle in general, as the concrete inversion of life, [was] the autonomous movement of the non-living’ [27]. More than their own experiences, people experimented imposed experiences, mediated by external images that clearly defined what was beautiful and what was not, which were the best schools, the best jobs, the best way of dressing, of thinking and even of loving. Life became artificial, and everything that can be defined as artificial cannot be anything other than the opposite of vital, lives which, deep down, were not really lives but that ended up marking the wishes, desires and ways of doing and being of a great majority of people. In other words, artificial lives ended up defining real lives. Likewise, the ideal families shown in fictional television programmes had no merit other than leading daily lives. This led many people to think that their private lives, although banal, could also be interesting. Thus, along with family life fiction, reality TV programmes emerged, gaining increasing ground over time until the 2000s, when the revolution would take place. At the start of this decade, after years

42

A. Sánchez-Rojo

of successful programmes where people would go to publicly expose different aspects of their private and personal lives, channels in numerous countries launched a programme that would at last record and broadcast a person’s whole life, from the time they got up to the time they went to bed. This programme was called Big Brother and was hugely successful in all the countries where it was broadcast [28]. The programme took its name from the all-observing eye in George Orwell’s dystopian novel 1984 [29]. It consisted of a series of people—depending on the country, the number of contestants could be more or less—voluntarily locking themselves up in a home equipped with cameras in every corner, where they must stay for up to 3 months and at least 1 week. It all depended on when the audience decided they should each abandon the house, as it was the viewers who would decide who should stay and who should go each week. During their time there, contestants had to take on different challenges and activities proposed by the programme, in addition to simply living: eat, clean, wash, sleep, go to the bathroom, etc. Plain, simple reality is boring, so contestants had to try to live ‘exceptionally’, in other words argue, fall in love, fall out of love, be jealous, get angry, be desperate, be happy, etc. The exceptional part of everyday life would attract the attention of the audience because precisely in everyday life, in bare life shared by us all, if something exceptional had not already happened to us, it could happen one day. Due to its great success, there have been editions throughout the years, extending to other formats and spaces, whether an island, a farm or a hotel, simply living together, finding a partner or showing off skills such as singing or dancing. In the words of Andacht, it is true that ‘in a playful way, Big Brother shows the backstage of appearances, the strip-tease of the self, and for this it involves the relationship with the other who is in front of me’ [translated from Spanish, 30], another who is very similar to me in what they represent, as we all eat and sleep, we all fall in and out of love and we all argue and get angry with the people we live with; in other words, we all supposedly have a private life. This sphere of our life, previously reserved for the hidden, secret side, could pose certain doubts that we would resolve with those closest to us or, even in silence and solitude, with ourselves. However, now we had the opportunity to observe how others live, to see how they acted and to see ourselves reflected in those people. One looked for oneself in Big Brother participants. Television, as an informative medium inherent to public space, absorbed the private sphere from the outset by merely showing it openly. As a result, the private side has absorbed any neutral treatment of the public side; it is easy to see how even political news has followed the formats of entertainment programmes [31]. The fact that peoples’ private life has occupied increasing public ground through television has led to an increasing demand for private life in the public space. Thus, during elections it is common for candidates to not simply present their programmes but also to offer more personal interviews or take part in entertainment programmes where they publicly show different aspects of their private life to also attract voters. When social networks emerged in the mid-2000s, the context could not have been better. For years, television had shown us the private life of many people for public entertainment; fame no longer depended on great achievements, and we

The Challenge of Developing One’s Own Identity in ICT Contexts: The Apparent Need…

43

could see ourselves reflected in that person who talked about their troubles in front of the camera, as their troubles were similar to ours. The only fault with these television programmes was that, despite the viewer being moved and involved as a reaction to the images, participation was passive. Social networks emerged to solve that problem. Finally there was a tool that offered simultaneous visibility worldwide. The spectacle would no longer be one-way broadcaster-receiver, it would be multiway, incessantly exchanging the roles of broadcaster and receiver to the point of not knowing who is who. Facebook, Twitter, YouTube or Instagram—to name just a few of the most popular social networks—allow us to accumulate a large number of friends with whom we can share photos, videos, opinions and experiences of all kinds. We can tell them what we like with just a click and even become their ‘followers’ as, just like the famous, now we can all have fans regardless of whether all they can see of us on the screen is normal life. ‘In these spheres it is possible to publish photos and tell who one is in order to make contacts, as well as to encourage users to change and transform: to stop being who they were or who they are, to constantly reinvent themselves’ [translated from Spanish, 32] and not according to themselves, rather on contact with others who, depending on the moment, will indicate the ideal way of being and doing. Now it seems that everything must inevitably be public in order to exist. What is important is the story and not the content of the story [33]. According to Newmahr, ‘the use of Facebook can decrease the distance between the experience and the desire to share the experience. Before Facebook (and Twitter), the closest approximation was to have an experience and then think, “I can’t wait to tell people about this!”, but the necessity of the waiting at least meant that there was a “this” and then an impulse to share. Desires to post an update to Facebook do not require an event or even a separate recognition of a thought that we then, a moment later, want to share. Instead, these frames suggest that at least some of us are thinking in terms of our sharing’ [34]. This marks an extremely important difference in how we face the world. When an individual thinks about sharing before experiencing, there is a radical change in how they are shaping their subjectivity [35]. It is a subjectivity more dependent than independent, and this, considering the social value still afforded to autonomy and dependence, can be a problem as we saw in the case of the hikikomori phenomenon. Nowadays, the self is fundamentally configured online and depending on others. Transparency comes first in cyberspace; it demands authenticity from the individuals participating in it. Although the terms are sometimes confused, what tends to be valued is self-disclosure and not so much self-presentation. However, the former can sometimes require intense and prolonged attention by the audience, and, in a world in which information flows constantly and there is so much to pay attention to, it is the latter that usually ends up standing out [36]. Thus, the intrinsic way of ‘being’ online sometimes makes it difficult for individuals to present themselves as they really are. They often show themselves as they would or should like to be according to the series of valuation principles that defines their community [37]. This can create an identity crisis in individuals as they are not, do not want to be or

44

A. Sánchez-Rojo

do not manage to be what is demanded by the Internet [38]. In turn, it can also prevent them from achieving real intimate relationships as they base how they interact with others on an avatar that does not fully define them rather than on themselves [39]. For this reason it is not rare in our world, despite being constantly accompanied, that experiencing feelings of isolation, abandonment and loneliness is common [40]. Young people can hide things nowadays, especially regarding their relationship with their parents. Parents are still an authority no matter how much this is increasingly questioned, and adolescence is a stage of rebellion where the adolescent naturally wants to live a life away from the family. They can also belong to several communities and hide certain things from some and from others. We can find studies where these concealment dynamics lead authors to deduce an effective concern among young people for their privacy [41]. However, privacy is not so much related to hiding as it is to secrets. The way the Internet is made up means that young people increasingly need to tell everything, whether only to a few or to everyone, whether through anonymity or not. What is important is to make yourself visible, and visibility has never been incompatible with a certain degree of concealment; on the contrary, what it is incompatible with is secrets, as these have traditionally been understood. The important thing today is to make experiences visible, and that is perfectly compatible with any type of concealment. If we state that young people today have no privacy, in no case is this due to their inability to hide things or themselves, as it is obvious they can and do, but rather it is due to their inability to keep things exclusively for themselves, their inability to feel that they exist, thanks to and by keeping secrets.

4  The Digitalisation of Secrets as a Strategy for Education In Sect. 2 we show to what extent secrets have traditionally been configured as a substantial element in shaping personal subjectivity. Section 3 describes the process that has led to the fact that today secrets are generally not cultivated. Taking into account their importance for shaping the self and their incompatibility with today’s hyperconnected world, we could recommend moments of temporary disconnection to facilitate their recovery. However, we have reached a point in which digital not only configures Internet and cyberspace but also those spaces that, despite not being mediated by technology, could not be considered purely analogue today. In fact, it has been proven that people who decide to disconnect from social networks end up lost in their relationship with the world [42]. This is because people do not only use social networks to communicate but also for entertainment and information: that what appears on social networks ends up occupying most conversations. Likewise, the fact that all public life procedures can be carried out on the Internet has made it more difficult to do so by any other means; having a digital identity is important to arrange a doctor’s appointment, for banking or any other type of formality. Finally, to this we must add that, in a world in which public exposure is encouraged and

The Challenge of Developing One’s Own Identity in ICT Contexts: The Apparent Need…

45

showing personal aspects publicly is generally considered positive, refusing to do so is not well regarded and creates suspicions that can lead to the individual who voluntarily isolates experiencing problems, for example, finding a job or creating and maintaining personal relationships [43]. Therefore, the solution to problems derived from an overly dependent subjectivity, in a world that nevertheless highly values autonomy and independence, can never be disconnection. We have reached a point in which, if we want to be present and actively participate in our world, this is unfeasible. We must therefore search for a solution assuming that we are developing our life through certain technology. As Landgon Winner showed many years ago, technologies make policy [44]. In other words, their structure, design and functioning are never neutral, and they shape the world in a certain way, regardless of how we use them. The fact that our lives are fundamentally played out on screens has specific and inevitable implications in how we live and develop [45]. Social networks have been created for individuals to expose themselves publicly. It is true that they all have privacy policies we can configure to protect ourselves, but their very sense is for us to expose ourselves, so they constantly encourage us to do so. Some studies suggest that their very design means that people worry less about protecting their privacy [46]. Given this state of affairs, cultivating secrets might therefore seem impossible. However, this is because we do not take into account that our world has changed; that the change from analogue to digital has led to, according to Floridi, a reontologisation of the world [47]. If the world is different, the parameters through which we observe and define must also be different. Hence, what we should do first is to redefine the concept of secret according to the world we now live in, as it is configured. The professional field of education tends to view digital technologies as mere means and that the problems associated with them are simply due to misuse that can be corrected by limiting use. We can find numerous guides on the market for parents and teachers with guidelines on proper Internet use, especially during childhood and adolescence. However, these guides generally do not consider that the world has changed and that digital technologies imply purposes beyond being used as means. Teachers must start from this premise when searching for solutions to problems or risks associated with cyberspace [48]. At the beginning of Sect. 2, we said that, according to etymology, the concept of ‘secret’ referred to something separated as it is unique and special. This is the key. Its hidden nature is a legacy received from analogue culture but is not the essence of its definition. What is really important is that it is one’s own. Nowadays it could be possible to have secrets as personal, own and unique configurations, regardless of whether they are generally visible to someone. The problem does not lie in visibility, rather in that social networks are increasingly more rigid and limited in their design. Character limitations, the homogeneity of spaces to post photos, videos and personal creations, and how they are presented to us, mean that despite being full of personal data, they are less and less personal. If we compare the possibilities of a blog with those of a Facebook, Twitter or Instagram profile, the difference is substantial. In a blog we can freely decide how to structure information we want to include, how to organise posts, what type of font to use, text length and endless

46

A. Sánchez-Rojo

other details. In a blog we can create a truly personal space; we can create secrets. This is not possible on the social network profiles we have just mentioned. So recovering the secret in education entails redefining it adapted to the digital world. When private had no space in public, that a secret was essentially defined by hiding it was important. Today, however, this is not so important. A secret, as a configuring element of subjectivity, requires being one’s own, personal creation. Thus, although solitary activities such as reading, individual writing, learning to play an instrument or collecting objects can still be interesting ways to create a unique subjectivity, they are not the only ways nor possibly the most popular. Creating personal corners in cyberspace is a strategy more adapted to our times. For this reason we must demand less rigid and marked spaces from digital content designers and encourage children and young people to train in using them. However, changing the perspective of how we view the world we live in will be the first step.

5  Conclusion We began this chapter by looking at the characters of two novels: Marcel, the leading character of À la recherche du temps perdu by Marcel Proust, and Paul, the protagonist of Taipei by Tao Lin, published a hundred years later. These two novels showed us two apparently incommensurable worlds which, in the end, are not so incommensurable. It is true that the ways they develop are different, but we cannot demand that Paul have a stable and continuous personality deeply rooted in the past like Marcel while he lives in an essentially fragmentary world. However, as personal and individual subjectivity is still socially important in his world, what we can ask is that he somehow configure it without stepping outside the parameters that define his reality. In his case, he achieves this through an intimate relationship that allows him to introduce a certain analogue continuity in his life without breaking digitality. Paul’s character shows us that you do not have to break away from analogue, especially from what is humanly positive and can help curb the negative aspects of digitality. What we must do is simply redefine it. As we have attempted to show, this is the way forward with regard to the educational value of the secret. We have demonstrated its importance in building personal subjectivity, but also that, as it was understood in the analogue world, it is incompatible with the new reality. However, we do not have to fully deny its possibility nor force a return to the analogue world to conserve it. The secret can be introduced in our lives without breaking from the digital reality we live in. We must simply redefine it according to new parameters. Just as Paul cannot act like Marcel, we cannot demand that a twenty-first-century child or young person cultivate secrets as someone their age could a hundred years ago. What we can do is try to make them do it differently, adapted to the world they live in. This new way lies in putting their hidden nature in the background and focusing more on their uniqueness. To create personal corners that truly belong to us and differentiate us from others in cyberspace requires the existence and

The Challenge of Developing One’s Own Identity in ICT Contexts: The Apparent Need…

47

promotion of digital platforms designed for this purpose. This is what we must demand as teachers. It is not about being conformist or nostalgic. It is about detecting pedagogically important elements and adapting them to the digital world we live in.

References 1. M. Proust, In Search of Lost Time I: Swann’s Way (Random House, New York, 1992) 2. N.K. Hayles, My Mother Was a Computer. Digital Subjects and Literary Texts (The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 2005) 3. T. Lin, Taipei (Conongate Books, Edinburgh, 2013) 4. M.  Augè, Non-Places: Introduction to an Anthropology of Supermodernity (Verso, New York, 1995) 5. C.J. Sheu, What we talk about when we talk about new media: digital subjectivity and Tao Lin’s Taipei. Textual Pract. 34(8), 1269–1284 (2020) 6. P.G.W. Glare, Oxford Latin. Dictionary (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1968) 7. H.G. Liddell, R. Scott, Greek-English Lexicon (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1996) 8. D. Maddox, Veridiction, Verifiction, Verifactions: Reflections on Methodology. New Literary History 20(3), 661–677 (1989) 9. Aristotle, The Metaphysics (Dover Publications, New York, 2007) 10. G. Simmel, Sociology: Inquiries into the Construction of Social Forms, vol. 1. (Free Press, New York, 1950) 11. C. Maillard, Secretos y misterios [Secrets and mysteries]. Archipiélago: Cuadernos de Crítica de la Cultura, 52 (2002) 12. M. Van Manen, B. Levering, Childhood’s Secrets: Intimacy, Privacy and the Self Reconsidered (Teachers College Press, 1996) 13. E.S. Vila Merino, La educación del secreto: infancia, identidad y alteridad [Secret’s education: childhood, identity and otherness]. Revista Iberoamericana de Educación 47(1) (2008) 14. J.  Peskin, Ruse and Representations: On Children’s ability to conceal information. Dev. Psychol. 28 (1992) 15. K.J. Rutenberg, D. Sliz, Children’s Restrictive Disclosure to Friends. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly 34 (1988) 16. A.J. Watson, R. Valtin, Secrecy in the Middle Childhood. Int. J. Behav. Dev. 21(3) (1997) 17. A. MacIntyre, Dependent Rational Animals: Why Human Beings Need the Virtues (Open Court Publishing, Chicago, 2001) 18. T.A. Kato, S. Kanba, A.R. Teo, Hikikomori, multidimensional understanding, assessment, and future international perspectives. Psychiatry Clin. Neurosci. 77(8) (2019) 19. T.  Saito, Hikikomori: Adolescence Without End (University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, 2013) 20. A.  Sánchez-Rojo, El fenómeno hikikomori: tradición, educación y tecnologías de la información y la comunicación (TIC) [The hikikomori phenomenon: tradition, education and information and communication technologies (ICT)]. Arbor: Ciencia, Pensamiento y Cultura 193(785) (2017) 21. P. Gay, The Bourgeois Experience: Victoria to Freud vol. 1. Education of the Senses (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1984) 22. M.  García Morente, Ensayo sobre la vida privada [Essay on the private life] (Encuentro, Madrid, 2011) 23. H. Arendt, The Human Condition (The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1998) 24. J.  Ortega y Gasset, La rebelión de las masas [The Revolt of Masses] (Alianza Editorial, Madrid, 2005)

48

A. Sánchez-Rojo

25. C.  Lispector, A descoberta do mundo [The Discovery of the World] (Rocco, Rio de Janeiro, 1999) 26. E. Nascimento, Clarice Lispector: uma literatura pensante [Clarice Lispector: a thoughtful literature] (Civilização Brasileira, Rio de Janeiro, 2012) 27. G. Debord, Society of the Spectacle (Black & Red, Detroit, 1970) 28. S. Holmes, D. Jermyn (eds.) Understanding Reality Television (Routledge, London, 2004) 29. G. Orwell, 1984 (Penguin Books, London, 2008) 30. F. Adracht, El reality show. Una perspectiva analítica de la televisión [Reality show: an analytic perspective of television] (Norma, Barcelona, 2003) 31. D.K.  Thussu, News as Entertainment: The Rise of Global Infotainment (Sage, Thousand Oaks, 2007) 32. P. Sibilia, L. Diogo, Vitrines da intimidade na internet: imagens para guardar ou para mostrar? [imacy’s Windows on internet: images for keeping or for showing?]. Estudos de Sociologia 16(30) (2011) 33. R. Mace, Reframing the ordinary: Cyberspace and education. Teoría de la Educación. Revista Interuniversitaria 32(2) (2020) 34. S. Newmahr. Sharing and waiting on Facebook, in Polular Culture as Everyday Life, ed. by D. Easkul, P. Vannini, (Routledge, Abingdon-on-Thame, 2016) 35. G. del Dujo, A. Vlieghe, J. Muñoz-Rodríguez, J.M. Martín-Lucas, Thinking of (the Theory of) Education from the Technology of our Time. Teoría de la Educación. Revista Interuniversitaria 33(2) (2021) 36. A.E. Schlosser, Self-disclosure versus self-presentation on social media. Curr. Opin. Psychol. 31, 1–6 (2020) 37. S. Uski, A. Lampinen, Social norms and self-presentation on social network sites: Profile work in action. New Media Soc. 18(3), 447–464 (2016) 38. A.S. Elias, R. Gill, Beauty surveillance: The digital self-monitoring cultures of neoliberalism. Eur. J. Cultural Stud. 21(1), 59–77 (2018) 39. C. Forbes, Authentic friendship in the age of social media. Pacífica 29(2), 161–174 (2017) 40. S. Turkle, Alone together: Why We Expect More From Technology And Less From Each Other (Basic Books, New York, 2011) 41. D. Boyd, It’s Complicated. The Social Lives of Networked Teens (Yale University Press, New Haven, 2014) 42. L. Portwood-Stacer, Media refusal and conspicuous non-consumption. The performative and political dimensions of Facebook abstention. New Media Soc. 15(7), 1041–1057 (2012) 43. S.M. Baum, C.R. Critcher, The costs of not disclosing. Curr. Opin. Psychol. 31, 72–75 (2020) 44. L. Winner, Do artifacts have politics? in The Social Shaping of Technology, ed. by D. Mackenzie, J. Wajcman, (Open University Press, Maidenhead, 1999) 45. J. Vlieghe Education and world disclosure in the age of the screen, in Education in the age of the screen, ed. by N.  Vansieleghem, J.  Vlieghe, M.  Zahn, (Routledge, Abingdon-onThame, 2019) 46. N.J. Fast, A.S. Jago, Privacy matters… or does it? Algorithms, rationalization, and the erosion of concern for privacy. Curr. Opin. Psychol. 31, 44–48 (2020) 47. L. Floridi, The Philosophy of Information (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2011) 48. A. Sánchez-Rojo, J. Martín-Lucas, Educación y TIC: entre medios y fines. Una reflexión post-­ crítica [Education and ICT: between means and ends. A post-critical reflection]. Educação e Sociedade 42 (2021)

“Don’t Be Your Selfie”: The Pedagogical Importance of the Otherness in the Construction of Teenagers’ Identity Tania Alonso-Sainz

1  Introduction The title of this work is inspired by an advertisement1 that promotes a famous ice cream. The advertisement advocates for Gen Z authenticity, with the following comments in voice-over while images of happy young people are shown: “I’m myself, I’m all my likes. I’m my reactions and my replies. I’m my blocks (all of them). I’m my followers and all the people I follow. I’m my filters, not only the virtual ones. I’m my stories, thousands, and thousands of different stories. I’m myself, not my selfie.2” The video ends with the slogan “made to be unique.” What can we say of this advertisement? Is it indicating something about the identity of young people? At a first glance, we realize that the advertisement distinguishes and, at the same time, relates the “real” identity and the virtual identity. “I’m myself, not my selfie” is a way of saying I am not what you see in my selfie, or, better, I am more than what you can see in my selfie. Secondly, the advertisement reminds us that nowadays technological identity is an inescapable part of the youths’ identity (“I’m my followers, and all the people I follow”). And finally, the slogan “made to be unique” brings us to the conceptualization of authenticity in This paper is part of the postdoctoral research project “Meaning, possibilities and limits of character education for teenagers and their teachers.” Reference: UNIRPOSTDOC2021.  Access to the advertisement created by the Agency Wunderman Thompson: https://www.youtube. com/watch?v=80-Or3Wo2A8. 2  Self-photographs. 1

T. Alonso-Sainz () UNIR, Madrid, Spain e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 J. M. Muñoz-Rodríguez (ed.), Identity in a Hyperconnected Society, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-85788-2_4

49

50

T. Alonso-Sainz

post-­modern3 era, where “being authentic” is related with “being unique,” that is, with the idea of being different, special. Then, to be unique (whatever unique means) is, in itself, considered as a positive aspect, something that adds great value to a person. In this work I will explore the construction of teenagers’ identity in the technological context they live in and develop their relationships with others. First, I will focus on the role of “the otherness” in the modern identity construction, using Charles Taylor’s work categories. Second, I will explore how this modern identity is built in teenagers focusing on their technological lives. In simple words we can formulate it like this: since our birth, our identity is  – explicitly or implicitly  – always build through encounters with others. That is why philosophers, along history and across different traditions of philosophical thought, talk about the impact of otherness on our self or on our identity. Social media changes the way we relate with others, so the construction of the identity must be unavoidably affected in some way. Thirdly, I will research the promotion of “selfies” on social media and its impact in the category of otherness, in the construction of identity, as well as its pedagogical implications. In the last part of the article, I will also say something about the role of the teacher in this increasingly technological identity of teenagers. Social media are many and of many types. In this article I am going to focus on Instagram, for two reasons: because it is the most widely used social media by young people between 16 and 23 years of age4 and because it is the social media that attracts most new users each year according to 2020 statistics from IEB School.5 In 2017, Everson [1] showed that there were 800 million active users on Instagram, reaching 1 billion in 2021, according to the available statistics.6 Social media is divided into different types [2]: blogs, social network sites (SNSs), content communities, collaborative projects, virtual game worlds, and virtual social worlds. Instagram is classified (like Facebook) as SNSs. Instagram is an online, mobile phone photo-sharing, video sharing, and SNS that enables its users to take pictures and then share them on other platforms [3]. On Instagram, users create hashtags (#) so that other users can easily find what they like. It is similar to Facebook in some respects, but it differs in offering several filters that allow users to change the resolutions and color of the pictures they post. Now, let us move on to the understanding of otherness in the construction of identity, as I have previously mentioned.

 I will use the terms “modern” and “postmodern” indistinctly to refer the actual time of nowadays.  According to the dictionary, a teenager is a person aged between 13 and 19 years old, so this is the reason to pick Instagram as the focus of this research on teenager’s identity. 5  Access to key data on social media. https://www.iebschool.com/blog/medios-sociales-mas-­ utilizadas-redes-sociales/ 9th December 2020. 6  Access to number of monthly active Instagram users from January 2013 to June 2018. https:// www.statista.com/statistics/253577/number-of-monthly-active-instagram-users/ 27th January 2021. 3 4

“Don’t Be Your Selfie”: The Pedagogical Importance of the Otherness…

51

2  “ I’m Myself and All My Likes”: The Role of Otherness in Modern Identity Construction To explain the role of otherness in the construction of identity, a good place to start is looking at humans as “language animals” [4]. Far from the number of philosophers that assert that language is a tool that humans use to describe reality, code, decode, and communicate, I support the work of Buber [5], Gadamer [6], Oakeshott [7], and Taylor [4, 8, 9] among others, who defend that language is not just a tool but that it shapes human experience and gives us meaning to the world in a shared practice of speech and conversation. The first interesting feature of understanding human beings as language animals is the fact that language is a shared practice. That is something that cannot be achieved by oneself. If language is one (or the most fundamental) of the human being’s traits, then we already understand or intuit the importance of otherness in the construction of the person, that is, in the construction of identity. The conversation is not merely a communication, a dialogue, or an exchange of information but a way to become human, a way to interpret ourselves and the world we live in. When talking of the self, the identity, and the configuration of the personhood, many philosophers have pointed out the metaphor of the conversation to resist the image of people creating their personhood via inwardness, self-reflection, and solitude, emphasizing the importance of the other (otherness) in the construction of our identity. Oakeshott has the conversation as the philosophical ethos of his work. In 1959, he said: «conversation is the appropriate image of human intercourse —appropriate because it recognizes the qualities, the diversities, and the proper relationships of human utterances. As civilized human beings, we are the inheritors, neither of an inquiry about ourselves and the world, nor of an accumulating body of information, but of a conversation» [7]

And regarding education, he said: «Education, properly speaking is an initiation into the skill and partnership of this conversation in which we learn to recognize the voices, to distinguish the proper occasions of utterance, and in which we acquire the intellectual and moral habits appropriate to conversation» [7]

As we can read in the Oakeshott quotes, we are human beings to the extent that we participate in a conversation in which we learn to recognize different voices of different importance. In that conversation we learn a series of intellectual and moral habits that enable us (here education comes into play) to take part in this conversation in an increasingly active way. In this conversation we acquire an idea of what the world is and an interpretation of who we are in the course of our history. Through language we are initiated into the human and humanizing adventure, through discernment, says Taylor, that is, through qualitative and normative distinctions about what is good, what is bad, what is ugly, what is pleasant, what gives fear, what is worthwhile, what to discard, etc. The meaning that a hug has for me, for example, is a shared meaning; it is, says Taylor, the meaning of a hug for us [8, 9].

52

T. Alonso-Sainz

In the same way, the value that I give to myself, the interpretation that I make of myself, is built through the value that others give me and the interpretation that others make of me. Later we will dwell on alterity in the technological or virtual world, but, for now, we can leave the following questions opened: Who are “the others” on social media? How does the image that they have of me influence me? Does the virtual world blur a good construction of my identity? What is the advertisement mentioned at the beginning of the chapter referring to when it says “I am myself and all my likes”? To what extent can a person build her identity from the image that her followers have of him or her on social media? How do we build our identity through language in a virtual world based on images? How does the social media platform Instagram impact the construction of identity in the context of a language based on “likes,” short written comments, and images? As we read in Taylor’s last quotation, language is not static but takes shape and changes through conversation. When we say that we receive language throughout childhood, it would be more correct to say that we are introduced into an ongoing conversation, into the conversation of a community: a community that not only creates and shapes its language, but the language itself generates the community. Can digital language (likes, comments, images) have the same status as analog language (face-to-face conversations) in the construction of our identity? What differences exist between the digital or technological community that is generated on social networks and the communities of friends, families, and neighbors? Because language is given to us by others in the early stages of our lives and only with others it is transformed throughout it, we know that we are beings of a dialogic nature, and this data is an ontological feature of the human being. Later on, I will explore to what extent, and in what way, technologies (specifically social media) affect this dialogic nature of human beings. The most interesting point that Taylor makes in relation to the dialogical nature of the human being is the emphasis on identifying as fallacious the idea that identity is discovered, uniquely and mainly, by searching within ourselves and talking to ourselves as the only source of our self. Therefore, the dynamics of identity confirms that we are with others, that is, that our identity is dialogical, not monological. We see it better in the following quotation: Thus my discovering of my own identity doesn’t mean that I work it out in isolation, but that I negotiate it through dialogue, partly overt, partly internal, with others. […] My own identity crucially depends on my dialogical relation with others [8].

This quote from Taylor is central to this work. Let’s examine it more closely. When we are talking about the identity of adolescents, the first piece of information we have is that identity cannot be worked in isolation. At the same time, we know that a large part of their time and relationships are spent in the virtual world. Therefore, it is easy to conclude that a large part of teenager’s identity is built on the interactions they have on social media. On the other hand, numerous research (as we will see in the next section of this chapter), confirm that the type of interactions between adolescents that occur on the social media does not generate their well-being [10] but tends to lead to narcissism,

“Don’t Be Your Selfie”: The Pedagogical Importance of the Otherness…

53

anxiety, and superficiality. In this sense, social media not only affect their modern way of living, but they directly affect the construction of their identity, that is, the interpretation they make about who they are, the value they have, the things they prefer, and the goals they set. A second piece of information we gather from the Charles Taylor’s quote is that our identity is negotiated through dialogue with others. A dialogue that is sometimes external and other times internal. The dialogue in Taylor’s work should not be taken only in its strict and literal sense, because it encompasses a wide range of interactions or encounters that can be real or imaginary, such as internal conversations with people that we do not have in front of us right now. For example, when a teacher is delivering a course for the first time, he may wonder what his most admired teacher would say about how he reacted in front of a class to a child who has challenged him. They are imaginary conversations that can occur with people who have passed away or people who have not been born. What would I tell my grandson about my adolescence? We also dialogue with the family, parents, grandparents, and siblings with authors of books or characters from novels, series, or movies that have impacted us and who become interlocutors. In another part of his work, Taylor explains that these others with whom we dialogue to build our identity are the “significant others.” In a simple way, we can say that the “significant others” are those important interlocutors in our lives. Taylor says that we need the “significant others” who introduce us to language in a broad sense, which is the world of meanings. This introduction does not simply occur at the beginning of our lives but throughout it [9]. For this reason, we cannot discover our identity in solitary walks and meditations in intimacy, because even in those moments we are dialoguing with others. And this is the case throughout our lives. There is no kind of “mature stage” in which we no longer need others. At the beginning of our life, these significant others would be our parents, later our friends, and later those that we choose. But what happens in the image society? What happens on social media as the greatest exponent of the image society? It happens that on many occasions there are “others” that we would not want to be important or “significant,” but in fact they are. A simple example of this is the inability of a teenager (or an adult) not to feel bad about a negative comment he has received on social media from someone he does not even know, someone who has never seen his face. This simple example confirms for us that there is something that has changed in our freedom to choose these “significant others” in the technological era. In this sense, our inner life is always a polyphony of conversations with other people. Therefore, to say who I am is to point beyond myself, to point to my relationships with significant others, to my network of interlocutors, to my dialogue partners who help me to constitute my identity, as explained clearly here. This is the sense in which one cannot be a self on one’s own. I am a self only in relation to certain interlocutors: in one way in relation to those conversation partners who were essential to my achieving self-definition, in another in relation to those who are now crucial to my continuing grasp of languages of self-understanding – and, of course, these classes may overlap. A self exists only within what I call “webs of interlocution” [9].

54

T. Alonso-Sainz

This ontological understanding of being in dialogue is today considered as revolutionary, since modern contemporary philosophy wants to emphasize individual freedom, autonomy, and independence. The self-made human being is the image of the modern human being. Freedom, autonomy, and independence are modern ideals associated with an image of the human being who is responsible for himself, who thinks for himself, and who has overcome dependence on others. However, as we saw in the last-­ mentioned quote, this image of the independent being is simply an illusion, or, rather, it is an independence that can only be achieved to a certain degree. One is independent and free to exchange some “networks of interlocutors” for others with which one continues to understand oneself and reality. Despite this, according to Taylor, existing within a network of interlocutions is an inescapable ontological feature of the human being [11]. Let’s say that the real independence is the choice of the dependencies we want. The ontological dimension of the human being as a “dialogical being of social nature” opens up numerous questions of the technological identity of teenagers we are exploring in this chapter. Now that we know that dependence on and influence of others are inevitable traits of identity construction, we understand that it is not possible to avoid the influence of our digital relationships. In the technological world or virtual world in which the greatest number of daily communications takes place, what role does otherness play? When Taylor wrote in the late 1980s about the “language community” that configures us, is our social media the new language community that makes sense of reality and build up our identity? With the COVID-19 pandemic, the number of virtual interactions has increased exponentially [12]. At the same time, the image that is offered on social media exacerbates the possibility of superficiality. Social media also offers the possibility of showing a different image from who we (really) are. What are the implications of this? What happens when the main community is the digital one? What happens when the main space of interlocutions occurs on social media, that is, a place where we are more able to project an image of ourselves that is not the real one?7 From an educational point of view, how can we offer young people the possibility of constructive relationships, real dialogues? Note that this is especially important now, once we have understood that the dialogical nature of the human being is an ontological trait; that means that not addressing this dimension is directly related with the construction of our identity. For now, I leave these questions noted, which I will try to answer later. In conclusion, so far we have established that (1) the construction of my own identity has to do with others; (2) the construction of identity in today’s youth occurs mainly on social media; (3) on social media there are “significant others” that very often are not chosen, but somehow imposed; and (4) building healthy relationships in the 7  It seems important to me to point out that the possibility of showing a false version of ourselves was not born with technology, or with social networks, although the technological dynamics itself favors the dissociation between the real self and the projected self. After a screen, after a built profile, it is easier to make up the identity.

“Don’t Be Your Selfie”: The Pedagogical Importance of the Otherness…

55

social network is not a trivial matter but affects the construction of identity, understanding identity as the understanding we have about ourselves, our goals, our preferences, and our values. In the next section, we are going to research another part of the advertisement’s slogan: “made to be unique.” This slogan is closely related to the modern idea of being different. As we will see below, many recent studies have linked the phenomenon of projecting our image and expressing ourselves as different and special through social media to narcissism.

3  “ Made to Be Unique”: The Value of Difference in Modern Era and the Risk of Narcissism Human beings of all times have always wanted to understand themselves. But they differ in the way they do it. Nowadays, self-knowledge does not mean the search for human nature but the knowledge of myself, different from the self of the person next to me. In this sense, Taylor says: We seek self-knowledge, but this can no longer mean just impersonal lore about human nature, as it could for Plato. Each of us has to discover his or her own form. We are not looking for the universal nature; we each look for our own being. Montaigne therefore inaugurates a new kind of reflection which is intensely individual, a self-explanation, the aim of which is to reach self-knowledge by coming to see through the screens of self-delusion which passion or spiritual pride have erected. It is entirely a first-person study, receiving little help from the deliverances of third person observation, and none from “science” [9]. The question of identity is thus circumscribed to a specific field of interest and a premise: “each person has his or her own original way of being” [9], and thus asking about identity is the question of each of the identities of each person. Thus, the notions of difference, originality, and diversity emerge intertwined in our culture of authenticity [11]. Although it is true that authenticity is, basically, self-referential, since it seeks that the person, in their difference, carry out their life plans, their orientations, and be faithful to them, this may lead to the content of that purpose be the person himself, his selfhood. It is a culture of tranquility, a culture at peace with itself “because on any reading it is exactly in theory what it is in practice” [11]. We contemplate here the total absence of tension between the ideal, the objective, the challenge, and what de facto happens in practice. When there is no tension between the ideal and the practice (because they totally coincide), we should realize that we are probably facing the culture of narcissism, which establishes its individualistic solipsistic theory without the need to confront others, with the past, with the future, with the external, with the not-me. For personal development, this expression simply requires to delve into yourself, make decisions, and act. Only. No constrictions. No need for reasons.

56

T. Alonso-Sainz

The incentives to disengage are clear: break ties with others, with the past, with established conventions and norms. These motivations have always existed. They are not a feature of modernity or the technological age. For example, there has always been a tension between what it would take to develop a professional career and what children demand or between what is received and what I want to build. The conflict of demands is not new; the difference is “the relatively greater ease with which these external constraints can now be dismissed or delegitimated” [11]. That is to say, the modern difference is that now there is only room for reflection on whether that moral choice is genuine, authentic, really yours. The path is not discernment but a break with the old. This fracture with the external, the old, and the given is the break with otherness, which is presented in modernity as an inexorable way to be authentic. This is what Professor Garrocho was referring to in a recent article when he said that “wherever we look there will be a slogan encouraging us to be ourselves, but this invitation to accept ourselves as we are, is either redundant or a plea in favor of a narcissistic authenticity” [13]. Among the various educational manifestations, a current pedagogical trend is not to tell a child if his drawing is beautiful or ugly, because the fact that he has expressed himself and is true to himself is a pedagogical achievement. In this situation, if the child has expressed his self, free from external pressures, there is a totality and unity that go beyond any dispute between desire and morality. This expressivist aesthetic loyalty to oneself constitutes an independent goal, which has its own telos, since it expresses a good and a satisfaction. In the same way, the innovative teacher is not the one who discerns the best method but the one who creates a new one, evoking the passage from art as imitation to art as expression. Thus, the goal is not to imitate the best pedagogies and reject the bad ones (innovation as discernment) but to create new learning methodologies (innovation as creation). Adolescents have matured in a digitalized society with an increasing use of technology and social media. This fact has created interest in the academic work, so researchers have mapped the link between the use of social media and outcomes of well-being as well as the link between the social media and the tendency to narcissism [2, 14–18]. Narcissism can be defined as a “personality trait than entails a person having an exaggerated self-concept, a high level of self-importance, and a desire to be admired” [19]. Some traits of a narcissist person are as follows: (i) they think they are better than other people, special, and unique [20]; (ii) they prefer shallow relationships, so online communications fit them better given that they have total control over their self-presentation, which means that they can show themselves in many and different ways [21]; (iii) narcissists are more inclined to engage in photo-sharing activities on SNSSs, and this is related with the fact that they post more personal photographs that accentuate their attractiveness, as an “online hall of mirrors” [22]; and (iv) they have strong self-focus, feeling of entitlement, they want to gain admiration and promote their esteem establishing dominance over others. In summary, they are dependent on obtaining affirmation and appraisal from their relationships [2].

“Don’t Be Your Selfie”: The Pedagogical Importance of the Otherness…

57

Even if no causal relationships can be established, there is a negative relationship between the use of social media and the well-being of adolescents [23]. However, gender and the profile of the individuals should be taken into consideration to reach some conclusions [24–26]. Even if our focus is on adolescents, it is interesting to note that the findings about narcissism related to the use of Facebook also apply to adults. A recent research raised the question “is Facebook usage linked to narcissism?” [15], and in an experimental study it was concluded that Facebook activities, like commenting, posting status updates, updating the profile picture, or viewing photos, were significantly linked to narcissism. This study found that the frequency of these activities was a good predictor of narcissism. In a study of 2016, Sheldon and Bryant [16] pointed to the research of Buffardi and Campbell [19], who argued that narcissists use Instagram because they function well in the context of shallow relationships and highly controlled environments, where they have complete power over self-presentation. This study also makes an important contribution to understanding age and contextual indicators to predict why and how a person chooses to create and uses Instagram, and all that relates with narcissistic conduct. Some of the important findings of the study were the following ones: (i) life satisfaction negatively predicted the use of Instagram to appear cool; (ii) surveillance (or knowledge about others) is the main reason for using Instagram; and (iii) control predisposition significantly influences peoples’ motives for interaction with others. An interesting study from 2017 investigated the hypothesis that taking selfies was related to narcissistic behaviors. The results were not as expected. While the researchers hoped to find data demonstrating that posting selfies was linked to narcissistic traits, the research concluded that there is no evidence of a causal relationship. The results did show that the tendency to post many selfies is related to the need or desire to gain audience and feedback on the image of oneself [18]. This leads us to an interesting question, which we have called “the truth and lies of selfies.” The truth about selfies is closely linked to what we have discovered in the previous sections. That is, we are beings of a dialogic nature who build our identity with others. That is, far from being a simply narcissistic banal behavior, the tendency to post a large number of selfies points to a great truth: the human being has the ontological trait of needing another (alterity) to help him define his identity. The big lie, or the great danger associated with this, is that in social networks, as we have seen previously, relationships are superficial and the images that we can show of ourselves can vary. That is to say, in the technological world, the possibility of portraying the image that we think will be liked and will be affirmed and recognized by others is more likely. A physical trait of human beings that can be useful to explore is thinking that the only part of ourselves that we cannot see is our face. This helps us to understand our need for otherness. If we understand that the other is the most significant thing about us (the image of our whole body that distinguishes us the most), then we verify the need we have for another to reveal our identity to us.

58

T. Alonso-Sainz

In this way, the “selfie,” with all its risks and dangers, must be understood not so much as a tendency to narcissism but as the human desire or need to be looked at, recognized, and affirmed by others, not in a pathological way but as an ontological human need.

4  Conclusion At the beginning of this work, we have asked ourselves what implications the use of social networks has on the construction of the identity of adolescents. To answer this, we have used the work of Charles Taylor. We have discovered that the role of otherness in the construction of our identity is an ontological feature of the human being. We have also seen that being authentic in modernity, unlike in other times, has been related to the value of our difference. Later, we have seen that the identity of adolescents is completely influenced by social networks and specifically by Instagram, which is a social network with certain peculiarities. In this virtual world, we have found that it is more difficult to choose the “significant others.” At the same time, in today’s society, the importance of discovering your own identity, detaching yourself from the image that others have of you, leaving the opinions of others behind, as if that were possible, is insisted upon. Recent research shows the insistence on both trying to be “oneself,” “discovering one’s identity,” and “using social networks well” as well as “discovering the link between narcissistic tendencies and the massive use of social networks, specifically about posting selfies.” However, thanks to Taylor’s work, we can conclude that social networks point to a characteristic that is inherent to the structure of the human being, that is, digital activity on Instagram is completely related to the need for otherness that all human beings have to build our identity. The pedagogical challenge is in the work that teachers have to do to reveal the need that hides behind each selfie of each adolescent. In this discovery, the great challenge is to help them choose those “significant others” that help them build their real identity, to accept themselves as they are (without filters), and to improve themselves every day so as not to indulge themselves.

References 1. C. Everson, Instagram says it now has 800 million users, up 100 million since April. CNBC.com (2017). Retrieved from https://www.cnbc.com/2017/09/25/how-­many-­users-­doesinstagram-­ have-­now-­800-­million.html 2. L. Leung, R. Zhang, Narcissism and social media use by children and adolescents, in Internet Addiction in Children and Adolescents: Risk Factors, Assessment, and Treatment, ed. by K. S. Young, C. N. de Abreu, (Springer Publishing Co, New York, 2017), pp. 47–64

“Don’t Be Your Selfie”: The Pedagogical Importance of the Otherness…

59

3. D. Frommer. Here’s how to use Instagram. Business Insider (2010, November 1). Retrieved from http://www.businessinsider.com/instagram-­2010-­11?op¼1 4. C. Taylor, The Language Animal. The Full Shape of the Human Linguistic Capacity (Harvard University Press, Harvard, 2016) 5. M. Buber, Yo y tú (Caparrós, Madrid, 1993) 6. H.G. Gadamer, Philosophical Hermeneutics (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1976) 7. M. Oakeshott, The Voice of Poetry in the Conversation of Mankind (Bowes & Bowes, Londres, Reino Unido, 1959) 8. C.  Taylor, Philosophical Papers I: Human Agency and Language (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1985) 9. C.  Taylor, Sources of the self, in The Making of the Modern Identity, (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 1989) 10. A. Orben, Teenagers, screens and social media: A narrative review of reviews and key studies. Soc. Psychiatry Psychiatr. Epidemiol. 55(4), 407–414 (2020) 11. C. Taylor, The Ethics of Authenticity (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 1991) 12. R.M. Viner, S.J. Russell, H. Croker, J. Packer, J. Ward, C. Stansfield, R. Booy, School closure and management practices during coronavirus outbreaks including COVID-19: A rapid systematic review. Lancet Child Adolesc. Health 4(5), 397–404 (2020) 13. D. Garrocho, No te aceptes (tal y como eres) (2021, July 2nd). Retrieved from: https://ethic. es/2021/07/no-­te-­aceptes-­tal-­y-­como-­eres-­ser-­uno-­mismo/ 14. S.T.  Hawk, R.J. van den Eijnden, C.J. van Lissa, T.F. ter Bogt, Narcissistic adolescents’ attention-­seeking following social rejection: Links with social media disclosure, problematic social media use, and smartphone stress. Comput. Hum. Behav. 92, 65–75 (2019) 15. T. Alloway, R. Runac, M. Quershi, G. Kemp, Is Facebook linked to selfishness? Investigating the relationships among social media use, empathy, and narcissism. Soc. Netw. 3, 150–158 (2014) 16. P. Sheldon, K. Bryant, Instagram: Motives for its use and relationship to narcissism and contextual age. Comput. Hum. Behav. 58, 89–97 (2016) 17. C.  James, K.  Davis, L.  Charmaraman, S.  Konrath, P.  Slovak, E.  Weinstein, L.  Yarosh, Digital life and youth well-being, social connectedness, empathy, and narcissism. Pediatrics 140(Supplement 2), 71–75 (2017) 18. C.T. Barry, S.R. Reiter, A.C. Anderson, M.L. Schoessler, C.L. Sidoti, “Let me take another selfie”: Further examination of the relation between narcissism, self-perception, and Instagram posts. Psychol. Pop. Media Cult. 8(1), 22–33 (2019) 19. L.E. Buffardi, W.K. Campbell, Narcissism and social networking web sites. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 34(10), 1303–1314 (2008) 20. P. Sheldon, in Self-monitoring and narcissism as predictors of sharing Facebook photographs. Presented at the southern states communication association conference, Tampa: FL (2015) 21. A.M. Manago, M.B. Graham, P.M. Greenfield, G. Salimkhan, Self-presentation and gender on MySpace. J. Appl. Dev. Psychol. 29(6), 446–458 (2008) 22. C.  James, K.  Davis, L.  Charmaraman, S.  Konrath, P.  Slovak, E.  Weinstein, L.  Yarosh, Digital life and youth well-being, social connectedness, empathy, and narcissism. Pediatrics 140(Supplement 2), S71–S75 (2017) 23. P. Verduyn, O. Ybarra, M. Résibois, J. Jonides, E. Kross, Do social network sites enhance or undermine subjective well-being? A critical review. Social Network Sites Subject. Well-Being 11(1), 274–302 (2017) 24. E. Frison, S. Eggermont, Exploring the relationships between different types of Facebook use, perceived online social support, and adolescents’ depressed mood. Soc. Sci. Comput. Rev. 34(2), 153–171 (2016) 25. A. Orben, T. Dienlin, A.K. Przybylski, Social media’s enduring effect on adolescent life satisfaction. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 116(21), 10226–10228 (2019) 26. J.M.  Twenge, T.E.  Joiner, M.L.  Rogers, G.N.  Martin, Increases in depressive symptoms, suicide-related outcomes, and suicide rates among US adolescents after 2010 and links to increased new media screen time. Clin. Psychol. Sci. 6(1), 3–17 (2017)

Truth in a Hyperconnected Society: Educate, an Outlandish Answer to the Post-truth Phenomenon Bianca Thoilliez

1  Introduction Post-truth can be defined as an assertion of ideological supremacy by which to try to persuade someone about something no matter the available evidence [1–3]. Knowing what the truth is may cause a rift in opinions, but it should not stop mattering. We, both individually and collectively, should care for and about truths and the search for them [4]. The debate on the crisis of determining truth in the democratic public space began in the professional domain of journalism [5] and is impossible to understand without considering the technologies that have made it possible. In this chapter I will examine the sources of the political dimension of the problem as well as how the social media have multiplied and exacerbated the problem. However, I am also particularly interested in the pedagogical dimension of the matter. I aim to point out the main obstacle the post-truth phenomenon poses to teaching and, from there, to consider how to respond to the conditions post-truth creates in educational situations. I will begin by encompassing the problematic relationship between the search for truth and political practice and the place post-truth practices hold in that relationship. I will then go to explore how essential social media are to understanding the workings and scope of post-truth practices. From there, I recreate three post-truth scenarios in which education becomes impossible. The chapter concludes with two very basic but nonetheless outlandish ideas in the current context: that the pedagogical dimension of the post-truth problem must be taken on in pedagogical terms and that education is only possible if it is practiced affirmatively.

B. Thoilliez () Departament of Pedagogy, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Madrid, Spain e-mail: [email protected]

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 J. M. Muñoz-Rodríguez (ed.), Identity in a Hyperconnected Society, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-85788-2_5

61

62

B. Thoilliez

2  T  he Search for Truths and Political Practices, a Complicated Relationship The first documented contemporary political act of post-truth is the episode in which Vladimir Putin, when asked about the filmed footage of Russian tanks crossing the Ukraine border, denied that he was invading Ukrainian territory. Other major moments soon followed, and it certainly did not all start with the American elections in 2016: the denial of scientifically grounded facts such as the theory of evolution so as to favor a literal reading of Genesis to explain the origin of the world and the different species on it, the movement of families opposed to vaccination campaigns under the suspicions of a worldwide plot to enrich the pharmaceutical lobby and as the cause of autism in children, or the denial of the climate emergency by claiming the planet is warming up as part of normal geological cycles the Earth has been through many times already which are only a few examples of the widespread practice of denying the facts. The “post-” prefix designates not only “after” but also a change in context and meaning based on the awareness of a crisis, as if we could no longer locate the present we are living in. In her book La faiblesse du vrai. Ce que la post-vérité fait à notre monde commun, Myriam Revault d’Allonnes [6] offers a profound examination of the advent of the post-truth regime, from the urgency of gaining awareness of the nature and scope of the phenomenon in order to deflect its ethical and political effects. As Revault d’Allonnes [6] notes, post-truth goes far beyond the deconstruction began by the “masters of suspicion”: Nietzsche, Marx, and Freud. These three critical philosophers did not do away with the distinction between true and false; rather, they objected to the absolute and false nature of the truth understood as a universal norm. In contrast, post-truth refers to a gray area in which we no longer know if things are true or false. This is much more problematic than lying. The formula “post-truth” was used for the first time by the American essayist Ralph Keyes in 2004 and then proclaimed word of the year in the Oxford English Dictionary in 2016, after Brexit and Donald Trump’s election, two events that were rife with fake news. Post-truth is defined as that which is related to circumstances in which objective facts have less influence on the public than the ones that appeal to emotions or personal beliefs. It may be argued that propaganda and manipulation have always done the same. However, the Oxford dictionary adds that the very idea of truth has become indifferent and obsolete. This type of lie would be an essential break from the type of lie used, for example, in totalitarian regimes. In totalitarian systems, the combination of ideology and terror results in the systematic and consistent construction of a set of falsehoods that end up replacing reality. In contrast, in our democracies, the danger resides in the tendency toward the relativism of “anything goes.” Therefore, we can question fact-based truths, historical truths, events, what happened. Post-truth separates the facts from their objective reality in order to transform them into contingent opinions that anyone can hold as true. This situation undermines our ability to live together in a common world.

Truth in a Hyperconnected Society: Educate, an Outlandish Answer to the Post-truth…

63

Indeed, truth and politics have never been good bedmates. This idea is central to La faiblesse du vrai [6]. Politics always involves a degree of lying and manipulation. There has always been suspicious of the compatibility between the quest for truth and the undertakings of politics. As recalled by the French philosopher, the death of Socrates is one of the earliest examples of this poor pairing of truth with politics: for Plato there is a manifest incompatibility between the search for truth and the conditions in which politics is done. He does not reject politics; to the contrary, he considers that the city must trust whoever has the must trustworthy view: philosophers. Plato postulates the existence of a truth of ideas, of the intelligible world, that the sensible world (within which is politics) can only imperfectly imitate. His reading of the death of Socrates, who was condemned by a democratic city, represents the divorce between the truth and politics. Aristotle, however, viewed the problem differently. He made a distinction between the realm of science, defined by need, and the realm of human affairs, defined by contingency. So, Aristotle distinguished between the domain of rational truths on one hand and the contingent in human endeavors on the other, where matters are not determined necessarily. In his view, it is important to develop a truth specific to human affairs, or what he called “probable.” From this perspective, politics does not deduce from an ontology like that of truth. Rather, it is first and foremost an experience that has some qualities that resist any kind of conceptualization. Aristotle defines politics as deliberation among citizens capable of exercising their illustrated judgment. Indeed, this judgment is constructed out of debate or even through conflicting opinions. Later, modernity brought about a new way of understanding the relationship between truth and politics, divorcing it from ontological principles but also from Christian principles as well. This split is perfectly embodied in Machiavelli, who considers that although the Prince cannot always be virtuous, he should always appear to be virtuous. What matters to Machiavelli is the effective reality, linking action to appearance, since it is performed in the public space, which is a space only of appearance. The Prince needs to know how to act with the strength of a lion, as well as to proceed with the craftiness of a fox. However, the most important split, the one that sheds light on the advent of post-truth, is the introduction of factual truths, which are placed somewhere between rational truths and opinion and are shared experiences by the political body. These types of truths have always been particularly vulnerable but have become even more so in the age of globalized information and relativism, to the extent of being mistaken for opinions. In such a context, truth makes no sense. Revault d’Allonnes wonders, “Is post-truth politics not a new avatar of this immemorial conflict [between politics and truth], or is it a brand-new phenomenon?” [7]. A kind of perversion of what modernity, and particularly the Enlightenment, wanted to institute: the appeal to judgment founded on the result of deliberation and critical examination. Belief that plurality of opinions is a fundamental principle of democracy does not at all mean that all opinions are equal. In the face of this relativism, it is essential to consider that legitimate opinions are based on facts. But with “alternative facts,” this specific regime of truth disappears from politics. Indeed, populism and post-truth are certainly linked. In addition to their

64

B. Thoilliez

penchant for rewriting history, populist regimes also criticize those who “know,” the elites who, despite their fallibility, can tell the difference between true and false. But Revault d’Allonnes goes even further. As soon as we realize that the fundamental question of politics is not about truth, but about how we collectively develop judgments based on factual truths, we should ask: Are we in a world where the difference between true and false no longer matters? How can we keep building a “common world”? From this point of view, it seems easier to live in a totalitarian universe where individuals still have a “truth” they can refer to, even if it is completely detached from reality…. Then, everyone evolves in a world of permanent suspicion, where no one knows if the speaker is lying or not. This is the universe where truth becomes unimportant, where post-truth would be attacking the social imagination. It makes fiction, but unlike productive fiction (e.g., artistic or social), it does not enrich reality; it destroys it. What can be done? Systematically correct this false news item in the media? Vote for laws to control it? Some governments are considering legislating on post-truth. However, the risks this involves to democracies make one suspect that the remedy is worse than the disease. To this type of challenges, there can only be long-term solutions. Moreover, from an educational point of view, the aspiration should be to arm people intellectually enough to be able to recognize truths and reject falsehoods. As will be argued further on in the chapter, we should take action at schools and make citizens understand that politics is not about truth but about shared judgment. Each generation should be reminded about the value of democracy, despite its fragile, imperfect nature. The rise of populisms and their threat to democracy are a reality that to many [8, 9] is attributable to postmodern relativism: the idea that there are no objective facts but only interpretations is borrowed to attack scientific truths and proven causes of social phenomena for political gain.

3  Social Media as Amplifiers of Post-truth The post-truth scenario and its impact on how states of opinion are generated have spread and increased exponentially through technologies that give us new, multiple, and simultaneous ways to communicate and share information. The possibilities of thinking with, of, and about that information diminish as loops of likes and unlikes, loves and unloves, follows and unfollows increase. As Patrick Troude-Chastenet notes, for the fake news business model to work, it takes large intermediary platforms such as search engines (Google), social media (Facebook, Twitter, Instagram), and advertising networks (Google Ads). To a great extent, this makes them “if not political accomplices, at least economic collaborators with the fake news industry, because in the end, they are its main beneficiaries” [10]. And either way, the proliferation of data made available from numerous sources has not brought about the promised land of a democracy made stronger by well-informed publics and freer citizens. Instead, we have a progressive suspension of practices of thinking.

Truth in a Hyperconnected Society: Educate, an Outlandish Answer to the Post-truth…

65

In his essay The Twittering Machine, Richard Seymour [11] voices concerns and feelings that many users of social media have toward them. It is a common experience to grow an ambivalent love-hate relationship with social media made of our dependency or, as Seymour calls it, our addiction. The social networks have turned into a space that provides us with a continuous stream mixing news, opinions, and entertainment that inform our day-to-day life, opening us up to a recreation of the (problematic) public sphere, or perhaps shutting us up into it. A first reaction to this essay is an urge to delete every single social media account we have, for several reasons: a wish to spend our time on other matters, weariness, and saturation from the speed of news and the reactions to it, the frequent para-depressive feeling of tedium and anger generated by the social media’s amplification of an already depressing social and political context. On one hand, The Twittering Machine is a powerful critique of the material and discursive infrastructure of social media and of the social symptoms they make explicit and multiply. One of them is the need to generate contents to share compulsively on social media: the self-imposed need to write compulsively and reactively about the latest point of contention. Seymour introduces the problem of the materialness of writing understood as technology, and its historicalness, i.e., mutations in writing through different media and supports throughout history, which determine its subsequent uses and effects. Machines, supports, and media are not merely inert instruments; they are processors, generators, and transmitters of social relationships. The deeply materialistic approach of the book, however, does not focus only on the materiality of Internet understood as the monopoly of large corporations that manage these spaces or as the material infrastructure and technical instruments (cables, optical fibers, servers, storage systems, software codes, etc.). Seymour prefers to focus on matters regarding the social relationships that are generated, constructed, and maintained on social media. Perhaps because Marx insisted that the pure development of the forces of production (such as technologies) did not offer sufficient explanation. Thus, Seymour’s argument presents a devastatingly critical view of social media but without the habitual demonizing that tends to portray them as the utmost evil, a malign spirit that possesses us and controls us. Evil, like good, does not reside (or at least not fully) inside social media, but outside. The key always lies in the social relationships of production, in the social world that machines and their uses reflect, process, and generate around them. Seymour [11] focuses on questions regarding what he calls “social industry,” based mainly on the production and collection of data and of the objectification and quantification of social life in numerical form.1 In short, he focuses on all that machinery that ensnares us in a web made of time, attention, habits, and addiction. Of writing,2 “a practice that links human beings to machines in a configuration of 1  For further details on this point, one of the best works on the numericalization of our lives was written by Colin Koopman [12] (2019). 2  From there, The Twittering Machine unfolds in six chapters, each titled in first person plural “we all” followed by a list of figures and common behaviors on social media: “We are all connected,” “We are all addicts,” “We are all famous,” “We are all trolls,” “We are all liars,” “We are all dying” and the conclusion: “We are all writers.”

66

B. Thoilliez

relationships without which most of what we call civilization would be impossible” (p. 9). The object in Seymour’s crosshairs is the collective and thus political condition of these figures and logics. It is not about moral judgments based on criticizing individual behaviors. We are indeed not only all connected but also entangled in these logics and figures. Because of the social networks’ infrastructure, we all exercise and participate in them, at different times and to different degrees. Moreover, the “networks” are never really the problem. As Seymour repeatedly drives home, the social networks only reveal (and amplify) problems that already existed or exist before and/or outside them. If we are dependent on social networks, it is not (or not only) caused by the addictiveness of their design (production of dopamine, satisfaction from prizes in the forms of likes, as the more psychologistic analyses highlight) but because there was something, some emptiness, in our lives that social media has come to fill. In this way, The Twittering Machine builds a persuasive phenomenology of all the habits and effects our writings and ourselves experience on social media: the quest (like an addiction to gambling) for the tweet or post that will make us celebrities, the need to react to the latest controversy, emphatically showing our indignation, approval, or rejection. All this is done in an immense but perfectly calculable quantity of words, of time, of writing, and thus of work. Post-truth practices happen and grow out of this ecosystem. Some of the problems with social media can be explained by another classical Marxist opposition: use value versus exchange value. Take, for example, the word “content” and the special relevance it has acquired on the Internet. We constantly speak of the content we consume on the social media, not in terms of countable contents of singular items but as an infinite, uncountable substance that is constantly being created and circulated. Basically, the exchange value of content is overinflated on social media, where what matters is the continuous production and circulation of new content regardless of its use value. The production of constant novelty contrasts sharply with the slowness of learning it and discussing it. At the same time, the social networks individualize us as receptacles of symbolic capital: we are individuals who, like it or not, share what we do, we put it into circulation, hoping for others to react immediately; we accumulate connections, followers, likes, re-­ tweets. Seeking the best argument is far from being the main goal. In his conclusions, Seymour [11] resurrects the notion of acedia, a sad passion, close cousin of melancholy and apathy. Perhaps the monotony and confinement imposed by the pandemic have increased this feeling even more. Perhaps the multiplication of tasks involved in remote working in recent months has increased our screen time and thus our social media time. In a way, time loses its value and so, paradoxically even more time can be wasted on social media. This tedium, carelessness, and lack of self-value of life are the acedia that, accompanied by addiction, generate a writing of compulsive logics and a continual need or (self-) obligation to express oneself. Freedom of speech is now an obligation, an (self-) induced compulsion. You are free to express what you want, as long as you express something. Having to think it through before expressing it is not cool. One talks to the other only to self-assure, not to seek out something together, not to exchange arguments sincerely enough to be able to end a conversation convinced of

Truth in a Hyperconnected Society: Educate, an Outlandish Answer to the Post-truth…

67

something different from when it started. This nearly impermeable resistance to new ideas presents a horrifying challenge for any attempt at educating. Many people today live wrapped so tightly in their own beliefs that it becomes impossible to shed them. This applies to students as well. Everyone has the right to express their opinion, but that should not give each person the acknowledged right to have his or her own facts. Nor should there be a right to deny proven facts. Even without it being possible to have a universally shared knowledge of things, “shifting the question for truth to the question for the value of truth does not mean that everything is equally valid” [13]. Indeed, if everything is equally valid, then nothing has any worth. And education precisely and essentially consists of initiating the new generations in what we deem to be worthwhile. Education becomes impossible when the student remains in a position of cognitive impermeability, undervaluing the truth and epistemic concepts that underpin educational action such as “objectivity, consistency, impartiality, sincerity, contrasting beliefs (hypotheses or theories), respect for evidence, precision, and accuracy” [14]. An educated person must absorb the values contained in these concepts. And a teacher, especially on working at schools, should embody them and practice them.

4  W  ithout Trust in the Condition of Truthfulness, Education Is Impossible: Three Fables Without trust in the condition of truthfulness, education is impossible. Truthfulness is often considered to be an important moral value that must be put into practice in the course of public life. The word truthfulness, or veracity, is used to describe an opinion, judgment, or statement that bears a close relation with the truth and the truthful. In this way, truthfulness can be considered as a condition that must envelope any testimony or reasoning that claims to express a speaker’s stance or belief. This concept is thus closely associated with virtues such as sincerity and honesty, in opposition to lies and falseness. This is fundamental given that the truthfulness of an utterance reveals the speaker’s ability to tell the truth. In an educational setting, this translates to trusting that the one who maintains the educational communication (the teacher) has the ability and intention to make certain utterances. To make this point clearer, I offer here three different fables that tell stories through particular situations. Fulfilling Rorty’s invitation [15] of developing a philosophy (and, as I already transposed elsewhere, a pedagogy [16]) of detailed descriptions instead of a philosophy (and a pedagogy) of manuals and treatises, I tell a tale of three classroom situations that I believe can help us understand why education in times of post-truth is on the verge of becoming impossible. All three situations illustrate what teaching within a post-truth atmosphere really looks like.3 They further

3  All three keep a different relation with fiction and reality. Being the first one an adaptation of an expert from the short story “Comfort” written by the Canadian writer Alice Munro [19]. The second and third are reality-based stories.

68

B. Thoilliez

previous attempts [4, 17, 18] to practice educational stories out of preexistent fables and experiences, the sort of story-telling that as a pedagogue I believe can reinvigorate practices of truth-caring and trust-reenactment, and thereby to restore the conditions of truthfulness and trust that make education possible.

4.1  F  irst Fable: “Do You Think It Hurts Us to Hear the Other Side of the Story?” A biology teacher at a small high school in Anytown, Canada. Twenty years of teaching experience behind his belt. A while ago, advertisements in the town began cropping up bearing neo-Baptist messages, urging being reborn in Christ. Then came Creationist charts of Noah’s ark-based timelines forced to fit geological time, rates, and events. A series of conferences is scheduled at the town library: “Creation and Science: Learn how the Bible, the history book of the universe, provides the starting point for science.” A new student Bible study club is created. An email to the high school announcing a school trip to the “Creation Museum” in Petersburg, Kentucky. And one day in class: Student It’s not that we necessarily want the religious view, sir. It’s just that we wonder why you don’t give it equal time. Teacher Yes, well. It’s because I am here to teach you Science, not Religion. Student Do you think it hurts us to hear the other side of the story? Teacher If you want the religious interpretation of the world’s history, there is the Christian Separate School in the next town, which you are welcome to attend. Student If we get taught atheism, isn’t that sort of like teaching us some kind of religion? Teacher You know, I happen to be the boss in this classroom and I decide what will be taught. Student I thought God was the boss, sir.

4.2  S  econd Fable: “If You Make Me Study It, It May Change What I Think” A faculty of education that could be anywhere in Spain. Second year in a 4-year Bachelor of Arts program to become a primary school teacher. The end of the term draws near, as does the final exam. The coursework has alternated between teacher lectures and seminary-style readings. The subject is quite technical, although every technical aspect about education and its institutional dimension always involves asking questions requiring inner reflection. This item has been worked on throughout the semester. And one day in class:

Truth in a Hyperconnected Society: Educate, an Outlandish Answer to the Post-truth…

69

Student What’s going to be on the exam? Teacher Well, what was on the syllabus we gave you at the beginning of the course. The contents we’ve covered and the lessons and readings we’ve worked through. Student The readings, too? Teacher Yes, the readings, too. Student I’d rather they weren’t on the exam. I don’t think they should be on it. Teacher Is that so? Why not, if I may ask? Student What we covered in the lectures were more objective and followed the Board of Education directives, but the readings… Teacher Go on, I’m listening. Student They’re full of opinions, they’re interpretations. And it’s one thing if you make us read them and talk about them in class and another thing if we have to study the ideas. Teacher What’s the difference? Student Well, if you make me study it, it may change what I think.

4.3  Third Fable: “Because You Say So, Right?” A teacher at the primary school in a small ville somewhere in France. In a class in the last grade, they are studying the solar system. The planets, the satellites, the motion of the Earth. The teacher also brings up the problem of space debris, the DPS system, and the space race between the USA and the USSR in the 1960s and 1970s: human’s first trip to the Moon. The teacher is eager to give them a scientific way to view the world, to notice the sustained tension of steps forward and backward in the quest for knowledge and in technological achievements. And one day in class: Student Teacher Student Teacher Student Teacher Student Teacher

That’s not true. I beg your pardon? What you’re saying isn’t true. The Americans never landed on the Moon. What do you mean they never landed on the Moon? It’s all fake. They filmed it in a Hollywood studio. Wait, who told you that? No one. I saw it on TikTok. How they made the video and all that. But it’s not fake that Neil Armstrong was the first human to step on the Moon or that he traveled with Edwin F.  Aldrin in Apollo 11. That all really happened. Student Yeah…. Because you say so, right?

70

B. Thoilliez

5  A  ffirming the Essential Principles of Education to Keep It Possible These three fables are situations where education becomes impossible because of a rift in epistemic trust, a questioning of the veracity of the content the teachers are trying to go over with their students. All three stories overflow with resistance, in the psychoanalytical sense, to the intellectual mission of school. As Julian Baggini suggests, at school we can and should work with procedures and methods for discovering truths (principles of the scientific method, logical reasoning, principles of induction-deduction, the relationship between historical antecedents and consequences, etc.). However, before all that, there needs to be an attitude of cultivating epistemic virtues “such as modesty, skepticism, being open to other perspectives, the spirit of collective research, the disposition to upset those in power, the desire to create better truths and the willingness to let the facts guide or morality” [20]. This attitude, this willingness, and this inclination are what the post-truth climate seriously jeopardizes when it penetrates the conditions of educational possibility. The dangers can be discerned in these three open-ended fables that develop the hypothesis of what happens when the post-truth climate takes hold in our classrooms and what becomes of the possibilities for education. The tales reflect that the problems that arise are different from the conditions and consequences on the political stage. Perhaps that is also why it reveals the autonomy of pedagogical knowledge: post-­ truth generates distinctly educational problems, and therefore, as pedagogues it is up to us to come up with education-based answers. There are obstacles to teaching that are caused by the spread of the post-truth phenomenon, obstacles that require us to think of distinctly educational answers to address the post-truth conditions rather than political ones. It will be of little use to create Ministries of Truth, to hire worldwide fact-checking companies, or to overthrow the Zuckerberg Galaxy and restore the traditionalist Guttenberg Galaxy. Nor do we need state police to sniff out hoaxes and rumormongering or any other subjectivizing practices of post-censure [21, 22]. Education, of the essential [23], of what transcends criticism of its own potentialities [24–26], of resistance, liberation, and obstinacy [27, 28]. Affirming education in these post-truth times is an outlandish exercise, in the sense that teaching, as a way of cultivating the epistemic virtues mentioned above, turns out to be one of the most counter-hegemonic and counter-­ cultural acts we can perform. Truly trusting in the liberating powers of education, cultivating, and spreading important epistemic virtues such as intellectual honesty, open-mindedness, the love of knowledge, reflexivity, and meticulousness [29]. As concerns the social media and their power to amplify post-truth (perhaps best illustrated in the third fable), what can be done from the school side? Perhaps first is to reflect collectively on how we use social media and what for and how we might use them in other ways rather than being used by them. It starts with a necessarily collective conversation since it affects an increasingly important aspect of our lives together. The pedagogical dimension of the problem cannot be reduced to a well-­ meant choice of better manners or individual attitudes toward social networking.

Truth in a Hyperconnected Society: Educate, an Outlandish Answer to the Post-truth…

71

Rather, it should teach students questions such as these: What do we want to do on/ with social media? How do we want to spend our time and use our writing? What for? What spaces do we want to build? What practices and habits do we need to foster? Where and how do we get information? What conditions of truthfulness differentiate a TikTok video from an encyclopedia? The educational answer is not to expel but to appeal on them to the collective logic. We must open and participate in collective spaces capable of generating contents, with new information to spread and new things to learn. We must insist that it does not only involve the use of data and facts but of finding and generating shared meanings (and subjecting them to the epistemological conditions of each curricular discipline). This may perhaps let us articulate new narratives and meanings to what happens to us and through us while also providing logics of cooperation and collaboration capable of rebuilding an organic meaning of the spaces where our students participate on the Internet. As pedagogues, the increase of young people in our classes who are dragged down by anti-scientific ideas (the first fable), locked into cycles of self-confirmation of their own points of view (the second fable), or lulled by their inability to differentiate between sources of authority (the third fable) requires us to affirm the basic principles and missions of education. In another article I maintained that two ways to fight against this situation are to affirm fallibility and pluralism: to value truths over falsehoods and the fallible and shared search for the former, the open, attentive, and plural study of problems [4]. To them I would now like to add a third direction: to delve deeper into initiating students in thematically rich learning contents of longstanding tradition [30]. And I maintain that this can and must be done from within each discipline itself, from the deep understanding of its tradition, of the forms of knowledge that operate in it and the epistemic virtues that it can sow on the path to the students’ intellectual development. In a recent work, Robert Eaglestone points out the importance of recognizing the different ways of knowing that each curricular discipline demands or has greater potential for developing in the classroom. To go from a student-centered teaching to one not just centered on the discipline alone, but on a “disciplinary awareness/conscience” in which each discipline has its place, on account of the structural conditions of the forms of its knowledge and discovery of its truths. Thus, in the classical Aristotelian division about the way of knowing, the sciences promote the episteme and sophia, whereas the humanities approach the experience of the techne and phronesis. In practical terms, this would imply, for instance, that we calculate an equation but we deliberate on the meaning of a poem or that we follow deductive rules in a chemical experiment but we adapt models and examples to write an essay; we gather information and data, but we “get” meanings. “Thinking your way around a situation in life, deliberating it with your friends, is not the same as discovering the mathematical truths about the circumference of a circle. It involves values, other people, decisions that are judgments and not calculations, uncertainties” [31]. A curriculum centered on cultivating the different disciplinary ways of knowing accepts that what is important in the different areas and fields is not their conversion to professionalizing competencies but the strengthening of the intellectual, physical, aesthetic, and moral dispositions that each discipline aims to develop.

72

B. Thoilliez

Working in this way, I believe, may make school settings a good space to resist the post-truth climate and its dangers. Lies are with the heart of totalitarian states, which are always tempted to falsify what is real. The post-truth that emerges and spreads through our contemporary democratic societies comes from a blurring of the borders between what is true and what is false. It bears witness to a new phenomenon, an attitude of indifference to truth. Even beyond politics, relativism (anything goes), present in our society for a long time, had largely laid the groundwork for the advent of alternative facts and other fake news. Post-truth threatens the very possibility of a shared world by undermining the existence of a reality common to human plurality. And schools are on the front line of this cultural battle. Since one of the first tasks of schools is to transmit scientific and factual truths, our inherited symbolic and intellectual heritage [32, 33], it also has the task of teaching the citizens to be active agents in the public debate such that they can have a well-honed criterion for differentiating between voices as more or less expert, for recognizing and assessing arguments as better or worse, proposals as being more or less plausible. These two missions are not separate, because only in the context of a shared culture can political controversies be possible and useful. Schools only fulfill their democratizing promises insofar as they teach what is worth being taught on the twin road of preserving what is valuable and individual and collective emancipation. Acknowledgments  The ideas in this chapter are the fruit of work and discussions underway in the framework of the research project “Difference, Tolerance, and Censure in Europe: Freedom of speech in contemporary public discourse” (SI1/PJI/2019-0) as well as the project #LobbyingTeachers: Theoretical foundations, political structures, and social practices in the public-­private relations in matters of teachers in Spain” (PID2019-104566RA-I00/AEI/https://doi. org/10.13039/501100011033). My most sincere gratitude to the members of the project “The hyper-connected identity of youth and their perception of time in digital leisure” (PGC2018-097884-­ B-I00) for their invitation to contribute and share with them in this volume.

References 1. L. McIntyre, Post-Truth (Cambridge: MIT, 2018) 2. H.G. Frankfurt, On Bullshit (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2005) 3. H.G. Frankfurt, On Truth (Random House, 2006) 4. B. Thoilliez, ‘Making Education Possible Again’: Pragmatist Experiments for a Troubled and Down-to-Earth Pedagogy. Educ. Theory 62(1), in press (2022) 5. E.  Herreras, M.  García-Granero, Sobre verdad, mentira y posverdad. Elementos para una filosofía de la información [About truth, lies and post-truth. Elements for an information philosophy]. Bajo Palabra, II, 24, (2020) 6. M. Revault d’Allonnes, La Faiblesse du vrai. Ce que la post-vérité fait à notre monde commun [The Weakness of Truth. What Post-truth Does to Our Common World] (Paris: Seuil, 2018) 7. M. Revault d’Allonnes, La Faiblesse du vrai. Ce que la post-vérité fait à notre monde commun [The Weakness of Truth. What Post-truth Does to Our Common World] (Paris: Seuil, 2018), p. 363 8. J. García del Muro, ‘Good bye’, verdad. Una aproximación a la posverdad [‘Good Bye’ Truth. An Approach to Post-truth] (Barcelona: Milenio, 2019) 9. M. Ferraris, Manifesto of New Realism (New York: SUNY Press, 2014)

Truth in a Hyperconnected Society: Educate, an Outlandish Answer to the Post-truth…

73

10. P. Troude-Chastenet, Fake news et post-vérité. De l’extension de la propagande au Royaume-­ Uni, aux États-Unis et en France [Fake news and post-truth. On the extension of propaganda to the UK, the US and France]. Quaderni. Communication, technologies, pouvoir, 96, (2018) 11. R.  Seymour, The Twittering Machine (La máquina de trinar) (Madrid: Akal (Kindle edition), 2020) 12. C. Koopman: How We Became Our Data. A Genealogy of the Informational Person (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2019) 13. E.  Herreras, M.  García-Granero, Sobre verdad, mentira y posverdad. Elementos para una filosofía de la información [About truth, lies and post-truth. Elements for an information philosophy]. Bajo Palabra, II, 24, (2020), p. 167 14. A.  Arrieta, La posverdad es más peligrosa que la mentira [Post-truth is more dangerous than lies]. The Consersation, 21/09/2020. https://theconversation.com/la-­posverdad-­es-­mas-­ peligrosa-­que-­la-­mentira-­145978 (2020) 15. R. Rorty, Contingency, Irony and Solidarity (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989) 16. B. Thoilliez, Hope and education beyond critique. Towards pedagogy with a lower case ‘p’. Ethics Educ. 14(4), (2019), 453–466. 17. B.  Thoilliez, When a teacher’s love for the world gets rejected. A post-critical invita tion to become an edifying educator. On Education. J. Res. Debate 3(9), (2020) https://doi. org/10.17899/on_ed.2020.9.11 // https://www.oneducation.net/no-09_december-2020/when-­ a-­teachers-love-for-the-world-gets-rejected-a-post-critical-invitation-to-become-an-edifying-­ educator/ 18. B.  Thoilliez, Docentes en las aulas: miradas constantes, palabras precisas, sonrisas perfectas [Teachers in the classroom: constant glances, precise words, perfect smiles]. Studium Educationis 20(2), (2019), 57–70. 19. A. Munro, Comfort. STORYCUTS (London: Vintage Digital (Kindle edition), 2011) 20. J. Baggini, Breve historia de la verdad [Brief History of the Truth] (Barcelona: Ático de los Libros (Kindle edition), 2018), p. 60 21. J. Soto Ivars, Arden las redes: La postcensura y el nuevo mundo virtual [Networks Burn: Post-­ Censorship and the New Virtual World] (Madrid: Debate, 2017) 22. J. Soto Ivars, Por qué siguen ardiendo las redes [Why do the networks keep burning]. ETHIC, 23/10/2019. https://ethic.es/2019/10/por-­que-­siguen-­ardiendo-­las-­redes/ (2019) 23. H. Arendt, The Crisis in Education. In Between Past and Future: Eight Exercises in Political Thought (New York: The Viking Press, 1961) 24. N.  Hodgson, J.  Vlieghe, P.  Zamojski, Manifesto for a Post-Critical Pedagogy (London: Punctum Books, 2017) 25. N. Hodgson, J. Vlieghe, P. Zamojski, Education and the love for the world: Articulating a post-­ critical educational philosophy. Foro de Educación, 16, (2018), 7–20. 26. N.  Hodgson, J.  Vlieghe, P.  Zamojski, Manifestations of the post-critical: from shared principles to new pedagogical paths. Teoría de la Educación. Revista Interuniversitaria 32(2), (2020), 13–23. 27. G. Biesta, Obstinate Education. Reconnecting School and Society (Leiden: Brill, 2019) 28. G. Biesta, The Rediscovery of Teaching (London: Routledge, 2017) 29. B. Thoilliez, The Craft, Practice, and Possibility of Teaching. Stud. Philosophy Educ. 38(5) (2019), 555–562. 30. P.  Standish, B.  Thoilliez, El pensamiento crítico en crisis. Una reconsideración pedagógica en tres movimientos [Critical thinking in crisis. A pedagogical reconsideration in three movements]. Teoría de la Educación. Revista Interuniversitaria 30(2) (2018), 7–22. 31. R. Eaglestone, ‘Powerful knowledge’, ‘cultural literacy’ and the study of literature in schools. IMPACT. Philosophical Perspect. Educ. Policy 26, 10 (2021) 32. B. Thoilliez, Conservar, legar, desear. Prácticas docentes edificantes para restaurar “lo público” en la educación [Conserve, Pass On, Desire: Edifying teaching practices to restore ‘the publicness’ of education]. Revista de Educación (forthcoming) 33. F.X. Bellamy, Crisis de la transmisión y fiebre de la innovación [Transmission crisis and innovation fever]. Teoría de la Educación. Revista Interuniversitaria 33(2) (2021), 169–178.

Adolescence and Identity in the Twenty-­First Century: Social Media as Spaces for Mimesis and Learning David Reyero, Daniel Pattier, and David García-Ramos

1  Introduction Concern over online relationships and online forms of socialization and their effects on the person is not new and does not necessarily follow what intuition or fear of the new would suggest. It was thought at first that online socialization would bring an end to traditional relationships, but although these are affected, it has not been possible to determine the exact correlation between both types of relation. For Castells, it seems that at a basic level, nothing essentially different takes place. If you had friends before the Internet, you would continue to have friends “in real life” notwithstanding the Internet; and if you had no friends before the Internet, you would continue to have none outside the online universe despite your use of the Internet. For some people, the Internet in fact served to deepen or help maintain relations that were present before its onset, for example, relations between relatives separated by immigration [2]. The studies cited by Castells, however, precede the rise of social media and refer mostly to the use of the Internet more generally. Would they reveal the same results if they were dealing with social media? We cannot forget that many of the greatest and most influential social media are relatively recent. Facebook was created in 2004, Twitter in 2006, WhatsApp in 2009, Instagram in 2010, and TikTok in 2016, just to name the most well-known, although not necessarily the most widely used today. None of them has reached the legal age of adulthood, and the analyses on their long-term effects are therefore yet to be discovered.

D. Reyero () · D. Pattier Complutense University of Madrid, Madrid, Spain e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected] D. García-Ramos Universidad Católica de Valencia, Valencia, Spain e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 J. M. Muñoz-Rodríguez (ed.), Identity in a Hyperconnected Society, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-85788-2_6

75

76

D. Reyero et al.

Before continuing, it might be convenient to lay out the problems that an investigation focused on social media entails. Aspects of identity creation and relationships vis-à-vis social media are hard to study for at least two reasons. First, because most senior researchers spent the first 30 or 40 years of their lives—the most determinant in the formation of the self—without ever sending a message through social media. However, anybody who is under the age of 20 today will have a hard time socializing without smartphones and social media and managing the codes of conduct that these require. Second, because, as we said earlier, the effects of such a socialization are still unknown, given that not enough time has passed to be able to determine what they are. The chapter is thus structured as follows: First, we will study the phenomenon of social media, trying to identify the peculiarities of a system of relations that is essentially different from other types of relations. We will not address the negative aspects associated with social media, such as addiction, vulnerability, etc., for these are the focus of an abundant literature [3]. Such literature in itself deserves a study of its own, for many reflect certain incomprehension on the part of adults regarding social media in adolescence, and even a certain fear, which quite possibly distorts their perception of what constitutes social media’s risks and benefits [4]. After this initial look, we will explore two partly contradictory aspects. On the one hand, social media allow for maximum exposure, an exposure that reveals a desire to be recognized, acknowledged. At the same time, they allow for maximum anonymity, which makes available the possibility of playing with one’s identity, truth, and deception. The reflections that follow from these analyses lead us to some conclusions regarding education in this, our present context.

2  Social Media Human beings are eminently relational beings. Not only social beings, like bees, but communal, in the sense that they establish organic and affective links and hierarchies between them, as opposed to merely functional ones. Our community, starting with the most basic cell, our family, constitutes us. Even its absence constitutes us. Human comprehension is always communal. Every individual’s self-­ comprehension is the fruit of relationships, each with different levels of import and characteristics. Relations can be mediated by affection and hierarchy, like parent-child relationships; by affective links only, such as friendships and romantic relationships; by administrative regulations, such as those entailed by citizenship; or by function, such as those formed in the army or the shopfloor. These different relations produce different types of effects and have differing levels of significance for the individual. All intentional human relations—as opposed to those that are merely coincidental, such as those produced by sharing a same space—are mediated by language. Language is a social invention that transcends the social and explains the personal.

Adolescence and Identity in the Twenty-First Century: Social Media as Spaces…

77

We can only comprehend ourselves in structures that are learned, starting with language. Social media, like all social networks, are nourished by this relational nature of human beings, their search for position and identification within the community. The very concept of net or network necessitates a link or series of links mediated by a common interest and a shared language. This interest does not necessarily entail an identical judgement, but a judgement, nonetheless. Perhaps when entering Twitter to comment on a football game, our ideas on the sport or the teams that played it might differ from other participants in the conversation—in fact, they must differ for any exchange to be meaningful—but there is a common interest in the game, the teams, the competition, or the very desire to be with others and exchange ideas or opinions. The phenomenon of social media impacts and stems from the relational condition of our humanity. According to Nesi et al. [5], social media transform relations between adolescents in five ways: first, changing the frequency and immediacy of their experiences; second, amplifying their experiences, third, altering the qualitative nature of interactions; fourth, facilitating new opportunities for compensatory behaviors; and fifth, creating completely new behaviors. In effect, after an initial period in which social media were looked at askance, fearing that they posed risks to adolescents’ mental and spiritual health, new studies try to explore, from a more neutral starting point, the intricacies of the behaviors that they unleash and the possibilities that they open. Social media offer, indeed, a new way to experience everyday life and the search for one’s self [6]. Through social media, teenagers experiment with the image of themselves that they show others. This is not a new phenomenon: our behavior at home is not the same as our behavior outside the home. Teenagers can tell that contexts with different friends and people have different exigencies. None of this, again, is new, for part of our social learning consists in knowing when, how, and to whom one should say what, and what should remain unsaid, depending on whether the audience consists of our peers, or not. Social media, however, introduce a complication, and this is the public character of the message. Before the Internet, the impact of roles adopted in real life was limited to our audience during the time of exposition. When expositions are ubiquitous and asynchronous, as many of them are online, they are available for a universe of people whose numbers are enormous—they can even include publics that one did not wish to reach with said message or image at all. This plurality of publics with different objects causes what is known as context collapse, a phenomenon that leads users to generate different profiles with which to face the world or to shield themselves behind anonymity. The object is not always to completely conceal one’s identity but to hide one’s identity from certain type of public that one perceives might endanger or prosecute it [7]. Social media are in this way arenas of combat in which identities that would be in the minority, silent and practically invisible in the non-virtual world, can grow and become dominant in the virtual world.

78

D. Reyero et al.

2.1  Identity in Social Media: Anonymity as Identity When we present ourselves before others in the real world, acknowledgment is usually immediate. It is a dialectic of reciprocal acknowledgments in which different elements at play contribute to construct and reinforce our identity. It is true that today, identities are multiple, liquid, and unstable. Perhaps they have always been so, but today, they are so more than ever [8, 9]. One of the most immediate and, at first glance, superficial elements that construct and reinforce our identity before others is fashion. Clothing, accessories, hairstyle, and a long etcetera identify us with one or another urban tribe, with a determined social class—apparel brands in this sense function as metadata labels. But there is nothing superficial about fashion. Indeed, there are few phenomena as mimetic as fashion: we identify with someone and imitate the way they dress to imitate their way of being in the world. For Lipovetsky, fashion has the capacity of configuring our identities beyond differences, conflicts, and competition. Fashion is a mimesis that lives in the dialectical tension expressing difference vis-à-vis the other that one is imitating or trying not to imitate [10]. Another fundamental element at play in the construction of our identity is language. Speaking has never been a neutral action, as demonstrated by Bourdieu’s linguistic capital, or Butler’s human being as a language animal that speaks itself [11, 12]. If no technology is neutral, language, which we can regard as our most ancient technology, is the least neutral of all: in its very essence, it is meant to eliminate, denote, identify, etc. Simon Peter was identified—and accused—because of how he spoke. Shibboleth: the mark of the group is the linguistic mark. I belong to the group; I speak how its member speak. To integrate, immigrants must integrate linguistically [13]. A final element is time: memory, as well as the possibility of a project, implicitly relies on identity. Identity is thus presented before the other as a common past or a common future, as a signified contemporaneity—millennials, boomers, etc. There is a generational trait in identity that is worth remarking. Strong identity processes, like nationalisms, always look for a common past, an origin [14, 15]. Indeed, the notion of generations constitute an explanatory resource commonly used today to explain the differences marked by digital and technological revolution(s): boomers, millennials, Generation Z, etc. The very term “digital native” that marks those born under the “digital” sign with an identity similar to indigenist identities remits us to a historical, temporal event: the apparition of the Internet. These elements—fashion, language, and time embedded in memory and projects—to which we could surely add many others significantly contribute to the configuration of human identity. And although identities are multiple, dynamic, plastic, and adaptable, as Bauman has pointed out, we can identify a person who speaks a certain way, dresses a certain way, and has had this or that particular experience. Or at the very least, we believe that we can identify them. So that, contrary to what it may seem, the moment when everything that distinguishes us from the masses becomes “identitarian” —that is, the power of minorities—we are submitted more

Adolescence and Identity in the Twenty-First Century: Social Media as Spaces…

79

than ever before to the tyranny of identity: any mark is an absolute sign of what we are and what substitutes us. We have become what we represent, signs without referents, identities whose only content is form: ours are post-metaphysical identities. But what happens with these elements online? What happens to language, fashion, and time-as-memory and time-as-projects? They are still there: nothing changes so that everything can change. Identity is transformed into anonymity the same way that members of a group speak the same, dress the same, and have the same projects and memories. If it was difficult to achieve the yearned paradise of identification with my equals, my models, my idols, “in real life,” the virtual world makes it much easier, because these does not have to be true (see Sect. 3). The phenomenon of anonymity contains two processes that are worth some reflection. The first is what we can refer to as hyper-exposition of minority ideas and/or practices. Anonymity allows users to express ideas that are not filtered by social correctness in a visceral way that would not be used openly. Anonymous users can thus become sources of ideas that circulate in the social world more crudely, as well as sources of hatred, attacks, and polarization. And polarization allows many other persons to identify with dark or politically incorrect notions that are easier to deal with in comparison to those that are more complex and demanding. Moreover, behaviors and notions that were socially frowned upon as bizarre or outlandish and were kept private or concealed are more readily expressed online behind the shield of anonymity, making it easier to find others who identify with them. Is this an eminently positive phenomenon, bringing into the light of day what was once kept in the dark? Perhaps we should first ask ourselves why these behaviors were concealed. Were they shameful or politically incorrect? Does their public purview improve or worsen society? Why is anonymity still necessary? In many cases, these behaviors are socially tabooed and entail penalties. Is anonymity the previous step in the disappearance of a penalty, that is, a first step toward the normalization of what was until now not regarded as normal? Is the existence or absence of said taboos socially positive or negative? Taboos have social functions in the order as well as in the formation of adolescent identities. A taboo is an expression of a limit, and in this sense, it is educational. Where there are no limits, there can be no formation [16].

2.2  R  econfiguration and/or Loss of Modesty (Pudeur) and Intimacy Along with anonymity, which is the ultimate level of concealment of the self behind the screen of a created character, the Internet and social media also introduce the phenomenon of total exposure and the loss of modesty and intimacy. This loss has two faces. The first and most evident is the over-exposition of a narcissist self in need of recognition, a need that can become a pathological rejection of modesty or pudeur, that “tendency of keeping one’s own intimacy from the purview of strangers” [17]. Jacinto Choza regarded this loss of modesty as a sign of our times even

80

D. Reyero et al.

before the appearance of social media. The loss of intimacy has to do with a lack of ideals and sense of meaning, which Taylor identified as one of the sources of contemporary malaise [18]. Wandering prey to the individual need of sustaining ourselves in a world without lofty ideals or great narratives is the source of unbearable tedium. The self is offered refuge only in its vulgar private interests. Deprived of the possibility of heroism, the self sustains itself in “extimacy,” in the publicization of its own intimacy, which is made to go beyond itself [19]. The other face of the loss of intimacy is involuntary, and this can be so devastating for the self that some who have experienced this have committed suicide. A perfect example of this took place in the midst of the pandemic. A nursing student in Madrid disclosed a private discussion that she had held in WhatsApp regarding a conflict related to the Covid confinement (https://twitter.com/el_pais/status/ 1330940987095601157). Although its object was the opposite of anonymity, for it sought to make public something that was private and, therefore, unknown, the repercussion of the leaked conversation had a similar effect: it encouraged social polarization. The betrayal of privacy and intimacy, which have been an important literary subject and the object of social chastisement, can reach dangerous dimensions online, with a great temporal and spatial reach. Must we assume, therefore, that modesty and intimacy no longer exist? Or has modesty changed its object, having been displaced from the realm of intimacy to other geographies of the self? Would not context collapse, as presented above, imply a fragmentation of intimacy that would correspond with the fragmented self of postmodernity? If this is the case, then we are dealing with more than just the disappearance of restrictions and taboos or the release from ancient oppressions. We are dealing with the reconfiguration of what modesty, shame, and intimacy mean, a reconfiguration that would bring significant changes in the construction of identity and its presentation in society. Sexual or gender identities, which have resulted from the liberation of the body, are the latest avatar of an angelism that seems to make everything evanescent, more than liquid, gaseous. Because bodies—tattooed, modified, shown, exposed, objectified—are no longer body-subjects but objects of a subject that does not know itself or where it stands. They are merchandise offered in social media dominated by the image and concept-labels or hashtags. This would easily explain why the body, the traditional site for the expression of intimacy and modesty, has become the absolute opposite. Instead of covering or concealing it, it is made public and exposed. But modesty and intimacy have not disappeared; they have dematerialized or lost their mooring. They are disembodied: the body has given way to an immaterial subject, so that what is said and shown, that is, the sign and not reality, the word and not the thing, are what count.

3  Likes and the Search for Acceptance and Recognition The exposition of intimacy in what we have above denominated “extimacy” shapes the search for recognition and acceptance that every identity supposes. In the dialectic of Bentham’s panopticon, popularized by Foucault [20], the subject acts to be

Adolescence and Identity in the Twenty-First Century: Social Media as Spaces…

81

seen—or because he is seen—applying the three rules of social control and government that modernity has generalized, those of a contract that we all follow without being coerced to do so, but without being able to act outside it. This acting to be seen demands a recognition of the other that finds its opposite in denunciation. Not being seen, not being recognized, leaves the subject’s action devoid of content, as if he were performing before an empty theater. The subject’s representation in the theater of social media demands the subject’s recognition. The subject is continually presenting itself to the other, subjecting itself to the other’s gaze. The formation of identity in social media is essentially responding to this structure of recognition and vigilance: the subject watches and governs its own recognition in the shape of the received likes and comments, which can adopt different communicative-pragmatic modalities. First, there is the recognition of the presented identity and, second, the other’s acceptance within the group through labels that categorize and classify discourse. The case of the hashtag is paradigmatic in this sense. Sharma argues that “Twitter hashtags are unique because rather than merely categorising content, they enable users to intensify their engagement by ‘organising’ content and facilitating participation in conversations” [21]. However, hashtags enable the organization and categorization of discourse neutrally. The truth is that the use of hashtags already implies an intent that underlines and gives meaning to a message: when we include a hashtag or an emoticon in our messages, we are taking sides regarding one group or another. Under the symbol #, we accept the other in our discourse and we are accepted by the other. Social media’s frame of interaction, which lies between the unidirectional communication of traditional media and the bidirectionality of conversations, allows the enunciating subject to leave when it feels threatened but also to turn any enunciation or message into a conversation, a discussion, and, quite often, a lynching. The acceptance that is entailed in every communicative act—the active listening of the other as the acceptance of the other—can suddenly become an expulsion, the cancellation of all discourse. The accepting embrace that Arendt expects for the newborn, the depth of goodness, always happens at the same time and place in which banal evil takes place or could take place. Such banality of evil can consist in looking elsewhere, not seeing the other, abandoning the conversation, excluding the other, and embracing our obedience to the same—those who speak like me, dress like me, remember like me and relate like me. The openness to the other that takes place in a conversation is easily severed in social media’s dialectic of likes when the multidirectional becomes unidirectional, limiting the possibilities and horizons of meaning in the communicative pragmatic of online discourse (as we will see below in Sect. 5.1) [22, 23].

3.1  Post-Truth and Identity Formation In the era of post-truth—or the post-metaphysical era—it is necessary to establish a common framework for speech. Habermas laments that the language of myth and rituals that served as a communicative framework for certain experiences has

82

D. Reyero et al.

been lost [24]. And we are missing the Rosetta stone that would allow the translation that we need: the initiation ritual experience of religious language. How is identity formed today and what truth lies at its foundation? As we have pointed out before, image and sign now constitute the materials of identity-formation (see 1.1), while truth is liquefied—or volatilized—made fluid, changing, unstable. It is not a matter of denouncing or exposing a truth that was concealed—which is sometimes necessary, as the #MeToo movement demonstrated—but the dismissal of the truth as something necessary to sustain the online discourses with which the self seeks to form its identity. The discourse is self-referential: being this or that means simply using this or that hashtag, this or that emoji. Identity is born from the sign; it does not produce the sign. No event or ritual produces symbolic value, not because this process no longer takes place but because it takes place overabundantly: everything is a sign, everything is/has value, depending on the number of likes that it garners. It is significant that in Wikipedia, truth-value has been substituted for Neutral Point of View, which has nothing to do with veracity or verifiability. “Truth” is measured by the number of bibliographic references that sustain this or that version of the so-called facts [25]. Truth is not important, what is important is the number of people who affirm that something is true. In this sense, hyperconnectivity has accelerated the processes of social consensus but, as we will see and it has also skewed them, producing surprising levels of homogeneity vis-à-vis increased polarization. René Girard called this unanimity that produces narrative, myth, rite, and symbol méconnaissance [26]. The truth is today a half-truth spoken to procure success with little regard for veracity. At the same time, everything is called into question: fake news are produced to enthrall, seduce, and possess the self that is no longer an individual or a person but (part of) the mass, what Lawtoo has called the phantom of the ego. Lawtoo explores this process as a (patho)logy of the ego that became especially active at the end of the nineteenth century, with its roots in Nietzsche and in the psychology of the masses developed by Gustave Le Bon, Gabriel Tarde, and Freud [27]. In our days, a mass led by enormously polarized and polarizing leaders possesses the self, leaders with the capacity of haunting or enchanting their followers, that is, making them act as if they were possessed, with hypermimetic behaviors, in a compulsive imitation of the other and its desires, wanting to become it. Such leaders are referred to today as influencers (see Sect. 5). Lawtoo locates the new social media—the heirs of journalism, radio, and television—at the center of the process [28]. We believe that this (patho)logy that takes place in social media— some traits of which we have already addressed, such as the loss of modesty, “extimacy”, the loss of the body, immaterial subjects, online identities, context collapse, etc.—coalesces into a conflictive rivalry that becomes the source of new forms of violence, such as cyberbullying, online lynching, etc. In sum, the violent ideological polarization that forces the self to identify with a position bypassing critical analysis. As we will see, René Girard’s mimetic theory offers an interesting approach for understanding these processes.

Adolescence and Identity in the Twenty-First Century: Social Media as Spaces…

83

4  Social Media, Mimetic Rivalry, and Conflictual Identity Evgeny Morozov warned us years ago that we have assumed certain concepts related to the Internet as being positive, such as openness, transparency, or free access, without sufficient critical analysis [29, 30]. Indeed, our epistemological attitude before the Internet seems to be one of méconnaissance. Social media manifest how polarization and confrontation are not isolated or exceptional phenomena. On the contrary, they are very common, and indeed, necessary, in the apparition and development of human cultures [31]. To be able to combat their worse consequences, we must thoroughly analyze them to understand what type of anthropological and sociological devices are at play in the generation and strengthening of polarization in social media. In effect, many recent studies show a worrisome aspect of social media, a face whose philosophical-anthropological background must be carefully investigated. Some of these studies, such as that of Lee et al. [32], retain an optimistic and unelaborated idea about social media: the notion that greater exposition to different arguments can lead to a lessening of social polarization by forcing users to reformulate their reasoning in order to respond to dissenting opinions. It seems that those who designed the study presuppose that heterogeneity is a good in and of itself and so is exposition to it. If we expose people to different opinions, they argue; we can begin to solve the problems of fanaticism and intolerance. However, studies that address recent experiences show what really happens: exposure to opposing views increases polarization [33]. Because polarization is increased by the search—voluntary or generated by algorithms—of texts that coincide with one’s own ideas, then these become more extreme and monolithic. Twitter is one of the arenas where such polarization is most virulently expressed. Mimetic theory can be used to understand why all of this happens. As René Girard suggests, there are violent dynamics in expansion that culture tries to channel through different cultural devices, all of which remit to a sacrificial origin. For Girard, culture is the way in which a group controls violence, a control that is crystallized in rites, myths, and other cultural devices, which implicitly carries an order, a hierarchy, a structure [26]. The recent polemic regarding so-called cancel culture is directly related with this: an individual or a group or an element is chosen as a sacrifice, real or symbolic [34], upon whom we allocate the blame for a given social problem, for the injustice and oppression that are present in our communities, in our cities. Social media are a new stage for the concurrence of desire, from the most capitalist consumerism to the desire of recognition from the other users, a prestige measured in likes. Machuco Rosa argues that “digital social networks illustrate some of the ideas proposed by René Girard, namely the advance of internal mediation as a characteristic of modernity based on an increasingly intense mimetic process” [35]. Indeed, these new spaces of socialization are not submitted yet to systems of ritualization and are therefore hard to channel. This is why escalation is quick and constant, notwithstanding that the dissipation of sacrificial events is equally rapid, and it is hard for lasting cults or institutions to crystalize. The anarchic and collaborative

84

D. Reyero et al.

character of the Internet makes it enormously refractory to institutionalization and institution—and this is true for social media, which are an important part of the Internet. When using mimetic theory to study how violence operates in this new space, its causes, its channeling, its consequences, and the ways it is confronted, we see a mechanism that is simultaneously archaic and new, and that finds in mimetic rivalry and in the new and anomic online contexts the best breeding ground for choosing scapegoats, the escalation of violence, exclusion from the axiological dimension and convictions, and the identitarian recovery of lost unanimity on the shoulders of innocents turned guilty. Several researchers have adopted mimetic theory as an explanatory framework from which to study social media [35–39]. Indeed, if there is a phenomenon in which the mimetic nature of human relations is evident, that is social media. Concepts from mimetic theory can be easily and almost intuitively applied to what happens in social media: mimetic contagion, the escalation of violence, undifferentiation, and the already mentioned méconnaissance, a kind of “I didn’t do it” or “if it was me, I didn’t know,” through which guilt is disavowed, or, in Bauman’s words, “an adiaphorization of evil” [40]. Girard’s prediction [41] that the twenty-first century would be the century of the victims more so than the twentieth century has come true in great part thanks to social media. Movements such as #MeToo, #JeSuis, etc. in which there is a macro-identification with a victim could not have been possible if it were not for social media, especially in their globalized dimension. At the same time, in that online space where everything is equalized, conflict is always just around the corner, for we look for difference and condemn it. These are the two faces of mimesis [38]. On the one hand, we unite around an identity expressed through different media. Hashtags, as we have seen, are one of them, but there are others: frames and filters for our profile pictures, with flags, ribbons, colors, or emojis—different-colored hearts, different faces—that express our solidary identification with the victim or victims of the moment or with the identities or groups with whom we stand in solidarity before the ever present threat of some enemy that will, sooner or later, end up appearing under another mark. All of these elements have an identitarian function in common. They contribute to marking the posture of the interlocutor in the discourse that is being elaborated, providing it with a reference frame and delimiting the interpretive possibilities of his or her contributions. In other words, they draw a hermeneutical horizon—an urban, political skyline, in the full sense of these words—that precedes the interpretation of the message. They thus generate marks of identity that strengthen the sense of belonging while at the same time defining new forms of expulsion and dominion. First, all those who do not explicitly adhere to the movement, assuming the identity that it entails, are expelled. Second, when a differential mark is proclaimed, all those who do not assume the mark/brand—in its different formats—either confront the new mark and are consequently expelled from the conversation or remain silent to avoid expulsion. They then assist at the conversation without taking sides, without, in fact, participating. They are the audience, the public that contemplates the arena or agora where a conversation is taking place which, far from being heterogenous and dialectical, tends toward homogeneity.

Adolescence and Identity in the Twenty-First Century: Social Media as Spaces…

85

How do adolescents position themselves vis-à-vis these new dynamics that actualize the old dynamics of the sacrificial mechanism explored by René Girard [26]? What role do these new forms of communication and socialization have in the construction of adolescent identities? Rephrasing the question asked in the introduction, up to what point do the new tools of online social communication that we have created in the image and likeness or real life communication are now shaping our modes of communication [1]? In the following, and last, section, we will try to answer these questions using a concrete example that features influencers, YouTube, and education.

5  I nfluencers as Mimetic Mediators: New Educational Channels? 5.1  Types of Communication in Social Media Mimetic mediation is inescapably shaped by the type of communication that is established between the realities of the person being imitated and the person that imitates. The degree of mimesis between influencers who maintain no direct communication with their followers is much lower than that between influencers and followers who periodically engage in direct communication. The latter influencers establish social communities in which they are at the center of the union [42]. It is therefore important to study the communication that takes place between influencers and their audiences if one wants to understand the degree of mimetic mediation that diverse online spaces facilitate. Social media have shattered the traditional categorization of human communication acts [22]. We had always spoken of two possibilities of communicative interaction. In bilateral or two-way communication, the sender and the receiver participate in communication interchanging their roles in a synchronic or asynchronous space. In unilateral or one-way communication, the message follows one direction, from the sender to the receiver, without there being any feedback from the latter. However, the configuration of most social media and their communicative usage break with this traditional division. Social media allow for two types of bilateral communication. On the one hand, there is what we can call equaled bilateral communication, in which sender and receiver interchange roles and the content or message is open. For instance, when one of my contacts sends a WhatsApp message and I respond, we engage in a communication act in which each of us alternates between sender and receiver as long as the conversation lasts [23]. But social media also house unequal bilateral communication acts, in which receivers can leave feedback regarding the message emitted by the sender, but they do so from a hierarchically inferior position and a sense of distance, and the message is not open. Thus, an influencer who posts a picture on Instagram does not expect to enter into a conversation with equals—an equaled

86

D. Reyero et al.

communication act—but to receive positive feedback from an audience of receivers in the shape of clicks on the heart icon or comments. Comments can be positive or negative: the influencer’s intention was not to initiate a conversation but to elicit a response centered on them. Social media also generate two different types of unilateral communication. There is a unilateral communication act per se, in which senders send messages to receivers without allowing for feedback. Instagram stories posted by the greatest influencers leave no possibility for comments or even likes. But there is also a pseudo-unilateral communication act in which senders send messages to receivers without expecting or intending to get feedback, but the possibility of leaving feedback exists, so that users engage in unequal bilateral communication. Politicians use Twitter this way, writing tweets that serve as announcements or their personal or professional opinions and not to engage in conversations with the users who read/ receive those tweets. The communicational intention of the sender in social media is an important aspect, for the appellative function of the message can serve as a gauge with which to critically examine its content and the communication act it entails. Has the sender produced a message without appellative intent and seeks merely to share a personal experience, or does the message appeal to the receiver to act in a certain way? For instance, to purchase the clothes that the sender is wearing, or to vote for a specific political party. Perhaps, however, we should ask ourselves if there is ever a non-­ appellative function in social media. After all, they have been conceived with clear commercial intent that depends on the amount of time we spend on these platforms in our day-to-day. Communicative spaces that allow users to participate more or less openly with influencers encourage a transformation from external mimesis, where the subject that imitates and the model that is imitated are not rivals, to internal mimesis, in which distance disappears and interactions can take place. These can have a higher degree of conflict and, therefore, depth. Hence the success of platforms such as Twitch, or the live streams of other applications in which audiences can interact directly with influencers in real time sending questions or commenting on what they are doing or saying.

5.2  What Are Influencers? But what or who are these influencers of whom we speak? They have arisen in the last decades as persons who produce online content in social media such as Twitter, Instagram, YouTube, TikTok, etc., that is followed by hundreds of thousands, and sometimes millions, of users. It is interesting that in the course of time, many of them have changed their communicative acts as described in the above typology, going from unilateral to bilateral communication, or vice versa. Be that as it may, the reality is that 40 million people are subscribed, for instance, to Rubén Doblas

Adolescence and Identity in the Twenty-First Century: Social Media as Spaces…

87

Gundersen’s YouTube channel elrubiusOMG, and his videos have been viewed more than 9 billion (i.e., 9 thousand million) times. These numbers indicate the capacity influencers have to impact society. It is difficult to gauge the degree to which interactions with influencers, such as viewings, produce transformations in users, but from a mimetic perspective, there is no doubt that the magnitude of these numbers points to some influence in the construction of the personality of a considerable number of receivers, or followers, and of course, in the influencers themselves in their role as senders [35, 43]. The number of followers needed to be regarded as an influencer depends on the social media in which content is posted, but generally speaking, a person has considerable influence in social media if they have at least 10,000 followers. Influencers’ capacity to impact society increases exponentially the greater their number of followers. We can speak of levels of influence using the categories developed by YouTube in regard to its content producers: graphite (less than 1000 subscribers); opal (1000 to 9999 subscribers); bronze (10,000 to 99,999 subscribers); silver (100,000 to 999,999 subscribers); gold (1 million to 9 million subscribers); and diamond (10 million or more subscribers). The number of influencers’ followers is very important vis-à-vis mimetic mediation, for the groups that follow certain accounts generate a social identification. The identification with these accounts determines a way of communication, dressing, and thinking that affect each person as it relates to the socialization dimension.

5.3  Influencers’ Mimetic Impact on Adolescence In order to understand the repercussion influencers have in society, and more specifically, on adolescents, we must first understand what is meant by influence. According to the Oxford English Dictionary, to influence is “to have an effect on the way that someone behaves or thinks, especially by giving them an example to follow,” whereas influence as a noun refers to “the power that somebody/something has to control what happens or what somebody does.” Influencers are persons who exert power (in this case, socially) over others by virtue of their condition as imitable or the regard in which they are held, which makes them referents. Thus, interactions with influencers do not take place among equals, because people consider influencers as superior in some way and (consciously or unconsciously) grant them sway over their thoughts, their actions, and even their worldview. Influencers, therefore, have great power, which is why many marketing and publicity campaigns try to harness it. If AuronPlay stated a clear preference for a political party before an upcoming election, he would in all likelihood affect the results, given his high number of followers [44]. Similarly, if Verdeliss posted a video saying that she liked a particular baby carriage because it was comfortable and functional, the sales of said carriage would increase significantly because of her influence on the audience most interested in that kind of product.

88

D. Reyero et al.

The great power that audiences grant influencers creates spaces of influence and mediation in social media in which audiences follow, in the original sense of the word, their influencers’ thinking, hoping to dress like them and act like them. Their relationship can almost de described as co-dependent, with followers searching for the contents posted by their favorite influencer(s) daily, and influencers, for their part, relying on the feedback they hope to receive from their followers, which for the most part takes place through unequal bilateral communication, and which, in mimetic theory, is denominated as internal mediation. During adolescence, when exposition to social media is at its highest due to the possibilities and configuration of contemporary society, and when character and personality are still unconsolidated, influencers’ impact can be determinant. Several studies show that people trust the posts and content published by influencers as if they came from true experts or opinion leaders because they had positive experiences in their personal communicative relationships with said influencers [45]. The mimetic behavior that influencers generate in adolescents can vary greatly, from the mere adoption of certain fashion styles, accessories, or products (let us not forget the reversible happy/angry octopus plush toys) to a profound embrace of certain identity aspects that have a direct effect on young followers’ life-projects— the groups they join, their speech or slang, etc. [46, 47]. Online culture is today a shared element in adolescence, a period in which group acceptance plays an essential role in the configuration of a person’s behavior and way of being [48]. Peer pressure is no longer embodied. It is no longer necessary to be physically present in a particular space—which one could avoid—at a particular time. As we saw in Sect. 2, since the subject has abandoned the body and become dematerialized, it is not subject to the time and space of a physical encounter. Online encounters are produced everywhere and at any time, or rather, without the limits of space or time. The constant actualization of profiles in social media responds to a mimetic impulse of approximation to the model, the other, that is never fully realized—distance is always growing, in a constant game of différance, of supplementation. The subject, as we saw in Sect. 3, is more susceptible of becoming that phantom of the ego described by Lawtoo [27, 28], a possessed subject. As we can see, influencers’ capacity to influence the development of adolescents’ personality is significant. To understand their impact on the education of young people, we will use Biesta’s division of education’s purposes into three discrete categories—assessment, socialization, and subjectivation [49]. First, one of education’s purposes is the teaching of contents and competences, whose acquisition is evaluated and graded accordingly (assessment). There are influences who are directly implicated in this teaching task from the informal perspective of social media. Influencers who use the video platform YouTube to create audiovisual educational content—whether they are certified teachers or not—are called edutubers, but this kind of influencer exists in all social media. Teacher and engineer David Calle, for example, posts educational videos in his Unicoos YouTube channel to help students with mathematics, physics, chemistry, technical drawing, and technology. Calle was a finalist for the 2017 World Teacher Prize and was recognized by Forbes magazine that same year as one of the world’s one hundred most

Adolescence and Identity in the Twenty-First Century: Social Media as Spaces…

89

creative people [50]. A graduate of audiovisual communications, Rubén González’s YouTube channel A toda leche features videos on history and contemporary issues with lighthearted language and humor. These and other such influencers have a high impact on adolescent education by specifically addressing subjects and matters that students must learn during their schooling. But we should not forget the other two purposes of education: socialization, that is, the introduction of students into the discourses and practices necessary for communal, social life, and subjectivation, the development of their individualization. It is in these areas that influencers exercise the greatest educational power, promoting forms of group socialization and acceptance among adolescents. To be accepted by a group, adolescents or teenagers undergo so-called viral challenges popularized by an influencer or participate in certain activities that are directly produced by a mimesis of that kind of adolescent referents, such as TikTok dances. Indeed, socialization of adolescents today practically demands that individuals accept and perform activities developed or made viral in social media as if they were rites of passage or initiation. Negative responses to this social pressure, that is, the decision to not participate in this kind of practice or to disengage or not participate in social media (an option that very few adolescents choose or can choose), also generate a possibility of socialization for the like-minded but produce a vacuum of communication vis-à-vis the great majority of their peers. The influence exercised by adolescents’ referents through social media produces an impact in their subjectivation, generating an individuality that embraces certain patterns or models as if they were their own. Using mimetic theory language, it is a subjectivation in which adolescents give in to the mimetic impulse that allows an individual to accept the mass’s criteria. The construction of adolescents’ identities and personalities is heavily influenced by the continual input received from the influencers that they follow. Influencers mold the personality of contemporary adolescent individuals, leaving a common space open for the socialization of their followers. Due to integration of social media as key spaces of socialization and communication in adolescents’ everyday lives, it is impossible to establish a duality that separates online and offline activities and experiences, as both configure each other in an inseparable unity within each individual adolescent’s personality [51]. It is precisely in the interaction and tension between both lives (online and offline) that the new subject emerges. An important part of adolescent socialization takes place as users of social media, and it entails acceptance and recognition of others in their age group regarding their online presence, their posts, the content that they create in the diverse online platforms in which they have accounts. They are creating a subjectivity modeled on the exigencies of the audience, within which peers have a special relevance, for they can stifle the very moral autonomy of the person [52]. Thus we observe that influencers whose audiences consist mostly of adolescents contribute to their socialization and subjectivation, purposes that are inherent to education, and only some contribute to teaching contents and competences. The proverb that says “it takes a village to raise a child” highlights how the education of younger generations is a complex process that goes beyond parents and professional educators. And today’s “villages” include social media referents and influencers,

90

D. Reyero et al.

and their impact in the construction of identity during adolescence is indeed greater than those of parents or teachers.

6  Conclusions Human beings are mimetic animals. Their desire to be is mediated by the desires and images that others transmit. The development of social media and the Internet has not introduced anything new in that sense, but they have supposed a qualitative leap in the offer of what is desirable and in the form of creating and presenting such offer. On the one hand, all can now offer our identities as desirable, and on the other, models easily accessible to all are offered as if they were real regardless of whether they are or are not. Social media generate their own rules and demands for the maintenance of one’s own identity and generate their own ways of confronting content collapse. The phenomenon of anonymity as an expression of an identity that exposes itself without a subject that can—or is called upon—defend it reveals two interesting aspects that have consequences in the education of the younger generations. First, there exists a need to express and defend what was hidden, and second, there exists a desire to rebel, a promethean desire to end with the prohibition of any tabooed practice and normalize all that has until now been marginalized or rejected. Social media and the Internet confine humans in a world seemingly without limits but which is enormously stressful and demanding. Anonymity coexists with the apparently contradictory phenomenon of the loss of modesty and over-exposition. But there is no real contradiction between these two elements, for both of them are related to the emptiness and loss of meaning that people seek to fill through the defense of any desire that goes beyond the norm, exposing either that which is provocative or reactive or the self itself, which only exists to the degree that it is sanctioned by others. A world of rivalry without norms or taboos, in which identities confront each other freely, does not have the effect of bringing peace to human relations. On the contrary, it encourages violence by feeding the enmity of opposing identities that are increasingly anathemized in a dynamic in which virtual lynching is the order of the day. Most lynch mobs remain online, but their effects spill over onto the real world quite easily, both through the emotional and psychological damage inflicted on the lynched, because the Internet space in which it occurs overlaps with communities or spaces such as schools, universities, or towns, where those who interact and compete online also interact and compete in real life. Social media have an increasingly powerful impact in the formal and informal education of adolescents. Besides the aspect of contents and competences addressed by edutubers, who act as untiring and dematerialized teachers, other aspects of education are also affected. The desires transmitted by influencers shape the desires of their adolescent followers, and whoever stands out and receives the recognition of

Adolescence and Identity in the Twenty-First Century: Social Media as Spaces…

91

an authority in his or her field ends up transferring their authority to other realms, especially in adolescence. Finally, we must ask ourselves how identity formation takes place in the present context. Social media have indeed dematerialized human relations, decoupling them from time and place, de-locating them, as it were. Life online is life, but not real life, for it is not submitted to the demands of time and space that constrain material and corporeal relations. Edutubers seem to never feel tiredness before their “students” (viewers, followers, etc.), even though they spend hours researching a topic and preparing a video that should educate anybody as opposed to a particular, known group. The consequence of such dematerialization is frustration. Rising levels of depression are perhaps related to the growing number of hours spent online and the demands made by online relations, where weariness has no place and perfection, tuning, and customization are demanded [53]. There is a growing literature focused on policies and proposals to reduce or limit the use of social media. Proposing a total disconnection, going offline, sounds too radical, for it would be unpopular and excessive as well as impossible. However, any attempt to recover the deep and profound human desire to be, in its relational and material character, must consider disconnection and the recovery of face-to-face living to the extent possible. To escape the phantoms of the ego that threaten it, to free itself from the possessions and hauntings that enthrall it, the subject must be embodied, for only the body facilitates real connections.

References 1. M. McLuhan, in The International Encyclopedia of Linguistic Anthropology, ed. by J. Stanlaw, (Wiley-Blackwell, Hoboken, 2020) 2. M. Castells, Internet y la sociedad red [Internet and net society]. La factoría 14(15), 1–13 (2001) 3. A. Vannucci, E.G. Simpson, S. Gagnon, C.M. Ohannessian, Social media use and risky behaviors in adolescents: A meta-analysis. J. Adolesc. 79, 258–274 (2020) 4. M.D. Griffiths, D. Kuss, Adolescent social media addiction (revisited). Educ. Health 35(3), 49–52 (2017) 5. J. Nesi, S. Choukas-Bradley, M.J. Prinstein, Transformation of adolescent peer relations in the social media context: Part 1—A theoretical framework and application to dyadic peer relationships. Clin. Child Fam. Psychol. Rev. 21, 267–294 (2018) 6. R.  Mace, Reformulando lo ordinario: Ciberespacio y educación [Reformulating ordinary: ciberspace and education]. Teoría De La Educación. Revista Interuniversitaria 32(2), 109–129 (2020) 7. A.H. Triggs, K. Møller, C. Neumayer, Context collapse and anonymity among queer Reddit users. New Media Soc. 23(1), 5–21 (2021) 8. A.  Sen, Identity and violence: The illusion of destiny, in Issues of Our Time, 1st edn., (W. W. Norton & Co., New York, 2006) 9. Z.  Bauman, Identity: Conversations with Benedetto Vecchi. Themes for the 21st Century (Polity Press, Cambridge, UK/Malden, 2004) 10. G. Lipovetsky, El imperio de lo efímero: la moda y su destino en las sociedades modernas (Editorial Anagrama, Barcelona, 1996)

92

D. Reyero et al.

11. P. Bourdieu, in Language and Symbolic Power, ed. by J. B. Thompson. Translated by Gino Raymond and Matthew Adamson., (Polity Press, Cambridge, 1991) 12. J. Butler, Giving an Account of Oneself, 1st edn. (Fordham University Press, New York, 2005) 13. R. Girard, The Scapegoat. Translated by Yvonne Freccero. (Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, 1986) 14. J. Juaristi, El bucle melancólico: historias de nacionalistas vascos (Espasa, Madrid, 1997) 15. D. Reyero García, El valor educativo de las identidades colectivas: cultura y nación en la formación del individuo. Revista Española de Pedagogía 59(218), 105–120 (2001) 16. D. Reyero, F. Gil Cantero, Education that limits is education that frees. Revista Española de Pedagogía 77(273), 213–227 (2019) 17. J. Choza, La supresion del pudor signo de nuestro tiempo. En La supresión del pudor y otros ensayos (pp. 15–36) (EUNSA, Pamplona, 1990) 18. C. Taylor, The Ethics of Authenticity (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1992) 19. J. Lacan, The Seminar of Jacques Lacan. Book VII. The Ethics of Psychoanalysis: 1959–1960 (Norton, Madrid, 1978) 20. M. Foucault, Discipline and Punish: the Birth of the Prison (Vintage Books, New York, 1995) 21. S.  Sharma, Black twitter? racial hashtags, networks and contagion. New Formations 78, 46–64 (2013) 22. H. Gruber, Genres, media, and recontextualization practices: Re-considering basic concepts of genre theory in the age of social media. Internet Pragmatics 2(1), 54–82 (2019) 23. L.  Cantamutto, C.V.  Delfa, El discurso digital como objeto de estudio: De la descrip ción de interfaces a la definición de propiedades. Aposta. Revista de Ciencias Sociales 69, 296–323 (2016) 24. J. Habermas, A hypothesis concerning the evolutionary meaning of rites. En Postmetaphysical Thinking II (pp. 43–56) (Polity Press, Cambridge, 2017) 25. N.  Tkacz, The truth of Wikipedia. Digithum: Humanities in the digital era. (Number 14):88–93 (2012) 26. R. Girard, Violence and the Sacred (Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, 1989) 27. N.  Lawtoo, The Phantom of the Ego Modernism and the Mimetic Unconscious (Michigan State University Press, East Lansing, 2013) 28. N. Lawtoo, (New) Fascism: Contagion, Community, Myth (Michigan State University Press, East Lansing, 2019) 29. E.  Morozov, The Net Delusion: The Dark Side of Internet Freedom (Public Affairs, New York, 2011) 30. E. Morozov, To Save Everything, Click Here: the Folly of Technological Solutionism (Public Affairs, New York, 2013) 31. J. Watts, O. Sheehan, Q.D. Atkinson, J. Bulbulia, R.D. Gray, Ritual human sacrifice promoted and sustained the evolution of stratified societies. Nature 532, 228–231 (2016) 32. J.Y. Lee, K.M. Shin, S.-M. Cho, Y.M. Shin, Psychosocial risk factors associated with internet addiction in Korea. Psychiatry Investig. 11(4), 380 (2014) 33. C.A. Bail, L.P. Argyle, T.W. Brown, J.P. Bumpus, H. Chen, M.B.F. Hunzaker, J. Lee, M. Mann, F. Merhout, A. Volfovsky, Exposure to opposing views on social media can increase political polarization. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 115, 9216–9221 (2018) 34. G.  Shullenberger: Human Sacrifice and the Digital Business Model. Tablet Magazine (July 20 2020) 35. A. Machuco Rosa, Mimesis, Network Theory and Digital Social Networks. Xiphias Gladius: Revista interdisciplinar de Teoría Mimética, 93–111 (2020) 36. H. Weigand, Complex mimetic systems. Contagion J. Viol. Mimesis Culture 15, 63–87 (2008) 37. J. O’Higgins Norman, J. Connolly, Mimetic theory and scapegoating in the age of cyberbullying: The case of phoebe prince. Pastoral Care in Educ. 29, 287–300 (2011). https://doi.org/1 0.1080/02643944.2011.626069 38. E. Brighi, Charlie Hebdo and the two sides of imitation, in Imitation, Contagion, Suggestion : On Mimesis and Society, ed. by C. Borch, (Routledge, London, 2019), pp. 126–140

Adolescence and Identity in the Twenty-First Century: Social Media as Spaces…

93

39. P. Mitchell, F.V. Münch, #Contagion, in Imitation, Contagion, Suggestion: On Mimesis and Society, ed. by C. Borch, (Routledge, Milton, 2019), pp. 107–125 40. Z. Bauman, L. Donskis, Moral Blindness: The Loss of Sensitivity in Liquid Modernity (Polity Press, Cambridge, 2013) 41. R. Girard, I See Satan Fall Like Lightning (Orbis Books, Maryknoll, 2001) 42. D. Pattier, Science on Youtube: Successful Edutubers. Techno Rev. Int. Technol. Sci. Soc. Rev. 10(1), 1–15 (2021) 43. E.S. De la Piedra, R.J. Meana, Redes sociales y fenómeno influencer. Reflexiones desde una perspectiva psicológica. En Miscelánea Comillas. Revista de Ciencias Humanas y Sociales 75(147), 443–469 (2017) 44. J.D.  Fernández Gómez, V.  Hernández-Santaolalla, P.  Sanz-Marcos, Influencers, marca personal e ideología política en Twitter. En Cuadernos. info 42, 19–37 (2018) 45. J. Sarmiento-Guede, J. Rodríguez-Terceño, La comunicación visual en Instagram: estudio de los efectos de los micro-influencers en el comportamiento de sus seguidores. Estudios sobre el mensaje periodístico 26(3), 1205–1216 (2020) 46. K.P.  Moreno, S.E.V Castañeda. Los YouTubers: espejos influyentes en el proyecto de vida adolescente. En Imaginario Social 2(2) (2019) 47. V. Pérez-Torres, Y. Pastor-Ruiz, S. Abarrou-Ben-Boubaker, Youtuber videos and the construction of adolescent identity. Comunicar, Media Educ. Res. J. 26(55), 61–70 (2018) 48. S. Aran-Ramspott, M. Fedele, A. Tarragó, YouTubers’ social functions and their influence on pre-adolescence. En Comunicar. Media Educ. Res. J. 26(57), 71–80 (2018) 49. G.  Biesta, What is education for? On good education, teacher judgement, and educational professionalism. En Eur. J. Educ. 50(1), 75–87 (2015) 50. L. López-José, J. Maza-Córdova, F. Tusa, Educar en el contexto digital: el reto de ser edutuber. En Revista Ibérica de Sistemas e Tecnologias de Informação E25, 188–200 (2020) 51. E.F.  Rodríguez, J.M.G.  Pequeño, La socialización de los jóvenes interconectados: Experimentando la identidad en la sociedad aumentada. En Profesorado. Revista de Currículum y Formación de Profesorado 21(2), 171–190 (2017) 52. A. Del Prete, S. Redon Pantoja, Las redes sociales on-line: Espacios de socialización y definición de identidad. En Psicoperspectivas 19(1), 86–96 (2020) 53. J.M.  Twenge, T.E.  Joiner, M.L.  Rogers, G.N.  Martin, Increases in depressive symptoms, suicide-related outcomes, and suicide rates among US adolescents after 2010 and links to increased new media screen time. Clin. Psychol. Sci. 6(1), 3–17 (2018)

Online Identity Construction in Younger Generations via Identification with Influencers: Potential Areas of Vulnerability Belén González-Larrea, María José Hernández-Serrano, and Noelia Morales Romo

1  T  he Social Vulnerability of the Youngest Generations in Digitality Young people have become one of the most vulnerable social groups in recent years. This is due to both structural and conjunctural factors. The institutions that supported them are progressively losing strength: the family, school, politics, and work that guaranteed limits on their identity. Currently, youth is blurred, advancing the adolescent stage and dehumanizing relationships. From a developmental perspective, adolescents are a vulnerable group due to their limited capacity for self-­ regulation and their great susceptibility to peer pressure [1]. Importantly, the vulnerability concept in social sciences is less broad than in common language. It is limited to situations in which vulnerability has social causes or implies differences generated by society for some social groups. The Human Development Report of the United Nations Development Program [2] divides vulnerable people into three groups: (1) poor people; (2) women, people with disabilities, migrants, minorities, children, youth, and elderly people, and (3) disadvantaged communities and regions. Accordingly, younger generations are considered under the “umbrella” of vulnerable people. However, on the other hand, a vulnerable person can be defined as someone who can be injured or received physical or moral injury. This places us in the field of prevention, one of the central topics of this chapter.

B. González-Larrea () · M. J. Hernández-Serrano · N. Morales Romo University of Salamanca, Salamanca, Spain e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 J. M. Muñoz-Rodríguez (ed.), Identity in a Hyperconnected Society, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-85788-2_7

95

96

B. González-Larrea et al.

The socially vulnerable people are, therefore, those who share group traits that place them in worse conditions or in a situation of initial danger in the society in which they live. Some authors [3] point to a relationship between insecurity and vulnerability. This author refers to insecurity as a cluster of circumstances that push us to feel vulnerable due to the loss of control over various aspects of our life: work, privacy, and community life. These last two areas are relevant when analyzing our study goals. More specifically, following the theoretical line of Bourdieu [4], the language is the product of symbolic battles between social groups with different degrees of power. The winners own the terms and dictate the proper uses of them. In the context of digital culture, this is particularly interesting in the analysis of the impacts and power influencers and gamers have on children and young people. Several studies have indicated that adolescents are very receptive to online influencer content [5], and therefore, their susceptibility to persuasive messages may be high [6]. As an example, some authors [7] analyzed the discourse on the type of language used in the channels of the three Spanish YouTubers with the highest number of followers. The study found a clear trend toward the use of violent and discriminatory vocabulary, although there are radical changes in the tone used. Adolescents as receptors of messages, which include contents, habits, attitudes, or life styles, are put into vulnerable positions within the digital spaces. This is the starting point of this chapter, by considering the influences brought by the idols, celebrities, and other influencers from media and social networks. Without a doubt, the largest consumers and prosumers of social media are young people, who have found a space to express themselves through social networks, being relevant to detect potential areas of vulnerability in their construction of the digital identity when adolescents generate links and bonds with such influencers.

2  R  educing Vulnerability in the Context of the Information and Communication Society While technologies and digital infrastructures considerably simplify our daily tasks, the attractiveness of the Internet for young people is given by the quick response, immediate rewards, interactivity, and multiple windows with different activities. For them, the use of technologies is positive, as long as the rest of the activities of a normal life are not neglected [8]. Since digitally is natural, is part of their culture, as younger generations are named as “tech-savvy” or other well-known tags such as “digital natives” and “digital residents,” the focus should seek new approaches to analyze and reduce vulnerability for this social group. This implies to expand social, individual, and group sensitivities. Analyzing the vulnerability of young people in relation to the construction of their online identity requires a social contextualization.

Online Identity Construction in Younger Generations via Identification with Influencers…

97

Firstly, current societies have several characteristics, including the development and identity of an entire digitized generation, through the free flow of information. Contemporary society is increasingly structured based on an “opposition between the network and the self,” which forces people to define themselves based on the technologies used [9]. As a result, the concept of identity has been extended to new areas of life with new ways of constructing identity in an information society that is not only associated with ethnic groups, races, gender, cultures, and nationality but also with a digital context: new ones have appeared categories of affiliation to the networks [10]. The digital identity or identity 2.0 is formed based on the actions that the individual does or does not do in digital media [11]. Moreover, digital social networks are presented as elements of entertainment, communication, and socialization strongly used by adolescents [12]. Secondly, connectivity is resulting in a constant pressure from both the peer group and technology to expand and gain greater power through alliances [13]. Once within a group or social networks, social pressure is very important because it facilitates socialization, access to information, entertainment, etc. However, this pressure is not enough considered as a vulnerable area, considering younger generations as a homogeneous group. Among the positive effects of a controlled and supervised use of social networks are the facilities of social interaction, the enhancement of cognitive development, the development of feelings of competence, and the generation of various educational elements [14]. On other hand, peer pressure is one of the variables that best predict the appearance of addictive behaviors among adolescents [15]. By considering these premises, this chapter states that reducing vulnerability of adolescents implies the identification of individual, family, and social risk and protective factors. Specifically, this chapter focuses on the vulnerability in the construction of the digital identity by adolescents when they socially interact with and being exposed to figures of influence from which they identificate.

3  Social Identity and the Role of Online Interactions The idea of constructing and sustaining an identity is associated in adolescence with how they feel and experience social connections and interactions, in line with the discourse identity theory [16] of and other theories which consider the co-presence of others [17] in the development of identity and the social identity theory [18] which advise that individuals strive to achieve a positive social identity in communication, in line with the proposal of collective identity-in-interaction for young people [19]. The relevance of social context for adolescents is expanded online [20]. This would explain why social interaction and connection as well as self-presentation are the main reasons for the use of social networks for adolescents [21]. Friendliness and vulnerability are important in forging social ties online [22] due to their

98

B. González-Larrea et al.

different kinds of social interactions. Other main social reasons for using social networks are to communicate their thoughts, seek support, ask questions, and share criticisms about themselves and others [23]. As a result, online social learnings and transactions are affecting the construction of the younger generation’s identity. So, this sense of selfhood is not only developed by what individuals subjectively feel or anticipate of themselves but also by the ways in which they are being recognized by their online peers; they gain social positions that matter to them or matter to their social group [24]. Receiving feedback and social validation is a social approval that at this age determines identity exploration and commitment [25], because it is not only what they receive or not but the socially appropriateness that is socially constructed by others or observed from others [26]. In this line, younger generations are experiencing different kinds of social connectedness while engaging in online practices, and it is the perception of others that would construct and sustain a way or ways of being and belonging in digitality [27], without forgetting that this social identification and the search for social interaction were positively linked to addictive use of social networks [28] or becoming the targets of online abuses when the reply is not the expected [29]. In this vein, the analysis of the impact of social networks on adolescents needs to be revisited by the influence in their social identity.

4  S  ocial Networks and Their Impact on the Psychosocial Development of Adolescents In our digital era, as we mentioned before, social networks are an important part of our society. They are used in various ways and for different purposes. For example, in the specific case of adolescents or young people, there is a need to experiment at this stage to see what they want for themselves and discover their identity. In fact, we know that young people, between 10 and 19 years old, are going through a key stage of development [30]. During this period, there are important psychological, emotional, physical, cognitive, and social changes that influence their behavior, desires, interests, and thinking. Therefore, it is easy for them to be susceptible to the influence of social networks. In this sense, there are other important elements that influence their behavior in social networks, for example, the sense of belonging, which is usually promoted within different social groups but has now found space at the digital level. Thus, this digital context opens an unlimited, open, immediate, and massive space. In fact, the identity construction of young people through social networks is provided by the possibility of publicly exposing their feelings, emotions, thoughts, ways of seeing the world, and their appearance, among others. Certainly, from the perspective of psychosocial development, this digital context allows communication with people of the same age or not, anywhere in the world and without being an elementary characteristic of knowing each other in person. In

Online Identity Construction in Younger Generations via Identification with Influencers…

99

that sense, young people have an important pressure to participate in these digital spaces. Similarly, they feel the need to belong to a social network that facilitates this interaction with others [31]. Thus, this context is no longer seen as a leisure option but becomes a requirement to belong to a social group. In this sense, in adolescence, peers are an important aspect in the construction of the identity of young people [32]. They are mutually referents of each other, modulating their tastes, preferences, and personal appearance depending on the feedback they receive from others.

5  I nfluencers as Influential Figures in the Construction of Young People’s Identities Consequently, it is clear that, through these social networks, spaces of socialization are generated between different people and with an important impact at the level of communication. In fact, a great diffusion force has been observed in certain people that have begun to gain space through social networks. Surely, we are familiar with the term influencers people considered as “celebrities” who, through the various social networks and digital platforms, have managed to capture a large number of followers who are aware of their publications on social networks. Then, we define influencers as public figures who disseminate varied and constant content through social networks [33]. This way, it has been evidenced that they are popular figures and are trending due to the high impact they generate in the community that follows them, especially young people [34]. But how do these opinion leaders begin to make an impact on the lives of others and why do they start to have impressive numbers of followers? Some authors refer to the “attribution theory” [35]. This theory is posited as the tendency that people attribute to the behavior of others due to dispositional rather than situational factors. In other words, browsing photographs of celebrities or other people may trigger assumptions or may give hints of how others live (without necessarily being real). As a result, according to this study, users may feel more vulnerable to judge themselves in relation to their own lifestyle. This consequently generates a sense of distress. Therefore, one of the conclusions reached was those non-reciprocal relationships, coupled with the publication of “enhanced” photos, could provoke a series of negative feelings about the person receiving such information, especially those who follow a larger number of strangers or celebrities. On the other hand, in the case of social networks, there are two types of relationships: symmetrical (when there is a correspondence relationship between other users) or asymmetrical (whose reciprocity is not necessary) [36]. Now, focusing on the type of relationship that is generated, studies from the field of social psychology have found a striking phenomenon. It is about parasocial relationships, understood as that unilateral relationship that is generated between the follower and the celebrity, in which the person who follows his referent perceives a close and intimate

100

B. González-Larrea et al.

relationship despite never having established a real relationship [37]. That is, this relationship is subjective and occurs according to the perception of the viewer. Authors such as McQuail [38] speak of such perception being shaped through the personal identification of the subject with respect to the person he/she admires. In this sense, all those images they perceive through the screen, they appropriate it as something personal and, although it may be fictitious, they take it as their own, as if it were part of their life. Regardless of the reason a person has for connecting to a social network and following an influencer, there will be an identification with that celebrity. Influencers shape their personality, develops their identity, and determines some criteria of social reality and attitudes [39]. As a result, there may be an influence in terms of values, beliefs, or ways of conceiving the world. Therefore, social networks and the media become a means of constructing reality [40]. Influencers become a strong point of identification for the younger population. In this chapter identification within social networks, when they follow influencers as their new idols, is reviewed by detecting potential areas of vulnerability in their construction of the digital identity.

6  Aims of the Study This study focuses on younger generations because compared to other age groups, they show more attention to narratives from influencers, both famous and proclaimed [41, 42], considering the nature of parasocial relationships [37, 43] and, as it was mentioned, that they face a vulnerable stage of life. The study aims to analyze the influences manifested by adolescents when they follow online influencers and gamers, specifically if via this identification they can perceive social influences in the domains of social relationships, ways of thinking, and peer pressure in line with potential areas of vulnerability, as described in the theoretical framework of this chapter.

7  Method In the context of the CONECT-ID research project, a questionnaire was designed and structured in five dimensions to measure the online adolescent interactions for their identity building and the hyperconnection risks. For this study, three dimensions and their variables were considered: (1) socio-demographic variables (age, gender); (2) online connection scenarios and uses (frequency of connection and type of social networks used); and (3) digital identification influences (influence on social relationships, ways of thinking and doing), as depicted in Table 1. Dimensions and effects were operationalized from concepts and variables emerged in a previous qualitative phase [44], using Likert-type scales and dichotomous questions. After a pilot-test final questionnaire with 19 items was

Online Identity Construction in Younger Generations via Identification with Influencers…

101

Table 1  Dimensions and variables considered for the analysis of influences Dichotomous items for “influences of identification” 1. In the time I spend on other activities (e.g., studying, going out, etc.) 3. In real life friendships 8. In my feeling of integrating into my group of friends 9. In my feeling of being part of the society 4. In my opinion about things that happen in the real world 5. In my opinion about myself 6. In wanting to think similar to how the people I follow online think 2. In what I decide to buy or consume 7. In wanting to do something similar to what the people I follow online are doing

Effects Interaction with offline actions

Dimensions Social relationships

Cultural and peer pressure Attitudes, similar thinking

Ways of thinking and doing

Behavior and decisions to act

administered online in November 2020, satisfactory index for internal consistency and reliability has been obtained (Cronbach’s Alpha = 0.713). Sample was collected representatively in educational centers from several regions of Spain (balanced by sex, age, residence, and social class) with adolescents between 12 and 18  years. As a result, the final sample consisted of 2066 participants. By gender, women represent 57.2% and men 42.8%, with ages between 12 and 18, grouped for this study into three ranges: (1) 12–14 years old with the highest representation (39.2%); (2) 15–16 (38.5%); and (3) 17–18 years old (22.3%). The SN more frequently used by the participants were WhatsApp (59.8% intensive users and 36.4% limited users, the rest no users), Instagram (54.4% intensive and 30.5% limited), TikTok (32.2% intensive and 35% limited), YouTube (28.6% intensive and 63.9% limited) with percentages of 65% and over of no users in Twitter, Snapchat, Facebook, and Telegram. For the aims of this study, we select a subsample of n = 1800 adolescents who indicated in a dichotomous question that they do “follow influencers or gamers” (respectively 86% of the sample). Descriptive and correlational analyses were run (using IBM SPSS Amos v.26 software) for explaining the demographic characteristics associated with the act of following an influencer or gamer and for outlining the factors of vulnerability for the social identity in adolescence, according to the two dimensions.

102

B. González-Larrea et al.

8  Results Firstly, according to Table 2, the percentages of adolescents who follow an influencer or gamers, by age, are similar with no significant differences. The percentage of adolescents in the range 17 and 18 years old is the lowest; however there were less participants in this cluster. By age, percentages of women are higher (57,3%), without finding significant differences. Secondly, it is interesting to know the time they spend per day, separately on weekdays and on weekends and holidays. According to Fig. 1, the higher percentages were found during weekends and holidays, as expected, when adolescents spend more than 3 hours per day connected to social networks (64,2%) comparing to weekly days when only less than a third of the adolescents (26,4%) are spending the higher levels in the number of hours connected. During these hours, the social networks more frequently used by the adolescents of the sample who follow influencers of gamers are Instagram (54.4% manifested they are intensive users, n = 979), then TikTok (32.5% manifested they are intensive users, n = 585), and YouTube (29.5% manifested they are intensive users, n = 530). Table 2  Frequencies and percentages by age and gender: “I follow influencers and gamers” Men Women Total 12–14 years old 15–16 years old 17–18 years old Total

No Yes 115 (13%) 796 (87%) 151 (12,8%) 1031 (87,2%) 266 (12,9%) 1800 (87,1%) 114 (14,1%) 695 (85,9%) 104 (13,1%) 692 (86,9%) 48 (10,4%) 413 (89,6%) 266 (12,9%) 1800 (87,1%)

Fig. 1  Percentages of hours of connection per day

Total 884 (42,8%) 1182 (57,2%) 2066 (100%) 809 (39,2%) 796 (38,5% 461 (22,3%) 2066 (100%)

X2 0.025

3.58

Sig. 0.875

0.166

Online Identity Construction in Younger Generations via Identification with Influencers…

103

Table 3  Correlations between items: “perceived influences” 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

1 1000

2 ,183** 1000

3 ,145** ,218** 1000

4 ,201** ,182** ,201** 1000

5 ,141** ,181** ,230** ,296** 1000

6 ,094** ,076** ,216** ,204** ,277** 1000

7 ,177** ,155** ,108** ,226** ,210** ,295** 1000

8 ,055** ,106** ,169** ,112** ,166** ,157** ,153** 1000

9 ,120** ,155** ,167** ,203** ,176** ,150** ,192** ,474** 1000

Finally, considering the aims of the study, about perception of the social network’s effects from the identification with influencers and gamers, some descriptive and relational analysis were conducted with the variables age and gender. For the analysis of “perceived influences,” both on social relationships and ways of thinking and doing, firstly, a correlational analysis was carried out (see Table 3) to consider the interactions among effects described theoretically. The only strong correlation (R Spearman, p = 0,001) was found for the effect “cultural and peer pressure” (0,474) indicating that when perceived influence on the effect “feeling integrated into my group of friends,” they are perceived also “feeling integrated in society.” The rest of correlations for effect “behavior and decisions to act” (items 2 and 7) was low (0,155), although significant, the same for the effects “interactions with online actions” (items 1 and 3) and for the influence on “attitudes and similar thinking” (items 4, 5, and 6) with correlations from .204 to .296. When carried out the descriptive analysis of the nine items, in general, the percentages were higher for “no,” except for the items 1 and 9 that were the ones in which the adolescent perceived influences are positive; these are “in the time I spend on other offline activities” (53.3% of yes and 46.7% of no perceive influences) and “in wanting to do similar to what the people I follow online doing” (52.5% yes and 47.5% of no perceived influences). However, for the aims of the study, we carried out a differential analysis by age and gender. By age, no significant differences were found for any of the items. By gender, as depicted in Table 4 significant differences were found for the items 3, 6, and 9. From the effects of interactions online, and dimension of social relationship, significant differences were found by gender on item 3, the influence that following an influencer has for offline friendship (77.8% men do not perceive any influence in offline friendship, while for women the percentage was lesser, 76.72%, Chi2 = 0,047, p .005), which would indicate a slightly less perception for women. From the effects of cultural and peer pressure, also pertaining to the dimension of social relationships, significant differences were found between men and women on the item 9, the influence that following an influencer has in the feeling of being part of the society (55.26% of men do perceived influence on this, while 50.43% of

104

B. González-Larrea et al.

Table 4  Influences on identification perceived by gender

1. In the time I spend on other activities (e.g., studying, going out, etc.) 2. In what I decide to buy or consume 3. In real-life friendships 4. In my opinion about things that happen in the real world 5. In my opinion about myself 6. In wanting to think similar to how the people I follow online think 7. In wanting to do something similar to what the people I follow online are doing 8. In my feeling of integrating into my group of friends 9. In my feeling of being part of the society

Men Women Av SD Av SD 0,5319 0,49,931 0,5344 0,49,906 0,3524 0,47,803 0,3957 0,48,924 0,3957 0,48,924 0,3957 0,48,924 0,4317 0,49,564 0,4549 0,49,820 0,2458 0,43,083 0,2570 0,43,721 0,1547 0,36,190 0,1193 0,32,430 0,2770 0,44,780 0,2823 0,45,031 0,3953 0,48,924 0,3957 0,48,924 0,5527 0,49,754 0,5044 0,50,022

women consider the influence, Chi2 = 0,042), evidencing that men perceive more this influence of belonging to digital culture, as an influence. From the effects of attitudes and similar thinking, and the dimension ways of thinking and doing, significant differences were found by gender on the item 6, the influence that following an influencer has for wanting to think similar to how the people I follow online think (84.52% of men do not perceive any influence on this, while 88.06% of women more strongly consider no influence on this, Chi2 = 0,029).

9  Conclusions and Implications for Education Since the age range of the study is between 12 and 18 years, it would be expected that there would be statistically significant differences between sex and age in the variables studied. Its absence by age seems to indicate that the follow-up of influencers or gamers has a homogenizing effect with respect to both variables. However, this raises a series of questions: if we assume a great difference between 12 and 18  years but consumption is similar, do the audiences of influencers and gamers receive a socializing effect? Moreover, we must add a double vulnerability of adolescence: as a social group and as an evolutionary factor that implies a less critical capacity and, consequently, a greater exposure to the negative effects of social networks. This chapter focused on the vulnerability in the construction of the digital identity by adolescents when they socially interact with and being exposed to figures of influence from which they identify. The dimensions analyzed, either the influences on social relationships or the influences on ways of thinking and doing, situate two areas with greater implications for education. Vulnerability is associated, thus, with both internal and external categories. One of the most relevant for adolescence with

Online Identity Construction in Younger Generations via Identification with Influencers…

105

potential vulnerability issues is the cultural and peer pressure, perceived or suffered by individuals when they manifested themselves as integrated in the society just for being connected to social networks and following influencers or gamers. This would have severe consequences for those adolescents for whom connection is not cultural, struggling with connectivity issues, or lack in knowing how to be connected with others in social networks, especially considering the rapid evolution of trends, topics, or streaming idols that are considered as influencers. To be updated in reference to their peers, as a symptom of positive adolescence, is enlarged in digitality toward the continuous modernizing of cutting-edge topics and people, increasing the possibilities of being left behind their group of peers. This is one of the potential areas of vulnerability in which education would need to reinforce the analysis of ways to feel interconnected and included, both in their group of friends and in society. There are same considerations for the internal dimension, dealing with the influences on generating similar attitudes and ways of thinking, even changes in the decisions or behaviors. Influencers and gamers put into public their thoughts and values, turning into opinion leaders with an impact on the lives of adolescents. By gender, the influences perceived by the adolescents of this study situated that both boys and girls are considered not being influenced, however, lessperceived by boys. This outcome needs to be studied further with qualitative data and deeper analysis, avoiding desirability and obtaining specific areas of likeability on tastes, preferences, opinions, and decisions. The study raises final questions about the way in which young people relate to their peers and also to other figures of influence, such as influencers or gamers, whether they are aware of the internal and external influences of the use of social networks and whether they have acquired the necessary training to be competent in establishing their digital identities and personal development to reduce potential areas of vulnerability. Along these lines, a critical and constructive training is advocated that presents young people as the true protagonists of their virtual actions who are aware of the risks and advantages that are influencing them.

References 1. S. Racionero, E. Duque, M. Padrós, S. Molina Roldán, 'Your Friends do Matter': Peer group talk in adolescence gender and violence. Children. 8 (2021) 2. PNUD, Informe sobre desarrollo humano 2019 (Programa de las Naciones Unidas para el Desarrollo, New York, 2019) 3. F. Gil Villa, La sociedad vulnerable. Por una ciudadanía consciente de la exclusión y la inseguridad sociales (Tecnos, Madrid, 2016) 4. P.  Bourdieu, ¿Qué significa hablar? Economías de los intercambios lingüísticos (Akal, Madrid, 2008) 5. L. Hudders, P. De Pauw, V. Cauberghe, K. Panic, B. Zarouali, E. Rozendaal, Shedding new light on how advertising literacy can affect children’s processing of embedded advertising formats: a future research agenda. J. Advert. 46, 333 (2017)

106

B. González-Larrea et al.

6. S. Van Dam, E. Van Reijmersdal, Insights in adolescents’ advertising literacy, perceptions and responses regarding sponsored influencer videos and disclosures. Cyberpsychol. J. Psychosoc. Res Cyberspace. 13 (2019) 7. S. Rego Rey, L. Romero-Rodríguez, Representación discursiva y lenguaje de los' youtubers' españoles: Estudio de caso de los' gamers' más populares. Index. comunicación. 6 (2016) 8. E. Echeburúa, P. De Corral, Adicción a las nuevas tecnologías ya las redes sociales en jóvenes: un nuevo reto. Adicciones. 22 (2010) 9. M. Castells, Globalización, sociedad y política en la era de la información. Bitácora Urbano Territorial 4, 42 (2000) 10. M. Casas Pérez, La identidad nacional en la sociedad de la información. Revista mexicana de ciencias políticas y sociales 45, 35 (2002) 11. R. Aparici, S. Osuna, La cultura de la participación. Revista Mediterránea de Comunicación. 4 (2013) 12. D. Reis, T. Almeida, M. Miranda, R. Alves, A. Madeira, Vulnerabilidades a la salud en la adolescencia: condiciones socioeconómicas, redes sociales, drogas y violencia. Revista Latino-­ Americana de Enfermagem 21, 586 (2013) 13. J. Van Dijck, La cultura de la conectividad: una historia crítica de las redes sociales (Buenos Aires, Siglo XXI editores, 2019) 14. D.  Villanueva, S.  Feced, B.  Calvo, I.  Barranco, Influencia negativa de las redes sociales en la salud de adolescentes y adultos jóvenes: una revisión bibliográfica. Psicol. Salud 27, 255 (2017) 15. D. Irles, R. Gomis, J. Campos, S. González, Validación española de la Escala de Adicción a Videojuegos para Adolescentes (GASA). Aten. Primaria 50, 350 (2018) 16. J. Gee, Chapter 3: Identity as an analytic lens for research in education. Rev. Res. Educ. 25, 99 (2000) 17. E. Goffman, The moral career of the mental patient. Psychiatry 22, 123 (1959) 18. H.  Tajfel, J.  Turner, The social identity theory of intergroup behaviour, in Psychology of Intergroup Relations, ed. by S. Worchel, G. Austin, (Washington, Nelson-Hall, 1986), pp. 7–24 19. K.  McLay, P.  Renshaw, Making ‘us’ visible: Using membership categorisation analysis to explore young people's accomplishment of collective identity-in-interaction in relation to digital technology. Br. Educ. Res. J. 46, 44 (2020) 20. A. Kay, Erikson Online: Identity and Pseudo speciation in the Internet Age. Int. J. Theory Res. 18, 264 (2018) 21. J.  Brailovskaia, H.  Schillack, J.  Margraf, Tell me why are you using social media (SM)! Relationship between reasons for use of SM, SM flow, daily stress, depression, anxiety, and addictive SM use–An exploratory investigation of young adults in Germany. Comput. Hum. Behav. 113, 106511 (2020) 22. J. Carpenter, S. Morrison, M. Craft, M. Lee, How and why are educators using Instagram? Teach. Teach. Educ. 96, 103149 (2020) 23. M. Wellman, Trans-mediated parasocial relationships: Private Facebook groups foster influencer–follower connection. New Media Soc (2020) 24. K.  McLay, P.  Renshaw, Making ‘us’ visible: Using membership categorization analysis to explore young people's accomplishment of collective identity-in-interaction in relation to digital technology. Br. Educ. Res. J. 46, 44 (2020) 25. K. Davis, Young people’s digital lives: The impact of interpersonal relationships and digital media use on adolescents’ sense of identity. Comput. Hum. Behav. 29, 2281 (2013) 26. S.C. Herring, S. Kapidzic, Teens, gender, and self-presentation in social media. International Encyclopedia of Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2 (Elsevier, Oxford, 2015) 27. D. Alvermann, J. Marshall, C. McLean, A. Huddleston, J. Joaquin, J. Bishop, Adolescents’ web-based literacies, identity construction, and skill development. Literacy Research and Instruction 5, 179 (2012) 28. S. Ponnusamy, M. Iranmanesh, B. Foroughi, S.S. Hyun, Drivers and outcomes of Instagram addiction: Psychological well-being as moderator. Comput Human Behav. 107 (2020)

Online Identity Construction in Younger Generations via Identification with Influencers…

107

29. G. Scott, Z. Brodie, M. Wilson, L. Ivory, C. Hand, S. Sereno, Celebrity abuse on Twitter: The impact of tweet valence, volume of abuse, and dark triad personality factors on victim blaming and perceptions of severity. Comput. Hum. Behav. 103, 109 (2020) 30. WHO. Adolescence: a period needing special attention. (2014). https://apps.who.int/adolescent/seconddecade/section2/page1/recognizing-adolescence.html 31. M. Ruiz-Corbella, A. Oliva, Social networks, identity and adolescent: New educational challenges for the family. Estudios sobre Educación 25, (2013) 32. L.E. Arab, G.A. Díaz, Impacto de las redes sociales e internet en la adolescencia: Aspectos positivos y negativos. Revista Médica Clínica Las Condes 26, 7 (2015) 33. K.  Freberg, K.  Graham, K.  McGaughy, L.  Freberg, Who are the social media influencers?: A study of public perceptions of personality. Public Relat. Rev. 37, 90–92 (2011) 34. E. Ferrara, R. Interdonato, A. Tagarelli, Online popularity and topical interests through the lens of Instagram. Proceedings of the 25th ACM Conference on Hypertext and Social Media - HT, 14 (2014) 35. K. Lup, L. Trub, L. Rosenthal, Instagram #Instasad?: Exploring associations among Instagram use, depressive symptoms, negative social comparison, and strangers followed. Cyberpsychol. Behav. Soc. Netw. 18, 247 (2015) 36. M. Zappavigna, Social media photography: Construing subjectivity in Instagram images. Vis. Commun. 15, 271 (2016) 37. E. Frederick, C. Lim, G. Clavio, P. Walsh, Why we follow: An examination of parasocial interaction and fan motivations for following athlete archetypes on Twitter. Int. J. Sport Commun. 5, 481 (2012) 38. D.  Giles, Parasocial interaction: A review of the literature and a model for future research. Media Psychol. 4, 279 (2002) 39. S.  Morales, Repensar la identificación con personajes mediáticos de ficción. Poliantea 9, 109 (2014) 40. A. Torrego, A. Gutiérrez, M. Hoechsmann, The fine line between person and persona in the Spanish reality television show La Isla de las tentaciones: Audience engagement on Instagram. Sustainability 13, 1753 (2021) 41. J. Maltby, D.C. Giles, L. Barber, L.E. McCutcheon, Intense-personal celebrity worship and body image: Evidence of a link among female adolescents. Br. J. Health Psychol. 10, 17 (2005) 42. T. Gleason, S. Theran, E. Newberg, Parasocial interactions and relationships in early adolescence. Front. Psychol. 8, Article 255 (2017) 43. D.  Horton, R.R.  Wohl, Mass communication and para-social interaction. Psychiatry 19, 215 (1956) 44. J.M.  Muñoz-Rodríguez, M.J.  Hernández-Serrano, C.  Tabernero, Digital Identity levels in older learners: A new focus for sustainable lifelong education and inclusion. Sustainability 12, 10657 (2020)

Collaborative Digital Governance: Pseudo-­Educational Identities on the International Political Agenda? L. Belén Espejo Villar, Luján Lázaro Herrero, Gabriel Álvarez López, and Juan García Gutiérrez

1  Introduction In recent years, immersion in digital culture in the context of education is contributing to reorganising the governance of training institutions, placing digital strategy in a position of institutional power on a global scale. The regulation of supranational bodies in terms of innovation and technology1 is only a very partial reflection of the momentum achieved by digitalisation on the international stage. In this sense, addressing educational digitalisation in terms of governance is mostly translating into incorporating the digital political agenda (European and Spanish) in institutions, to understand the digital capacity of these educational organisations (Promoting Effective Digital-Age Learning, 2015), to design digitalisation strategies based on the technological performance of centres (SELFIE, 2018) and skills acquired by teachers (DigCompEdu) [2], and all from an ethical perspective and a respect of human rights. Other lines of development based on digital educational governance that have started to gain prominence are related to how states use the information systems offered by digital technologies [3] and which are used to draft education policies and to monitor teaching institutions. Hartong [4] refers to the algorithmisation of data as a common procedure in the different spheres of public administrations which in these times are related from coordinates of accountability and governmental

1  Such as the European Institute of Innovation and Technology in Regulation (EU) 2021/819 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the European Institute of Innovation and Technology

L. B. Espejo Villar () · L. Lázaro Herrero · G. Álvarez López University of Salamanca, Salamanca, Spain e-mail: [email protected] J. García Gutiérrez UNED, Madrid, Spain © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 J. M. Muñoz-Rodríguez (ed.), Identity in a Hyperconnected Society, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-85788-2_8

109

110

L. B. Espejo Villar et al.

transparency, confirming a trend that is prevailing with great dynamism and agility. For this reason, different international bodies have been especially active in promoting ethical frameworks to address digital governance and the progressive implementation of AI systems in both industrial and military sectors as well as services more related to the public and their care, as in the case of politics, education or healthcare. As the contexts and functions of digital policy expand, the study of educational digitalisation is inconceivable without greater analysis of relational frameworks and alliances (agents) that have emerged in the framework of training systems. Verger et  al. [5] embody these alliances in investors and private organisations (with the approval of the state sector); they are the agents of the Global Education Industry (GEI). All cases refer to networks which, protected by digital progress, condition how teaching centres are organised and significantly reorient their pedagogical management, opening education to new market spaces [6–8]. At the same time, we have also observed how this concern has crept into the agenda of various international human rights bodies, especially in the universal sphere. So organisations such as the Human Rights Council and its Advisory Committee or the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child have included this issue in their latest reports (Table 1). The UN Secretary General launched a High-level Panel on Digital Cooperation; its first report ‘The Age of Digital Interdependence’ highlights a very important value to take into account from a pedagogical approach: interdependence. As we will see later in the analysis, another example has been the work carried out by several UN Rapporteurs, specifically on the right to privacy and the right to education,

Table 1  Digitalisation and human rights from an institutional perspective Title General comment on children’s rights in relation to the digital environment New and emerging digital technologies and human rights Digital technology, social protection and human rights Artificial intelligence and privacy and children’s privacy The promotion, protection and enjoyment of human rights on the Internet Promotion, protection and enjoyment of human rights on the Internet: Ways to bridge the gender digital divide from a human rights perspective The right to education in the digital age

Body/procedure Committee on the rights of the child Human rights council advisory committee Special rapporteur for extreme poverty Special rapporteur on the right to privacy Human rights council

Date 2/3/2021

Reference CRC/C/GC/25

5/2/2021

A/HRC/AC/25/ CRP.2 11/10/2019 A/74/493 25/6/2021

A/HRC/46/37

4/7/2018

A/ HRC/38/L.10/ rev.1 A/HRC/35/9

5/5/2017 Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for human rights Special rapporteur on the 6/4/2016 right to education

Note: United Nations digital and tech agenda. Source: Own preparation

A/HRC/32/37

Collaborative Digital Governance: Pseudo-Educational Identities on the International…

111

who in their subsequent reports have analysed the impact of technologies on exercising these rights. But back to the UNESCO, we would like to highlight two relevant works that are—if possible—even more significant in this paper. We refer to the UNESCO guidelines for mobile learning on one hand and, on the other, the study entitled ‘Keystones to foster inclusive Knowledge Societies’. Mobile learning is interesting from the perspective of the ‘ubiquity’ that defines the online/offline continuum and because young people use these devices, these ‘mobile technologies’, en masse to stay hyperconnected. Meanwhile, the study on the ‘Keystones to foster inclusive Knowledge Societies’ reflects on the scope of Internet and recommends four principles: the first, that Internet must be based on human rights; an open and accessible Internet; and, finally, multistakeholder participation. According to UNESCO, these four dimensions structure the concept of ‘universality of Internet’ that we take as a reference when analysing and framing possible alliances in the contexts of educational digitalisation and identifying agents. These dimensions help us to frame and define the framework and categories we can use to analyse these relationships and alliances as part of training systems mediated by ICTs and emerging technologies, including AI, as shown in Table 2. Table 2  Principles of Rights, Openness, Accessibility and Multistakeholder participation (ROAM) for Internet universality Rights

Openness

Accessibility

Multistakeholder participation

The Internet is becoming so significant in everyday life, work and identity in much of the world, that it is increasingly difficult to distinguish human rights on and off the Internet. UNESCO and the UN more broadly have affirmed the principle of human rights should apply to all aspects of the Internet. As human rights are indivisible, all these rights mentioned above also need to be balanced with rights such as to association and to ‘life, liberty and security of person’, and this applies to both digital and extra-­ digital life This general principle, applied to the Internet, highlights open global standards, inter-operability, open application interfaces and open science, documents, text, data and flows. Social and political support for open systems, not only technical expertise, is part of this principle. Transparency is part of openness, as well as a dimension of the right to seek and receive information This highlights accessibility to all in overcoming digital divides, digital inequalities and exclusions based on skills, literacy, language, gender or disability. It further points to the need for sustainable business models for Internet activity and to trust in the preservation, quality, integrity, security and authenticity of information and knowledge The general principle of participation in decision-making that impacts on the lives of individuals has been part of the Internet from its outset, accounting for much of its success. It recognises the value of multistakeholder participation, incorporating users and a user-centric perspective as well as all other actors critical to developing, using and governing the Internet across a range of levels (including states, business and industry, non-governmental actors, civil society, international governmental organizations, individuals and other stakeholders)

Note. The ROAM principles for Internet universality. Source: Own preparation based from UNESCO [9]

112

L. B. Espejo Villar et al.

Under these premises, this work aims to explore the frameworks underlying digital platforms in the context of digital governance. It attempts to reflect on the role played by collaborative platforms in the process of shaping youth identity and as an instrumental support for curricular contents of compulsory teaching. To what extent is curriculum digitalisation created based on educational values or mere attraction to instrumental elements? The chapter is structured into three distinct parts used to analytically map digital platforms. The intention is to study this tool as a hegemonic resource in the framework of edtech and to analyse the repercussions that the immersion of the private sector is having on the construction of knowledge, as well as the digital identity of young people. Throughout the paper we have asked ourselves if immersion in the private sphere is generating identities that lose educational (pseudo-educational) value and whether this digitalisation would be different from other premises. What is digitalisation contributing?

2  Political Agenda and Digital Governance: Collaborative? Not without some concern, we are witnessing discourses that view the presence of major international corporations in school innovation as natural. Brands such as Apple Distinguished Schools or Google Reference School have become educational references in digital innovation. Edtech (educational technology) is essential for analysing and understanding new educational processes. The growing presence of technology companies and organisations as a niche in the education market and their capacity to implement internal changes mean, at this time, a transfer of school responsibilities to sectors and institutions outside the field of education. The authority thus attributed to these institutions in competencies historically reserved for education authorities, such as selecting best practices and even the conceptualisation of excellence (Google Reference School Network is only awarded for implementing Google tools in school educational projects), would be bringing emblematic theories of the knowledge economy and innovation to the forefront of current affairs. The convergence of agents (state, business and university) aimed at attaining greater economic achievements is an indication that the triple helix model by Etzkowitz [10] has led to a new order in relations of knowledge and social structures. The change in this triangular relationship, which now affects non-university education, comes about in a context of globalisation that requires horizons of internationalisation in educational projects and which seeks private mediatisation for knowledge production [7]. Far from a local phenomenon, this situation has become a universal trend. Peroni et al. [11] refer to the case of Brazil to condemn the market culture being imposed in education due to the (un)controlled immersion of digital technology; they argue this after verifying the collaboration between administrations and major corporations (such as Google) in the production of knowledge.

Collaborative Digital Governance: Pseudo-Educational Identities on the International…

113

Beyond the mere development of a digital work system in schools, this fact is highly significant in school governance as it represents a turning point in public-­ private relationships in the education sector while also establishing another way of conceiving the programmatic priorities of the education institution. Could we be witnessing a new gateway for the private sector to access education? Aspects such as the accreditation or certification of institutional projects are put in the hands of major corporations that operate with interests very different from the school imaginary but which are increasingly less external to education projects. The same is true of teacher training, which is now a responsibility for business institutions (Google, Apple, Samsung, etc.), as teachers must obtain qualifications offered by corporations (Google for Education) in order for schools to be awarded digital certification [12]. Another element affected by these public-private interactions is the school curriculum, which in this context is experiencing greater content and method standardisation. The use of technological supports always entails the preparation of materials that must adapt to certain ideologies in principle related to consumer premises. Pearson, the largest global education company, clearly represents this idea. Its interest for the digitalisation of educational content, in collaboration with Apple and Microsoft, has caused great concern regarding the direction education may be heading in. The creation of platforms in which content is constructed from a stance of entertainment and novelty is moving away from the coordinates in which knowledge has been shaped in education [7, 13]. Sellar and Hogan [14] question Pearson’s development of digitalisation and its theories on replacing teaching staff. How these corporations defend individual skills and the use of data provided by educational platforms has become a crucial question not only for obtaining information on the youth literacy process but also on shaping their digital identity. Ostrowicz [15] expressed the idea about the digital revolution in the following terms: when a pill allows us to learn a new concept, with a hard drive allows us to store our memories, or when gene doping allows us to improve our intellectual abilities... This involves significant technological challenges and, even more important, ethical dilemmas: will another person be able to control our knowledge using technology? (p.35).

National and international administration governments have largely been establishing collaboration agreements (company-state) regarding the use of educational products. With these agreements, companies undertake to manage teacher training and provide digital learning platforms, as well as to promote their research and materials among the education community. However, aspects regarding control mechanisms applied to educational digitalisation and under what parameters are unclear. In the case of Spain, suspension of presence-based teaching during the health crisis contributed to strengthening collaboration agreements with major corporations. The Region of Valencia was one example. For the sake of digital transformation and educational innovation, teachers received specific training by brand professionals, and all pupils from public schools (and those with public funding) will have free access to a digital learning environment.

114

L. B. Espejo Villar et al.

Meanwhile, the Regional Ministry of Education of Andalusia has also offered schools education digitalisation services by means of an agreement signed with Google Ireland. This is not the case of other regional governments, such as Madrid, where access by major technology corporations is not permitted. What is the different between one case and the other? What should we learn from this commitment to digitalisation?

3  D  igital Platforms as Generators of Capital in Educational Governance Corporate environments in education (education publishers and technology companies) have found an opportunity to develop and consolidate their role in shaping educational governance in digital platforms. These resources, introduced in the 1990s in order to facilitate teaching-learning processes in a closed environment mediated by institutions and teachers [16], have meant accepting the specific interests of companies on the pedagogical conception of resources. Thanks to big data and statistical control, these tools have served to formulate policies in a readjustment of reality, in terms of efficiency and competitiveness, that contributes to subordinate educational realities to statistical data and monitoring teaching-learning processes [17]. Thus, digital platforms operate like digital governance mechanisms which serve private interests. The lack of debate on the implications of digital platforms in the comprehensive development of our pupils at all levels of education government (administration, schools and teachers) has contributed to a governance model in which information and technology are extensive and unbreakable processes [18]. Boneu [19] offers an overview of the evolution of content management systems (CMS), which would go from a first stage in which CMS are conceived as programs for online information management to the development of learning management systems (LMS), which provide training courses and events aimed at enhancing the digital skills of users. Finally, a third stage leads us to learning content management systems (LCMS) that integrate both CMS and LMS features, in the sense that they are implemented in structured environments designed so that organisations-­ companies can publish their own content; this aspect was materialised by opening up defining these practices and processes to the participation of experts and collaborators. Incorporating these private agents in learning environments entails major corporations interfering in educational processes and, therefore, specific interests in constructing an aspect that is common to all. Digital platforms, as tools designed by these corporations, are ultimately a Trojan horse to enter education systems by making general interest subordinate to their market interests. We must therefore analyse their surreptitious, interested intentions for certain centres of political and economic power.

Collaborative Digital Governance: Pseudo-Educational Identities on the International…

115

The role of education administrations as guarantors of the right to education would imply their involvement in regulating these means; however, we find that incorporating these market mechanisms in education systems has been exempt from legislative control. On the contrary, according to their own market goals, technology companies have developed the digital educational environments that public administrations buy and implement. At the crossroads between public and private interests in this educational governance model, superficiality seems to favour the public side by selling educational digitalisation processes as adapting educational systems to twenty-first-century needs, but the underlying current is set by educational corporations by integrating their products into schools. Thus, the use of policies based on private digital dynamics is increasingly consolidated in order to achieve adequate constant auditing aimed at monitoring educational actions in real time and taking measures susceptible to pedagogical intervention [17]. In the case of Spain, as regulating education is a regional competence, we can verify that there is no centralised policy on this issue; autonomous regions are in charge of shaping and drawing up the political agenda in this area. Within the scope of their competence, each autonomous region has digital platforms for the pedagogical and administrative management of their education systems. The design and implementation of these platforms is the result of collaboration between education administrations and sector companies [20], such as Microsoft in the Region of Valencia, Cisco in Galicia, Moodle in Catalonia or Google in the Canary Islands. Generally, schools sign up to education platforms voluntarily and management platforms are mandatory; choosing or developing alternative education platforms is left to their pedagogical criteria. Martínez [21] focused on the case of Andalusia, including an interesting variant: the role of education inspections. He details the platforms used in the regional education system and situates them in relation to the work of education inspections, stressing that an assessment plan on the efficiency of digital resources—especially platforms—is necessary in order to systematise their use and integration in teaching-learning processes. This work emphasises the lack of critical thinking on these privatisation processes and interference in educational governance. The COVID-19 pandemic has once again highlighted some of the problems involved in these digitalisation processes we were already witnessing before the health crisis but which have now increased. In a recent report by Education International [22] (Williamson and Hogan, 2020), the authors analyse the channels agents and networks have used to achieve commercial education opportunities during the COVID-19 crisis. According to these authors, we are witness to a process of ‘commercialisation and privatisation of public education through edtech during the emergency of global school closures and home-based learning’ (p. 78). The report highlights that major edtech companies, education sector companies and technology corporations are investing in implementing products during the pandemic in order to capitalise on them in the future. At the same time, they recognised that commercialisation and privatisation are important at some moments and that without the contribution of the private sector many millions of students around the world would have been left with no access to education during the pandemic. Williamson and Hogan [22] believe that it is not a solely private initiative but that efforts are

116

L. B. Espejo Villar et al.

being dedicated to creating multisectoral networks at the same time that dependencies are generated among the different agents. This results in a specific representation of the global education industry and dynamics of interconnected regulation of education at an especially complex time, reminiscent of old concerns on the role of transnational private authority in education systems, undermining democratic control of public education, cutting back on teaching autonomy and the very concept of education as a public good [23]. Back to the case of Spain, one example of this interference can be found in the Region of Madrid. During the COVID-19 pandemic, public education platform EducaMadrid crashed as it was not prepared for such a high volume of activity as required at that time, and many schools decided to use free, private corporate educational platforms such as Google, Microsoft and Apple. After a data protection problem, the education authority banned the use of any private platform and began signing collaboration agreements with Microsoft, Google and Adobe to adapt their policies to European and Spanish regulations in order to use their platforms as a supplement to the public platform. The Region of Madrid has also signed an agreement with Grupo Planeta to offer digital resources and tools developed by the publishing company. What initially could seem a proactive attitude of control by private companies in the public sector ends in accepting market frameworks in digital educational governance. To sum up, the digital learning market activates political subjects that until now were on the fringes of decision-making in the educational framework. We are referring to a sector where public and private environments coexist with interests that are initially divergent (development of a public good and of a private good) but which in practice maintain an apparently symbiotic relationship, but in a background of acceptance of market frameworks and the subordination of public interests to private, in a model of digital educational governance were the private sphere takes the political initiative [24]. The repercussions of this model in public administration can be seen in ad hoc legislative design (beyond acceptance of data privacy rules) and in the use of private corporate platforms (technology companies and education publishers) for schools to the detriment of public platforms. In short, the ‘platformisation’ of e-learning means the inclusion of private agents that are expanding their commercial operations in digital educational governance; global entities geared towards offering educational resources and solutions to countries that implement policies favourable to the development of the private sector and which find a supposed ally in the market. Accepting these frameworks as urgent solutions to unforeseen problems (such as the case of the pandemic) should not be at odds with a profound debate on the role these private political agents are playing in the educational governance model and, above all, in the educational repercussions that adopting their interests may have for the future of national education systems, a debate that is until now unresolved but already shows signs of some risks mentioned in this chapter.

Collaborative Digital Governance: Pseudo-Educational Identities on the International…

117

4  E  merging Technologies and Their Impact on Exercising Human Rights at International Level After all, all technological discourses at their various levels reach the citizen/consumer who, in one way or another, also takes part in formal, non-formal and informal education processes. From this perspective, not only the doctrine already known [25–29] but many international organisations are asking about this impact on how we understand and construct youth identity or, in other words, how emerging technologies affect citizens and the exercise of human rights, more so in the case of the most vulnerable groups such as women, children or people with disabilities, including other groups or minorities. In order to respond to this question, we will avail of various documents generated by the United Nations which, precisely due to their universal nature, as valid analysis proposals pertinent to the global and interdependent reality we face in the digital world. Indeed, we face what has been called the ‘attention economy’ in ‘cognitive societies’ [30]. Digital technologies are not only present in all areas of personal life (even in the most intimate, private and personal lives2) but by spreading throughout socialising processes they increasingly penetrate internal processes such as cognitive one and, therefore, also in the construction of moral personality through processes of manipulation or attracting attention, more typical of commerce (advertising and marketing) than of education processes. We are therefore now realising the addictive power of technologies, from video games to social networks or even online advertising. All the applications and messages we receive on digital media are focused on capturing the attention of the citizen/consumer (and the longer the better) through a more or less rudimentary system of exchanging rewards, characteristics of behavioural psychology. Technology products, in any format or version, require the ongoing attention of ‘users’. It is the energy that ‘nourishes’ them, making them more and more ‘useful’ and ‘necessary’. It is a perverse feedback or, in other words, a vicious circle. The more people who continuously pay attention to digital products—i.e., the more lasting connection there are to products—the more they can squeeze the various data flows generated by connections, which in turn results in providing multiple information, apparently necessary and interesting, to users. Having said that, the basis on which products and connections are built is more economic than pedagogical. In other words, the digital world with the plethora of products it feeds is not designed to ‘automatically’ improve people’s lives (nor their personality or social relationships) but to maintain and increase attention flows towards the digital, following the foundations of neuromarketing and advertising [31–33]. We can think about how technologies have influenced politics at various levels, both with mass telecommunications espionage and public profiles to induce them to vote in a certain way. And although these 2  Along with reports by the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the right to privacy, some works of fiction, such as Machines Like Me (McEwan, 2019), explore and openly reflect on the scope of technology in the most intimate and private spheres.

118

L. B. Espejo Villar et al.

practices are of dubious morality, the truth is that we cannot apparently get rid of them. We are faced with what has been called “surveillance capitalism” [34] (p. 9), that is, an economic order that demands human experience as a free raw material to be exploited for a series of hidden commercial practices of extraction, prediction and sales. The influence is a subject of concern by the international community as indicated in several international resolutions and documents. For the issue at hand, one of the most important and recent international documents was drafted by the Children’s Rights Council (CRC), which in recent years has been working on a new ‘General Comment (GC)’ on children’s rights in relation to the digital environment (CRC/C/ GC/25). These comments are relevant as they help us to interpret the rights contained in the convention. Furthermore, this General Comment (GC25) is, if possible, more important because in 1989 the digital world did not have the weight it has today in children. GC25 starts by defining what is understood by ‘digital environment’, stating that it is ‘constantly evolving and expanding’ and ‘encompassing information and communications technologies, including digital networks, content, services and applications, connected devices and environments, virtual and augmented reality, artificial intelligence, robotics, automated systems, algorithms and data analytics, biometrics and implant technology’ (paragraph 2). It is therefore an extensive definition, in line with existing international definitions.3 The importance of this new environment for children is also justified as it affects all aspects of life, offering new opportunities to exercise their rights while posing risks due to their infringement or abuse. For this reason, the GC25 adopts the principles of non-discrimination; best interests of the child; right to life, survival and development; participation; and evolving capacities, which are also fundamental in the digital world. Firstly, non-discrimination means that, in a virtual environment, children should have equal and effective access to the digital environment in a way that is beneficial to them (paragraph 9). But what does this seemingly general and vague statement mean? Specifically, it means providing free and safe access for children in specific public locations and investing in policies and programmes that support all children having affordable access to digital technologies and their informed use in educational settings, communities and homes (paragraph 9). The comment undoubtedly associates access with the necessary digital literacy, both at schools and in the home, but also with the discrimination involved in exclusion from the use of technologies. Secondly, and taking into account the best interests of the child, this principle must go hand-in-hand with evolving capacities [35]. Indeed, best interests will be a primary consideration in both actions related to the provision, regulation, design, management and use of the digital environment (paragraph 12), as well as

3  Vid. Human Rights Council Advisory Committee Report ‘New and emerging digital technologies and human rights’ (A(HRC/AC/25/CRP.2, 5 February 2021)

Collaborative Digital Governance: Pseudo-Educational Identities on the International…

119

exercising rights in the digital world. Above all, best interests of the child modulate proper protection of children in cyberspace. The right to life, survival and development places special emphasis on ‘risks relating to content, contact, conduct and contract encompass, among other things, violent and sexual content, cyberaggression and harassment, gambling, exploitation and abuse, including sexual exploitation and abuse, and the promotion of or incitement to suicide or life-threatening activities’ (paragraph 14). It also affirms a relevant aspect from a pedagogical perspective and for the development of children, which is that ‘the use of digital devices should not be harmful, nor should it be a substitute for in-person interactions among children or between children and parents or caregivers’ (paragraph 15). Something that was also mentioned by the Special Rapporteur when examining the right to education in the digital era (A/ HRC/32/37, 6 April 2016), warning that, for example, ‘massive open online courses should not be used to weaken public provision of education or promote the privatization and commercialization of public education’ (paragraph 90) and technologies cannot undermine human values in education and cannot break the fundamental mission of universities as the moral seat of learning (paragraph 105). In the recommendations, the Special Rapporteur associates safeguarding the right to education and the principle of development, which we have seen, warning and advising how digital technologies can collaborate in sustaining and expanding process of commercialisation and privatisation of education. Thirdly, we must address children’s participation in the digital environment, in other words, using all digital resources available to them to foster participation at all levels (from local to supranational). This principle would also entail their voice being heard and taken into account, mainly by the private sector, in all matters related to the creation and design of digital products geared towards children. Also from the public sector, as ‘States parties are encouraged to utilize the digital environment to consult with children on relevant legislative, administrative and other measures and to ensure that their views are considered seriously and that children’s participation does not result in undue monitoring or data collection that violates their right to privacy, freedom of thought and opinion’ (paragraph 18). In this same vein, another recent relevant contribution is by the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the right to privacy, in relation to artificial intelligence (AI) and children’s privacy (A/HRC/46/37, 25 January 2021).4 As indicated in the General Comment cited above, ‘States parties should require all businesses that affect children’s rights in relation to the digital environment to implement regulatory frameworks, industry codes and terms of services that adhere to the highest standards of ethics, privacy and safety in relation to the design, engineering, development, operation, distribution and marketing of their products and services’ (paragraph 39). For this reason, in a substantial part of the report, the Rapporteur’s work on the right to privacy has focused on the impact of artificial

4  In this area, we must also consider the UNICEF project on Recommendations for AI policies and the rights of children (UNICEF 2020).

120

L. B. Espejo Villar et al.

intelligence, especially on children’s privacy and rights. In the knowledge society, data are undoubtedly the new fuel to keep the economic engine running, and, therefore, they must be protected in order to affirm and safeguard a humanist approach in detriment to those that are more commercial or economistic. The Rapporteur considers children’s right to privacy from the perspective of developing ‘their bodily and mental integrity, decisional autonomy, personal identity, informational privacy and physical/spatial privacy’ (paragraph 71). And this is because children’s right to privacy has traditionally been determined by adults (paragraph 79). However, this approach objectifies the child, treating them independently and isolated from their affective and relational fabric, thus achieving the opposite of what is pursued; the most digital autonomy is claimed from more isolated and independent children; they are also more vulnerable and defenceless to technological and digital attacks. As stated by the Rapporteur, adult interpretations of the privacy needs of children can prevent the healthy development of autonomy and independence, and restrict a child’s privacy in the name of protection. How adults use surveillance in order to protect children is an example of this. It limits the child’s right to privacy and autonomy, and yet children are subject to increasing technological surveillance by Governments, the private sector, parents, family and peers. (paragraph 80).

Indeed, the use of the notion of surveillance is clear example of how using a commercialist approach can pervert the use of terms. Surveillance not only has a ‘commercialist’ reading that seeks to squeeze and collect all a person’s data in all possible ways. Surveillance from a pedagogical approach is nothing more than a way of articulating the care and necessary attention of adults towards young people, in other words, not leaving them to their own autonomy. Some approaches that may legitimately seek to promote children’s rights and their ‘empowerment’ in the digital environment actually undermine their own identity and offer it, as a mass of data, to the highest technological bidder.

5  Conclusions The aim of this chapter is to show digitalisation as a new channel for configuring educational governance, bearer of a capital that is essential for underpinning alliances between governments and international bodies. The responsibility that administrations and schools are assuming in the implementation of institutional guidelines on digital education added the legitimacy achieved by new agents in controlling educational organisations. We have verified the scope of digital technology, not only in the diversification of the contexts and functions being carried out, in terms of digitalisation, in the design of education policies, but which also proposes a relational framework whose educational repercussions are unprecedented in the organisation and operation of education systems.

Collaborative Digital Governance: Pseudo-Educational Identities on the International…

121

The digitalisation of education is shaping a new governance scenario where the presence of private agents acquires notable relevance. By offering digital platforms, technology companies and education publishers are determining the forms and background of education processes while meeting their market objectives. This growing influence sets the pedagogical approach and teacher training, obtaining an education system concerned with implementing these platforms from a political and economic stance without the accompanying thought process on decisive political and social factors. The permeability of the education system in incorporating these tools requires a calm debate on the axiological and identity implications in young people; the monitoring of their processes and educational performance along with the incorporation of hardware for correct development—computers, routers, mobile devices, digital blackboards, etc.—and the need for a constant presence in the virtual field entail the integration of values typical of capitalism, such as competitiveness and efficiency, to the detriment of fairer approaches to education that prioritise cooperation and improving the common space. Therefore, public administrations, as leading agents in a desired democratic educational governance focused on the common good, must assume debates and regulate and control access by these private political agents to the digital education stage. International studies reviewed offer an accurate and universal analysis of the impact of digital technologies on the rights of children, precisely from a human rights-based approach. This is necessary in order to (re)direct a training itinerary in which technologies really are at the service of people, and not vice versa, as the opposite implies a commercialisation of the identities of children and young people, not exactly because of their superior interest but because of other types of—not so superior—interests.

References 1. H.A. Giroux, Neoliberalism’s war on higher education (Haymarket Books, Chicago, 2014) 2. C.  Redecker, Y.  Punie, European Framework for the Digital Competence of Educators: DigCompEdu (Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 2017). Available from: https://op.europa.eu/s/pkmR 3. B.  Williamson, Moulding student emotions through computational psychology: Affective learning technologies and algorithmic governance. Educ. Media Int. 54(4), 267–288 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1080/09523987.2017.1407080 4. S.  Hartong, Education Governance and the Productive relationalities of School monitoring infrastructures, in International Perspectives on School Settings Education Policy and Digital Strategies, ed. by A.  Wilmers, S.  Jornitz, (Verlag Barbara Budrich, Leverkusen-Opladen, 2021), pp. 242–253 5. A. Verger, C. Lubienski, G. Steiner-Khamsi, The emergence and structuring of the global education industry: Towards an analytical framework, in World Yearbook of Education 2016: The Global Education Industry, (Routledge, New York, 2016), pp. 1–25 6. J. Adell Segura, L. Castañeda Quintero, M.F. Estebe, ¿Hacia la Ubersidad? Conflictos y contradicciones de la universidad digital. RIED Revista Iberoamericana de Educación a Distancia 21(2), 51–68 (2018). Available from: http://revistas.uned.es/index.php/ried/article/view/20669

122

L. B. Espejo Villar et al.

7. R.  Gorur, S.  Sellar, G.  Steiner-Khamsi, World Yearbook of Education 2019: Comparative Methodology in the Era of Big Data and Global Networks (Routledge, London, 2018) 8. G.  Saura, K.  Caballero, Capitalismo académico digital. Revista Española de Educación Comparada 37, 192–210 (2020). https://doi.org/10.5944/reec.37.2021.27797 9. Unesco. UNESCO’S INTERNET UNIVERSALITY INDICATORS. Framework for Assessing Internet Development. (2019) Available from: https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/ pf0000367617?posInSet=1&queryId=a46642b0-­1893-­4f04-­9bfb-­b832b0851652 10. H.  Etzkowitz, Innovation in innovation: The triple helix of university-industry-government relations. Soc. Sci. Inform. 42(3), 293–337 (2003) 11. V.M.V.  Peroni, M.R.  Caetano, L.R.G.  Gomes Arelaro, BNCC: disputa pela qualidade ou submissão da educação? Revista Brasileira de Política e Administração da Educação 35(1), 35–56 (2019) 12. J.  Knudsen, T.P.  Lundh, S.R.I.  Education, M.  Hsiao, D.  Saucedo, Zearn Math Curriculum Study Professional Development Final Report. SRI Education; TERC (2020) 13. L. Castañeda, J. Salinas, J. Adell-Segura, Hacia una visión contemporánea de la Tecnología Educativa. Digital Educ. Rev. 37, 240–268 (2020) Available from: http://greav.ub.edu/der/ 14. S. Sellar, A. Hogan, Pearson 2025: Transforming teaching and privatising education data. Edu. Int., 25 (2019). Available from: https://n9.cl/ii4i3 15. I.  Ostrowicz, Lo que se esconde detrás de la EdTech y la LearnTech. Telos Cuadernos de Comunicación E Innovación 110, 30–35 (2019) 16. E.  Dans, Educación online: plataformas educativas y el dilema de la apertura. Revista de Universidad y Sociedad del Conocimiento 6(1), 22–30 (2009) 17. B.  Williamson, Digital education governance: An introduction. Edu. Res. J. 15(1), 3–13 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1177/1474904115616630 18. J.R. Gil-García, S.S. Dawes, T.A. Pardo, Digital government and public management research: Finding the crossroads. Public Manag. Rev. 20(5), 633–646 (2018). https://doi.org/10.108 0/14719037.2017.1327181 19. J.M. Boneu, Plataformas abiertas de e-learning para el soporte de contenidos educativos abiertos. Revista de Universidad y Sociedad del Conocimiento 4(1), 36–47 (2007) 20. M.M.  Castro-Rodríguez, A.D.C.  Calvo, V.M.H.  Rivero, Análisis de plataformas educativas digitales comerciales españolas destinadas a Educación Primaria/Analysis of Spanish commercial digital educational platforms for Primary Education. Revista Latinoamericana de Tecnología Educativa –RELATEC. 16(2):49–62 (2017). Available from: http://dx.medra.org/1 0.17398/1695-­288X.16.2.49 21. M. de Carmen Martínez Serrano, Las plataformas educativas de la Consejería de Educación de la Junta de Andalucía y el plan de inspección educativa. Revista Avances en supervisión educativa 32, 1–25 (2019). https://doi.org/10.23824/ase.v0i32.651 22. Williamson B, Hogan A. La comercialización y la privatización en y de la educación en el contexto de la COVID-19. Internacional de la Educación. 82 (2010). Available from: https:// ei-­i e-­a l.org/recurso/la-­c omercializacion-­y -­l a-­p rivatizacion-­e n-­y -­d e-­l a-­e ducacion-­e n-­e l-­ contexto-­de-­la-­covid-­19 23. A.  Verger, The rise of the global education industry: Some concepts, facts and figures. Edu. Int. (2016). Available from: https://www.ei-­ie.org/en/ item/21340:the-­rise-­of-­the-­global-­education-­industry-­some-­concepts-­facts-­and-­figures 24. E.-J. Díez-Gutiérrez, Gobernanza híbrida digital y Capitalismo EdTech: la crisis del COVID-19 como amenaza. Foro de Educación 19(1), 105–133 (2021). https://doi.org/10.14516/fde.860 25. R.J. Cavalier, Impact of the Internet on our moral lives (The SUNY Press, Albany, 2005) 26. E.  Morozov, La locura del solucionismo tecnológico (Katz Editores y Capital Intelectual, Buenos Aires, 2015) 27. N.  Carr, Atrapados: cómo las máquinas se apoderan de nuestras vidas (Buenos Aires, Taurus, 2014) 28. A. Keen, Internet no es la respuesta, vol 3 (Catedral, La Galera Barcelona, 2016)

Collaborative Digital Governance: Pseudo-Educational Identities on the International…

123

29. S. Turkle, En defensa de la conversación: el poder de la conversación en la era digital (Ático de los Libros, Barcelona, 2020) 30. T. Wu, Comerciantes de atención: la lucha épica por entrar en nuestra cabeza (CAPITÁN SWING LIBROS, Madrid, 2020) 31. N.  Eyal, Enganchado. Cómo construir productos y servicios exitosos que formen hábitos. Sunshine Business Dev (2020) 32. A. Alter, Irresistible. ¿Quién nos ha convertido en yonquis tecnológicos? (Ediciones Paidós, Barcelona, 2018) 33. J. Williams, Clics contra la humanidad (Ediciones GATOPARDO SLU, Barcelona, 2021) 34. S. Zuboff, La era del capitalismo de la vigilancia: La lucha por un futuro humano frente a las nuevas fronteras del poder (Barcelona, Paidós, 2020) 35. G.  Lansdown, La evolución de las facultades des niño (UNICEF-Centro Innocenti., Florencia, 2005)

Part II

Educational Processes, Practices and Challenges

Students with Disabilities in the Digital Society: Opportunities and Challenges for Inclusive Education Antonio Jiménez-Lara, Agustín Huete-García, and Eduardo Díaz-Velázquez

1  Introduction: ICT in Education Education systems are currently facing unprecedented technological investment, which is transforming schools. The widespread application of information and communication technologies (from now on, ICT) is a global challenge, particularly affecting children’s and young people’s technology-mediated identities and social relationships, both in and out of school. Technology has become a standard tool in schools. This digitalization process allows students to acquire the necessary skills to survive in a society focused on technological knowledge in a new learning experience. The use of technology in the classroom goes beyond the simple use of computers and other devices; it requires active student participation, collaboration with other classmates, and a new interaction between teacher and student. Incorporating these tools in schools has some benefits that help improve efficiency and productivity in the classroom by increasing students’ interest in their academic activities. However, we should ask ourselves about the impact of ICT in education on particularly vulnerable groups: is the use and application of ICT a factor that increases or reduces segregation and educational inequalities?

A. Jiménez-Lara State Disability Observatory, Olivenza, Spain A. Huete-García () University of Salamanca, Salamanca, Spain e-mail: [email protected] E. Díaz-Velázquez University of Alcalá, Madrid, Spain e-mail: [email protected]

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 J. M. Muñoz-Rodríguez (ed.), Identity in a Hyperconnected Society, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-85788-2_9

127

128

A. Jiménez-Lara et al.

This chapter will focus on a specific group: students with special educational needs (from now on, SEN) due to a disability. In particular, in the context of inclusive education. We analyze the risks and opportunities that the deployment of ICT in schools can mean for students with disabilities and, by extension, for the development and improvement of inclusive schools, from the perspective of universal design and for all people. In the following lines, we will make a general approach to the access of students with SEN derived from a disability to the general education system and the difficulties and barriers that education systems currently face in achieving inclusive education. We analyze the role that ICT can play in facilitating the educational inclusion of these students and the accessibility requirements that these ICTs need. Next, we will specifically explore the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the use and generalization of ICT, particularly for students with SEN arising from a disability. We will highlight both the potential of ICT and the risks and difficulties that their use may entail for students with disabilities, especially if they are not designed with universal criteria.

2  Disability, Inclusive Education, and Design for All People People with disabilities do not always have equal access to spaces where citizenship rights are exercised, including the education system. Thus, article 2 of the 2006 UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (from now on, Convention) establishes that “discrimination on the basis of disability” means any distinction, exclusion, or restriction on the basis of disability which has the purpose or effect of impairing or nullifying the recognition, enjoyment, or exercise, on an equal basis with others, of all human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural, civil, or any other field [1]. Noting these risks of discrimination in areas such as education, the Convention recognizes the right to inclusive education in its article 24: “States Parties recognize the right of persons with disabilities to education. With a view to realizing this right without discrimination and on the basis of equal opportunity, States Parties shall ensure an inclusive education system at all levels” [1]. However, inclusive education has not always been the answer to special educational needs arising from disability. In fact, there are still two parallel systems in many countries today: general education and special education. A historical milestone toward inclusive education, the Salamanca Statement of 1994, promoted by UNESCO, conceives that “regular schools with this inclusive orientation are the most effective means of combating discriminatory attitudes, creating welcoming communities, building an inclusive society and achieving education for all” [2]. UNESCO has been one of the international organizations that have most promoted the model of inclusive education. Eleven years after the Salamanca Statement, and 1 year before the Convention, UNESCO states: “rather than being a marginal

Students with Disabilities in the Digital Society: Opportunities and Challenges…

129

issue on how some students can be integrated into general education, inclusive education is an approach that looks into how to transform education systems and other learning environments to respond to the diversity of learners” [3]. As Echeita and Ainscow point out, the aim of inclusive education should be to eliminate social exclusion and segregation arising from any diversity, not only of disability but also of gender, ethnicity, or social class [4]. However, children with disabilities worldwide continue to have lower access to education and poorer educational outcomes than those without disabilities. According to the 2011 World Report on Disability, “children with disabilities are less likely to start school than their peers without disabilities and have lower rates of staying and being promoted in schools. Education completion gaps are found across all age groups in both low-income and high-income countries, with the pattern more pronounced in poorer countries” [5]. Given this situation, the same report considers that “the inclusion of children with disabilities in general schools promotes universal primary completion, is cost-effective and contributes to the elimination of discrimination.” Nevertheless, as the UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities indicated in its General Comment 4 (2016) on the right to inclusive education, inclusion implies a process of systemic reform involving changes and modifications to the content, teaching methods, approaches, structures, and strategies of education, so the inclusion of students with disabilities in general classes without consequent structural changes would not constitute inclusion [6]. The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (SDG), although unlike the Convention it is not a legally binding instrument for states, recognizes the value of ensuring inclusive, equitable, and quality education in its SDG 4 on education, which translates into two specific goals: • Target 4.5 Ensure equal access to all levels of education and vocational training for the vulnerable, including persons with disabilities. • Target 4.a Build and upgrade education facilities that are child, disability and gender sensitive and provide safe, non-violent, inclusive and effective learning environments for all [7]. However, as mentioned above, segregation based on disability still exists in the education systems of much of the world, just as segregation on socioeconomic, ethnic, or gender grounds does. At present, these other forms of segregation answer to social, economic, or cultural dynamics, more or less complex, but the segregation of students with disabilities are in many cases socially and legally legitimated [8], even in more advanced societies. Although different international institutions, such as the OECD, take SEN into account in their database [9], we lack updated data to give a worldwide account of SEN identification and their schooling in general or special schools. At the European level, we do have data from 2018 collected by the European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive Education, which, on the one hand, shows the very uneven detection of learners with an official decision of SEN between different countries. The SEN identification rates range from 1.02% to 25.12%. On the

130

A. Jiménez-Lara et al.

other hand, their distribution in general schools in primary and lower-secondary education is very uneven. While in countries such as Italy, Iceland, Malta, or Norway the percentage of learners with an official decision of SEN in inclusive education is above 90%, in others, it is below 50%, with other educational modalities such as special classes in general or special schools predominating [10]. At the same time, that countries such as Italy or Portugal or some specific regions have successful experiences in the transition from a segregated to an inclusive education model [11] and legislative reforms in such countries continue to move toward inclusive education, resistance to general schooling is emerging among some of the families of students with disabilities. These families defend schooling in special education centers and react, as in Spain, against legislative reforms that orientate the education system toward inclusion. In this sense, this mobilization against shows the partial failure of the process of educational inclusion. It reflects the fear of families that their children will not be adequately cared for and their dissatisfaction with experiences of inclusion in ordinary schools in which the latter have not provided students with the necessary support for their learning [12]. Alternatively, they may have been neglected by their teachers or bullied by their peers. In short, progress in the inclusion of students with special educational needs in general schools may be slowed down if these schools do not provide the necessary support for these students and do not develop education from an inclusive approach. “To be schooled in the ordinary education system is a necessary but not sufficient condition for inclusion since sufficient support staff and resources need to be available at ordinary centres in order to respond to the needs of students with disabilities. Therefore, inclusive education would be a step towards an inclusive society in which persons with disabilities could be considered equal citizens. Inequalities in the access to the ordinary education system or segregating education will condition the life opportunities of students and, thus, favour employment and economic inequalities in adulthood” [8]. One of the keys to guaranteeing equal access to an inclusive education system is that its contents, spaces, methodologies, and evaluations are accessible, for which they must design according to criteria of universality. A student with a disability in the ordinary education system cannot be considered included if it is not accessible and responds to their needs. In this sense, ICTs used in educational contexts must also be designed for everyone, that is, with universal accessibility criteria, so that students with disabilities can use them on an equal footing with their peers. The COVID-19 pandemic situation, and a global context open to developing inclusive policies in all areas, in which ICTs will play an essential role, could be an opportunity to make our education systems more inclusive [13] or, if no action is taken, to widen the disability gap.

Students with Disabilities in the Digital Society: Opportunities and Challenges…

131

3  A  ccess to Educational Technologies for Students with Disabilities Before the massive incorporation of technology into education systems, there were already discriminatory elements toward scholars with disabilities, mainly due to lack of resources, inaccessibility of spaces and care devices, as well as a high frequency of rejection or ignorance of specific needs on the part of teaching teams and other scholars. Current evidence indicates that the design of educational policies lacks a disability perspective, educational systems overlook the responsibility to educate students with disabilities [14, 15], school spaces present accessibility problems [16], and teachers are not prepared for the education of people with disabilities [17]. Thus, from a rights point of view, there are unresolved challenges to which technology can be added both as a protective factor and as a factor that aggravates disability discrimination. Technologies can both promote and undermine the inclusion of people with disabilities in the educational system [18]. The current deployment of technology in schools is centered on the high growth of mobile devices [19], primarily individual screens (smartphones, tablets), PowerPoint data projectors, interactive whiteboards, gamification, virtual reality, and cloud-based learning tools. Each of these technologies can be a source of difficulty for the inclusion of people with disabilities in education systems if appropriate measures are not taken. As is evident, most devices are based on an audio-visual-intensive experience, for which students with vision or hearing disabilities will need adaptations that are not always available. Touchscreen devices can open up a world of new possibilities for people with learning or intellectual disabilities [20], but they can be inaccessible to students with physical disabilities without appropriate adaptations. The transition from computer to tablet as an essential tool for learning may be an unexpected step backward for students with disabilities who already had adaptations to these devices. One of the significant advantages of digital technologies applied to schools is their ability to personalize learning [21]. Many schools are increasingly trying to offer solutions adapted to the individual characteristics of students. However, personalization of learning should not be confused with segregation in school facilities, whether centers, classrooms, or technological tools. The current needs of the disabled population must necessarily be taken into account when introducing technological devices in schools through the inclusive design of devices intended for the general population (without disabilities). Technologies applied to the educational process have incorporated elements, applications, and innovations that favor the inclusion of students with disabilities. The development of assistive technologies has expanded the possibilities of access to educational content for people with disabilities. Assistive technologies specifically designed for people with vision, hearing, and reading disabilities can also have unexpected positive effects. For example, screen

132

A. Jiménez-Lara et al.

reading, or speech recognition software, can help improve the ability of all students to access information presented in schools. However, the inclusion of a student with a disability in the classroom is not only a matter of incorporating unique resources for the student, known as assistive technologies. It is a matter of avoiding exclusivity in the school’s design, the classroom, and the classroom materials used in it. Assistive technologies are added to improve equity and inclusion. However, from an inclusive or universal design point of view, advances in disability-specific technologies are insufficient. The development of technological tools requires the application of a universal design for all people that do not replicate in the future the current ableist conception of education systems, built according to a demand in which the needs of the disabled population have not been taken into account, which has had detrimental consequences that materialize in poor educational results [17]. Teachers, however, are often not adequately prepared to address the technology needs of their SEN students and have not had the opportunities to access the technology due to limited availability and cost [22]. There is strong evidence to suggest that the qualification of teachers is a critical factor in the learning outcomes that children achieve. The certification of qualified teachers is also an inclusion key [23]. The addition of a layer of technology to the schools can complicate matters as much as simplify them for people with disabilities. There are potential drawbacks to this ostensible benefit: the risk that technology development contributes to deepening disability inequality in schools is warned about in Article 24 of the Convention. Introducing questions about whether the disability is appropriately addressed in global technology deployment education policies is a rights issue. Policies of access to digital technology for students with disabilities should address equality in the same way that attends issues about gender, poverty, rural areas, minority, or others [23, 24]. The rapid development of technology implies a comprehensive transformation of education systems. Trends move toward the entry of technology into the classroom and toward the partial or total replacement of face-to-face classes. The strong impetus of technological development has coupled with the implementation in times of the COVID-19 pandemic, where social distance and non-face-to-face have become a vital necessity.

4  T  he Impact of COVID-19 on ICT Deployment for Scholars with Disabilities ICTs offer multiple advantages for inclusive education: enable students to progress at their own pace, promote autonomy, enhance cooperative and project-based work, provide immediate and dynamic teaching experience, enrich the learning environment, facilitate access to multiple information resources, encourage both

Students with Disabilities in the Digital Society: Opportunities and Challenges…

133

synchronous and asynchronous communication between students with disabilities and their peers and teachers, and overcome some of the limitations resulting from sensory, motor, or intellectual disabilities [25]. Technology has indeed made it possible for many of the barriers that exist in the real world to disappear in virtual environments. As Panamanian activist Fanny Wong stated at the Fifth International Congress on Higher Education, Disability and Human Rights, held in August 2012 at the Technological University of Panama, “within the network, the blind are not blind, the deaf are not deaf, and those who cannot move, move. In the virtual space, there is no disability, and all people are equal in their opportunities” [26]. Face-to-face education is essential for the education of children with disabilities, who must learn, like other children, to live with their peers in addition to the curricular content. However, UNESCO has found that an increasing number of adults with disabilities are enrolling in distance education courses, due not only to the growing availability of this educational modality but also to technological advances that make it possible to overcome some of the barriers to learning that these people encounter in face-to-face environments [27]. Along the same lines, it has been found that blended learning based on ICT is, in some countries, the majority option among university students with disabilities. For example, in public universities in Spain, it is estimated that the proportion of university students with disabilities is 5.5% in the National University of Distance Education, which has a blended model strongly supported by technology, and 1.2% in on-site public universities [28]. However, it is not clear to what extent this difference is due to the attractiveness of blended education or the lack of accessibility of on-site universities. In addition to the growth of ICT in education, there is also the need to use ICT to enable schooling in times of pandemic, where social distance and non-presence have become a vital necessity. According to UNESCO, more than 1.6 billion students were affected by school closures in 190 countries during the peak of the crisis. COVID-19 has exacerbated existing inequalities, leading to the educational exclusion of the poorest, most disadvantaged, and marginalized, and has put 24 million students worldwide at risk of dropping out of school [29]. UNESCO promoted as a response to the sudden disruption of educational processes the establishment or expansion of distance learning strategies, warning that flexible and inclusive programming and learning structures should be designed so that students under challenging circumstances, including students with disabilities, are not left behind [30]. One way to improve learning for a wide range of student needs is to deliver a curriculum using Universal Design for Learning (UDL). UDL is based on the premise that there is significant variability in how all students learn, so the curriculum must align with those learning differences. In this sense, teaching and learning must use many methods to support all students, including but not limited to students with disabilities [31].

134

A. Jiménez-Lara et al.

The pandemic-induced model shift (from face-to-face to distance learning) has disproportionately impacted learners with disabilities, especially those with intellectual and developmental disabilities. The disruption of routines, the lack of contact with peers, the loss of support, and the difficulties in accessing materials provided by educational centers, due to the current lack of technological tools, connectivity, and digital skills, as well as the lack of accessibility of content and applications, have meant a risk of regression in the educational process of these students [32]. However, the emergency measures adopted to guarantee to learn by telematics tools during the closure of schools decreed to deal with the first wave of the pandemic have not always considered the needs of students with disabilities. Nor have the platforms used for this purpose been sufficiently accessible (even though clear regulations require their design to be barrier-free), which has prevented some students with disabilities from using these platforms [33]. It should also be noted that students with disabilities are affected to a greater extent than other students by economic, social, and technological divides. According to Eurostat (2019), 28.4% of the EU population with a disability (aged 16 or more) was at risk of poverty or social exclusion, versus 18.4% of the population without disability [34]. In the United States, according to a recent Census Bureau report, the percentage of children with disabilities was 7.0% in the lowest income quintile, compared to only 2.8% in the highest income quintile [35]. Another study also referring to the US population, and based on data from the 2017 Current Population Survey, shows that after controlling for socioeconomic and demographic variables, people with disabilities as a group, and in particular people with physical disabilities, mental disabilities, or multiple disabilities, are less likely to have a computer [36]. There are also risks linked to the lack of digital skills (of students, parents, and teachers) that specifically affect students with disabilities, such as their increased vulnerability to cyberbullying, which not only violates their rights and has very negative emotional and social consequences but also harms their school performance [37]. The removal from the classroom during the pandemic has highlighted the gaps in resources, tools, and technological capacities, but it has also had some positive effects. One of the most notable is that it has shown that more active collaboration between family and school is possible. As Portuguese professor David Rodrigues has pointed out, “After so long trying to bring families into the school, the pandemic ended up bringing the school into the family” [38]. The improvement of the relationship between school and family may be one of the legacies of the pandemic: teachers have entered homes via the Internet or WhatsApp and have been able to learn about the difficulties faced by families, just as parents have had the opportunity to get to know teachers better and to value their teaching work. This experience of a partnership between parents and teachers, made possible by digital tools in a challenging context, is likely to induce greater rapprochement between teachers and families in the future [39].

Students with Disabilities in the Digital Society: Opportunities and Challenges…

135

On the other hand, the pandemic has stimulated innovation within the education sector to support the continuum of education and training, primarily through distance learning solutions [40]. It is hoped that the innovations related to remote learning and the investment effort in education technologies that the pandemic has spurred will continue in the long term, as this is the best way to ensure that education systems will be able to provide the necessary additional support to students in the event of further disease outbreaks [31]. In any case, going forward, investments in education must be guided by the principles of equity, inclusion, and resilience so that education systems better ensure that all learners are served and are more resilient to future crises. In particular, investments in the development of support services are required in most low- and middle-income countries to adequately meet the needs of all children with disabilities and their families. These efforts, combined with greater coordination between early care, education, and health services, can mitigate the risk of further marginalization and pave the way for true educational inclusion of children with disabilities.

5  C  onclusions: ICT as a Possible Tool for Inclusive Education Fulfilling the right of persons with disabilities to inclusive education, recognized in article 24 of the Convention, not only implies that children with disabilities are educated in the same schools as other children but also requires profound changes and modifications in teaching methods, approaches, structures, and educational strategies that make education for all possible. One of the keys to guaranteeing an inclusive education system is the accessibility of its spaces, contents, and assessment tools, for which they must be designed according to criteria of universality. ICTs used in education must also be designed for everyone so that students with disabilities can use them on an equal footing with their peers. The increasing incorporation of ICT in education, driven by the need to implement distance learning modalities during the pandemic, can be an enabler of inclusion and contribute to increased educational exclusion if appropriate measures are not taken. As has been shown, technology developments in schools rarely consider disability as a target population to consider and project the massive use of technologies that may be ineffective and inaccessible and whose use is already problematic today. Policymakers need to recognize that educational practices adopted in response to COVID-19 have not always considered the needs of students with disabilities and therefore need to incorporate a disability perspective, which is mandated by the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.

136

A. Jiménez-Lara et al.

Ultimately, students with disabilities should be a priority target in school digitization plans. If the implementation and development of future school systems are built without an inclusive perspective, they will most likely replicate the same shortcomings of current education systems. Beyond the response to the crisis caused by COVID-19, the incorporation of technology and efforts to implement distance learning at all levels of education provides valuable lessons and can lay the foundation for building more open, inclusive, and flexible education systems.

References 1. United Nations, Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (United Nations, Washington, D.C., 2006) 2. UNESCO, The Salamanca Statement and Framework for Action on Special Needs Education (UNESCO, Salamanca, 1994) 3. UNESCO, Guidelines for Inclusion: Ensuring Access to Education for All (UNESCO, Paris, 2005) 4. G. Echeita, M. Ainscow, La educación inclusiva como derecho. Marco de referencia y pautas de acción para el desarrollo de una revolución pendiente. Tejuelo 12, 26–46 (2011) 5. World Health Organization, World Report on Disability (World Health Organization, Ginebra, 2011) 6. Comité sobre los Derechos de las Personas con Discapacidad: Observación General núm. 4 sobre el derecho a la educación inclusiva, CRPD/C/GC/4. United Nations (2016) 7. United Nations, Agenda 2030 sobre desarrollo sostenible. United Nations (2015) 8. E.  Díaz Velázquez, Disability law in Spain: “Moving forward towards full citizenship and inclusion?”, in The Legacies of Institutionalisation: Disability, Law and Policy in the ‘Deinstitutionalised’ Community, ed. by C. Spivakovsky, L. Steele, P. Weller, (Hart Publishing, Oxford, 2020), pp. 59–72 9. OECD. Special Education Needs – Statistics and Indicators. https://www.oecd.org/education/ innovation-­education/specialeducationneeds-­statisticsandindicators.htm 10. J. Ramberg, A. Lénárt, A. Watkins, European Agency Statistics on Inclusive Education: 2018 Dataset Cross-Country Report (Odense, European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive Education, 2020) 11. G. Echeita, C. Simón, (coords.): El papel de los Centros de Educación Especial en el proceso hacia sistemas educativos más inclusivos. Cuatro estudios de caso: Newham (UK), New Brunswick (Canadá), Italia y Portugal (Ministerio de Educación y Formación Profesional, Madrid, 2020) 12. A. Huete, M. Otaola, C. Manso, Inclusiva Sí, Especial También: ¿revolución o resistencia? El ciberdebate sobre el cierre de los Centros de Educación Especial en España. Siglo Cero 50(4), 75–98 (2019) 13. G.  Echeita, La Pandemia del Covid-19. ¿Una oportunidad para pensar en cómo hacer más inclusivos nuestros sistemas educativos? Revista Internacional de Educación para la Justicia Social 9(1), 7–16 (2020) 14. R. Blanco, C. Duk, El legado de la Conferencia de Salamanca en el Pensamiento, Políticas y Prácticas de la Educación Inclusiva. Revista Latinoamericana de Educación Inclusiva 13(2), 25–43 (2019) 15. C.  Clark, A.  Dyson, A.  Millward (eds.), Towards Inclusive Schools? 1st edn. (Routledge, London, 1995)

Students with Disabilities in the Digital Society: Opportunities and Challenges…

137

16. M.  Tamayo, J.  Rebolledo, A.  Besoaín-Saldaña, Monitoring inclusive education in Chile: Differences between urban and rural areas. Int. J. Educ. Develop. 53, 110–116 (2017) 17. T. Saloviita, Attitudes of teachers towards inclusive education in Finland. Scand. J. Educ. Res. 64(2), 270–282 (2020) 18. F. O’Brolcháin, Autonomy benefits and risks of assistive technologies for persons with intellectual and developmental disabilities. Front. Public Health 6, 296 (2018) 19. R.P. Barneva, K. Kanev, B. Kapralos, M. Jenkin, B. Brimkov, Integrating technology-enhanced collaborative surfaces and gamification for the next generation classroom. J. Educ. Technol. Syst. 45(3), 309–325 (2017) 20. K.S.  Kversøy, R.O.  Kellems, A.-R.K.  Alhassan, H.C.  Bussey, S.D.  Kversøy, The emerging promise of touchscreen devices for individuals with intellectual disabilities. Multimodal Technol. Interact. 4, 70 (2020) 21. J.  Al Ja'am, S.A.  El-Seoud, M.U.  Mwinyi, Design and implementation of a multimedia-­ based technology solution to assist children with intellectual disability to learn. Int. J. Emerg. Technol. Learn. 12(4), 141–152 (2017) 22. K. Koch, Stay in the box! Embedded assistive technology improves access for students with disabilities. Educ. Sci. 7(4), 82 (2017) 23. P. Twining, N. Davis, A. Charania, A. Chowfin, F. Henry, H. Nordin, C. Woodward, Developing New Indicators to Describe Digital Technology Infrastructure in Primary and Secondary Education (UNESCO, Montreal, 2015) 24. C. Running Bear, W.P.A. Terrill, A. Frates, P. Peterson, J. Ulrich, Challenges for rural native American students with disabilities during COVID-19. Rural Spec. Educ. Quarter 40(2), 60–69 (2021) 25. S.J.  Romero Martínez, I.  González Calzada, A.  García Sandoval, A.  Lozano Domínguez, Herramientas tecnológicas para la educación inclusiva. Revista Tecnología, Ciencia y Educación 9, 83–112 (2018) 26. C. Rama, La educación virtual como la modalidad educativa para las personas con necesidades especiales: solo en la red no hay personas con discapacidad. Revista Diálogo Educacional 13(38), 325–345 (2013) 27. D.  Chambers, Z.  Varoglu, I.  Kasinskaite-Buddeberg, Learning for All: Guidelines on the Inclusion of Learners with Disabilities in Open and Distance Learning (UNESCO, Hershey, 2016) 28. A. Jiménez Lara, A. Huete García, M.P. Otaola Barranquero, El rendimiento académico de los estudiantes universitarios con discapacidad. Fundación ONCE (submitted for publication) 29. UNESCO, Concept note. 2020 Global Education Meeting. Extraordinary Session on Education post-COVID-19 (2020) 30. UNESCO, Distance learning strategies in response to COVID-19 school closures. UNESCO COVID-19 Education Response. Education Sector issue notes. Issue note n°2.1 (2020) 31. C.V.  McClain-Nhalpo, R.  Kulbir Singh, A.H.  Martin, Pivoting to Inclusion: Leveraging Lessons from the COVID-19 Crisis for Learners with Disabilities (The World Bank Group, Washington, D.C., 2020) 32. Plena inclusión: El derecho a la educación durante el COVID-19. Análisis, propuestas y retos para la educación del alumnado con discapacidad intelectual o del desarrollo durante el confinamiento. Plena Inclusión España (2020) 33. L.  Jia, M.  Santi, Inclusive education for students with disabilities in the global COVID-19 outbreak emergency: Some facts and thoughts from China. Disabil. Soc. (2021). https://doi. org/10.1080/09687599.2021.1925226 34. Eurostat, Disability: Higher risk of poverty or social exclusion. Eurostat News, 08/02/2021 (2021) 35. N. Young, Childhood Disability in the United States: 2019. U.S. Census Bureau. American Community Survey Briefs. Issued March (2021) 36. M. Scanlan, Reassessing the disability divide: Unequal access as the world is pushed online. Univ. Access Inf. Soc. (2021)

138

A. Jiménez-Lara et al.

37. Grupo Social ONCE, El acoso y el ciberacoso escolar en el alumnado con discapacidad. Fundación ONCE para la cooperación e inclusión social de personas con discapacidad (2019) 38. C.R. Cury, L.A. Ferreira, L.G. Fabris, A.M. y da Silva, O Aluno com Deficiência e a Pandemia. Instituto Fabris Ferreira (2020) 39. A.  Bernardo, Da pandemia nasce uma nova relação entre escola e família. Nova Escola, 08/07/2020 (2020) 40. United Nations, Policy Brief: Education During COVID-19 and Beyond (2020)

Hyperconnected Identities and Educational Relationships from an Intercultural Perspective Eduardo S. Vila Merino and Victoria E. Álvarez Jiménez

1  Introduction In his book The Relativity of Wrong [1], Isaac Asimov wrote that improving existing knowledge does not necessarily imply that all such knowledge was wrong or false, illustratively exemplifying it as follows: ‘When people thought the Earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the Earth was spherical, they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the Earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together’. It is paradoxical, to say the least, that several decades later, the flat Earth movement is gaining followers in the so-called Knowledge Society, with studies indicating that videos uploaded to YouTube are the main driver of this belief, as commented by Buxarrais and Farias [2]. Since such situations do not originate in the classroom but rather on the net, they undoubtedly challenge ‘the meaning of our educational systems and the very future of contemporary cultures and societies’. In the social and pedagogical field, the construction of knowledge is mutable and contingent, but not morally relativistic (not everything is equal); rather, it is ‘in context’, i.e. it has its raison d’être in being framed in an environment that gives it meaning, whether narrative, analytical, theoretical, evaluative, etc., in character. It is for this reason that we will understand technology as culture, insofar as it serves to express technical knowledge which has techné, i.e. systematised making or doing, and logos, a specific knowledge about such making or doing, all of which requires an episteme, namely, knowledge, that gives it its basis and meaning. From this premise, ‘it creates ways of thinking, being and acting; in short, ways of living and a different lifeworld insofar as it changes the ways we relate to things and to others,

E. S. Vila Merino () · V. E. Álvarez Jiménez University of Malaga, Malaga, Spain e-mail: [email protected]

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 J. M. Muñoz-Rodríguez (ed.), Identity in a Hyperconnected Society, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-85788-2_10

139

140

E. S. Vila Merino and V. E. Álvarez Jiménez

ultimately also changing our ways of perceiving and creating realities, including our own identity and that of things of the world’ [3]. From here we can analyse, for example, discourse related to the technocommunicative mediations young people experience through the latest technological artefacts, which allow them to establish new relationships with reading and writing and, consequently, with knowledge. While studies also warn of a semantic and syntactic impoverishment, of difficulties in understanding long texts and of lack of depth as a guiding principle of most communications, especially in social media environments, others point to the democratisation it has brought and how having a social platform increases possibilities in terms of participation. In any case, it is worth bearing in mind these words of Llovet [4]: ‘The question we must ask ourselves is whether or not the ease with which we can write using new computer media enters the realm of dazzle and phantasmagoria that Benjamin so aptly discussed when analysing the characteristic objects of post-industrial and consumer civilisation’. This situation clearly shows the importance of reflecting on how communication technologies and hyperconnection affect people and collectives, social cohesion and our social being, and how cultural meanings must be permanently (re)interpreted, to ensure a discourse between their reproductive and transformative nature and cultural diversity. As Olivé [5] said: ‘To suppose that all human beings could come to perceive the same thing implies supposing that they would have access to exactly the same conceptual resources and that they would develop exactly the same kind of practices; this is a highly exaggerated and impossible idealisation, but, even if it were not, it would still be undesirable’. This is a fundamental aspect to bear in mind as we live in a world of hyperconnected identities, where the very concept of identity seems to become liquid, following Bauman’s terminology, and where hyperculturality surrounds us and poses a series of challenges, since: ‘Hyperculture does not create a uniform cultural mass, a single, monochrome culture, but rather leads to increasing individualisation as we follow our own inclinations and assemble our own identity from the hypercultural background of life forms and practices. Indeed, this is how identities and figures emerge in a patchwork where the colours refer to a new practice of freedom, one which takes place thanks to the hypercultural defactualising of the lifeworld’ [6]. These new practices make up diverse identities without a common experience horizon or generally valid rules of behaviour, a place separated from that inherited and where one’s own is that acquired, which is replaced by the emphatically opposed dichotomy between the new and the old. Faced with this panorama, it is worthwhile rethinking the idea of identity in order to ensure we do not get lost in what is said to be transforming the identity construction process, thus allowing us to see its hold in the hyperconnected sphere and within desirably and irreversibly multicultural societies.

Hyperconnected Identities and Educational Relationships from an Intercultural…

141

2  Identity(ies) and Hyperconnectivity As discussed by Vila [7], to speak of identity is to speak of a complex process involving multiple interacting factors of a personal, social and cultural nature, configured to give prominence to education as a key element in constructing subjectivity, intersubjectivity, differences and identity organisation. That is why it is important to understand that identities are not finished products but rather are being built continuously with a qualitative, self-referential character, at the same time allowing us to see the alterity of others. This means that identities and differences are not homogeneous or isolated in character but rather are permanently in contact with others, establishing mutual appropriations; indeed, in dialectical contact with themselves and in their context, they can be stripped of their own in order to continue being themselves but in a different way. This has important connotations from the point of view of today’s hyperconnectivity, since the world of relationships is increasingly virtual (even in educational relationships, especially given the current pandemic situation). We must therefore emphasise the contingent character of identities, which means that the phenomena of appropriation, dispossession and reappropriation that characterise the relationship – not the substance, which is identity – are always selective, cultural phenomena, not mechanised, and are constructed in turn from the differences themselves. The processes of globalisation and hyperconnectivity, in contrast, seem to have hegemonised a contrary belief about the nature of identity, since, instead of accepting its fundamentally hybrid character, result and, at the same time, possibility of diverse crossed experiences, it has exaggerated its particular nature and its individualising functions, leading to a certain conceptual confusion between identity and ethnicity or between identity and a sort of virtual ‘avatar’ from which we relate to each other. In this sense, we find ourselves surrounded, paradoxically, by a technomedia fabric that, especially in the case of young people, shapes our identity around hyperconnection [8], with digital technology playing a major role in cultural and affective mediation, in the configuration of the public and the private and in the construction of citizenship [9]. Digital technologies are thus transformed into technologies of the self, following Foucault’s terminology, with sometimes blurred lines and different aspects to be taken into account, insofar as they imply not only opportunities but also dangers. One of the main ones is perennial confusion – now technologically updated – of muddling the means with the ends. It is not possible to live without the medium, and the idea of not being connected is often experienced with distress, it being seen paradoxically as social isolation. We therefore make the medium our own, incorporating it in our selves in a creative and narratively active manner, although not always from an ethical perspective. Leisure, relationships, work, consumption, etc., everything goes through the connection to the net, also altering the variables of time and space, as we will see later on. In any case, from all the above we can deduce that the construction of identity is a process rather than a defined sequence, one that has dialectical character and is

142

E. S. Vila Merino and V. E. Álvarez Jiménez

configured from social practice through different dimensions (Jenkins spoke of ‘moments of identification’). We can therefore consider identity to be based on norms of belonging founded on symbolic oppositions, these being understood as spaces of experience and sense that configure, from their multiplicity, the now of what we are [10], which is indissolubly linked, albeit increasingly distantly, to that of a plural, diverse other. However, as we live in multicultural contexts, managing social cohesion is one of the cornerstones of our future and a fundamental part of education. Our academic and political commitment is to interculturality. This, far from being seen as an abstract, rational, homogeneous category, refers more to the confrontation and controversial intertwining of different groups, communities and identities that enter into an exchange (virtual or real) and affirm themselves as identities based on intense relations of negotiation and conflictive dialectics from which we can try to develop reciprocal loans of meanings, which are also visible in the sphere of hyperconnection. In cyberspace  – a complex, multifaceted, multidirectional world – cultures are diluted in this play-off between global and local, between the self and others, between reality and the avatar, but are never lost. Somehow they are there, more or less diffused, but always influencing, mediating, questioning. To leave aside interculturality as an important element for the construction of identities in the network society and in a hyperconnected world is to not take into account the way people approach the digital sphere through transits and patterns of meaning, while failing to consider the influence of digital media in the construction of identities, even more so for digital natives, which is also to leave a gap that is essential for interculturality to become visible in social cohesion models. Intercultural discourse would therefore question a double dimension of culture and the possibility of its joint articulation: as a process of multiplicity from the common, and as a form of expression of subjective, individual and collective belongings as recognition of the particular, with its projection in the virtual world. In turn, this intercultural discourse requires from pedagogy an interrogation, a way of questioning how we articulate our own discourse on culture and differences. And this leads us to speak of intercultural pedagogy as a pedagogy of listening, of encounters and possibilities, of negotiations and common spaces, of indefinitions and belongings, of what is established and what is yet to be built. This does not mean that we should not keep in mind a characteristic mentioned by Han, namely, the growing individualisation related to identity constructions linked to hyperconnectivity and hyperculture. Some authors have made use of the metaphor of surfing (even talking about the surfer generation), insofar as many aspects of reality are merely skimmed over in the digital world and relationships with things (and very often between people) are superficial. Here, information is exchanged quickly and permanently without creating deep bonds or fertile dialogues and without really conversing (intertwining language and emotion, as Maturana [11] would say); indeed, the overriding goal is to satisfy personal impulses and interests, building relationships with a utilitarian perspective of the other. In the digital world, there is an almost irrepressible urge for users to show (rather than share) everything that happens to them, what they do, what they experience, etc.,

Hyperconnected Identities and Educational Relationships from an Intercultural…

143

since the meaning of what they experience is built more on exhibiting (a clear example is the cult of the body) than on enjoying or learning from it. Here the past is outdated and the future is a science-fiction movie, meaning only the present is of interest. This situation produces contradictions, such as those between hyperconnectivity and loneliness, between individualism and certain forms of openness and tolerance, between communicating but not conversing, between self-interest and the possibility of building solidarity networks, between the immobility of the present and mobilisations for just causes, between creating new words and semantic networks and impoverishment in the use of language, between egocentrism and the proliferation of participatory social forms and movements on the web, between new forms of transmedia narrative and an impoverishment of reading capacity, etc. In any case, hyperconnected identifications can constitute a risk for pedagogical thinking by trying to reduce the individuals they are addressed to abstract concepts or categories, depriving them of their corporeality, their experiences and their voices, making it necessary for such identifications to take place within a heterogeneous process of openness to the other, rather than constrained by prejudice. This is why we have often spoken of identification processes as labyrinths, but labyrinths in which the identity-difference binomial acquires meaning from the existence and presence (corporeal or otherwise) of the other. Hence, in the face of prevailing homogeneity on the net, differences are generators of identity, and these, in turn, refer back to human diversity and its fundamental role for an ethical conception of our being-in-the-world. In a certain sense, it is also about modifying the current concept of experience and its excessive focus on the subject in favour of an experience understood in terms of confrontation with the other and others, where identity generates and is generated by alterity itself, taking shape in the identity-difference binomial. This leads us to consider that the current context requires new forms of identity construction generated through the dialectical interrelation between the collective and the individual, from a political perspective to which, apart from the reconstruction of particular identities as brought about thanks to immersion in a plurally complex society, we must add the importance of having a new form of collective identity built from and transcending the previous ones, i.e. one which starts off from that inherited and not from the fragmentation of a present that has been superficialised due to hyperconnectivity. In any case, this question leads us to a major consideration to be taken into account, namely, that ‘inferring identity from culture means denying the complexity of the social forms of exchange of individuals and groups as constitutive elements of culture’ [12]. This must also be valid for cultures that are present or generated hyperculturally in the sphere of overwhelming hyperconnectivity, where intracultural diversity is also very much present and, indeed, surely represents its greatest potential in terms of combating its most harmful effects. In this sense we can affirm, by way of corollary, that identities (in plural) are configured from the differences (also in plural) between different cultures in permanent interaction (more or less virtual), allowing us to see their substantive complexity while revealing their

144

E. S. Vila Merino and V. E. Álvarez Jiménez

potential in terms of social and educational construction, which increasingly takes shape within changeable, fickle, complex spaces and times.

3  T  ime and Educational Relationships in the Network Society Education is times, multiple and varied: times of experiences, of how people live events, times that mediate between teaching and learning, times of socialisation and consumption (which are now the majority), times of hyperconnectivity. In this sense, Gimeno [13] proposes the presence of time in education from several dimensions: school organisation (from calendars to timetables), the dedication of teachers, pupils and their glances at the clock, class or recess time, time for enrichment or loss, time for relationships or time for loneliness. It highlights the value of school time while also emphasising the growing value of out-of-school time, taking into account social and cultural changes and how pupils and their families experience them. It is therefore important to allude to times of education which, as they take place in multiple places and moments, are in fact educations [14]. It must also be understood that we educate in time, that education exists because there is time, that almost everything that is worthwhile in education needs time – a lot of time – which goes against the immediacy and the prevailing technological neophilism. Moreover, we should not overlook the intrinsic relationship between the implementation of the right to education and the time variable. We can educate and be educated thanks to time: we have time at our disposal, and time disposes us. If we run out of time, we run out of educational possibilities. That is why it is important to keep in mind that: ‘In today’s societies there is a lot of activity and very little experience. A lot of circulation and very little transformation. The reason is precisely this: we do not question space and time. We just circulate through them, filling them until saturated’ [15]. Forensic scientist Cristina Cattaneo [16] has a fantastic book from a human point of view, albeit tragic for what it describes. His eagerness, and that of his team, to restore dignity to those immigrants who have lost their lives attempting to cross the Mediterranean, as well as to the living who remain, so they can identify their missing loved ones, is worthy of all praise. One of the most heartbreaking stories he tells is that of a boy from Mali who was about 14 years old. When they analysed his body, they noticed that he had his grades from school sewn into his trousers, probably as proof of what a good student he was…. What importance he must have placed on his education in order to do this! How many doors would he dream would open for him in the schools of Europe he never reached? Stories such as this one, which bring us back to a more tangible, less liquefied reality, should also make us reflect on that right to education for which we need presence and time. For all these reasons, it is necessary to stress the intentional and formative use of time with a pedagogical dimension that does not undermine its cultural and

Hyperconnected Identities and Educational Relationships from an Intercultural…

145

recreational character, which sometimes clashes head-on with forms and times in which the role of new technologies, and specifically social networks, is something to grab onto –occasionally even with pathological overtones – in which time ‘passes us by’ and any experiential quality is projected onto a different reality, sometimes even a parallel one, and all this without forgetting the incessant rise of the consumerist dimension of time. We use leisure to shop, to consume, to surf, to play and to interact virtually. The social is not tangible, as we perceive the world as fragmented and distorted, amputated of what until very recently constituted essences, creation of meaning and fundamental parts of our emotional education. What happens when there are people for whom the direct experience of leisure and consumption takes up most of their free time, and this is almost totally mediated by communication technologies? What configuration of reality is constructed, how, and with what interests? What possibilities are there for the development of counter-hegemonic thinking in this disjunctive? What role should education play? [14]. Obviously, this panorama and its use vary over time in keeping with how it is used or abused, since it can be a source of both the most creative and also of the most degrading. Heidegger, in his book Being and Time, already stressed that ‘the being of an instrument is a being-for’. Somewhat more poetically, the philosopher Santiago Alba Rico [17] calls on all of us when he affirms that ‘in the world of new technologies (...) everything happens as if the path we are looking for, at night, with a lantern, were in the lantern itself’. Our analysis cannot lose sight of this, without leaving aside the axiological and even ontological dimension that may be behind it: the interests of cultural industries, transnational social media corporations, phenomena such as the proliferation of fake news and its social and political consequences, etc. This is why we need ‘convergent ethics’ in a pluralistic world, synthesising and integrating ‘with the social sciences, which are in charge of the social impact of new technologies’ [18]. Or in the words of Paulo Freire: ‘Critical understanding, which must infuse the education we need, sees in technology an increasingly sophisticated intervention in the world that must be subjected to political and ethical scrutiny’ [19]. However, returning to the ways of relating and understanding time in the network society [20], and specifically with regard to social networks, we find the way in which all this is having a major influence on the construction of new forms of intimacy and extimacy to be no less significant. Particularly interesting in this sense, and with important consequences for pedagogical analysis, is the phenomenon of ‘extimacy’, a term originally coined by Lacan to refer to the externalisation of intimacy. Extimacy has gained in strength on social media in terms of how we relate to each other, with perceptive changes around what is intimate and, therefore, what for the other represents a possible breach of rights. This is an aspect that requires more in-depth analysis, always from this concept of intimacy in the context of time and its educational value, where intimacy and freedom are two interrelated facets that refer to the often difficult balance  – even more so in our technified societies  – between the public and private spheres [21, 22]. It is therefore a factor to be taken into account in educational relationships in a society where intimacy is becoming extimacy in many facets of everyday life.

146

E. S. Vila Merino and V. E. Álvarez Jiménez

The above is also closely related to the sense and meaning of experience in today’s societies, where the virtual is sometimes more important than the real and the show more important than enjoyment itself. Examples of this can be seen in different aspects such as tourism or attending a public act, concert, etc., where there are people who are more concerned with capturing the moment with their camera or smartphone than living it. This should also make us reflect, since experience, especially among younger people, is highly influenced by this situation in which the public is very much present in personal and even intimate moments. That is why we now need, more than ever before, a pedagogy of time that values its necessity and its use, that recognises the inherent experience of time and that understands that time itself educates us, as well as taking into account: ‘Changes in the forms of relationships, derived in particular from use of the Internet and social media; changes in how we conceive intimacy and extimacy and in the way we approach and access information (which is ever more fragmented and diffuse and therefore requires individuals to be increasingly critical and discerning, an aspect that must be addressed pedagogically) and build knowledge; changes due to the peculiarities of virtual educational processes; changes in the habits of approaching others, of knowing them, of learning, etc.’ [23]. This means rethinking the educational relationship from a pedagogy of alterity that investigates the tensions inherent in educational relationships from the digital context and hyperconnectivity. In the aforementioned text, we identified and developed the following aspects, which we now succinctly update.

3.1  Object-Subject The educational relationship has a subject as the object of knowledge, or, in other words, in a certain sense the purpose sees the learner as the object, given that there is a teleologically marked and defined intentionality in the relationship, but this assumed purpose cannot act if separated from the person to whom it is directed. One of the keys is therefore to be aware that what is specific to the educational relationship is not to have an objective in itself but rather what kind of objective, since here intentionality has an educational character that aims for learners to develop by reading the hyperconnected realities and assuming, from their identity, everything that surrounds them, striving to ensure they have the tools necessary to understand and transform these realities while understanding and transforming both themselves and also the other people and contexts they interact with.

3.2  Intentionality-Functionality Closely linked to the above is the tension through which the educational relationship is shaped by marking its functional character, as derived from it being an intentional relationship, and the shift involved in moving it to the merely utilitarian or

Hyperconnected Identities and Educational Relationships from an Intercultural…

147

speculative field. This is often the case in the digital world because of the utilitarian and hedonistic nature of many of the interactions that take place, including formative and educational ones. Education in digital and hyperconnected environments must therefore take into account that: ‘Education does not consist of a purely personal relationship, such as friendship, because intentionality is interposed between the educator and the learner; however, neither does it consist of a purely functional relationship, in which particular subjects, with their fears and desires, can be cancelled out for the sake of objectivity [...]. This is so because the intentionality of education has a distinctive character that we can designate as the way the learner is orientated towards the world’ [24].

3.3  Influence-Autonomy Likewise, to speak of intention is to speak of influence, something intrinsic to the act of education. The influence of the teacher or peers is no less important if we focus on digital training and educational environments. So what is key to this influence being a positive one? The answer would be by ensuring it enables and promotes the autonomy of the subject, since dependence tends to destroy itself in the educational relationship, disappearing for the sake of freedom. Indeed the hyperconnected universe often believes itself to be self-sufficient and that learning can be exclusively self-taught (although at least ‘tutorials’ are always necessary, drafted by someone with a pedagogical vocation). However, for a relationship to be truly educational, we agree with Freire [25] when he states: ‘Knowing that I must respect the autonomy, dignity and identity of the learner and, in practice, seek coherence with this knowledge, leads me inevitably to the creation of certain virtues or qualities without which such knowledge becomes false, empty and inoperative verbiage’. Influence can be power over the other, especially given the asymmetrical situation of formative and educational links in digital contexts, making it essential to set the limits of such influence, and doing so precisely with the reference of autonomy would be a sensible and sensitive criterion towards the other.

3.4  Responsibility-Freedom Alluding to responsibility by discussing education for autonomy from the perspective of the educational relationship leads to tensioning of the link between responsibility and freedom in such a relationship, a burning issue in the digital world, and the rights inherent in the phenomena of hyperconnectivity, social media, ethical limits and interference in the freedom of others, indiscriminate and uncontrolled use of big data or artificial intelligence, etc. To educate responsibly is to consider the learner’s interests and needs, to generate relationships of mutual trust and care which can only be exercised from one’s own freedom and for the freedom of others,

148

E. S. Vila Merino and V. E. Álvarez Jiménez

and this should be as valid for a conventional school context as for any virtual teaching process.

3.5  Authority-Discipline The exercise of authoritarianism is the antithesis of freedom. However, it is often confused with authority and, in any case, seems to have the question of discipline attached to it, all of which are aspects of great interest in order to continue framing the educational relationship. It is therefore necessary to start from a clear differentiation of both terms in order to understand this tension in the rough virtual sea we are currently sailing on: • • • •

Authoritarianism is imposed, while authority is achieved through relationships. Authoritarianism fosters dependence, while authority fosters autonomy. Authoritarianism destroys freedom, while authority embraces it. Authoritarianism seeks obedience, submission, authority and discipline, allowing reflection on the rules and the development of a critical sense [26]. • Authoritarianism is based on anti-pedagogical relationships, while authority is based on pedagogical tact. Taking these ideas into account, we can therefore say from the educational field that affectivity  – the world of intertwined emotions (and digital contexts are no strangers to this) – defines the possibilities of influence and recognition of authority. The permanent immediacy of hyperconnectivity sometimes makes relationships highly visceral and reactions very primary, transforming education into indoctrination. In contrast, legitimate authority, in order to continue being an authority, will always start off from the educational relationship of the rights of the other.

3.6  Trust-Respect An educational relationship is not possible without trust and respect, as simple and complex as that. How is this generated in the world of the eternal present, of liquid relationships? In a sense, they are two sides of the same coin. Trust, as it has the capacity to make us better by improving self-confidence, is a crucial element from a pedagogical point of view and must be understood as the foundation of social cohesion, it being the prelude to action and to the multiplication of our future possibilities. Respect, starting from the Kantian conception of our duty to treat others as an end and not only as a means, emphasises the denial of any relationship that implies dependence or inaction, falsely taking refuge in not wishing to interfere in the freedom of the other.

Hyperconnected Identities and Educational Relationships from an Intercultural…

149

3.7  Singularity-Collectivity The educational relationship is in itself an experience, an educational experience where a fundamental part of what is learned is the relationship itself and where the balance to be achieved is related to attention to singularities but without losing sight of the social sense of all educational actions. The hyperconnected world sometimes moves between extreme individualism and gregarious socialisation, making it important for attention to this diatribe to be internally present at all times. In short, we believe it is essential to, beyond the brief aspects outlined, make the effort to rethink the educational relationship in the framework of the tensions described and in digital, virtual and hyperconnected educational contexts, since, although technology is configuring new realities that require pedagogical answers, it is no less true that ‘digital human beings need the “you” to verify their presence and existence on the net, to reaffirm and accept who they really are, and to understand what happens to them, what they do, and what they feel. The net not only allows you to be heard and feel accompanied, but also modifies, from the position of the group, the ways of being and of being in a group (...), since technology, understood as culture, is basically social’ [3]. This is at the very heart of education and shows why it is so important to dedicate intellectual efforts into research along these lines.

4  Some Pedagogical Conclusions The configuration of hyperconnected identities undoubtedly implies modifications in the logic and reality of educational relationships that cannot be pedagogically ignored. This does not mean we have to bow to all their effects, some of which have been described here, but rather that they must be taken into account in any educational proposal, as they increasingly shape the identity of what we are becoming. This requires us to reflect on privileged spaces in the relational sphere and in virtual contexts, including a reformulation of power relations which, in the intercultural framework, are affected by elements of dialogue and translation under the common axis of the search for justice in terms of real equality of conditions (and the need to rethink social class as a cultural category), demanding, on the one hand, social equality and rights based on cultural differences and, on the other, the recognition and participation of individuals and groups whose cultural identity differs from the hegemonic one, since ‘people who have never learned to use reason and imagination to enter a wider world capable of welcoming different cultures, groups and ideas are impoverished personally and politically, no matter how successful their professional preparation may be’ [27]. In a context such as the current global pandemic, which has further highlighted the differences in resources in terms of access to education and has led to the proliferation of virtual education in the academic sphere (with its pros and cons,

150

E. S. Vila Merino and V. E. Álvarez Jiménez

especially in the relational and intercultural sphere we are dealing with), any analysis must first bear in mind the right to education, which, as with any fundamental right, presents a series of prerequisites that must be considered. One of them is presence: one cannot be an educational subject without being physically present. Recently many countries have been living in a context of ‘virtual presence’, which has a series of peculiarities that make access unequal, meaning simply ignoring it would be to curtail this right. However, we cannot stop there. A second part is related to the conditions in place, and it is here that other issues come into play, most notably attention to diversity from an intercultural and inclusive perspective, which, in practice, is being rendered invisible as a guiding principle of the education system, with all this implies [28]. Vulnerability is one of the raisons d’être of rights, along with the dignity of individuals and groups. It is for this reason that any measure implemented must take these rights into account, including those of all education professionals (since, without forgetting the crucial role of teachers at the different levels of the education system, from early childhood through to university education, other professions, such as those of guidance counsellors or social educators, must not be overlooked) and the conditions in which their work is being carried out. Furthermore, all this must be without prejudice to the assumption of duties and, above all, of commitment to an education that does not lose sight of cultural diversity or of scientific, social, artistic and ethical knowledge, an education that takes into the highest consideration the added value of the development of critical thinking and solidarity, qualities that are so important in our present and our future. In synthesis, specifying these elements clashes with some aspects thrown into the spotlight in the current situation, of which we would like to highlight three (since all educational processes are sometimes reduced to three unfocused aspects): the use of digital technologies as an end and not as a means, assessment for the purpose of qualification as a key priority in education and the straitjacket approach to the label of ‘useful’ (utilitarian) knowledge as a way to differentiate the contents to be prioritised to the detriment of values and other socially desirable and intrinsically educational aspects, along with the reduction of the relational dimension from a necessary pedagogy of alterity, as alluded to. Moreover, all of the above means that the social dimension of education, which is inseparable from any consideration of rights in the pedagogical sphere, is relegated to the background. There is much talk, for example, of the digital divide but in a way that is detached from the social divide, as if it were only a question of material resources (although this is obviously also true). But what happens when the resource is given (in the form of a tablet or Internet connection) and we delegate the ‘blame’ for school or social failure on people and/or their families? What happens when we put training resources online, but we do not work on social skills, moral dilemmas, critical thinking, etc.? Inclusion and interculturality, as core aspects of the right to education, are based on multiple vertices, ranging from the methodological to the conceptual, from the cultural to the political. That is why it is important to once again recall – more than ever in today’s hyperconnected world – the major questions of education, which go

Hyperconnected Identities and Educational Relationships from an Intercultural…

151

hand-in-hand with the epistemological and axiological: What do we educate for? What kind of society do we want to foster through education? What should our reference points for educational action be? What is the meaning of the act of educating? What do we understand by educational relationship, and how can we develop it in the present circumstances? What changes are necessary to ensure the different forms of education (not only schooling) have continuity in times of pandemic or other exceptional situations? and a long etcetera. Reflecting on and questioning the relational and intercultural perspective around identities and differences, cultural diversity and social ascriptions and belongings is a necessary theoretical balm in a globalised, digital, hyperconnected world based on more or less asymmetrical interactions. It should be remembered that the virtual world can be seen as a non-place which the subject can enter with these new subjectivities and somehow negotiate spaces from the frictions that arise from communicative digital interaction, where identities are not configured as a summation but rather are mutually altered through horizontal interaction. It is a space that constitutes a framework of homogenisation and the will to erase differences, but where, at the same time, differences still manage to escape and manifest themselves. This situation clearly shows the importance of keeping intercultural citizenship and ‘civility’ in mind in this complex virtual world, understood as ‘the ability to interact with strangers without holding their strangeness against them and without pressing them to surrender it or to renounce some or all the traits that have made them strangers in the first place’ [29]. The hyperconnection, deterritorialisation and acceleration of social life imply a resignification of the concepts of territory, border and belonging to the political community, at the same time as they constitute a source of potential social changes, some more desirable than others, some based more on control or segregation and others on creativity or solidarity (with use of big data in multiple of these senses being paradigmatic). Notwithstanding, it must not be forgotten that: ‘Information can only be converted into knowledge through an adequate pedagogical strategy. If the data do not constitute elements for discussion, reflection and criticism, in short, if they are not processed, it will be impossible to obtain true knowledge. The information a person accumulates thanks to technologies and access to the Web should not be confused with mastery of knowledge’ [30]. Finally, we would like to add that, from a pedagogical perspective, it is important to break away from the tyranny of the permanent present [31], from only the immediate being truly valid, and to emphasise the following three issues as inescapable elements for reflection: how we ensure that relationships in the virtual sphere can be considered educational relationships, in the sense that we have already analysed [23]; how hyperconnected identities do not become diluted in moral and cultural relativism, establishing elements to rethink emerging realities from the refuge of interculturality; and how all this enhances the value of education not merely as a minor instructive or formative detail but rather as a point of reference that enlightens us towards the future, given that: ‘Educating consists of illuminating the experience of our possibilities for improvement. Culturally inserting pedagogical knowledge therefore has to aspire,

152

E. S. Vila Merino and V. E. Álvarez Jiménez

precisely because of its purpose, to reflect on other experiences, possibilities and interpretations of the world and of the human. And to achieve the discovery of these other possibilities, there is no choice but to establish an imagined distance with respect to time, space and the dominant ends’ [32]. We must not forget that education makes sense precisely by placing it in context, that it is equally necessary to focus both on fighting against a sociology of absences (in the manner described by Boaventura de Sousa Santos, 2005) and on generating a pedagogy of presences that embraces social and human plurality, with the will to make lifelong learning a reality. Indeed, as Paulo Freire told us [33]: ‘it is the consciousness of the world that creates my consciousness. I know what is different about me, and thereby recognise myself’.

References 1. I. Asimov, La relatividad del error (Barcelona, Planeta, 1989) 2. M.R. Buxarrais, L. Farias, Desafíos de la educación moral y ciudadana ante las tecnologías emergentes. Transdigital. Revista Científica 1(1), 1 (2020) 3. A.G. del Dujo, J.  Vliegue, J.M.  Muñoz-Rodríguez, J.  Martín-Lucas, Pensar la (teoría de la) educación, desde la tecnología de nuestro tiempo. Teoría de la Educación. Revista Interuniversitaria 33(2), 5 (2021) 4. J. Llovet, Humanidades y nuevas tecnologías. En Bertoni et al: La escuela vaciada. La enseñanza en la época pospandémica (Altamarea, Madrid, 2021) 5. L. Olivé (comp.), Ética y diversidad cultural. México: FCE (1999) 6. B. Han, Hiperculturalidad (Barcelona, Herder, 2018) 7. E.S.  Vila, Un juego de espejos: pensar la diferencias desde la pedagogía intercultural. Educación XX1 15(2), 119 (2012) 8. J.G. Palfrey, U. Gasser, Born Digital: Understanding the First Generation of Digital Natives (Basic Books, New York, 2013) 9. S. Banaji, D. Buckingham, Young people, the internet and civic participation: and overviem of key findings from the Civic Web Project. Int. J. Learn. Media 2(1), 15 (2010) 10. F. Bárcena, La experiencia reflexiva en educación (Barcelona, Paidós, 2005) 11. H. Maturana, El sentido de lo humano (Santiago de Chile, Dolmen, 1994) 12. R. Marí, Cultura y diversidad (Barcelona, Gedisa, 2007) 13. J. Gimeno, El valor del tiempo en educación (Morata, Madrid, 2008) 14. J.A. Caride, E.S. Vila, M. Vieites, Hacia una pedagogía del tiempo en la sociedad-red. J.A. En Caride, M.B. Caballo, R. Gradaille (coords.): Tiempos, educación y ocio en una sociedad de redes. Barcelona: Octaedro (2020) 15. M. Garcés, Fuera de clase. Textos de filosofía de guerrilla (Galaxia Gutenberg, Barcelona, 2017) 16. C.  Cattaneo, Naufraghi senza volto. Dare un nome alle vittime del Mediterraneo (Milano, Raffaello Cortina Editore, 2018) 17. S. Alba Rico, Lo grande y lo pequeño. CTXT 5(3/2021) (2018) 18. L. Palazzani, Innovation in Scientific Research and Emerging Technologies. A Challenge to Ethics and Law (Springer, London, 2019) 19. P. Freire, Pedagogía de la indignación (Morata, Madrid, 2001) 20. M.B. Caballo, J.A. Caride, P. Meira, El tiempo como contexto y pretexto educativo en la sociedad red. Educación Social 47, 11 (2011) 21. L. Tello, Intimidad y 'extimidad' en las redes sociales. Las demarcaciones éticas de Facebook. Comunicar 21(4), 205 (2013)

Hyperconnected Identities and Educational Relationships from an Intercultural…

153

22. P. Sibilia, La intimidad como espectáculo (Buenos Aires, FCE, 2012) 23. E.S.  Vila, Repensar la relación educativa desde la pedagogía de la alteridad. Teoría de la Educación. Revista Interuniversitaria 31(2), 177 (2019) 24. M. Martínez, F. Esteban, G. Jover, M. Payá, La educación, en teoría (Síntesis, Madrid, 2017) 25. P. Freire, Pedagogía de la autonomía (Siglo XXI, Madrid, 2006) 26. J.M. Esteve, Educar: un compromiso con la memoria (Barcelona, Octaedro, 2010) 27. M. Nussbaum, El cultivo de la humanidad. Una defensa clásica de la reforma en la educación liberal (Paidós, Barcelona, 2005) 28. J.A. Caride, E.S. Vila, V.M. Martín (coords.), Del derecho a la educación a la educación como derecho: reflexiones y propuestas. Granada: GEU (2018) 29. Z. Bauman, Modernidad líquida (México, FCE, 2002) 30. R.  Aparici, D.  García-Marín, Comunicar y educar en el mundo que viene (Barcelona, Gedisa, 2018) 31. P. Merireu, Pedagogía: necesidad de resistir (Popular, Madrid, 2018) 32. F. Gil Cantero, 'Educación con teoría'. Revisión pedagógica de las relaciones entre la teoría y la práctica educativa.Teoría de la Educación. Revista Interuniversitaria 23(1), 19 (2011) 33. P. Freire, El grito manso (Buenos Aires, Siglo XXI, 2003)

Social Networks and Their Influence on Building Gender Identity: Design of a Mobile App as a Social and Educational Resource Targeting the Family Context Gabriel Parra-Nieto, Jesús Ruedas-Caletrio, and Sara Serrate-González

1  Introduction In addition to classic social environments, especially school and family, children and adolescents today are immersed in a new space for interaction: social networks. Young people use them to communicate, exchange information and interiorise beliefs, rules of conduct and values [1]. In recent years, and especially in recent months, the role of social networks has gained even more significance in communication between young people and in maintaining their relationships due to the lockdown and restriction measures in place because of the COVID-19 pandemic, which has impacted offline socialising. Social networks also facilitate artistic expression among young people, as well as assessment by creating and distributing audiovisual content generating a high volume of feedback that greatly impacts the image they decide to show to their peers [2]. By analysing the values and beliefs we are exposed to on the Internet, various studies have highlighted that social networks create virtual spaces where classic gender stereotypes remain in force and which perpetuate the discourses of the patriarchal system [3, 4]. In these spaces, young people actively take part in creating their own image, which may be different from the image portrayed in real life. Thus, the identity built in the virtual sphere to relate to peers is modulated with the reinforcement—positive or negative—received in comments, likes or even offline conversations focused on events in the virtual environment. Furthermore, the gender socialisation young people are subject to on social networks reinforces traditional patriarchal values by continuing to repeat sexed stereotypes as they constantly repeat specific messages of what society expects of their gender [4].

G. Parra-Nieto () · J. Ruedas-Caletrio · S. Serrate-González University of Salamanca, Salamanca, Spain e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 J. M. Muñoz-Rodríguez (ed.), Identity in a Hyperconnected Society, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-85788-2_11

155

156

G. Parra-Nieto et al.

Gender, meanwhile, is a cross-cutting category that impregnates all social relationships and greatly influences both interpersonal relationships and individual development [5]. From here, we can define an individual’s gender development as an intangible mental dimension based on a certain biological sexual morphism, although it is accompanied by gender characteristics and psychological traits associated with masculine and feminine which we can study [6, 7]. Forming identity is therefore a process of building the personal and social self that entails assuming certain values and ideas, as well as a shared group culture. Even though we show a more or less homogenous identity externally, we really form a multidimensional identity that includes multiple cultural identities and references for each person [6, 8]. Therefore, and due to the global scope of these media, users often move in very different environments and contexts, such as fan groups, thus generating different identities by which they select what aspects of themselves to show to others at any time. This leads to fragmented identities that serve to represent the ideal of what we would like to be, always considering what social norms tell us as desirable. In case of doubt, social networks enable us to continuously compare ourselves to our peers, and this social comparison allows us to adapt our personality, what we show of it, in line with what others in our social group show. Thus we adopt different roles that we internalise and which inevitably become part of our identity. Social networks are therefore necessarily directly related to the development of self-concept. In the virtual world, we portray a prefabricated identity that is shaped and simultaneously manifested in different ways, an identity that is therefore fluid and multiple [1]. Establishing relationships with others in this new virtual environment follows models already present in traditional communication, so gender remains one of the main factors in creating our identity. On social networks we find and adopt gender patterns and stereotypes that modulate our masculine and feminine identities. Note in this regard that men use social networks to a greater extent to create new relationships, while for women they are a way to maintain them with more frequent and extensive communication than afforded by traditional channels [9]. These media are also used differently according to gender. Women share more information, are more open, empathetic and revealing, while men are more closed-­ off and inexpressive, showing themselves to be less emotional [3]. We also note that the prototypical gender images are still present in this environment despite significant social changes experienced in recent years and technological developments. However, there is an apparent decline in stereotypes with women increasingly adopting an androgynous profile that highlights the masculine qualities established as desirable by society [10]. Girls however have started to adopt an excessive sexualisation traditionally predominant in males, and which is being instilled in them by consumer society, as a means to assess their own self through the response from their peer group [1]. The image of the female body is highly sexualised on social networks, and, despite certain groups being aware of the existence of gender stereotypes and their aim to renegotiate social values they do not share, they sometimes appear to be trying to

Social Networks and Their Influence on Building Gender Identity: Design of a Mobile…

157

show an attractive image, to generate desire and acceptance with their posts and interactions on social networks. Faced with gender stereotypes on social networks, each individual’s response will depend on the reactions they perceive from their environment: studies in this field show that women appear to be more open, friendly and involved in creating and maintaining stable social relationships in the virtual environment [3]. Social networks therefore allow them to express their personality without significant changes compared to their offline life despite the fact that, as is natural and occurs in numerous virtual environments, different identities are projected depending on the social context, leveraging the opportunities offered by social networks and technologies to control what we want to show to, and hide from, others. In addition to contact with friends and colleagues, social networks are also used to create, maintain and develop romantic relationships in which we can still see that the nuance of equality and the eradication of gender roles have not yet fully penetrated [4]. The rise in gender-based violence among young people, especially with new forms of virtual aggression or control, is a scourge on society in which social networks are complicit by disseminating the myths of romantic love assumed and internalised by young people [4]. Constant connection therefore allows for permanent—and practically indetectable—control and domination, often justified with the ideal of romantic love. These myths which create inequality remain fully in force in new environments for socialisation and can lead to the situations of domination-submission underlying most cases of gender-based violence. The importance modern society lends to sexual passion and desire plays a great role in maintaining the social subordination of women as the foundation is not egalitarian; rather it is based on women’s emotional dependence on men. Thus, the patriarchal system educates women to complement men and adopt a subordinate role [4]. The propagation of sexist values and ideas that convey the permissiveness of certain actions related to gender-based violence is supported by the rapid dissemination of written and visual information online. A study by García-González and Bailey [11] highlights how, after the 2019 feminist protest #Un VioladorEnTuCamino (#ARapistInYourWay), a series of memes went viral showing the sexist and misogynistic values of our society; the authors ensure that this only proves that Internet is, after all, another place for social and cultural reproduction (p.109). This reaches young boys and girls through dissemination channels and media. Likewise, the feeling of romantic love based on a woman’s dependence and fragility is idealised by our society and is considered the only possible solution for controlling our fear of loneliness or facing up to complicated life situations; in short, it is a means to self-fulfilment and happiness, thus becoming a system for configuring social practices and gender relationships [4].

158

G. Parra-Nieto et al.

2  Stereotypes and Social Networks Traditional gender stereotypes have a lesser implicit presence on social networks than in the real world, although certain characteristics are maintained such as male aggressiveness [12]. Boys and girls show similar profiles on social networks; this reflects an increasingly more egalitarian society in which men and women take on the same duties and roles [3]. However, when dealing with relationships as a couple, the features deemed desirable by men are narcissism, submission and dependence [4], so women may show more androgynous traits to their peer group while at the same time adopting dependent roles in their most intimate relationships. Although offline many girls show qualities and traits traditionally associated with the feminine world, such as emotivity, a peace-keeping nature or more subjective vision of the world [3], when presenting themselves on social networks they do so in a much less stereotyped way, with little presence of the gender traits that shape their life in the real world. In addition to maintaining certain characteristics associated with the ideal of femininity, such as communication, socialising or reconciliation, girls voluntarily adopt masculine characteristics to define themselves as active, objective and strong [13]. For girls, adopting masculine characteristics seems to be psychologically beneficial, while, if they are limited to traditional roles and characteristics associated with femininity, they feel a negative influence on their well-being. This is perhaps due to the transformation of society, which has praised masculine and competitive characteristics which are the basis for our current employment system and which therefore deems feminine characteristics, constantly associated with weakness and dependence, as undesirable [3]. However, in the relationships of couples, the feeling of romantic love still maintains gender stereotypes in our society and encourages the resurgence of sexist values based on its idealisation to justify its presence in a society that defines itself as egalitarian [4]. In summary, we can observe a general decrease in the presence of the stereotypical image of feminine; profiles are increasingly more androgynous and focus on emotional stability and the strength and integrity of one’s own personality [3]. Despite this progress, we must consider the great presence of conducts of control or domination via social networks in couple relationships which could easily lead to situations of gender-based, physical or psychological violence.

3  Family as a Key Agent in Gender Socialisation The social and personal development of each individual in the information society, framed within a context where digital is beginning to overtake tangible, has been compromised by the exponential proliferation of innovations that have changed

Social Networks and Their Influence on Building Gender Identity: Design of a Mobile…

159

traditional lifestyles, to the point of hindering the development of an identity comprised of values interiorised for several generations [14]. New methods of operating, interacting, educating and, in short, living and coexisting are a challenge for young adolescents who develop through hyperconnectivity while physical and traditional dimensions continue to guide their lives [15]. Adolescents develop under the protection of the family, the first socio-­educational agent that interacts with them and with which they live immersed in a specific cultural context [16]. Family takes on a fundamental dimension regarding its role as a socialising agent, as part of its contribution to conveying values and attitudes towards their sons and daughters in relation to society as a whole [17]. As a fundamental pillar, family must act accordingly [18] as part of a joint life project where interrelation and bidirectionality among all members make them responsible for developing the environment [19]. In this sense, the role of family must be rethought beyond what is catalogued as traditional as we are witness to the proliferation of equality between men and women within the family core [20]. This is facilitated by changes in different areas of life that promote opportunities among boys and girls to reinforce their perspectives of gender roles, turning family into an essential element within this socio-­ educational enclave [21]. These changes are linked to feminist thought demanded, especially, in this contemporary society that is witness to a crisis of sociability, influenced by digital culture [19]. Focusing on the technological context, the socio-family situation adolescents develop in has a considerable influence as it has a transcendental impact in developing their personality [14], observing how socialisation in today’s family begins to revolve around cultural patterns forged by interiorising the uses and features of ICTs in our daily lives [17]. The socialising role of families on the Internet is crucial for favouring responsible hyperconnectivity in relation to interaction in this virtual environment [16], so we must reflect on the social responsibility of families and their role in developing civic attitudes and values that favour their sons and daughters building a healthy identity in the information society [19]. Families are often uneasy when witnessing this social transformation based on digitalising human relationships, a context in which they observe how their sons and daughters interact with ICTs with great speed and ease under the premise of ubiquity [22]. In this sense, technological resources monopolise the majority of homes and may alter activities and habits within the interrelation between different family members, such as the face-to-face socialisation process between parents and children [17]. Without forgetting the issue of gender, some studies state that family households with daughters usually have more technological resources to access Internet than families with sons [20]; girls use ICTs to develop social relationships and boys for recreational use by interacting with online games [16].

160

G. Parra-Nieto et al.

4  Parental Mediation and Control We are aware of the importance of families when participating in building the identity of their sons and daughters, aiming for them to be able to adequately coexist with technological developments. To achieve this, we should note the different types of intervention parents tend to use in building identity, presented by Martínez and Medrano [23], who state there are different forms of mediation: (a) Restrictive mediation: establishing explicit rules of use for media: when they should and should not be accessed; what content can be accessed; times for different screens; etc. (b) Shared mediation: participating with them online and commenting content visited and/or developed. (c) Instructive mediation: explaining some aspects of the various contents and advising on them. (d) Unfocused mediation or ‘laissez-faire’ model: allowing children to access what they want, when they want, how they want and as much as they want. The concern families show about the repercussions ICTs may have on their children and how they use them leads them to decide to intervene and mediate in order to help their children, using the dynamic of parental control [24]. We understand this process as implementing rules, limits and regulations established by families, as well as knowledge of hyperconnected activity [25]. More restrictive parental control is often caused by the digital gap between the two generations, in which younger generations have grown up with the use of new technologies and adults have applied patches in their learning so as not to be left behind [26]. The family mediation process of parents towards their children is decisive in the digital environment. The mediation process in the virtual world aims to avoid the various risks and problems young people are exposed to online, focusing the process from a preventive and anticipated perspective more than a reactive and decisive one [18], under the premise of dialogue and collaboration between both parties. However, despite family mediation in the use of ICTs focusing on active mediation based on interest and monitoring children’s hyperconnected activity, Sánchez-­ Antolín, Andrés and Paredes [26] confirm coexistence with mediation based on setting restrictive limits, such as establishing rules or time limits for the use of technological devices. The instructive mediation style is the most common after shared and restrictive, by combining strategies such as accompanying children in the use of ICTs, establishing and remembering rules, controlling use times, setting schedules, etc. [27]. We address how the family influences their children building their identity through their hyperconnectivity as it has a notable impact in a phase in which personality can be shaped and influenced by relational experiences. Thus, positive and negative experiences online are decisive in the evolution of the subject’s identity construction and their self-concept. Families are a key element in these processes as positive mediation can improve relationship quality and reduce risky behaviours, although

Social Networks and Their Influence on Building Gender Identity: Design of a Mobile…

161

some studies highlight how problematic use by young people is directly associated with the family environment, suggesting that adolescents who use the Internet with more problems tend to have less family support and supervision [28]. However, the traditional father-mother family is not exempt from the gender influence in how they develop socialisation with their children using ICTs. Various studies state that there are notable differences in how they supervise their children based on gender. Daughters are normally more controlled by their parents, linked to the traditional perception of greater fragility of the female gender, which requires more protection than boys [29]; especially when talking of fathers, rather than mothers, they tend to use shared and instructive mediation more frequently with daughters than with sons [27]. Along this line, in their study Garaigordobil and Aliri [30] state that mothers tend to be more authoritarian with daughters than with sons; this may be linked to the traditional social pattern in which mothers are less demanding with their sons, having a greater influence than fathers in the emergence—or not—of sexist attitudes in their sons and daughters. However, a positive, communicative and empathetic family climate towards younger members can promote greater parental control in adolescence and, above all, reduce the possibility of risky behaviours online such as violence in their own relationships [21]. Families tend to show more concern regarding the sentimental relationships, sexuality and intimacy of sons and daughters. Considering traditional traits regarding gender differentiation, hyperconnectivity in girls can completely escape the control of families. Issues such as connection times also change depending on gender as families usually restrict ICT use after midnight for girls more than boys [31]. As these are times that children are in their room and, therefore, in their private environment, the aim is to avoid online activities that can promote problematic situations such as sexting or grooming, whose victims are mainly women [31].

5  Socio-Educational Alternatives and Responses Technology is part of how we act, how we relate and, undoubtedly, how we are. It thus becomes a key channel for socialisation in adolescence in which the family is often not up to the socio-educational circumstances and needs. Faced with this, family is one of the basic pillars in the relationship between the educational development of children and ICTs, so it must respond to their education with strategies that guarantee their comprehensive training [18]. Families are concerned about not being able to meet their children’s demands given their interests and needs related to hyperconnectivity in light of the digital gap between the generations [17]. This problem must be addressed with awareness of opportunities and risks to favour family communication with understanding, active listening and acceptance of the development of adolescents online [21, 31]. Families must get involved in promoting alternatives that develop educational guidelines to take on new roles in the socialisation of minors on the Internet. There

162

G. Parra-Nieto et al.

is therefore an urgent need to raise awareness among families about the importance of mediation with their children with co-education to promote the responsible use of ICTs [29], as well as offering instructions on the access and use of social networks to transmit values and attitudes in their use [22]. Specifically, family must reshape its relationship with ICTs in order to enhance its socialising function in values through collaborative use, guiding attitudes towards proper use of social networks by their children who must learn to interact in spaces where deep socialisation is developed [19]. We understand that, given the difficulties of school education and social education in general to intervene in managing and building the identity of adolescents online, we must offer parents the opportunity to have mechanisms and resources for acting at home so they can develop informal education, offering a novel educational possibility to address problems emerging among their children. Families must be offered tools and support guides to work jointly with their children on different essential areas in building their identity (Fig. 1). Critical thinking, pro-social values, ethics and morals, privacy and empathy are elements of socialisation that must be developed with different activities and guides to work with young people and which would increase the capacity to address educational shortcomings in virtual matters—inexistent today—by providing guides for action for possible problems as well as prevention methods. Being aware of the socialising profile of families, they must get involved in the socio-educational aspect of how their children build their identity, taking the digital context as the protagonist faced with their continuous development on the Internet. Work with projects involving workshops which, in cooperation with the family as a whole, address the proactive and safe use of ICTs, as well as the competences and skills of parents who may be affected by the generational digital gap, along with talks to raise awareness on different risks, debates on the implications, fears and potential of ICTs, etc.

Fig. 1  Elements of adolescent development to work with ICTs along with families. (Source: compiled by authors)

Critical thinking

Empathy

Privacy

Pro-social values

Ethics and Morals

Social Networks and Their Influence on Building Gender Identity: Design of a Mobile…

163

We believe it is important to take a step forward and offer a practical socio-­ educational response requiring cooperation between different family members. To achieve this, a mobile app has been designed to work on the elements of identity development in adolescence: critical thinking, pro-social values, ethics, morals, privacy and empathy. This app contains different educational materials for families so they can contextualise, understand and discover the socialisation process and its link to technologies during different stages of evolution. The app is interesting as it is based on the idea that it can be used by the family as a whole, so both adults and adolescents can find answers and resources; it is not only a support for adults, rather it is a tool for joint and collaborative use, where the benefits affect all family members.

The app is organised into five elements grouped into themed blocks related to analysing information, device security, data protection, content management and publication, social relationships on the Internet and the construction of reality faced with videogames. The contents of these blocks are configured according to the characteristics, needs and ages of children from different areas; the area related to building gender identity is one of the key spaces in the app, and we will exemplify its development on this area.

164

G. Parra-Nieto et al.

Families first access theoretical content where they can consult scientific literature on studies about micro-sexism, sexist language in school, sexualised posts on social networks, etc. This content offers a scientific reality and solid contributions to overcoming these problems. Second, they can view videos explaining the different aspects related to these themes so they can, in an entertaining way, gain deeper insight into some realities and case studies of sexting or grooming, for example, and how to address these cases. Next, the app has intervention guidelines to offer more specific advice for working on content management according to the different aspects of each themed block, such as awareness of the lack of reality of memes that influence gender perception, or videogames, series or other multimedia content that can sexualise females and promote violence towards women. Families can also consult dynamics and activities so they can work on what they have learned about each theme in a practical way and consult other types of information with some ‘useful links’. In summary, there are different socio-educational proposals that we believe could have a place in the socialising impact of families with their children in order to foster the positive construction of their identity.

Social Networks and Their Influence on Building Gender Identity: Design of a Mobile…

165

References 1. M.I.  Cantor Silva, E.  Pérez Suárez, S.M.  Carrillo Sierra, Redes sociales e identidad social. Aibi, revista de investigación, administración e ingeniería 6(1), 70–77 (2018) 2. J.R. Sanz Ponce, E. López Luján, Consecuencias pedagógicas entre el alumnado de enseñanza básica derivadas de la COVID-19. Una reflexión en torno a los grandes olvidados de la pandemia. Teoría De La Educación. Revista Interuniversitaria 33(2), 149–166 (2021). https://doi. org/10.14201/teri.25471 3. V.  Renau, X.  Carbonell, U.  Oberst, Redes sociales on-line, género y construcción del self. Aloma, Revista de Psicologia, Ciències de l’Educació i de l’Esport 30(2), 97–107 (2012) 4. M.Á. Blanco Ruiz, Implicación del Uso de las redes Sociales en el Aumento de la Violencia de Género en Adolescentes. Comunicación y medios 30, 124–141 (2014) 5. M.A. Espinosa Bayal, La construcción de género desde el ámbito educativo: una estrategia preventiva. Recuperado de: https://www.emakunde.euskadi.eus/contenidos/informacion/ proyecto_nahiko_formacon/es_def/adjuntos/2006.02.09.angeles.espinosa.pdf (2006) 6. P.  Colás Bravo, La construcción de la identidad de género: enfoques teóricos para fundamentar la investigación e intervención educativa. Revista de Investigación Educativa 25(1), 151–166 (2007) 7. C.  Paetcher, Masculine femininities/feminine masculinities: Power, identities and gender. Gend. Educ. 18(3), 253–263 (2006) 8. J.M.  Muñoz, P.  Torrijos, S.  Serrate, A.  Murciano, Entornos digitales, conectividad y educación. Percepción y gestión del tiempo en la construcción de la identidad digital de la juventud. Revista Española de Pedagogía 78(277), 457–475 (2020) 9. N.L. Muscanell, R.E. Guadagno, Make new friends or keep the old: Gender and personality differences in social networking use. Comput. Hum. Behav. 28(1), 107–112 (2012) 10. S.G.  Mazman, Y.K.  Usluel, Gender differences in using social networks. Turkish Online J. Educ. Technol. TOJET 10(2), 133–139 (2011) 11. L. García-González, O. Bailey Guedes, Memes de Internet y violencia de género a partir de la protesta feminista #UnVioladorEnTuCamino. Virtualis 11(21), 109–136 (2020) 12. K.L. Rulison, S.D. Gest, E. Loken, Dynamic social networks and physical aggression: The moderating role of gender and social status among peers. J. Res. Adolesc. 23(3), 437–449 (2013) 13. I. Psylla, P. Sapiezynski, E. Mones, S. Lehmann, The role of gender in social network organization. PLoS One 12(12) (2017). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0189873 14. M.C. Caldeiro-Pedreira, I. Aguaded, Contenido e interactividad ¿Quién enseña y quién aprende en la realidad digital inmediata? Virtualidad Educación y Ciencia 8(15), 92–105 (2017) 15. G. del Dujo, V.J. Ángel, J.M.  Muñoz-Rodríguez, J.  Martín-Lucas, Pensar la (teoría de la) educación, desde la tecnología de nuestro tiempo. Teoría De La Educación. Revista Interuniversitaria 33(2), 5–26 (2021) https://doi.org/10.14201/teri.25432 16. S. Yubero, E. Larrañaga, R. Navarro, M. Elche, Padres, hijos e Internet. Socialización familiar de la Red. Una relación compleja. Universitas Psychologica 17(2), 1–13 (2018) 17. J. Rivillas, Socialización en familias en el contexto de incorporación en la cultura mediática. Revista Investigium IRE: Ciencias Sociales y Humanas 9(1), 82–95 (2018) 18. C. López-Sánchez, J.A. García del Castillo, La familia como mediadora ante la brecha digital: repercusión en la autoridad. Revista Colombiana de Ciencias Sociales 8(1), 108–124 (2017) 19. J. Plaza, C. Caro, La implicación de la familia en la formación ético-cívica de los jóvenes a través de las TIC. Aloma, Revista de Psicologia, Ciències de l’Educació i de l’Esport 34(2), 97–106 (2016) 20. J. Lepicnik, P. Samec, Uso de tecnologías en el entorno familiar en niños de cuatro años de Eslovenia. Comunicar 20(40), 119–126 (2013) 21. R. Domínguez-Mora, E. Vargas-Jiménez, R. Castro-Castañeda, S. Núñez-Fadda, Impacto de la comunicación familiar en la victimización por internet en parejas adolescentes. Una perspectiva de género. Opción 32(13), 979–1000 (2016)

166

G. Parra-Nieto et al.

22. M. Ruiz-Corbella, A. De-Juanas, Redes sociales, identidad y adolescencia: nuevos retos educativos para la familia. Estudios sobre educación 25, 95–113 (2013) 23. J.I. Martínez, C. Medrano, La mediación parental y el uso de Internet. INFAD Int. J. Develop. Educ. Psychol. 1(1), 549–556 (2012) 24. Y. Pastor, R. Martín, M. Montes, Patrones de uso, control parental y acceso a la información de los adolescentes en la red. Estudios sobre el Mensaje Periodístico 25(2), 995–1012 (2019) 25. L.L.  Berríos, M.R.  Buxarrais, Uso de las TIC y mediación parental percibida por niños de Chile. Comunicar 23(45), 161–168 (2015) 26. P. Sánchez-Antolín, C. Andrés, J. Paredes, El papel de la familia en el desarrollo de la competencia digital. Análisis de cuatro casos. Digital Educ. Rev. 34, 44–58 (2018) 27. I. Bartau, A. Aierbe, E. Oregui, Mediación parental del uso de Internet desde una perspectiva de género. Revista Electrónica de Investigación Educativa 22(2), 1–14 (2020) 28. A. Beakley, M. Ellithorpe, D. Romer, The role of parents in problematic internet use among US adolescents. Media Commun. 4(3), 24–34 (2016) 29. P. Arnáiz, F. Cerezo, A.M. Giménez, J.J. Maquilón, Conductas de ciberadicción y experiencias de cyberbullying entre adolescentes. Anales de psicología 32(3), 761–769 (2016) 30. M. Garaigordobil, J. Aliri, Parental socialization styles, parents’ educational level, and sexist attitudes in adolescence. Span. J. Psychol. 15(2), 592–603 (2012) 31. R.  Gamito, P.  Aristazabal, M.T.  Vizcarra, Sociedad multipantalla: un reto educativo para familia y escuela. Revista Prisma Soc. 25, 398–423 (2019)

Digital Identity and Quality of Life Technologies in the Older Adults Antonio Víctor Martín-García, Alicia Murciano-Hueso, Patricia Torrijos-­Fincias, and Bárbara Mariana Gutiérrez-Pérez

1  Over-Ageing and Digitalisation in Developed Societies The population over 60 is increasing faster than any other age group in practically all the world’s developed countries. The World Health Organization (WHO) [1] predicts that the number of people over 65 will triple in 2050, from 524 million in 2010 to 1.5 billion in 2050. This figure represents 15% of the entire global population. The consequences of this demographic change and increased life expectancy pose opportunities and challenges whose effects are already visible in the development of the twenty-first-century society [2]. The demographic increase of older people is coupled with the dynamic of mass digital technology use, globalisation and the rapid diffusion of a multitude of mass products to define an era of technological advances that are changing many aspects of society. Despite these developments emerging simultaneously, their progress is not coordinated. To date, technology seemed to have largely ignored the ageing population, while older people did not seem interested in using technology. However, some updated data point to changes in this interest. On one hand, evidence shows that technologies offer the greatest benefits in this group in terms of quality of life [3], a positive effect notable in improved psychological development [4] and in other aspects specifically related with dependence [5]. Moreover, the use of technological tools favours quality leisure time and offers a feeling of personal and social well-being [6]. In this sense, it is important to stress that active ageing can be encouraged by the use of technological devices, which is associated with improved health, increased interpersonal relations and personal satisfaction, fewer feelings of loneliness or lower levels of depression or social isolation [7, 8]. Meanwhile, recent studies by Martín Martín [9] or Sunkel and Ullmann [10] note A. V. Martín-García · A. Murciano-Hueso () · P. Torrijos-Fincias · B. M. Gutiérrez-Pérez University of Salamanca, Salamanca, Spain e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 J. M. Muñoz-Rodríguez (ed.), Identity in a Hyperconnected Society, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-85788-2_12

167

168

A. V. Martín-García et al.

that older people increasingly view technology more positively; a recent increase in Internet use by over 65 s has been reported [11]. Therefore, and as indicated in some studies [12, 13], the model has been changing in recent years in terms of interest in and frequent use of technology by the elderly. In summary, accelerated technological development and the ageing population pose major questions of academic and socio-political interest that must not be disassociated from the fields of education and pedagogical gerontology. A new field of study and multidisciplinary intervention has emerged in this context of technological and socio-demographic changes and the need to address new social challenges related to an over-ageing population: gerontechnology.

2  Q  uality of Life Technologies in the Framework of Gerontechnology Gerontechnology is an interdisciplinary field of research and application covering gerontology—the scientific study of ageing and technology—as well as the development and distribution of technology-based products, environments and services [14]. The term gerontechnology was first used at the Eindhoven University of Technology (Netherlands) by Graafmans and Brouwers [15]. This emerging field of scientific and technical development stems from the concern and interest for research combining technological developments and the study of ageing [16]. The two main objectives are therefore to use technology to (a) prevent or compensate the perceptual, cognitive or physical deterioration of ageing and (b) support or improve opportunities associated with ageing using technical applications for daily life, communication, leisure, services, learning and art [17]. Gerontechnology is therefore a new professional field, or applied discipline, designed to develop techniques and products based on knowledge of the ageing processes and cultural preferences and aspects of the elderly [18]. Literature available agrees that these special needs and interests of the elderly regarding technology include five areas (see Fig. 1), also called ‘domains of life’, related to living environments; communication; personal mobility and transportation; health; and employment, education, recreation or self-fulfilment. We will look at each in detail below.

2.1  Living Environments Technologies The ageing process poses a series of functional challenges that require greater attention and support to adapt to new environments [17]. A new interest therefore emerges in household care and control technologies to facilitate greater independence. Some of these technologies incorporate different types of reminder systems for people with cognitive difficulties. Others focus on installing a series of

Digital Identity and Quality of Life Technologies in the Older Adults

169

Fig. 1  Areas of gerontechnology

infrastructures in order to mitigate possible physical limitations: mobile telecare services; accessible interfaces to facilitate browsing for TV or the Internet; screen readers, virtual keyboards and speech synthesis; home automation and smart digital homes; mobile devices; etc. In addition to these, many other technologies developed also aim to compensate the vulnerability of older adults regarding certain functional barriers that limit their daily development. For example, 3D virtual reality (VR) is being explored as a resource for training older people with spatial alterations to familiarise themselves with emergency exits and entrances, access to certain places, etc. There are also so-called multi-sensory environments which recreate spaces combining image, audio, textures and aromas with visual screens, lights and colours, vibrations and pleasant aromas that attempt to stimulate all the senses in an ambience of comfort and relaxation [19].

2.2  Communications Technologies These technologies help satisfy older people’s needs for social interaction, improving health and safety [6, 20, 21]. They are generally technical aids and resources that the elderly or disabled can use to access and improve online interaction, such as screen readers (which read website texts aloud), screen magnifiers (for people with poor vision), voice recognition software, synthesisers or text-to-speech converters, remote control and supervision devices, etc. Meanwhile, smartphones are one of the most commonly used and complete communication technologies due to their many features. Use of these technologies by the elderly is on increase, although recent research [22, 23] continues to point to older people still feeling removed from this technology, or they do not feel comfortable or ready to use them, largely because they are not designed for this age group. Good design guidelines are therefore required to include improvements in terms of ergonomics and ease of use of

170

A. V. Martín-García et al.

technological products, aspects already incorporated into some of the so-called smart technologies.

2.3  Personal Mobility and Transportation Most modern technological developments in transportation related to ageing focus on compensating the physical and cognitive limitations of the elderly. On one hand, a large field of scientific literature focuses on creating products and environments for personal mobility with a view to preventing, delaying or compensating limitations (e.g. handrails, canes, walkers, wheelchairs, barrier-free environments) [5, 24]. There is likewise great interest in compensating the limitations of ageing related to driving [25]. Although driving problems are not specifically associated with age [26], studies indicate that elderly drivers are characterised by a decrease in sensory and motor skills, increased perceptual and cognitive deterioration and some limitations of driving skills under certain conditions, such as complex junctions, difficult weather conditions and night driving [27, 28]. Nowadays we thus can find examples of technological developments related to mobility and transportation such as informative assistance devices or even driverless cars, presented as a definitive solution for elderly drivers [29, 30].

2.4  Health In recent decades there have been significant changes among the elderly population regarding the prevalence of non-communicable diseases, disabilities and other health problems [31]. According to WHO [1] reports, around 60% of a person’s quality of life and health depends on their lifestyle and individual behaviour; 53% of causes of death are related to lifestyle and health habits. These results are cause for concern for enabling older people to adopt conducts that can maximise healthy old age [32]. In this vein, a great technological area is developed for the purpose of preventing these behaviours with long-term, non-medical intervention, focusing on nutrition, exercise and reduced chronic exposure to environmental pollutants. Some examples of relevant technological applications in this area are all those including long-term monitoring of physical and psychological activity in everyday situations [33]. These are generally assistive technology, rehabilitation technology or adaptive technology, and they include all types of devices and programs that replace or enhance the body’s abilities in order to increase the functionalities of older people and design methods and tools dedicated to increasing the skills or compensating certain deficits of people with disability in their compensatory function [34, 35]. This type of technology is designed for a wide range of problems: cognitive, language, communication, mobility, manipulating the environment, hearing, visual or tactile disability, etc. [19].

Digital Identity and Quality of Life Technologies in the Older Adults

171

Cognitive stimulation is undoubtedly the area where technological applications can truly be developed today, generally computer programs that focus on specific age-related deficiencies in perceptual, motor and memory systems. The idea of these programs assumes that mental stimulation using challenging cognitive activities is a means to improve neuroplasticity, which in turn can improve cognitive reserve and maintain general cognitive function. For this reason, multiple programs and applications of various types have been developed in recent years for brain stimulation—both free and paid—proposing a series of objectives and activities related to improving specific areas such as language, attention, memory, basic calculation, etc. Meanwhile, in terms of ‘social stimulation’, the social integration, active participation and social commitment of older people are unquestionably a factor of successful and healthy ageing. Various technological projects thus offer websites and social blogs, social mentoring projects based on virtual platforms, social networks, etc., which seek to ensure truly active ageing, optimising opportunities for health, participation and safety and, ultimately, improving quality of life as people age [36, 37].

2.5  Self-Fulfilment: Employment, Education and Recreation Self-fulfilment is the process of fulfilling one’s own talents and tastes through sustained effort and achievement in an activity [33]. This field is currently a potential area for developing research into the elderly [9, 23, 38]. We can differentiate three areas of special need and interest for older people regarding technology. First is employment: as we age, performance at work can be affected due to loss of strength and health associated with age. Thus, a major field of research proposes certain technological developments in order to redesign jobs or compensatory physical conditions to provide safe work environments for older workers who, for example, continue to perform physically demanding jobs [39, 40]. Another important research niche is based on the possibility of developing technological advances to help older people perform certain jobs that require IT knowledge [41–43]. Along these lines, studies such as by Trigueros-Cervantes et al. [44] highlight the importance of adapting training processes to this sector of the population as they generally have a slower learning process with greater differences within the group. It is therefore essential to set longer training periods so that older workers can acquire these skills. The second area of research is—linked to the first and still very incipient—on technological developments related to learning and education, including distance learning. Some recent research studies already explore the multiple functionalities offered by digital technologies in teaching-learning processes [45, 46]. There is a growing offer of technology training, but also online training, to promote the incorporation of older people in the virtual world so they can benefit from its advantages in terms of training. Finally, the third is the great interest for recreation in older people, demonstrated in the exponential growth of technological developments based on

172

A. V. Martín-García et al.

computer games or programs to create visual art and music adapted to their specific interests [47–49]. As we have seen, there are currently various fields and areas of technological development that represent great progress in gerontechnology which attempt to cover the special needs and interests of older people regarding technology. Multiple initiatives by the European Commission are precisely researching the key role of these technologies to maximise quality of life in the elderly in the framework of active ageing [50]. Some examples include the ‘Decade of Healthy Ageing 2020-2030’ Plan; ‘Horizon 2020’ Programmes and the ‘Seventh Framework Programme’ (FP7); or the ‘European Innovation Partnership on Active and Healthy Ageing’ (EIP-AHA) initiative. However, one of the most notable initiatives in recent years is ‘Ambient Assisted Living’ (AAL) based on a new research and development programme on independent and assisted living technologies and services [51]. We will focus on this initiative below. The Ambient Assisted Living (AAL) programme addresses the need to promote the well-being of the elderly by using technology, so that each person can live with dignity in their own home by increasing their autonomy, self-confidence and safety, with help in their daily chores [52]. The AAL concept globally includes all dimensions necessary to promote independent living for the elderly: home care; supply with goods and chores; safety, security and privacy; health and wellness; hobbies; social interaction; information and learning; working life; and mobility (see Fig. 2). Through the different dimensions of AAL, in available literature we can find certain technological solutions created to cover the needs of the elderly [53, 54]. Some of the different types of services that can be included in the AAL system are alarms-emergency services (personal safety); telemonitoring and telecare (access to Fig. 2  Dimensions of Ambient Assisted Living (AAL)

Digital Identity and Quality of Life Technologies in the Older Adults

173

healthcare); information and communication support; support for physical and cognitive activities (support for daily activities); collaborative services (connection with social and professional environment); and interfaces for access to AAL services (tools adapted to the user). In this context, there is growing evidence that these life technologies have the potential to support active and healthy ageing [55–57]. However, many researchers detect limited acceptance of these technologies and high drop-out rates [58, 59]. One recurring aspect in literature is the fact that devices must focus more on user characteristics, needs and preferences [60, 61]. The demand and need to further study how the elderly perceive technology stems from this idea, focusing on aspects such as the representation of technologies or the role they play in shaping digital identity.

3  T  he Challenges of Technology Acceptance Among the Elderly 3.1  T  echnology Perception and Elimination of Barriers in the Use of Technology While technologies designed to improve quality of life offer multiple benefits, the adoption rate (understood as the decision to accept and regularly use something) by the elderly is still lagging far behind the speed with which these devices are created [62, 63]. This evidence supports the need to continue focusing on searching for and identifying factors that explain the process of accepting and adopting digital technologies by older people. Specialist literature offers approaches such as the domestication [64] or dissemination of innovation [65] that propose various levels of progression in technology acceptance, ranging from not having used technology to full adoption. The ultimate framework of general analysis of these approaches is the so-called Technology Adoption Models (TAM) originally proposed by Davis [66] and Davis et  al. [67], widely used for various types of users and technological devices. The main goal of the TAM lies in describing how user beliefs and attitudes influence their intention to use a specific technology. The model proposes that user perception of the perceived use and perceived ease of use of a specific technology is key in their attitude towards their intention to use it. The initial model has evolved to shape other models [68] that also study the need to consider individual differences, such as age, education, income, race/ethnicity and gender, among others [69–73]. Research on technology acceptance by the elderly is still highly scarce and mainly focuses on identifying factors that act as barriers or facilitators in accepting technology [45, 74]. In contrast, there has been a significant increase in the focus on analysis specifically towards older people since Renaud and Van Biljon [75] designed the first Senior Technology Acceptance and Adoption model (STAM), which highlights that intention to use technology is mainly influenced by external

174

A. V. Martín-García et al.

factors related to social influence. Based on this model, research has continued to study a series of factors that can influence technology acceptance by this specific sector of the population [76–78]. One of the most recent models is Senior TAM [79], designed to study gerontechnology. The outcomes of these latest research studies have proven how individual attributes, including age, gender, education, self-sufficiency and anxiety towards gerontechnology, as well as characteristics of health and capacity and/or facilitating conditions, explicitly and directly affect technology acceptance. Outcomes indicate that these factors better predicted behaviour in the use of gerontechnology than attitude factors conventionally used (these were perceived use and perceived ease of use). To maximise elderly people adopting technologies and their resulting benefits, we must continue to understand the complex processes underlying their decisions to adopt or abandon a specific technology [62]. Thus, gerontechnology, as an emerging field of scientific and technical development concerned with maximising quality of life for the elderly using technology, requires more information on users themselves. To achieve this, and based on this assumption on the challenge of adaptation faced by the elderly in light of the rapid pace of technological development, other approaches analyse this acceptance process and specifically focus on the role of emotions; we describe them in the following section.

3.2  Emotional Influence in Technology Use and Acceptance The goal of this approach is to analyse all the emotional components that configure certain mental representations users have of technology. Emotional state has been researched in scientific literature as a key component in mental representations towards any object; this factor influences disposition and self-perceived capacity to use various technological devices [80, 81]. For example, a study by Cenfetelli [82] demonstrated that emotions function as drivers of cognition in the field of initial technology use. Furthermore, emotions have been found to be significant precedents of the ease with which people perceive the use of technologies, especially influential in the case of negative emotions which may arise when faced with a novel stimulus, such as concern, nervousness or fear, among others [83–85]. Even though research has started to explore the role of emotions in technology use, it has been limited in various ways: on one hand, due to the very operationalisation of emotions, limited in studies to a small set of possible human emotions, and, on the other, because these emotions have sometimes been ambiguous in terms of how they affect cognitive beliefs and use behaviour. In scientific literature we can find studies that have focused on the influence of specific emotions linked to anxiety [84, 86], enjoyment [67, 87] or satisfaction [88]. As a result of the important digital literacy movement, concepts such as ‘technophobia’ were adopted in the context of educational-vocational technology training, linking it to negative emotions [89]. However, without detracting from the importance of this type of emotions and how they influence technology acceptance, these

Digital Identity and Quality of Life Technologies in the Older Adults

175

studies are extremely limited as they only consider some of the possible emotions involved in using or rejecting technology. Accordingly, recent research such as by Alexandrakis et al. [90], Burns et al. [91], Cenfetelli [82], Lu et al. [92] or Zeng et al. [93] advocates capturing and considering the most comprehensive variety of emotional states possible. An in-depth review of literature shows a certain theoretical diversity in terms of approaching studies on emotions and technology use. While in some studies such as by Venkatesh [94] emotion is proposed as an anchoring perception that leads to ease of use, in others it is proposed as a moderator between use and intention [88]. We can also find studies in which emotions are modelled as dependent on expected results and as direct influences in use [86], or even others, such as Koufaris [95], determine that, even though emotions are a direct and influential precedent in use, they are not directly related to utility. Thus, literature on emotional influence still includes a significant and interesting debate on the causal direction of the relationship between self-perceived emotions and cognition or assessment of certain stimuli [96]. Some theories, such as the appraisal theory by Scherer [97], argue that cognitions engender emotions, but support can also be found by considering that emotions can influence cognitive beliefs [98]. Based on this premise, the theory of reasoned action [99] holds that, in the context of initial technology use, emotions act as drivers of cognition. Meanwhile, social cognitive theory [100] states that there are reciprocal relationships between emotion and cognition and that content plays a key role in the direction of causality. Based on this debate, we can confirm research has been conducted and is necessary on how emotion influences intention to use and, consequently, technology acceptance [90, 101, 102]. Researchers such as Beaudry and Pinsonneault [101] propose the need to operationalise emotions that lead to technology use as a first step in order to act on two separate factors—positive and negative—based on the consistent conceptualisation of emotions in literature (e.g. Bagozzi et al. [103]). 3.2.1  C  lassification of Emotional Responses, Specifically Toward Information Technologies Beaudry and Pinsonneault [101] define emotions as a mental state of readiness for action that arises from assessing a technology. In order to research how emotions influence technology use, they propose a framework for classifying emotions based on the model of user acceptance [104] and emotion appraisal theories [105, 106]. They therefore combine two technology appraisal evaluations that determine users’ emotional reactions to a new technology [101, 104] (see Fig. 3). The first appraisal lies in classifying user perception of the technology as an opportunity or a threat [103]. User emotional reactions are thus determined as positive if they perceive the technology as an opportunity, as it achieves the objective, or negative if they perceive the technology as a threat and does not achieve the objective. Note that the levels of these two dimensions of emotions can be measured

176

A. V. Martín-García et al.

Fig. 3  Classification of emotional responses, specifically toward information technologies [101]

separately [107–109] and that emotions aroused can vary between individuals based on their unique psychological appraisals [101]. The second appraisal refers to the level of control perceived by users on achieving the expected result of accepting a technology [101, 105, 110]. In line with the previous appraisal, this dimension classifies these emotions triggered by a technology innovation event into four categories: emotions of achievement, challenge, loss and deterrence. Achievement and challenge are experienced when users perceive the technology innovation as an opportunity that can generate positive results. Achievement emotions refer to the pleasant feeling users experience when they can achieve their objective using technologies with very little effort, causing feelings related to pleasure, satisfaction and/or enjoyment. Challenge emotions refer to sensations related to the ability to excel which could improve positive user attitudes towards technology and help them achieve their objectives (involvement, pride, improvement). By contrast, a new technology innovation perceived as a threat is more likely to trigger emotions of loss or deterrence. When people have no control over the expected results of the new technology, they are likely to experience emotions of loss such as anger, disappointment and frustration. But when users have a certain control over expected results, their emotional reactions fall into deterrence, represented by anxiety, fear, concern, worry, etc. This emotional classification has been used in subsequent research studies with findings which suggest that users could experience both positive and negative emotions triggered by the same technology [92, 107, 108]. Currently, the significant increase in this type of research contributes to analysing all the emotional components that configure certain mental representations users have towards technology. This approach is a cornerstone for obtaining information required on users so the emerging field of scientific and technical development that is gerontechnology can achieve its goal of guaranteeing quality of life for the elderly using technology. How these mental representations are configured in the elderly and the consequent emotionality are an essential requirement in the role of technology and shaping digital identity.

Digital Identity and Quality of Life Technologies in the Older Adults

177

3.3  The Role of Technologies in Shaping Digital Identity Finally, we must link a line of work, associated with the previous and even more incipient, of studies focused on the role technologies play in the lives of the elderly and in shaping their digital identity. In this regard, we can find studies on the usability of digital devices, resources and spaces by the elderly [3, 111–113], but there is little research related to their digital identity. One of the most widely accepted theories these pioneering studies support is the identity theory [114] that attempts to explain how people’s identities influence and modulate behaviour, thoughts, feelings or emotions. This theory states that individuals strive to maintain a balanced, stable environment against disturbances, and they do so by changing their actions so their perceptions match a benchmark standard or an ideal self [115]. As such, discrepancy or non-verification of the desired identity (e.g. ageing) upsets the balance of the social environment, which causes changes in behaviour to disassociate from the inappropriate identity or to re-establish the desired identity [116]. In this regard, some research studies have focused on the use of technology as a component of identity. On one hand, Muñoz-Rodríguez et al. [117] start to explore identity factors in the construction of the digital self of adults and the elderly in order to be able to construct different customisable digital trajectories, based on their needs and focused on their experience, and their initial level of digital identity. Studies such as by Muñoz-Rodríguez et al. [117] thus analyse the relationship between uses of technology among older people considering their digital identity and inclusion. On one hand, some studies such as by Lupton and Seymour [118] or Parette and Scherer [119] reported that stigma associated with the use of certain technologies in people with disabilities leads people to reject certain technological devices. Along these same lines, the study by Astell et al. [115] presents convincing evidence that technological devices which project negative images of ageing are rejected or avoided by older adults in an effort to maintain a desired identity associated with notions of competence, independence and self-sufficiency. Consequently, it seems plausible that we can start to consider that the use of technologies for different activities or interactions may have led older people to develop and build a digital identity, changing how they interpret what they can do in a digital context [117]. Therefore, despite the difficulties facing the elderly when using gerontechnology, more and more older people form part of the virtual environment and may have built their digital identity unconsciously. In any case, more research is required on the subject to gain a more in-depth understanding of the complex dimensions surrounding the digital identity of the elderly. In this context, studies exploring relationships between ageing and digital technologies, and their perception in the framework of gerontechnology, allow us to delve deeper into these affects and uses of smart technologies to improve quality of life in people of advanced age. All this based around the concept of quality of life technologies in care and compensatory areas that favour psychological well-being and improved social interaction in old age.

178

A. V. Martín-García et al.

4  Conclusions This chapter has reviewed the relevance of technologies and their role in improving the quality of life of the elderly. In a digitalised society known for over-ageing, we must leverage technological opportunities in areas related to life at home and life in the community. The digital environment offers scenarios for communication, taking advantage of recreation and free time, health and/or ongoing learning. The question at hand is: how do our elderly perceive technologies? Perceived use and ease of use are understood to be factors that will influence technology acceptance and building a digital identity. The role of emotions in regulating cognition and behaviour is also undeniable. Thus, constructing digital identity is mediated by how the elderly perceive technology, whether they see it as an opportunity or as a challenge, as well as the level of perceived control. When older people perceive technology as a challenge, but they have a high expectation of achievement, they conceive the technological development as an opportunity, and it is more likely to generate emotions linked to the pleasure, enjoyment or satisfaction. Work in favour of a digital identity in which technological opportunities are perceived will favour intention of use and adaptability to the demands of a digital society. Raising awareness of different resources is not enough to achieve this; rather the technology acceptance of the elderly requires us to consider emotional factors as aspects that regulate behaviour. New pedagogical challenges therefore emerge if we wish to improve quality of life and favour the use of technology resources not only as care and compensatory tools but tool that favour a vision of active and healthy old age with participation in the community.

References 1. World Health Organization (WHO), World report on ageing and health (2015) 2. World Health Organization (WHO), Active ageing: A policy framework (2002) 3. F. Özsungur, A research on the effects of successful aging on the acceptance and use of technology of the elderly. Assist. Technol. (2019) 4. V.H.  Dao, Technology and Elderly Well-Being (University of Houston-Clear Lake, Houston, 2018) 5. B. Marques, J. McIntosh, A. Valera, A. Gaddam, Innovative and assistive ehealth technologies for smart therapeutic and rehabilitation outdoor spaces for the elderly demographic. Multimod. Technol. Interact. 4, 76 (2020) 6. V.  Renobell, S.F. de Frutos, D.R.  Fortanet, Beneficios de la educación online en personas mayores. V Congreso internacional virtual sobre La Educación en el Siglo XXI (2020) 7. S. Agudo Prado, J. Fombona Cadavieco, M.Á. Pascual Sevillano, La alfabetización digital de las personas mayores en Asturias. Magister 28, 1 (2016) 8. D.J. Souders, B. Gepner, N. Charness, J. Wekezer, Older adults as cutaway bus passengers: User-centered literature review. J. Transp. Res. Board 2516, 27 (2015) 9. F.M. Martín Martín, Habilidades comunicativas como condicionantes en el uso de las TIC en personas adultas mayores. Int. J. Educ. Res. Innov. 8, 220 (2017) 10. G. Sunkel, H. Ullmann, Las personas mayores de América Latina en la era digital: Superación de la brecha digital. Revista de la CEPAL 127, 243 (2019)

Digital Identity and Quality of Life Technologies in the Older Adults

179

11. A. Smith, Older adults and technology use: Adoption is increasing, but many seniors remain isolated from digital life. Pew Research Center (2018). https://www.pewresearch.org/ internet/2014/04/03/older-adults-and-technology-use/ 12. R.  König, A.  Seifert, M.  Doh, Internet use among older Europeans: An analysis based on SHARE data. Univ. Access Inf. Soc. 17, 621 (2018) 13. K.E. Pike, M.S. Chong, C.H. Hume, B.J. Keech, M. Konjarski, K.A. Landolt, B.E. Leslie, A. Russo, C. Thai, J.C. Vilsten, Providing online memory interventions for older adults: A critical review and recommendations for development. Aust. Psychol. 53, 367 (2018) 14. H. Bouma, J.A. Graafmans, Gerontechnology, vol 3 (IOS Press, Amsterdam, 1992) 15. J.A.  Graafmans, T.  Brouwers, GerontechnologyTM, the modelling of normal aging. Ine: Proceedings of the Human Factors Society Annual Meeting (1989) 16. A. Piau, E. Campo, P. Rumeau, B. Vellas, F. Nourhashemi, Aging society and gerontechnology: A solution for an independent living? J. Nutr. Health Aging 18, 97 (2014) 17. J. Fozard, J. Rietsema, H. Boum, J. Graafmans, Gerontechnology: Creating enabling environments for the challenges and opportunities of aging. Educ. Gerontol. 26, 331 (2000) 18. J.  Petermans, Gerontechnology: Don’t miss the train, but which is the right carriage. Eur. Geriatr. Med. 8, 281 (2017) 19. A.V.  Martín-García, Envejecimiento, educación y virtualización tecnológica. Aula 24, 29 (2018) 20. R. Khalaila, A. Vitman-Schorr, Internet use, social networks, loneliness, and quality of life among adults aged 50 and older: Mediating and moderating effects. Qual. Life Res. 27, 479 (2018) 21. Z.  Wang, X.  Li, M.  Chen, L.  Si, Social health insurance, healthcare utilization, and costs in middle-aged and elderly community-dwelling adults in China. Int. J. Equity Health 17, 17 (2018) 22. C.  González Oñate, C.  Fanjul Peyró, Análisis de los principales cambios en la estructura organizacional de las agencias de comunicación publicitaria. Comunicación y Conocimiento: Resúmenes del VI Congreso Internacional de la AE-IC (2018) 23. A. Seifert, M. Hofer, J. Rössel, Older adults’ perceived sense of social exclusion from the digital world. Educ. Gerontol. 44, 775 (2018) 24. M. Puyuelo Cazorla, L. Merino Sanjuan, Diseño de elementos urbanos: Sostenibilidad para la Smart City (Universitat Politècnica València, 2020) 25. M.A. Binotto, M.H. Lenardt, N.H.K. Carneiro, T.M. Lourenço, C. Cechinel, M.C. Rodríguez-­ Martínez, Gait speed associated factors in elderly subjects undergoing exams to obtain the driver’s license. Revista Latino-Americana Enfermagem 27, e3138 (2019) 26. A. Siren, S. Haustein, What are the impacts of giving up the driving licence? Ageing Soc. 35, 1821 (2015) 27. S. Motamedi, J.H. Wang, The impact of text driving on driving safety. Int. J. Traffic Transport Eng. 6, 325 (2016) 28. D. Pavlou, I. Beratis, E. Papadimitriou, C. Antoniou, G. Yannis, S. Papageorgiou, Which are the critical measures to assess the driving performance of drivers with brain pathologies? Transpor. Res. Procedia 14, 4393 (2016) 29. S.M. Reimer, W.L. Pfeiffer, J.F. Kreutzer, T.C. Lueth, L.T. D'Angelo, Evaluation of patient transfer assistance systems for nursing personnel at a residential home for the elderly. IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Biomimetics (IEEE ROBIO 2014) (2014) 30. J.  Son, M.  Park, B.B.  Park, The effect of age, gender and roadway environment on the acceptance and effectiveness of Advanced Driver Assistance Systems. Transport. Res. Part F Traffic Psychol. Behav. 31, 12 (2015) 31. J.R. Beard, A. Officer, I.A. De Carvalho, R. Sadana, A.M. Pot, J.P. Michel, P. Lloyd-Sherlock, J.E. Epping-Jordan, G.G. Peeters, W.R. Mahanani, The World report on ageing and health: A policy framework for healthy ageing. Lancet 387, 2145 (2016) 32. R. Zakeri, M.R. Cowie, Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: Controversies, challenges and future directions. Heart 104, 377 (2014)

180

A. V. Martín-García et al.

33. M.  Changizi, M.H.  Kaveh, Effectiveness of the mHealth technology in improvement of healthy behaviors in an elderly population—A systematic review. mHealth 3, 51 (2017) 34. F.  Alcantud Marín, Las tecnologías de ayuda: concepto y modelo de intervención, in Tecnologías de ayuda en personas con trastornos de comunicación, ed. by F.  Alcantud Marín, F. J. Soto Pérez, (Valencia, Ñau Llibre, 2003) 35. J.C. Aceros, B. Callén, M.T.L. Cavalcante, M. Domènech, Participação e idosos: a construção de um quadro ético para a teleassistência em Espanha, in Serviço Social no envelhecimento, ed. by M. I. Carvalho, (Lisboa, Pactor, 2013) 36. World Health Organization (WHO), Facts on Ageing and the Life Course, 10 (2012). https:// www.who.int/health-topics/ageing#tab=tab_1 37. A. Sixsmith, Technology and the challenge of aging, in Technologies for Active Aging, ed. by A. Sixsmith, G. Gutman, (Springer, New York, 2013) 38. N.G.  Abdelrahman, R.  Haque, M.E.  Polverento, A.  Wendling, C.M.  Goetz, B.B.  Arnetz, Brain health: Attitudes towards technology adoption in older adults. Healthcare 9, 23 (2021) 39. Z.  Alansari, N.B.  Anuar, A.  Kamsin, S.  Soomro, M.R.  Belgaum, The Internet of Things adoption in healthcare applications. IEEE 3rd International Conference on Engineering Technologies and Social Sciences (ICETSS) (2018) 40. E.H. Oh, H.J. Lee, H.K. Choi, Study of driving usability in senior consumers. Asia Life Sci. 15, 2177 (2018) 41. D. Martínez Espino, A. Núñez Reyes, R. Abascal Mena, Digitaprende: una aplicación para la alfabetización digital de adultos mayores. Pistas Educativas 39, 1059 (2018) 42. L. Liu, E. Dillon, J. Zhang, Finding a holistic design for elderly people to type on smartphones. Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Pervasive Technologies Related to Assistive Environments (2017) 43. R. Pang, X. Zhao, Computer keyboard design for elderly based on ergonomics. Packag. Eng. 2017, 211 (2017) 44. C. Trigueros-Cervantes, E. Rivera-García, J.J. Delgado-Peña, Las TIC y el alumnado mayor en los programas universitarios para mayores desde la perspectiva del enseñante. Análisis en el contexto español. RMIE 22, 273 (2017) 45. A.V.  Martín-García, J.M.  Muñoz-Rodriguez, S.  Serrate González, A.  Murciano-Hueso, Intención de participación en programas universitarios de mayores en modalidad a distancia. identificación de perfiles mediante análisis de segmentación. Pedagogía Social Revista Interuniversitaria, 39, 1–15 (2021) 46. J.M.  Muñoz-Rodríguez, P.  Torrijos Fincias, S.  Serrate González, A.  Murciano Hueso, Entornos digitales, conectividad y educación. Percepción y gestión del tiempo en la construcción de la identidad digital de la juventud. Revista Española de Pedagogía 78, 457 (2020) 47. K.M. Almondes, M.E.M. Leonardo, A.M.S. Moreira, Effects of a cognitive training program and sleep hygiene for executive functions and sleep quality in healthy elderly. Dementia & Neuropsycholia 11, 69 (2017) 48. J. Giacomelli, K.C. Fernandes, G. Lopes, J. Moura, J. Cheiram, A. Mello, Game design for training of elderly people in mouse and keyboard use. Proceedings of the XVII Brazilian Symposium on Computer Games and Digital Entertainment (2018) 49. W. Kopeć, K. Abramczuk, B. Balcerzak, M. Juźwin, K. Gniadzik, G. Kowalik, R. Nielek, A location-based game for two generations: Teaching mobile technology to the elderly with the support of young volunteers, in eHealth 360o, ed. by K. Giokas, L. Bokor, F. Hopfgartner, (Springer, Budapst, 2017) 50. H.J. Swift, D. Abrams, R.A. Lamont, L. Drury, The risks of ageism model: How ageism and negative attitudes toward age can be a barrier to active aging. Soc. Issues Policy Rev. 11, 195 (2017) 51. P.A.  Moreno Sánchez, Entornos de ayuda a la vida independiente de personas mayores sobre servicios de redes de próxima generación. Escuela Técnica Superior de Ingenieros de Telecomunicación (ETSIT UPM) (2014)

Digital Identity and Quality of Life Technologies in the Older Adults

181

52. D. Calvaresi, D. Cesarini, P. Sernani, M. Marinoni, A.F. Dragoni, A. Sturm, Exploring the ambient assisted living domain: A systematic review. J. Ambient. Intell. Humaniz. Comput. 8, 239 (2017) 53. A.  Almeida, R.  Mulero, P.  Rametta, V.  Urošević, M.  Andrić, L.  Patrono, A critical analysis of an IoT—aware AAL system for elderly monitoring. Futur. Gener. Comput. Syst. 97, 598 (2019) 54. D. Choi, H. Choi, D. Shon, Future changes to smart home based on AAL healthcare service. J. Asian Architec. Build. Eng. 18, 190 (2019) 55. J.L. Helbostad, B. Vereijken, C. Becker, C. Todd, K. Taraldsen, M. Pijnappels, K. Aminian, S.  Mellone, Mobile health applications to promote active and healthy ageing. Sensors 17, 622 (2017) 56. S. Lamb, J. Robbins-Ruszkowski, A. Corwin, T. Calasanti, N. King, Successful Aging as a Contemporary Obsession: Global Perspectives (Rutgers, New Brunswick, 2017) 57. S.T. Peek, E.J. Wouters, J. Van Hoof, K.G. Luijkx, H.R. Boeije, H.J. Vrijhoef, Factors influencing acceptance of technology for aging in place: A systematic review. Int. J. Med. Inform. 83, 235 (2014) 58. T. Greenhalgh, J. Raftery, S. Hanney, M. Glover, Research impact: A narrative review. BMC Med. 14, 78 (2016) 59. S.  Merkel, A.  Kucharski, Participatory design in gerontechnology: A systematic literature review. The Gerontologist 59, e16 (2019) 60. H.  Künemund, Chancen und Herausforderungen assistiver Technik. Nutzerbedarfe und Technikakzeptanz im Alter. TATuP-Zeitschrift Für Technikfolgenabschätzung in Theorie Und Praxis 24, 28 (2015) 61. A.  Nishchyk, N.C.  Sanderson, W.  Chen, How elderly people experience videos in MOOCS.  Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Engineering and Product Design Education: Building Community: Design Education for a Sustainable Future, E and PDE 2017 (2017) 62. M.L. Lund, L. Nygård, Incorporating or resisting assistive devices: Different approaches to achieving a desired occupational self-image. OTJR Occup. Particip. Health 23, 67 (2003) 63. E. Vaportzis, M. Giatsi Clausen, A.J. Gow, Older adults perceptions of technology and barriers to interacting with tablet computers: A focus group study. Front. Psychol. 8 (2017) 64. T. Berker, M. Hartmann, Y. Punie, Domestication of Media and Technology (McGraw-Hill, Berkshire, 2005) 65. E.M. Rogers, Diffusion of Innovations (The Free Press, New York, 2010) 66. F.D. Davis, Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Q. 13, 319 (1989) 67. F.D. Davis, R.P. Bagozzi, P.R. Warshaw, Extrinsic and intrinsic motivation to use computers in the workplace. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 22, 1111 (1992) 68. V. Venkatesh, H. Bala, Technology acceptance model 3 and a research agenda on interventions. Decis. Sci. 39, 273 (2008) 69. P.K. Chopdar, N. Korfiatis, V.J. Sivakumar, M.D. Lytras, Mobile shopping apps adoption and perceived risks: A cross-country perspective utilizing the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology. Comput. Hum. Behav. 86, 109 (2018) 70. Y.K.  Dwivedi, N.P.  Rana, M.  Janssen, B.  Lal, M.D.  Williams, M.  Clement, An empirical validation of a unified model of electronic government adoption (UMEGA). Gov. Inf. Q. 34, 211 (2017) 71. F. Hawlitschek, T. Teubner, H. Gimpel, Consumer motives for peer-to-peer sharing. J. Clean. Prod. 204, 144 (2018) 72. F. Liébana-Cabanillas, V. Marinkovic, I.R. de Luna, Z. Kalinic, Predicting the determinants of mobile payment acceptance: A hybrid SEM-neural network approach. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 129, 117 (2018) 73. C.  Park, D.  Kim, S.  Cho, H.J.  Han, Adoption of multimedia technology for learning and gender difference. Comput. Hum. Behav. 92, 288 (2019)

182

A. V. Martín-García et al.

74. B. Peral-Peral, J. Arenas-Gaitán, Á.F. Villarejo-Ramos, De la brecha digital a la brecha psico-­ digital: Mayores y redes sociales. Comunicar 23, 57 (2015) 75. K.  Renaud, Van Biljon, Predicting technology acceptance and adoption by the elderly: A qualitative study. SAICSIT ‘08: Proceedings of the 2008 annual research conference of the South African Institute of Computer Scientists and Information Technologists on IT research in developing countries: riding the wave of technology (2008) 76. A. Ahmad, T. Rasul, A. Yousaf, U. Zaman, Understanding factors influencing elderly diabetic patients’ continuance intention to use digital health wearables: extending the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM). J. Open Innov. Technol. Market Complex. 6, 81 (2020) 77. H. Guner, C. Acarturk, The use and acceptance of ICT by senior citizens: A comparison of technology acceptance model (TAM) for elderly and young adults. Univ. Access Inf. Soc. 19, 311 (2020) 78. M. Zhou, L. Zhao, N. Kong, K.S. Campy, S. Qu, S. Wang, Factors influencing behavior intentions to telehealth by Chinese elderly: An extended TAM model. Int. J. Med. Inform. 126, 118 (2019) 79. K.  Chen, A.H.S.  Chan, Gerontechnology acceptance by elderly Hong Kong Chinese: A senior technology acceptance model (STAM). Ergonomics 57, 635 (2014) 80. D. Johnson, J. Clarkson, F. Huppert, Capability measurement for inclusive design. J. Eng. Des. 21, 275 (2010) 81. Y. Lim, Psychosocial Inclusivity in Design: A Definition and Dimensions (Brunel University London, England, 2018) 82. R.T. Cenfetelli, Inhibitors and enablers as dual factor concepts in technology usage. J. Assoc. Inform. System 5, 472 (2004) 83. C.L.  Huang, P.  Haried, An evaluation of uncertainty and anticipatory anxiety impacts on technology use. Int. J. Human Comput. Interact. 36, 641 (2020) 84. V. Venkatesh, F.D. Davis, A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Manag. Sci. 46, 187 (2000) 85. L. Zheng, N. Montargot, Anger and fear: Effects of negative emotions on hotel employees’ information technology adoption. Int. J. Product. Perform. Manag. (2021) 86. D. Compeau, C.A. Higgins, S. Huff, Social cognitive theory and individual reactions to computing technology: A longitudinal study. MIS Q. 23, 145 (1999) 87. Y. Gao, M. Koufaris, Perceptual antecedents of user attitude in electronic commerce. ACM SIGMIS Database 37, 42 (2006) 88. A.  Bhattacherjee, Understanding information systems continuance: An expectation-­ confirmation model. MIS Q. 25, 351 (2001) 89. M.J.  Brosnan, Technophobia: The Psychological Impact of Information Technology (Routledge, London, 2002) 90. D. Alexandrakis, K. Chorianopoulos, N. Tselios, Older adults and web 2.0 storytelling technologies: Probing the technology acceptance model through an age-related perspective. Int. J. Human Comput. Interact. 36, 1623 (2020) 91. A.J.  Burns, T.L.  Roberts, C.  Posey, P.B.  Lowry, The adaptive roles of positive and negative emotions in organizational insiders’ security-based precaution taking. Inf. Syst. Res. 30, 1107 (2019) 92. Y. Lu, S. Papagiannidis, E. Alamanos, Exploring the emotional antecedents and outcomes of technology acceptance. Comput. Hum. Behav. 90, 153 (2019) 93. H. Zeng, X. Wang, A. Wu, Y. Wang, Q. Li, A. Endert, H. Qu, EmoCo: Visual analysis of emotion coherence in presentation videos. IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. 26, 11 (2020) 94. V. Venkatesh, Determinants of perceived ease of use: Integrating control, intrinsic motivation, and emotion into the technology acceptance model. Inf. Syst. Res. 11, 1 (2000) 95. M. Koufaris, Applying the technology acceptance model and flow theory to online consumer behavior. Inf. Syst. Res. 13, 205 (2002) 96. H.M. Weiss, Introductory comments: Antecedents of emotional experiences at work. Motiv. Emot. 26, 1 (2002)

Digital Identity and Quality of Life Technologies in the Older Adults

183

97. K.R. Scherer, Appraisal theory, in Handbook of Cognition and Emotion, ed. by T. Dalgleish, M. J. Power, (John Wiley, London, 1999) 98. J.S. Lerner, D. Keltner, Beyond valence: Toward a model of emotion-specific influences on judgement and choice. Cognit. Emot. 14, 473 (2000) 99. M. Fishbein, I. Ajzen, Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Philos. Rhetor. 10, 130 (1977) 100. A.  Bandura, The explanatory and predictive scope of self-efficacy theory. J.  Soc. Clin. Psychol. 4, 359 (1986) 101. A. Beaudry, A. Pinsonneault, The other side of acceptance: Studying the direct and indirect effects of emotions on information technology use. MIS Q. 34, 689 (2010) 102. K. Hornbæk, M. Hertzum, Technology acceptance and user experience: A review of the experiential component in HCI. ACM Trans. Comput. Human Interact. 24, 1 (2017) 103. R.P. Bagozzi, F.D. Davis, P.R. Warshaw, Development and test of a theory of technological learning and usage. Hum. Relat. 45, 659 (1992) 104. A.  Beaudry, A.  Pinsonneault, Understanding user responses to information technology: A coping model of user adaptation. MIS Q. 29, 493 (2005) 105. R. Lazarus, S. Folkman, Stress, Appraisal, and Coping (Springer, New York, 1984) 106. C.A. Smith, P.C. Ellsworth, Patterns of cognitive appraisal in emotion. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 48, 813 (1985) 107. K.Y.  Chen, M.  Harniss, S.  Patel, K.  Johnson, Implementing technology-based embedded assessment in the home and community life of individuals aging with disabilities: A participatory research and development study. Disabil. Rehabil. Assis. Technol. 9, 112 (2014) 108. T. Partala, S. Kujala, Exploring the role of ten universal values in using products and services. Interact. Comput. 28, 311 (2016) 109. J.A. Russell, J.M. Carroll, On the bipolarity of positive and negative affect. Psychol. Bull. 125, 3 (1999) 110. S. Lee, W. Kim, Y.M. Kim, K.J. Oh, Using AHP to determine intangible priority factors for technology transfer adoption. Expert Syst. Appl. 39, 6388 (2012) 111. K.  Bozan, A.  Berger, Revisiting the technology challenges and proposing enhancements in ambient assisted living for the elderly. Proceedings of the 52nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (2019) 112. D.  Hussain, P.  Ross, P.  Bednar, The perception of the benefits and drawbacks of Internet usage by the elderly people, in Digital Technology and Organizational Change. Reshaping Technology, People, and Organizations Towards a Global Society, ed. by C.  Rossignoli, F. Virili, S. Za, (Springer, Cham, 2018) 113. B. Kerbler, Using information and communication technology in home care for the elderly, in Caregiving and Home Care, ed. by M. Mollaoğlu, (InTech, Croatia, 2017) 114. P.J. Burke, J.E. Stets, Identity Theory (Oxford University, Oxford, New York, 2009) 115. A.J. Astell, C. McGrath, E. Dove, ‘That’s for old so and so’s!’: Does identity influence older adults’ technology adoption decisions? Ageing Soc. 40, 1 (2020) 116. A. Bailey, O. Ngwenyama, Bridging the generation gap in ICT use: Interrogating identity, technology and interactions in community telecenters. Inf. Technol. Dev. 16, 62 (2012) 117. J.M.  Muñoz-Rodríguez, M.J.  Hernández-Serrano, C.  Tabernero, Digital identity levels in older learners: A new focus for sustainable lifelong education and inclusion. Sustainability 12, 10657 (2020) 118. D.  Lupton, W.  Seymour, Technology, selfhood and physical disability. Soc. Sci. Med. 50, 1851 (2000) 119. P. Parette, M. Scherer, Assistive technology use and stigma. Educ. Train. Dev. Disabil. 39, 217 (2004)

From a Deficit of Nature to a Surplus of Technology: The Search for Compatibility in Education Raúl De Tapia-Martín and Manuela Salvado Muñoz

1  Nature Deficit How much carbon dioxide do trees absorb in a landscape created with Minecraft? How much carbon dioxide does the creation of this digital forest emit, how many years will it take for the plastics in the seas that are featured in so many Instagram photos to degrade, or how many species does a Twitch ecosystem need to be in balance? These questions are not only intended to deepen the reader’s reflection but also to introduce the reality/virtuality duality in which we currently live. Technological progress means that every day we see images and videos that are so life-like: we cannot tell if they are real or virtual. We are even so familiar with the concept of the cloud and the posts we upload to our social networks that we really believe they don’t exist: that they are immeasurable entities. However, the reality is overwhelming. Digital industries already account for 8–10 percent of global energy consumption, according to Greenpeace. The same source notes that if the Internet were a country, it would be the sixth most polluting country in the world. Energy is needed to manufacture, power, and cool data centers, communication networks, and user devices. Google estimates that a thousand Internet searches cause the equivalent greenhouse gas emissions of a car driving 1 km. Emails leave a footprint of 4 g of carbon each (50 g if there is an attachment). And 269 billion are sent every day (of which spam is largely to blame) [1].

R. De Tapia-Martín () Tormes-EB Fundación, Salamanca, Spain M. Salvado Muñoz IES Gredos, Piedrahíta, Ávila, Spain e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 J. M. Muñoz-Rodríguez (ed.), Identity in a Hyperconnected Society, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-85788-2_13

185

186

R. De Tapia-Martín and M. Salvado Muñoz

Next year, streaming will account for 80% of global data traffic; every minute, more than 4 million YouTube videos are watched, almost 40 million WhatsApp messages are sent, and more than 260,000 hours of movies and series are watched [2]. By activating our senses separate from nature, we live out of sync with our genes. In his book, The Extended Phenotype, Richard Dawkins [3] explained that we currently carry in our cells the genes that were selected approximately 60,000 years ago, when our activity was based on hunting and gathering and we spent many hours walking and observing the phenomena that allowed us to understand and manage nature. This process of learning through contemplation can be observed in thousands of scientists, astronomers, philosophers, farmers, and cattle breeders over the centuries. A clear example of this was the work that Charles Darwin did on the HMS Beagle expedition and thanks to which he was able to describe his famous theory on The Origin of Species. Even in later works [4], he used observation to make an extraordinarily precise description of a type of movement made by plants known as tropisms. These consist of permanent movements of the plant made in response to a stimulus. Darwin watched for up to 18 hours in order to describe this observation. This is unthinkable nowadays because of technology, which allows us to save time in a world that we have hastened. However, today many people have become so separated from nature that they do not even know where food comes from. They do not know what type of plant an artichoke or a tomato is, they still think that mushrooms are vegetables, and they are unaware of the reproduction cycles of thousands of animal and vegetable species that nourish us. Even worse, to a great number of people, it generally does not seem to matter. It is odd that we live obsessed with the weather, which we check on several apps throughout the day, and yet we are unaware of the climate, which is also changing so fast that it has already been classified as mankind’s biggest problem. But it seems that if we are told the temperature or about a storm by our virtual assistant (Cortana, Siri, etc.), it is easier than the reality of knowing the water cycle, atmospheric dynamics, or observing cloud cover. Who has never played at imagining shapes in the clouds? It seems this childhood game is not so popular anymore, because we suffer from “nature deficit disorder.” According to research by Richard Louv [5], this disorder contributes to epidemic obesity, attention deficit disorder, isolation, and childhood depression. Similar consequences associated with stress and anxiety are now also being attributed to the adult population as a result of this absence of nature. In his book Last Child in the Woods [6], Louv argues that the habits of Americans have changed since the 1980s: picnics are replaced by burger joints at the shopping mall, campground accommodation by hotels, and trips to national parks by days at amusement or theme parks. And if we also add the recent increase in apps and virtuality, the gap becomes even greater. One of the results of this is that children who have not had experiences in contact with nature will not seek them out in later life, nor will they allow their offspring to discover games of hunting and tracking, building huts, climbing trees, smelling petrichor, or distinguishing bird songs, that is, future generations who lack

From a Deficit of Nature to a Surplus of Technology: The Search for Compatibility…

187

multisensory perceptions will turn into adults who are more likely to suffer from stress and anxiety. If these generations that already suffer from nature-deficit disorder have the added pathologies derived from mobile phone addiction or hyperconnection, the number of pathologies skyrockets. In addition to physical diseases related to sedentary lifestyles, such as childhood obesity or type II diabetes, the most worrying conditions are psychological. Sleep deficit, anxiety, stress, and depression which are all associated with Internet abuse have been related to mobile phone usage as well [7]. All over the world, the number of mobile phones used increases daily [8], and with it the number of app and users on social networks, so the immediate future must prevent all these conditions, on the one hand, by educating the population on their responsible use and, on the other hand, by designing nature activities that let them disconnect.

2  The Need for Learning by Multisensory Perception Our species has evolved over the last 200,000 years in a continuous immersion in nature [9]. If we travel further back in time, the hominid group to which we belong has been shaped by the different ecosystems and continents in which it has lived and survived. To do this we had to receive information from our surroundings through a sensory apparatus that allowed us to analyze multiple variables in order to stay alive and reproduce. This scientific reality leads us to affirm that the human body has been designed to live in nature and to relate to it face-to-face and directly on a daily basis, as well as to the other members of our social group. Technological devices, especially digital ones in recent years, have created an absolutely disconcerting and dysfunctional relationship with the real world. Reality is virtual and the world has become a scenario of two-dimensional and “bi-sensory” axes (sight and hearing). The real environment is mediated and instrumentalized and displayed on a screen, be it a mobile phone, a computer, or a tablet [10]. Similarly, cities are so designed for traffic and vehicles that do not provide the necessary conditions for a wholesome quality of life intrinsically related to an intense contact with nature [11]. Parks and gardens are for the most part defined by aesthetic and administrative criteria, as are the conformation and location of the “secondary gardens” made up of trees along streets or large planters in pedestrian areas. In very few exceptions, such as the city of Victoria in Spain, the urban environment has been defined as a large green infrastructure where vegetation is not only ornamental but also confers ecological functions and ecosystemic, psychological, health, and social benefits to its citizens [12]. Despite this assertion, although the break from the life systems that uphold the realities of the biosphere is not absolute, very few degrees of connection remain for much of society today. People who have not lost their appreciation of nature and reality but who do not live in a rural setting conceive nature based on their

188

R. De Tapia-Martín and M. Salvado Muñoz

childhood and youth in a reality that occurred in the past, in a very different social, technological and environmental reality, on which they make comparisons with the present from a highly idealized past imaginary. This past, which is constantly referred to, was based on a life experience constantly in contact with nature and an experiential reality very different from the one today. When valuations and comparisons are made, all this common imaginary serves as a referential element of control. This past becomes highly valued, and it is essential to analyze the reasons why. In the same way, rural life is overvalued (far today from the purely agricultural and bucolic identity) when contrasted with the urban present, which is perceived as gray, stressful, and unproductive for the individual and for society. This idealization must also be broken down and characterized [13]. Many of the variables identified as positive in the parallelism may be useful and truthful and their results accurate, but there will be many others that are part of a subjective, inaccurate, and amiable shared abstraction. Thus, we can affirm that this umbilical relationship with nature has been based on experiences and learning “in” nature itself. Both experiences and learning result from multidimensional and multisensory aspects: multidimensional, because they were lived and learned in a wide range of possibilities, without determinisms, under a constant creativity. Living close with nature taught children and teenagers about its dangers, trained them to be responsible, and familiarized them with loneliness and even with boredom. It generated motivation, fertilized expectations, provided information, and produced a yearning to learn, all that was done in an atmosphere that was not always comfortable, sometimes not chosen, but that was constantly innovating and nurturing. They were also multisensory, because the whole environment and the relationship with it were carried out through the five senses, at all hours of the day and night and at all times of year. Sensory asepsis and thermal comfort, a waning appreciation for the value of making an effort, of sacrifice, and a lack of strategies for coping with frustration all work together to generate an impenetrable bubble around people of all ages. Nowadays these bubbles set an extreme limit on the natural relationship with the environment, with all the physical, mental, and interpersonal consequences that it entails (Fig. 1). For the generation of teachers, mothers, and fathers aged 45–50 years old and above, these circumstances gave rise to a very different way of being in the environment, of relating to it, of receiving information than the way people do today. Indeed, a comparison of this atmosphere of adult learning and experience with that which envelops students today shows the quantitative leap that has been made [14]. Education in a comprehensive sense should be received through all five senses. The predominance of sight and hearing as ways of receiving information from the usual environment (whether rural or urban) weakens or eclipses a number of the skills and abilities that every child, teenager, or young adult will need later in life.

From a Deficit of Nature to a Surplus of Technology: The Search for Compatibility…

189

Fig. 1  Education in the comprehensive sense must be received through all five senses

3  P  ros and Cons of Hyperconnectivity for Getting Closer to Nature At this point of reflection, we believe that education should help us rediscover ourselves as a species and understand how, throughout thousands of years of evolution, we have lived as part of nature. This can provide us with skills and abilities that allow us to adapt to the changing environment in which we live. One way this can be done is by using twenty-first-century technology. We will therefore try to assess the pros and cons of information and communication technologies in terms of our getting closer to nature. Starting with one of the most global, thanks to applications such as Google Earth or Google Maps, we can discover, observe, and study carefully any area of the planet. This allow us to delve into nature in other countries and even to find out the state of their resources. In addition, if we want to travel or to carry out an educational activity in situ, we can design a route that allows us to explore the types of landscapes of interest. But if we are already in nature, it is very important that connection times be kept to a minimum and that the activity allow us to discover everything that surrounds us with all five senses. The experience of camping or sleeping under the stars can draw in even more participants if we use applications like Google Sky Maps to identify stars, constellations, planets, and galaxies. The purpose of using the application is to spark the participants’ curiosity to star-gaze in the hope that they repeat the experience in the future, with or without the application. There are a growing number of applications, specialized in each country or continent, for identifying trees (Tree ID) or plants (SmartPlant). There are similar apps

190

R. De Tapia-Martín and M. Salvado Muñoz

for identifying animals, especially birds (SEO Birdlife), and even for recognizing their songs (Warblr). In short, websites such as Nature Mobile bring together a wide variety of applications for species recognition and identification, thereby promoting knowledge of biodiversity and citizen collaboration. Members of this network can upload photos that will be analyzed by experts for further classification, ask questions via chat, or share images and experiences on social networks. These types of applications, which are based on citizen science, are becoming increasingly popular and offer various advantages for the participants, whether individually or in a group of students. First and foremost, participants must be outside, in contact with nature, to be able to photograph biodiversity. Plants are the easiest to identify because it requires little travel, but looking for mushrooms requires taking long walks and seeking out fauna requires long waits. All that time should be spent on discovering tracks and signs in a way that brings participants closer to wildlife and motivates them to continue discovering and learning in the midst of nature. Furthermore, by interacting with scientists, experts, and other users, participants socialize with other people who share and spread the same interest in nature. From the point of view of formal education, these citizen science apps are an excellent tool for students to develop skills but also to increase their motivation and knowledge about nature. Prominent among them is the GLOBE program, which will be explained later, as well as others such as mySoil app which gives you access to a comprehensive European soil properties map within a single app. Discover what lies beneath your feet and help us to build a community dataset by submitting your own soil information. Xeno-canto is a website dedicated to sharing bird sounds from all over the world. Whether you are a research scientist, a birder, or simply curious about a sound that you heard out your kitchen window, they invite you to listen, download, and explore the bird sound recordings in the collection. But Xeno-­ canto is more than just a collection of recordings. It is also a collaborative project. For one of the most highly rated apps in this group of tools that allow collaborative work, our students describe the enthusiasm and motivation they feel when working with students of their age from other countries. This feature has also been facilitated by video-conferencing tools or platforms such as eTwinning, a community for schools in Europe and beyond. If the projects also raise awareness of local environmental problems for global dissemination, they will allow students to get closer to the reality of their environment and therefore to seek solutions that can involve their entire area. Lastly, we analyze what we lose from hyperconnectivity. The use of ICT in the classroom makes us lose touch with nature, and as a result we cannot develop all the cognitive and sensory stimulation, since they are based on the audiovisual. Moreover, as explained above, if children do not have experiences in contact with nature, they will not request to have them. Even worse, something that has also increased in recent years are fears and phobias towards animals or even nature itself [15], in short, fear of the unknown.  Not knowing leads to ignoring, promoting passive behaviours in society. If we do not know the nature of what surrounds us, and especially the benefits that it produces, we will not be able to value and protect it as it should. Therefore, we must

From a Deficit of Nature to a Surplus of Technology: The Search for Compatibility…

191

transmit messages through other areas, such as the arts, to make known the situation of humanity with respect to its relationship with nature. Showing a panorama in which, the individual is surrounded by the benefits of nature for himself when he has experiences in and with it. This is another of the losses that social networks offer us, we have begun to make trips to wear down landscapes or write down on our list of achieved, with the sole purpose of sharing it with the virtual world, without really understanding the functionality of what surrounds us. Selfies that show that idea of a wild and virginal landscape are more and more frequent, which we even observe since we turn our backs on it and in three seconds it has lost our interest.  If the activities are outdoors but participants use mobile phones, they may not achieve the objective of disconnecting. Sometimes students even use the time to read messages after the outdoor activity is done. For this reason, activities should be well planned, and, if possible, school devices and applications that allow working offline should be used. If we want to transmit values of respect for nature and raise awareness about environmental problems, using ICT, the first thing we must establish are some ground rules for their use just as we do in the classroom. The most important tenet is to have respect for others and for the privacy of the group. Moreover, the use of mobile phones, applications, video games, and social networks should not begin in early childhood. This recommendation made by doctors, psychologists, and psychiatrists [16] is also argued by the various networks of environmental educators in Spain and Europe, who advocate the benefits of learning in contact with nature for the development, welfare, and health of children, especially in the early stages. They emphasize that it fosters direct, empirical, and autonomous learning, since it invites inquiry, exploration, and experimentation, encourages critical thinking, and strengthens children’s resilience. In addition, being outdoors reduces infections, and contact with the air and sun strengthens the body’s defenses [17].

4  The Search for Solutions Through Experience 4.1  NASA’s GLOBE Program The answer to the entire conflict lies in creating a methodology for laying bridges between the dimensions, thereby allowing reality to be one and the same for the common good. It should facilitate a critical education in values that shows all realities and that gives a chance for nature to be compatible with technology. “My Recreation Place” is a project that uses active methodologies and multi-­ phase learning styles and activities [18]. This project is based on a comparative study of the surface temperature between wooded and asphalted areas in order to teach the heat island effect, as well as the variables that most affect climate change. Through technology, the aim was for students to get closer to nature, to work with it, and to acquire learning by experimentation and by applying the scientific method.

192

R. De Tapia-Martín and M. Salvado Muñoz

Fig. 2 (a) Students collecting data in nature by measuring surface temperature. (b) Students collecting data in nature. Detail of GLOBE app using the atmosphere protocol

The fundamental working tool was the GLOBE (Global Learning and Observations to Benefit the Environment) program. Supported by NASA, this program is a citizen science program that invites teachers, scientists, students, and citizens to collect data in contact with nature to understand how planet Earth works. The work is framed within the four subsystems that make up the planet: atmosphere, hydrosphere, biosphere, and pedosphere. The application collects the data taken on the ground to compare them with data collected by satellites to help make them become more and more accurate.

From a Deficit of Nature to a Surplus of Technology: The Search for Compatibility…

193

The students did field work gathering data on air temperature, atmospheric pressure, relative humidity, cloud cover, soil condition, and surface temperature (see Fig. 2a, b). With this, activities were developed in contact with nature through close observation of the phenomena that provide an understanding of the natural world, thereby allowing students or participants to increase their perception of nature, to know it, to understand it, and to begin to look through new eyes at a new need outside of hyperconnectivity. Nevertheless, after all the work was carried out in contact with nature, technology was then used to enter the data in the GLOBE program application, to process it statistically, and to create graphics and design materials for its dissemination with applications such as Canva, Genially, and Blogger  (https://iesgredosbiologia. blogspot.com/), which were later shared on social networks such as Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube (see Fig. 3). Finally, the GLOBE program holds numerous international campaigns, events, and symposiums every year to let the whole community share their findings. Most of them are virtual, so thanks to connectivity we can share experiences from anywhere around the world, a fact that also enriches learning and increases motivation to continue discovering. Analysing the results of the project, we can say that the students have learned the importance of scientific work to know the phenomena that govern nature. They have discovered the multitude of variables that come into play to analyse the functioning of the planet and have seen the need for humanity to be aware of the state of the planet and for it to respond with actions that allow us to respect and improve our local environment. So, if each of us works locally, we can tackle problems globally.

Fig. 3  Students analyzing data and doing collaborative work using different applications

194

R. De Tapia-Martín and M. Salvado Muñoz

4.2  T  he Center for Environmental and Artistic Activities (CIAM) of the Fundación Tormes Espinosa Barro This private environmental education facility with 20 years of experience is a benchmark for analyzing the relationship between digital technologies and education in nature. It is currently a 30-acre private nature reserve belonging to the European Natura Network that has received more than 70,000 students in programs related to the knowledge of biodiversity. (http://fundaciontormes-eb.org/). The physical space in which it is located was once an open-pit aggregate mining operation, where an award-winning ecological restoration project was carried out and has become an international benchmark. All the actions of the restoration project were aimed at turning the property as a whole into an environmental education center (see Fig. 4). Its programs and educational tools have been adapted over its 20-year span, during which the digital world has changed exponentially. In the decade from 2000 to 2010, teaching materials were exclusively in paper format, the reference guides for identifying species of flora and fauna were in book format, and the working tools were purely analogical (vision enhanced by lenses): binoculars, telescopes, and binocular magnifiers. In the following decade, from 2010 to 2020, there was a drastic change. Teaching materials were designed to be uploaded in pdf format and could be self-published by teachers. However, this step was completed later with the creation of web

Fig. 4  The Center for Environmental and Artistic Initiatives provides an education in nature that coexists with new technologies

From a Deficit of Nature to a Surplus of Technology: The Search for Compatibility…

195

platforms that offered digital resources with the possibility of working online (or be published to work in the field). Field guides thus gave way to applications (apps) that identify species in real time, both in images and sounds (bird and amphibian songs, bat ultrasounds, etc.). Even in star-gazing the planisphere has been replaced by applications that identify the constellations by superimposing the live sky with recorded star formations (Fig. 5). Optical tools were updated and telescopes were adapted to mobile phones (digiscoping) to make it easier to see birds at unimaginable distances. USB magnifiers allow extraordinary magnifications that provide a view of flora or insects in the midst of nature only available to specialists in previous years. Photo-trapping cameras can take pictures and record videos both during the day and at night, resulting in a knowledge of animal behavior on par with a nature documentary. A very important aspect of this digital transformation has to do with how the work teams at the Environmental Education Center communicate and their relationship with teachers. In the first decade, teachers who wanted to find out about the educational programs, the facilities, or the location had to e-mail to make inquiries, and this information was sent in the form of files. At present the programs are updated every year on the center’s website, the facilities can be viewed in all digital formats online, and the site is available on web browsers and Google services. The relationship between the facility’s team of environmental educators of the facility and the teachers is now direct through WhatsApp, so questions of any kind can be answered immediately. The members of the team of environmental educators Fig. 5 Environmental educators have adapted to the rapid evolution of teaching materials in a short time, integrating them into their curriculum

196

R. De Tapia-Martín and M. Salvado Muñoz

working in nature communicate over that same channel, which facilitates the organization, logistics, and unforeseen events that arise in a working environment set in a forest. In this temporal analysis, the changes in the student body are more difficult to evaluate objectively since the ages and the educational centres are very diverse. Even so, there are key points that can be firmly affirmed, such as the fact that in the first decade (2000–2010) no schoolchild from 10 years of age carried a mobile phone to field visits and in the second decade (2010–2020), 90% of students carry it with them despite not being able to use it during academic hours. In this line of statements, in the first period indicated, the students did not ask questions in relation to the availability of Wi-Fi in the facilities. In the exhibition spaces, with models, dioramas, or real samples of elements of nature (nests, feathers or similar) they did not demand the presence of digital tools (computer screens, tablets, augmented reality ...). On the contrary, in the last 5 years, questions related to both aspects (Wi-Fi and digital teaching aids) are common. In the same way, in the itineraries along the trails for the recognition of flora and fauna, the use of field guides in paper format were assimilated and used normally and intuitively, a fact that is already changing again when applications are required to search information. These circumstances allow us to assert that in the pre-technological stage, learning about aspects related to nature, its landscapes and ecosystems were more innate, intuitive, and direct, based on constant observation and reflection. However, currently that learning is mediated and needs digital educational tools. Although they facilitate compression capacity, they also reduce procedures and skills related to the interpretation of information, its interrelation and subsequent reasoning. The latest reports related to digital reading comprehension confirm that adolescents who read on paper improve their comprehension compared to those who do so on screen [19]. Some studies are already confirming that students who study in direct contact with nature improve their intellectual capacity compared to those who do so in the absence of it [20]. The aspects mentioned above, although already internalized and standardized, are an extraordinary transformation that has been assimilated very quickly. A change has been undertaken in the last 5 years that was absolutely unthinkable two decades ago, and the teams of environmental educators have had to adapt and update constantly every new academic year. All these changes are highly positive and beneficial for the educational process, although they must be understood as an evolution of the work tools but not as an objective in and of themselves. Education in nature as an environment of knowledge leads to more intense learning, more drawn out in time, more effective, and more efficient than learning carried out only in the classroom. As such, this must remain a priority [20].

From a Deficit of Nature to a Surplus of Technology: The Search for Compatibility…

197

5  Conclusions The life experiences of learning and working in a setting surrounded by nature are stimulating for the body and for psychological stability of people regardless of their age, living environment, and social status. Just as it is necessary to get 8 hours of sleep and to eat a healthy diet to have a suitable quality of life, it is equally ideal to spend at least 1 hour a day in nature (either in a forest or in a garden), so that the body can receive all the stimuli that allow it to “reset.” The current social and educational reality, marked by an ever-growing tendency toward hyperconnectivity and a distancing from nature, makes it necessary to create and apply new strategies ranging from educational methodologies to the design of cities. Technological tools are so varied and precise that we cannot do without them, but they should always remain under a critical eye of their use as objects that facilitate learning or allow us to be more connected with our peers, our environment, and ourselves. They must not cause us to become slaves to the object and our senses to be atrophied by lack of use. This article has presented examples of methodologies, programs, projects, and activities, as well as digital applications and tools to develop key competences and skills in students and citizens, by using technology to get closer to nature and thus reduce the pathologies derived from both nature deficit and excess use of these technologies. It is thus considered that the compatibility between nature and the digital world is both possible and advisable; it is only a matter of finding a suitable design for the programs and the educational methodologies.

References 1. G. Blacio Abad, J. Espinoza Vega, C.J. Valarezo Tinoco, Estudio de eficiencia energética de los servicios en la Nube. Final course paper for the degree: Msc in Operating Systems and Networks. Espol. Fiec, Guayaquil. 107p. (2014) 2. J.C. Velarde Neira, Master’s thesis. Análisis comparativo del uso del servicio de video streaming en relación a la tv por cable en Guayaquil (2018) 3. R. Dawkins, The Extended Phenotype: The Gene as the Unit of Selection (Freeman, Oxford [Oxfordshire], 1982) 4. C. Darwin, F. Darwin, The Power of Movement in Plants (Jeohn Murray, London, 1880) 5. R. Louv, The Nature Principle: Human Restoration and the End of Nature-Deficit Disorder (Algonquin Books of Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, 2012) 6. R. Louv, Last Child in the Woods: Saving Our Children from Nature-Deficit Disorder (Atlantic Books Ltd, New York, 2013) 7. S. Shoukat, Cell phone addiction and psychological and physiological health in adolescents. EXCLI J. 18, 47–50 (2019) 8. S.S. Cha, B.K. Seo, Smartphone use and smartphone addiction in middle school students in Korea: Prevalence, social networking service, and game use. Health Psychol Open 5, 1 (2018) 9. E.K.F. Chan, A. Timmermann, B.F. Baldi, et al., Human origins in a southern African palaeo-­ wetland and first migrations. Nature 575, 185–189 (2019)

198

R. De Tapia-Martín and M. Salvado Muñoz

10. A.M. Trancik, G.W. Evans, Spaces fit for children: Competency in the design of daycare center environments. Children's Environ. 12(3), 311–319 (1995) 11. B.M.E. Jansson, Children's Play, and Nature in an Urban Environment. Series: Europäische Hocheschulschriften / European University Studies / Publications Universitaires Européennes (1984) 12. Forest cities': the radical plan to save China from air pollution. The Guardian (2017) 13. R.  Sebba, The landscapes of childhood: The reflection of childhood's environment in adult memories and in children's attitudes. SAGE J. 23, 395 (1991) 14. S. Collado, J.A. Corraliza, Conciencia ecológica y bienestar en la infancia. Efectos de la relación con la naturaleza. (Nuria Romero. Editorial CCS, Madrid, 2016) 15. H. Freire, Educar en verde Ideas para acercar a niños y niñas a la naturaleza. (Rosa Guitart. Editorial GRAÓ del IRIF, S.L., Barcelona, 2011) 16. T.N.  Robinson, J.A.  Banda, L.  Hale, A.S.  Lu, F.  Fleming-Milici, S.L.  Calvert, E.  Wartella, Screen media exposure and obesity in children and adolescents. Pediatrics 140(Suppl 2), S97– S101 (2017) 17. H. Freire, ¿Déficit de atención o hiperactividad? Otra forma de prevenir y afrontar el problema. RBA integral. (2013) 18. M.L. Cacheiro, Recursos educativos TIC de información, colaboración y aprendizaje. Pixel-­ Bit, Revista de Medios y Comunicación 39, 69–81 (2011) 19. Y. Kong, Y. Seo, L. Zhai, Comparison of reading performance on screen and on paper: A metaanalysis. Comput. Edu. 123, 138–149 (2018) 20. S. Mancuso, S. Rizzitelli, E. Azzarello, Influence of green vegetation on children’s capacity of attention: A case study in Florence, Italy. Adv. Hortic. Sci. 20(3), 220–223 (2006)

Learn and Entertain: The Invisible Learning Processes of the Younger Generations in Social Networks Paula Renés-Arellano, Francisco Javier Lena-Acebo, and María José Hernández-Serrano

1  Introduction Social networks have induced a worldwide social and educative transformation— one that has been accentuated by the current COVID context. This panorama has precipitated a new learning ecosystem, as well as the emergence of novel social opportunities. The variety of possibilities awarded by this new social network-­ driven digital context plays a crucial role in kids’ learning process (used here and throughout the chapter in the broad sense, including younger kids and teenagers). Regardless of its less formal educational nature, social network learning is still equally important in the building of youngsters’ personalities and digital identities. Cobo and Moravec [1], in their Oxford Internet Institute research, state that one of the main reasons why people connect to the Internet is because they can access any kind of information. They can check the meaning of a word or explore a topic they are interested in—as a matter of fact, they often use social networks because they “aggregate people with whom they can play, debate, or share information” (p. 15). These are spaces where they can strengthen friendships and establish new or preexisting social relationships via common values and interests. It is in such a backdrop that invisible learning processes surface, what Cobo and Moravec call a protoparadigm, a work in progress open to different perspectives. The authors suggest that upcoming technological apps allow for new sorts of learning, offering optimized answers to different learning situations. They have also raised questions related to these new educational contexts—an open dialogue to question and rethink the role and limits of time and space in the learning undertaking. P. Renés-Arellano · F. J. Lena-Acebo University of Cantabria, Santander, Spain M. J. Hernández-Serrano () University of Salamanca, Salamanca, Spain e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 J. M. Muñoz-Rodríguez (ed.), Identity in a Hyperconnected Society, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-85788-2_14

199

200

P. Renés-Arellano et al.

Invisible learning processes happen in a technological society where social networks exert immense influence in the ways we relate to one another and in the ways we understand and interpret the world around us. Invisible learning takes place, in other words, in this alternate reality in which we are always hyperconnected to each other through social networks. This is precisely the thread that will guide this research: to understand and analyze the different learning types, how they are applied and perceived by kids and teenagers when they use social networks. The ultimate goals are to identify and examine what invisible learning processes may arise from the contexts above and, with them in mind, to foster safe spaces on the Internet, which would, in turn, make more competent Internet users out of younger demographics.

2  Theoretical Framework This study’s frame of reference is today’s technology and media society and its use of social networks by the younger generations, which brings about the need to identify the invisible learning processes that may influence kids’ communication skills and the building of their digital identities. Through this approach, it becomes evident that youngsters learn how to use social networks by actually using them. They do not undergo any sort of specific training mainly because they already have acquired the necessary skills that allows them to watch and learn outside formal educational contexts [2]. Most of them have learned to effortlessly navigate social networks through practice, by interacting with others and participating in online social communities [3]. However, although they can use social networks for communication purposes, use filters on photographs before posting them online, and follow influencers, there are certain skills and abilities that are invisible to a formal educational context—actually, they may be invisible even to the kids, themselves, due to a lack of awareness on the responsible use of social networks. Kids communicate through social networks by sending and receiving information, images, and videos but also by creating and designing multimedia content. They go online for different reasons and acquire knowledge from these interactions, thus transforming the means of communication [4]. Their overexposure to gadgets’ screens, along with the use of social networks, prompts cultural changes and influences the building of their personalities [5–7]. What these kids learn in social networks’ hypermedia context produces certain side effects, consciously perceived or otherwise. These side effects are charged with values, attitudes, and actions that may harm others or the kids, themselves, for example, when they share certain audiovisual content without consent from the parties involved [8]. Particularly, there is a variety in youngsters’ perceived learning processes when they use social networks, and these processes serve different purposes: communication, information, and entertainment, among others—all of them related to social interactions. Caldevilla [9] states that social networks play the role of relationship

Learn and Entertain: The Invisible Learning Processes of the Younger Generations…

201

cornerstones, especially because they are used for entertainment—it’s there that users see others’ updates and find new friends. In this line, Yau and Reich [10] assert that there are basic established qualities inherent to the friendships that arise from virtual or face-to-face relationships, and Del Moral [11] claims that maintaining friendships is one of the appeals that draw people to connect to social networks. Other authors, such as Bazarova [12] or Hong et al. [13] state that the need for social approval is occasionally the reason behind going online to make or talk to friends. In summary, the building of kids’ digital identities will also be determined by these sorts of learning processes they have acquired through virtual interaction in social networks [14]. For an effective use of social networks to happen, kids need to be creative and critical and to know how to safely employ different digital resources and technologies. Consequently, they will responsibly, safely, and ethically be able to interact with the online world. It is crucial then that kids make conscientious decisions and make use of what they learned from social networks to avoid risks that may stem from them and foster the creation of safe spaces [15–18]. To that effect, Scolari [19] inquires about what kids really know regarding the management of their social networks and what and how they learn when using these social networks, in other words, what skills they have learned in non-formal and informal environments that have allowed them to use social networks the way they do and how transmedia literacy may become a tool that will bring these learning processes to a formal educational context, such as a school. Social networks are informal educational environments where multiple and varied learning processes can take place, and such “knowledge and practices should be reworked and complemented upon in a formal context” [19, pp. 130]. The approach regarding the learning through social networks, from a younger user perspective (younger kids and teenagers), will guide this study in the analysis of the different types of learning processes that are created and that are perceived by them when they use such social networks.

3  Resources and Methods The aim of this research is to determine the types and uses of learning processes perceived by kids when they participate in social networks—learning processes that generate invisible learning. In detail, the specific goals are the following: (i) to ascertain what kids use social networks for, according to gender and age in the Spanish and Latin American contexts; (ii) to assess the types of learning processes perceived by the kids when they use social networks, considering gender and age in the Spanish and Latin American contexts; and (iii) to understand the relationship between age and gender and the invisible learning processes involved in the use of social networks. This research is based on a quantitative methodology whose objective focuses on comprehending the types and uses of the learning processes perceived by students

202

P. Renés-Arellano et al.

in primary and secondary schools, between ages 10 and 18, when they make use of social networks. The ages above mainly correspond with students in the last years of primary and secondary education according to the Spanish academic system. It is a descriptive study for which an ad hoc tool was designed to collect data from variables that, in turn, stemmed from an analysis of previously published assessments and proposals created by an international team of researchers. They aimed to identify the uses that kids make of social networks and what they learned from them. This study mostly substantiates its development in the following documents: European Commission’s DigComEdu and TEL, Findings, Technology and Engineering Literacy from the National Assessment of Education Progress. The data collecting tool, whose development included the required assessment and validation steps, was highly consistent both externally and internally in its development phase. It included a variety of questions that intended to analyze the frequency and the typology of students’ use of social networks in their learning process. Also, in accordance with the previous studies presented within this theoretical framework, this research will analyze five learning domains: 1. Communication (chatting, sending messages in different formats, etc.) 2. Socializing (creating new friendship circles) 3. Organization (recalling dates, events, etc.) 4. Entertainment (spending time, new hobbies) 5. Other learning domains, such as discovering useful information, digital skills, ways of thinking, etc. As shown on Table 1, the study was developed with a sample of N = 417 participants in Spain and N = 303 in Latin America, making up a total of N = 720 of boys and girls between 10 and 18 years of age, through a non-probabilistic sampling. The Latin American sample was centered on students coming from two countries, Mexico and Chile, with respective sample figures of N  =  153 and N  =  150 participants. Table 1  Sample description by gender and age

Gender

Age and gender

♀

Chile Mexico N = 150 N = 153 70 (46.7%) 76 (49.7%)

Total Latin America N = 303 146 (48.2%)

♂

80 (53.3%) 77 (50.3%)

157 (51.8%)

[10– 13]

[14– 18]

♀ 37 (51.4%) 49 (44.5%)

86 (47.3%)

♂ 35 (48.6%) 61 (55.5%)

96 (52.7%)

♀ 33 (42.3%) 27 (62.8%)

60 (49.6%)

♂ 45 (57.7%) 16 (37.2%)

61 (50.4%)

Spain N = 417 190 (45.6%) 227 (54.4%) 86 (38.9%)

Total N = 720 336 (46.7%) 384 (53.3%) 172 (42.4%) 138 234 (61.1%) (57.6%) 104 164 (53.9%) (52.2%) 89 (46.1%) 150 (47.8%)

Learn and Entertain: The Invisible Learning Processes of the Younger Generations…

203

The data on Table 1 shows a balanced participation of male and female students both in the Spanish and the Latin American sample groups. There was a 45.6% and a 54.4% distribution of girls and boys, respectively, in the Spanish sample group and a 48.2% and a 51.8% of girls and boys, respectively, in the Latin American sample group. Within this sample there was also a balanced participation: in the Chilean sample, the percentage of female students (46.7%) was slightly lower than the male students (53.3%), whereas in the Mexican sample the numbers were more even, 49.7% for girls and 51.8% for boys. Furthermore, the figures of students aged 10–13 in Latin America and Spain are quite similar, whereas in the sample group of students aged 14–18, there were more participants in Spain than in Chile and Mexico (the numbers were still not exactly too uneven, though).

4  Analysis and Results The assessment of the study data includes, after being reviewed and processed with the help of the SPSS software package, version 25, the descriptive analysis of the frequencies, which allowed to establish statistical relationships between age and gender. Social networks are mostly used by minors. The use that boys and girls make of social networks, such as WhatsApp, Facebook, Instagram, and YouTube (see Table  2), shows that they are highly involved in content creation for these platforms. For example, the Latin American students polled prioritize WhatsApp (58.7%, N  =  178), followed by Facebook (49.8%, N = 151), and YouTube (42.6%, N = 129); more specifically, Chilean students’ favorite platforms are WhatsApp (62.7%), Facebook (60%), and YouTube (58%), whereas Mexican students’ favorite is WhatsApp (54.9%) with all the other platforms ranking below 40%. In contrast, Spanish students prefer WhatsApp (59.5%, N  =  248) for communication and content creation. Differently from the Latin American context, the runner-up for Spanish students is Instagram (40%), followed by Musical.ly (23%, N = 96), and YouTube (21.6%, N = 90). As well as learning about students’ active participation in social networks and in content creation, they were also asked whether they visited other users’ profiles—the results were that 58.8% (N = 154) of Latin American kids and 68.8% (N = 287) of their Spanish counterparts check other users on YouTube, which were similar to Mexico (65.4%), but not so much to Chile, where there is a certain balance in the lack of other users’ profile lookups in all of social networks. Along this same line, Facebook is the second social network where Latin American students more often check others’ profiles (26.7%, N = 81), whereas in Spain, they go for Instagram (20.6%, N = 86). The least used social networks among those polled in Spain is Facebook, with 72.4%, and Twitter in Latin America, with 68% of the students saying they never visit it.

DK/NA Latin America Chile Mexico Facebook 5.3% 5.9% (8) (9) Twitter 12.0% 13.7% (18) (21) Instagram 8.7% 13.1% (13) (20) Musical.ly 17.3% 17.0% (26) (26) Snapchat 15.3% 13.7% (23) (21) WhatsApp 4.0% 4.6% (6) (7) YouTube 4.7% 5.2% (7) (8)

Total 5.6% (17) 12.9% (39) 10.9% (33) 17.2% (52) 14.5% (44) 4.3% (13) 5.0% (15)

Spain Total 11.8% (49) 13.7% (57) 7.7% (32) 12.5% (52) 14.4% (60) 5.8% (24) 4.8% (20)

I don’t use it Latin America Chile Mexico 9.3% 26.1% (14) (40) 72.0% 64.1% (108) (98) 33.3% 43.8% (50) (67) 55.3% 62.1% (83) (95) 38.7% 40.5% (56) (62) 11.3% 11.1% (17) (17) 1.3% 2.0% (2) (3) Total 17.8% (54) 68.0% (206) 38.6% (117) 58.7% (178) 39.6% (120) 11.2% (34) 1.7% (5)

Table 2  General use of social networks in Latin America and Spain

Spain Total 72.4% (302) 63.3% (264) 31.7% (132) 53.2% (222) 57.6% (240) 15.8% (66) 4.8% (20)

I only check content created by others Latin America Spain Chile Mexico Total Total 25.3% 28.1% 26.7% 10.8% (38) (43) (81) (45) 8.0% 15.7% 11.9% 14.4% (12) (24) (36) (60) 19.3% 18.3% 18.8% 20.6% (29) (28) (57) (86) 5.3% 7.8% 6.6% 11.3% (8) (12) (20) (47) 8.7% 18.3% 13.5% 9.6% (13) (28) (41) (40) 22.0% 29.4% 25.7% 18.9% (33) (45) (78) (79) 36.0% 65.4% 50.8% 68.8% (54) (100) (154) (287)

I actively participate by creating content Latin America Spain Chile Mexico Total Total 60.0% 39.9% 49.8% 5.0% (90) (61) (151) (21) 8.0% 6.5% 7.3% 8.6% (12) (10) (22) (348) 38.7% 24.8% 31.7% 40.0% (58) (38) (96) (167) 22.0% 13.1% 17.5% 23.0% (8) (20) (53) (96) 37.3% 27.5% 32.3% 18.5% (56) (42) (98) (77) 62.7% 54.9% 58.7% 59.5% (94) (84) (178) (248) 58.0% 27.5% 42.6% 21.6% (87) (42) (129) (90)

204 P. Renés-Arellano et al.

Learn and Entertain: The Invisible Learning Processes of the Younger Generations…

205

4.1  I nvisible Learning Processes Generated from General Social Network Use Table 3 shows that there are differences between the types of learning processes that kids perceived they acquired from social networks—49.9% of the students from Spain claim that their learning came from finding new forms of entertainment and 41.2% have learned how to communicate, whereas 49.5% of those in Latin America state they are always learning how to communicate, with very low percentages in the other variables. When asked about the frequency in which they perceived they had learned new content or skills in the different domains, 50.6% of the Spanish students replied that they did so “often/frequently.” 62.4% of the Latin American students, one of the highest percentages in this sample group, stated that they often learned in the entertainment domain; in other words, they made use of social networks to find ways to entertain themselves. It is remarkable, nevertheless, that “hardly ever” did the sampled Spanish students learn how to better organize themselves (their time, homework, etc.) or how to make new friends (33.7% and 34%, respectively, which are on a par with the Latin American results of 34%). 43.4% of the Spanish students answered that they “never” perceived that they had made friends through social networks. This is rather unexpected, since it would not be far-fetched to presume that kids use social networks to socialize and create new friendship circles with their peers. This is a learning domain that comes naturally for them and does not require much effort from their part, which may explain why their perceived learning and gain are less obvious when compared with other domains.

Table 3  Invisible learning process types derived from social networks in Latin America and Spain Never Latin America Communication 4.3% (13) Socializing 11.2% (34) Organization 15.8% (48) Entertainment 3.6% (11) Learning 5.6% (17)

Spain 8.6% (36) 43.4% (181) 19.7% (82) 1.9% (8) 4.1% (17)

Rarely Latin America 10.2% (31) 34.0% (103) 33.7% (102) 7.9% (24) 31.7% (96)

Spain 13.4% (56) 31.2% (130) 35.3% (147) 10.1% (42) 27.1% (113)

Often/frequently Latin America Spain 36.0% 36.7% (109) (153) 35.6% 17.7% (108) (74) 30.7% 34.3% (93) (143) 62.4% 38.1% (189) (159) 44.2% 50.6% (134) (211)

Always Latin America 49.5% (150) 19.1% (58) 19.8% (60) 26.1% (79) 18.5% (56)

Spain 41.2% (172) 7.7% (32) 10.8% (45) 49.9% (208) 18.2% (76)

206

P. Renés-Arellano et al.

4.2  S  ocial Networks and Invisible Learning Processes According to Gender Concerning the variable “gender,” 67.4% of the Spanish girls tend to actively participate and create content for WhatsApp, with Instagram coming second with 51.6%. The boys showed similar numbers for WhatsApp, 52.9%, but Instagram was a distant second with 30.4%. These figures coincide with the Latin American samples, in which 70.5% of the girls and 47.8% of the boys said that WhatsApp was their preferred social network for content creation. Another element analyzed was whether the students used other social networks: both Spanish girls (68.9%) and boys (68.7%) regularly said they watched videos on YouTube, with similar but lower numbers in Latin America with 47% for girls and 53.5% for boys. At the same time, Facebook is the least used social network by Spanish girls (74.4%) and boys (70%) (see Table 4), whereas in Latin America, Twitter is the least used by girls (74%) and Musical.ly by boys (65.6%). Table 5 shows that the Spanish girls “often” perceive learning processes happening in the entertainment (88.9%) and in the communication domains (80%), numbers that were similar to the boys’, who had 87.2% for entertainment, 76.2% for communication, as well as 69.2% in the learning of digital content and skills. These data coincide with the Latin American samples, in which most of the boys and girls state they learn how to entertain themselves (♀ = 88,5% and ♂ = 88,4%) and to communicate (♀  =  83,4% and ♂  =  88,4%) via social networks. There are some high percentages, however, showing low learning from both boys and girls—in Spain, boys with 70.5% and girls with 79.5% and in Latin America, 40.1% and 50.7% for boys and girls, respectively.

4.3  S  ocial Networks and Invisible Learning Processes According to Age Spanish boys and girls between 10 and 13 believe that when they use social networks, they learn how to entertain themselves (44.2%); they think they often learn digital contents and skills (49.6%) and have learned to make new friends (64.7%). 60.6% of the teenagers between 14 and 18 stated they have learned to communicate and 56.5% and 56.6% how to entertain themselves (see Fig. 1). In Latin America, on the other hand, students between 10 and 13 highlight that they frequently learn how to entertain themselves (93.4%) and to communicate (94.2%). These figures are not so distant from teenagers between 14 and 18, whose figures are 85.2% and 79.7%, respectively. At the same time, there is a medium-high percentage of kids that indicate they hardly ever learn to organize themselves in social networks (10–13  =  42.1% and 14–18  =  54.4%) or to make friends (10–13 = 33.95 and 14–18 = 52.7%) (Fig. 2).

DK/NA Latin America ♂ ♀ Facebook 3.8% 7.5% (6) (11) Twitter 15.3% 10.3% (24) (15) Instagram 14.6% 6.8% (23) (10) Musical.ly 21.0% 13.0% (33) (19) Snapchat 17.8% 11.0% (28) (16) 2.1% WhatsApp 6.4% (10) (3) 4.8% YouTube 5.1% (8) (7)

Spain ♂ 11.9% (27) 14.1% (32) 7.0% (16) 16.3% (37) 17.2% (39) 5.7% (13) 4.0% (9)

♀ 11.6% (22) 13.2% (25) 8.4% (16) 7.9% (15) 11.1% (21) 5.8% (11) 5.8% (11)

Table 4  Social network use according to gender I don’t use it Latin America ♂ ♀ 21.0% 14.4% (33) (21) 62.4% 74.0% (98) (108) 48.4% 28.1% (76) (41) 65.6% 51.4% (103) (75) 49.7% 28.8% (78) (42) 12.7% 9.6% (20) (14) 1.3% 2.1% (2) (3) Spain ♂ 74.4% (169) 63.4% (144) 37.9% (86) 69.6% (158) 67.4% (153) 19.8% (45) 2.6% (6) ♀ 70.0% (133) 63.2% (120) 24.2% (46) 33.7% (64) 45.8% (87) 11.1% (21) 7.4% (14)

I only check content created by others Latin America Spain ♂ ♀ ♂ ♀ 31.8% 21.2% 10.1% 11.6% (50) (31) (23) (22) 15.9% 7.5% 12.3% 16.8% (25) (11) (28) (32) 17.8% 19.9% 24.7% 15.8% (28) (29) (56) (30) 5.1% 27.4% 7.9% 15.3% (8) (40) (18) (29) 13.4% 13.7% 7.0% 12.6% (21) (20) (16) (24) 33.1% 17.8% 21.6% 15.8% (52) (26) (49) (30) 53.5% 47.9% 68.7% 68.9% (84) (70) (156) (131)

I actively participate by creating content Latin America Spain ♂ ♀ ♂ ♀ 43.3% 56.8% 3.5% 6.8% (68) (83) (8) (13) 6.4% 8.2% 10.1% 6.8% (10) (12) (23) (13) 19.1% 45.2% 30.4% 51.6% (30) (66) (69) (98) 8.3% 8.2% 6.2% 43.2% (13) (12) (14) (82) 19.1% 46.6% 8.4% 30.5% (30) (68) (19) (58) 47.8% 70.5% 52.9% 67.4 (75) (103) (120) (128) 40.1% 45.2% 24.7% 17.9% (63) (66) (56) (34)

Learn and Entertain: The Invisible Learning Processes of the Younger Generations… 207

208

P. Renés-Arellano et al.

Table 5  Invisible learning processes generated in social networks according to gender

Communication Socializing (making friends) Organization Entertainment Learning

Never/rarely Latin America ♂ ♀ 16.6% 12.3% (26) (18) 40.1% 50.7% (63) (74) 49.7% 49.3% (78) (72) 11.5% 11.6% (18) (17) 36.9% 37.7% (58) (55)

Communication 70.00%

Spain ♂ 23.8% (54) 70.5% (160) 49.8% (113) 12.8% (29) 30.8% (70)

Make friends

♀ 20.0% (38) 79.5% (151) 61.1% (116) 11.1% (21) 31.6% (60)

Often/frequently/always Latin America Spain ♂ ♀ ♂ 83.4% 87.7% 76.2% (131) (128) (173) 59.9% 49.3% 29.5% (94) (72) (67) 50.3% 50.7% 50.2% (79) (74) (114) 88.5% 88.4% 87.2% (139) (129) (198) 63.1% 62.3% 69.2% (99) (91) (157)

Organization

Entertainment

♀ 80.0% (152) 20.5% (39) 38.9% (74) 88.9% (169) 68.4% (130)

Learning

60.00% 50.00% 40.00% 30.00% 20.00% 10.00% 0.00%

Age 10- Age 14- Age 10- Age 14- Age 10- Age 14- Age 10- Age 1413 18 13 18 13 18 13 18 Never

Rarely

Often / Frequently

Always

Communication 15.20% 1.00% 21.00% 4.70% 39.30% 33.70% 24.60% 60.60% Make friends

64.70% 18.70% 17.00% 47.70% 10.30% 26.40% 8.00%

Organization

21.00% 18.10% 26.30% 45.60% 37.50% 30.60% 15.20% 5.70%

Entertainment

3.10%

0.50% 14.30% 5.20% 38.40% 37.80% 44.20% 56.50%

Learning

4.00%

4.10% 21.00% 34.20% 49.60% 51.80% 25.40% 9.80%

Fig. 1  Social networks’ perceived purpose according to age (Spain)

7.30%

Learn and Entertain: The Invisible Learning Processes of the Younger Generations…

100.00% 90.00% 80.00% 70.00% 60.00% 50.00% 40.00% 30.00% 20.00% 10.00% 0.00%

Often/ Frequently/ Always

Never / Rarely

Age 10-13

Never / Rarely

Often/ Frequently/ Always

Age 14-18

Communication

5.80%

94.20%

20.30%

79.70%

Make friends

33.90%

66.10%

52.70%

47.30%

Organization

42.10%

57.90%

54.40%

45.60%

Entertainment

6.60%

93.40%

14.80%

85.20%

Learning

38.00%

62.00%

36.80%

63.20%

Make friends

Organization

Entertainment

Communication

209

Learning

Fig. 2  Social networks’ perceived purpose according to age (Latin America)

Table 6  Invisible learning processes in social networks according to age and gender (Spain)

Communication Socializing (making friends) Organization Entertainment Learning

Never/rarely 10–13 ♂ ♀ 34.8% 38.4% (48) (33) 74.6% 93.0% (103) (80) 40.6% 58.1% (56) (50) 18.1% 16.3% (25) (14) 26.8% 22.1% (37) (19)

14–18 ♂ 6.7% (6) 64.0% (57) 64.0% (57) 4.5% (4) 37.1% (33)

♀ 4.8% (5) 68.3% (71) 63.5% (66) 6.7% (7) 39.4% (41)

Often/frequently/always 10–13 14–18 ♂ ♀ ♂ 65.2% 61.6% 93.3% (90) (53) (83) 25.4% 7.0% 36.0% (35) (6) (32) 59.4% 41.9% 36.0% (82) (36) (32) 81.9% 83.7% 95.5% (113) (72) (85) 73.2% 77.9% 62.9% (101) (67) (56)

♀ 95.2% (99) 31.7% (33) 36.5% (38) 93.3% (97) 60.6% (63)

210

P. Renés-Arellano et al.

4.4  I nvisible Learning Processes in Social Networks According to Age and Gender The analysis of the Spanish sample according to gender and age found on Table 6 shows that, often or always, boys of 10–13 learn new ways to entertain themselves (81.9%) and to learn (73.2%) using social networks, numbers that weren’t too far from the girls’, with 83.7% and 77.9%, respectively. In the group of boys of 14–18, they said they often learn new ways to entertain themselves (95.5%) and to communicate (93.3%) in social networks, similar to the girls’, who had 93.3% and 95.2%, respectively. Moreover, boys of 10–13 never or rarely learn to make friends in social networks (74.6%), similar to girls of the same age group (93%), whereas boys of 14–18 never or rarely learn to make friends (64%) or learn organization skills (64%), not too far from the girls in the same age group with 68.3% and 63.5%, respectively.

5  Conclusions In conclusion, the data from the sample groups of Spanish and Latin American kids and adolescents met the main goal of this research, which focused on comprehending the invisible learning processes perceived by minors when they make use of social networks. The specific objectives were also reached: the first one was to apprehend the general uses that boys and girls make of social networks according to age and gender in Spain and Latin America. Half of the students in the sample groups, both overall and by country (Spain, Chile, and Mexico), prefer to use WhatsApp to create content. In Latin America, it is followed by Facebook and YouTube in the general results and in Chile. In Spain, Instagram is the runner-up with 40%—it is important to highlight that, given its nature, the content created is mostly visual, that is, video clips and photographs. Likewise, the majority of the students sampled, Spanish and Latin American, use YouTube as their main content source. According to gender, the Spanish girls, in general, tend to use WhatsApp as their main communication network and Instagram as their most active content creation network. Spanish girls and boys prefer to visit other users’ profiles on YouTube and less so those polled in Latin America. Another objective was to analyze the invisible learning processes perceived by the boys and girls when they use social networks, according to age and gender, in Spain and Latin America. It’s been observed that the sample groups state they mostly use social networks for entertainment (49.9%) and communication (41.2%). With regard to frequency, Spanish students often learn useful information and digital skills in social networks, whereas Latin American ones usually learn to be entertained. According to age, 10–13-year-olds from Spain usually use social networks to entertain themselves (44.2%), similarly to 14–18 year olds from Latin America. The collected data and some of the results from the Digital 2021 report [20] indicate that social networks allow for a higher degree of connection, specifically

Learn and Entertain: The Invisible Learning Processes of the Younger Generations…

211

WhatsApp, Instagram, and YouTube—the latter has become the most used by the students in the sample groups in Spain and Latin America. If the younger generations make more and more use of social networks in different learning domains (such as communication or entertainment), it becomes crucial to delve into these learning aspects so that they can safely keep using social networks through the lens of critical thinking and accountability, which are, in turn, key ethical cornerstones for the responsible use of the Internet. There are invisible learning processes implicitly present in their use of social networks—these are learning models that may influence, positively or negatively, in the development of the students’ personalities and digital identities. Therefore, it is of utmost importance to design educational and pedagogical proposals that will promote kids’ safe use of social networks, underscoring these digital invisible learning processes, raising awareness about them among the students, and ensuring they are acquired in such a way so that these boys and girls may properly build their personal and digital identities [21]. In the same line, the platform PantallasAmigas (FriendlyScreens, from Spain), which is an initiative that promotes safe and healthy use of the Internet and social networks, exposes some of the analysis and pondering elements that may serve a guiding purpose in educational and pedagogical proposals to watch over kids’ online safety, the building of their digital identities, and the adequate invisible learning processes. Some of its most relevant bids include the need to safeguard one’s personal and others’ data; the maintenance of a low-profile participation in forums and social networks chats; an empathetic stance when interpreting what someone else has written, or how they could feel when reading others’ posts; and the favoring of respect when communicating with others in social networks. Funding Agency  This work is framed under the development of two research schemes: firstly, a national R + D project: “Hyperconnected identity of young people and their perception of time in digital pastimes,” funded by Spain’s Ministry of Science, Innovation and Universities (Ref. PGC2018–097884-B-I00), and secondly, within the framework of “Alfamed” (Euro-American Network of Researchers), with the support of the R + D Project “Youtubers and Instagrammers: Media Competence in Emerging Prosumers” (RTI2018–093303-B-I00), financed by the State Research Agency of the Spanish Ministry of Science, Innovation and Universities and the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF).

References 1. Cobo, C. & Moravec, J.W.. Aprendizaje hacia una nueva ecología de la educación invisible. n. Col·lecció Transmedia XXI. Laboratori de Mitjans Interactius / Publicacions i Edicions de la Universitat de Barcelona. https://bit.ly/3gVFEFz. (2011) 2. V.  Kumar, Customer relationship management, in Wiley International Encyclopedia of Marketing, (2010). https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444316568.wiem01015 3. D. Buckingham, E. Odiozola, Más allá de la tecnología (Aprendizaje infantil en la era de la cultura digital, Argentina, 2008) 4. L.  Johnson, S.  Adams Becker, V.  Estrada, A.  Freeman, NMC Horizon Report: 2014 K-12 Edition (The New Media Consortium, Austin, Texas, 2014). Retrieved April 19, 2021 from https://www.learntechlib.org/p/147472/

212

P. Renés-Arellano et al.

5. J. Habermas, [1986]: Historia y crítica de la opinión pública. (Gustavo Gili, Barcelona, 2004) 6. B.  Morgan, K.  Kristjánsson, Parents and Social Media. Adolescents’ perceptions of parental responses to morally salient social media scenarios. University of Birmingham and The Jubilee Center for Character and Virtues (2017) 7. J.  Arthur, K.  Kristjánsson, T.  Harrison, W.  Sanderse, D.  Wright, Teaching Character and Virtue in Schools (Routledge, New York, 2017) 8. T. Harrison, Virtuous reality: Moral theory and research into cyber-bullying. Ethics Inform. Technol. 17(4), 275–283 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-­015-­9382-­9 9. D.  Caldevilla Domínguez, Las Redes Sociales. Tipología, uso y consumo de las redes 2.0 en la sociedad digital actual. Documentación De Las Ciencias De La Información, 33, 45–68. Retriwed from https://revistas.ucm.es/index.php/DCIN/article/view/ DCIN1010110045A (2010) 10. J.C. Yau, S.M. Reich, Are the qualities of adolescents’ offline friendships present in digital interactions? Adoles. Res. Rev. 3, 339–355 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40894-­017-­0059-­y 11. J.A.  Del Moral, Redes Sociales ¿Moda o nuevo Paradigma? (Asociación de usuarios de Internet, Madrid, 2005) 12. N.N. Bazarova, Public intimacy: Disclosure interpretation and social judgments onFacebook. J. Commun. 62(5), 815–832 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-­2466.2012.01664.x 13. S.  Hong, M.R.  Jahng, N.  Lee, K.R.  Wise, Do you filter who you are?: Excessive self-­ presentation, social cues, and user evaluations of Instagram selfies. Comput. Hum. Behav. 104, 106159 (2020) 14. S.S. Wang, M.A. Stefanone, Showing off? Human mobility and the interplay of traits, self-­ disclosure, and Facebook check-ins. Soc. Sci. Comput. Rev. 31(4), 437–457 (2013). https:// doi.org/10.1177/0894439313481424 15. M. De la Villa, C. Suárez, Factores de riesgo en el uso problemático de Internet y del teléfono móvil en adolescentes españoles. Revista Iberoamericana de Piscología y Salud 7(2), 69–78 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rips.2016.03.001 16. J.M.  Pérez Tornero, Aprender valores con Internet: cómo potenciar la ética, el respeto, la tolerancia y la cooperación en Internet (Barcelona Octaedro, Madrid, 2017) 17. R. Gamito, P. Aristizabla, M. Olasolo, M.T. Vizcarra, La necesidad de trabajar los riesgos de Internet en el aula. PRO 21(3), 409–426 (2017) 18. M. Garmendia, E. Jiménez, M.A. Casado, G. Mascheroni, Net Children Go Mobile: Riesgos y oportunidades en Internet y el uso de dispositivos móviles entre menores españoles (2010-2015). In https://bit.ly/3cztIpe (2016) 19. C.A. Scolari, N. Lugo Rodríguez, M.J. Masanet, “Educación Transmedia. De los contenidos generados por los usuarios a los contenidos generados por los estudiantes”. Revista Latina de Comunicación Social. 116–132 (2019). https://doi.org/10.4185/RLCS-­2019-­1324 20. Datareportal, Digital 2021. Global Overview Report. Retrieved from https://bit. ly/2UgoniH (2021) 21. M.A. Pérez-Rodríguez, A. Delgado-Ponce, R. García-Ruiz, M.C. Caldeiro, Niños y jóvenes ante las redes y pantallas (Gedisa, 2015)

The Highs and Lows of a Hyperconnected University Identity Francisco Esteban Bara

1  Hyperconnectivity’s Highs for a University Education Higher education provides myriad opportunities and benefits, thanks to the consolidation of hyperconnectivity on its campuses and in its curricula. The first, and probably the most obvious one, is that it has thus adopted to students’ new modus vivendi. Michael Oakeshott affirmed some years ago that higher education should respond to the message stating that something new is brewing out there in the streets that is going to put an end to school formulas and syllogisms: adapt or move over [1]. It would of course be senseless for universities to turn their backs on reality or turn a deaf ear to what is happening in the outside world and how current circumstances are evolving. A university is an institution that needs to keep up a running dialogue with society, as it is one of its main reasons for its existence and one of the forces behind its creation [2]; if now our students, and teaching staff of course, are hyperconnected, higher education should adapt to these circumstances. The second reason is related to the above and refers to a psychopedagogical adaptation. Hyperconnectivity appears in one form or another when addressing new ways of teaching, learning, and evaluating [3]. A whole list could be presented of teaching methods and strategies currently in place in a large number of our universities that advocate some kind of hyperconnectivity, pedagogical approaches such as the flipped classroom, gamification, and thinking-based learning. Not only that, some of the pedagogical strategies that might be termed traditional have also been revamped and adapted to hyperconnectivity. Consider, for example, typical lectures, which no longer tend to involve the lecturer speaking and presenting a PowerPoint, with students listening and trying to assimilate what they are being told. Different

F. E. Bara () University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain e-mail: [email protected]

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 J. M. Muñoz-Rodríguez (ed.), Identity in a Hyperconnected Society, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-85788-2_15

213

214

F. E. Bara

technological resources are now coming into play to accompany the lecturer’s explanations, such as websites, videos on the virtual cloud, social media, etc. This may be due to, among other things, the belief that the best possible higher education is the one that encourages reflexive thinking, where hyperconnectivity unavoidably plays a central role. It seems reasonable to assume that undergraduates study a certain course because they want to follow a specific career, and if one thing is expected of their future working life, and rightly so, it is that they behave as what has come to be referred to as a reflective practitioner [4]. Our universities have been pursuing this goal for years with a steadfast commitment and with hyperconnectivity as a trusted ally. There will, of course, always be those that contend that things still need to improve a great deal. They tend to argue that there is still too much theory in higher education today and that it does not prepare people for the daunting reality of a professional career. This might be true in some cases and with certain degree courses, yet things have undeniably changed a great deal, especially since the introduction of the skills-based curriculum [5]. Having said this, it is worth considering the type of university identity that fosters an education leaning toward hyperconnectivity or informed by it. For students, this could be a kind of introduction to what is coming later, at personal level, and above all in their working lives. It is difficult to think of a professional sector in which hyperconnectivity is not present or, if one prefers, in which it is not part of their current functioning. This is all well and good, yet hyperconnectivity may also lead to problems for higher education, especially when it is viewed differently to the way described here.

2  Hyperconnectivity’s Lows for Higher Education Recent years have repeatedly seen a university described as a highly qualified teaching institution, a place to acquire a series of both professional and personal skills in order to keep up with the times. We want our universities to produce the finest doctors, architects, engineers, IT engineers, teachers and biologists, etc., and that they should all turn out to be model citizens, what we would call today defenders and champions of the now much-vaunted millennium development goals (MDGs). Our intention is to uphold the age-old promise that higher education made to society almost right from the start, namely, universities will constitute the agents of change [6, 7]. What is more, there is a sense that this commitment is renewed from 1 year to the next: tell us what you need today, what professional niches you need to fill, and what global issues you wish to redress, and here, in the drop of a hat, we will organize the best possible study plans, with double- and even triple-degree courses if necessary. It goes without saying that hyperconnectivity has a key role to play in all of this, yet what happens with the matter of a critical mindset, wisdom, or whatever you want to call it? This primordial and traditional mission of higher education should appear in more than just official documents, degree ceremonies, or course presentations.

The Highs and Lows of a Hyperconnected University Identity

215

A university is a community of seekers of the truth. We might say that university students are the heirs to that Socratic spirit that ruffled feathers and upset the community, seeking to awaken it so that it could think for itself and not follow the lead of others or the path laid out for it at any given moment. Indeed, students may be seen as a cloud of irritating and impertinent pests that, as the Spanish professor Alejandro Llano stated a few years back, are determined to go against the grain [8]. We should ask ourselves what the point is of a graduate empowered to hold down a job but devoid of a critical mindset; one that embraces the first discourse that comes along and simply accepts its premises, proclamations, and arguments, which they might well ignore where they have come from or where they are going; someone that is not willing to change their opinion, that is, who graduates just as they started, meaning a student who does not want to be a seeker of truth, who does not want to find answers, and who ultimately avoids problems by accepting everything they are told, what so-and-so thinks, what Tom believes, what Dick defends, and Harry criticizes. It is not simply a matter of finding truths but also of safeguarding them. The history of higher education is a tale of the accumulation of truths, always exposed and liable to be altered, yet truths all the same. Being part of a community of seekers of the truth does not mean starting from scratch or from where one wants but instead following that tradition of the quest for scientific, cultural, and humanistic discoveries that have enabled us to come this far. To put it another way, a university is like a vast pantheon in which we keep all those giants among thinkers who lend us their shoulders to see yet further afield, illustrious characters that not only tell us things but also invite us to share ideas with them. Moreover, the discourse being defended here does not belong solely to the realm of the philosophy of higher education [9], as it can be located even within the workplace itself, where hyperconnectivity features high on the agenda. In January 2019, the prestigious journal Harvard Business Review published an article called “Does Higher Education Still Prepare for Jobs?” [10]. The question was posed to employers and leaders of business organizations, which is no bad thing considering they are the ones that hire, renew, and fire a large number of university graduates. A significant share of those interviewed admit that there is a gap between what students learn at university and what is expected of them at work. This educational divide, if we may call it that, affects more than 40% of professionals aged between 25 and 34  in OECD countries and almost 50% in the USA.  Naturally enough, our universities are aware of this situation, as noted in the previous paragraph. With a view to righting this wrong, an innovative mechanism was put in place some time ago that basically involves conjuring up novel psychopedagogical methods, identifying sophisticated competencies, and using revealing ways of assessing learning and providing fresh and interesting new content. Nonetheless, we are barking up the wrong tree, as this is not the gap that those surveyed are referring to. It stands to reason that a doctor, an archaeologist, or a chemist will encounter new situations that will require them to learn on their feet and which they did not come up against at university! This has always been the case and will continue to be so despite the endeavor made to avoid it. The fact that higher

216

F. E. Bara

education prepares someone for a working life does not mean they are one and the same thing. If this education actually meant training a student for their corresponding career, the best thing to do would be to send them directly to the workplace, in other words, close universities. Tom should be paired with an experienced architect, and Dick should be mentored by an economist with a protracted track record. The research mentioned above contends something along the following lines: the greatest shortcomings are to be found in such matters as resilience, integrity, empathy, and curiosity, in short, in an individual’s character rather than in their professional prowess. Toward the end of the 1960s, a well-known study backed by the eminent psychanalyst and humanist philosopher Erich Fromm already went some way to clarifying the matter. The study focused on medical professionals, and right at the beginning of the study it states that it was not particularly surprising when collating data to learn that being a “good doctor” was not far removed from being a “good person” with the required technical training [11]. The circumstances at the end of the last century were different to today’s hyperconnectivity, and they will almost certainly be different to those in the twenty-second century some will say, and they are right, and we are not audacious enough to say that this matter will remain more or less the same. Some things never change, however. We might even be bold enough to propose a possible conclusion: the labor market is calling for graduates with a university spirit, standard-bearers for the cause of higher education, or, if you prefer, individuals with a critical mindset, who can prove to be members of a community of seekers of the truth. This demand made by employers and leaders of business organizations is closely related to those made by the public at large. Something similar is called for across the board, by shopkeepers, Amazon deliverers, bus drivers, security guards at shopping centers, and door-to-door salespersons. All these people are just as smart as any business person, and above all they have common sense. They also want Tom to behave in a critical manner with reality, above all because he has studied architecture, and Dick’s mind and soul are ready to question the surrounding reality, as no less is to be expected of someone who has studied at a Faculty of Economics. Toward the end of the 1990s, Michael Oakeshott [1] clearly and succinctly explained the responses that can be given to an axiom that could well be inscribed over the entrance to a university, both today and always. The message states that: outside in the streets all is chaos, please help us to distinguish between right and wrong. A critical mindset or the search for wisdom that reminds us of the university’s voice is perhaps the competency par excellence that a student can acquire in higher education. We mean forgoing intellectual and emotional digressions, abandoning flights of fancy, and arming oneself with understanding, a critique and reasoning, finding motives and meanings, avoiding navel-gazing, standing on the tallest shoulders in culture or science, and many other things of a similar nature. Furthermore, that guiding spirit of higher education is not only a benefit for those that cultivate it, as it also has collateral effects, and in an extremely positive way: it includes a concern for other people. A critical mindset is useful not only on campus; it is also like manna from heaven in offices and committee rooms, schools and hospitals, streets and squares, communities, social media, and TV debates. A critical mindset entails

The Highs and Lows of a Hyperconnected University Identity

217

mastering certain ways of being and behaving. Which ones? Well, all those manifested by students that one enjoys being with, with whom it is a pleasure to talk, with whom it is a delight to work, you know what we mean.

3  A  Possible Pedagogy for a Critical Mindset in Times of Hyperconnectivity We may affirm that recent years have witnessed the emergence of teaching methods that according to ideologues and instigators benefit students’ critical mindsets. Without seeking to be exhaustive, there are three ingredients that can be singled out. The first one involves respecting what a student knows and believes. This is a principle that has matured slowly, from a long time ago, when all of us who are now members of the teaching staff were taught any one of the different variations of constructivism, and we learned that everyone, to a greater or lesser extent, has some prior knowledge about almost anything. For some, this was an eye opener; for others it was just stating the obvious; and we should ask ourselves whether Socrates himself did not consider the same thing when he started a dialogue with those that addressed him. The second one means being proactive; one cannot remain standing still. There is nothing new in mentioning the role played here by the so-called active pedagogies. It means that students need to manage their own learning process, self-­ regulate, work in a team, undertake numerous and diverse assessment activities, etc. The life of a university student is much more dynamic now than it ever was. Nonetheless, it is hard to believe that someone who does not lift a finger or leave their chair because they are concentrating on reading a book or listening to a lecture is not pure and simple activity in constant movement. It is difficult to say they are wasting time simply because there is no movement or apparent activity. Something tells us that it is often time gained, and if our neurons and soul did actually generate some kind of noise, we would hear something very loud indeed. The third and last one: it needs to be understood that truths can be found anywhere, in a book on a set reading list, in what Bartolo has said in class or in what someone has found in some blog or others or in the always infallible Wikipedia. Truths are all over the place, and more importantly than finding them is to have the skill to look for them. This is definitely true, but even more important still is to know what one is looking for and whether what one has found is a real truth or simply another flight of fancy. We all know that knowing how to find a truth is an arduous task, and if it calls for anything it is to furnish oneself with criteria, on the one hand, and with a suitcase full of truths, on the other [12]. The commitment, therefore, is toward a pedagogy for cultivating a critical mindset that goes a long way back, and possibly for that reason, it has been consigned to the attic by some of our universities. The same fate has befallen that pedagogy because it is apparently simple, and now there is a tendency toward pedagogical engineering and hyperconnectivity that favors teaching in the most complicated

218

F. E. Bara

ways possible, and finally, it needs to be admitted that this is a pedagogy that does not award any accreditations for teaching staff either in individual faculties or in universities as a whole, which means it is not particularly expedient to dedicate it all the time it deserves. Nonetheless, and therein lies our proposal, it is one of the best ways on exercising a personal and educational influence on students’ potential critical mindset [13]. Here is an example: when we have an opportunity to discuss the university experience of people with a well-refined critical mindset, the conversation tends to mention the pedagogy we are referring to here; the pedagogy of example comes to the fore. Indeed, there is nothing more effective for cultivating a critical mindset than considering the example of someone specifically devoted to precisely that, its very cultivation. There may be a thousand and one ways of paying homage to the voice of the university we have been referring to, and each institution can adapt them to their own particular circumstances. Nevertheless, from our point of view, any proposal should consider two conditions sine qua non: the first, a critical mindset develops if it is systematically being used on a day-to-day basis, and secondly, that mindset is fine-tuned when it is systematically applied with other people, or to be more precise, when coexisting with teachers that include it in their duties. We use teachers in the plural; we mean an entire university if possible. A Robin Hood seeking to convey it may die of success, although unfortunately that occurs very occasionally and for certain students, the most normal thing is that most of them become campus pedants, obsessive bores that seek to explore issues seriously and stubbornly. It goes without saying that a lot could be said about this matter, and there is no doubt that lecturers each have their own strategies or personal teaching methods; yet it might be convenient to list a few of them that, at least from our standpoint, are designed to shake up young students’ minds and spirits. These are strategies that fit perfectly into a 2-hour class, and if one, several, or all of them are used there, so much the better. Or this might not be necessary, for in a single class, as we were reminded [14, 15], truly amazing things may occur regarding the matter in hand. We are referring to such questions as the seven listed forthwith. The first question is self-criticism. The lecturer that decides to cultivate their students’ critical mindset should be open to self-criticism. This attitude or way of behaving is an expression of the virtue of humility, which is perhaps one of the finest manifestations of that critical approach we are dealing with here. The prospective cultivator of a critical mindset will not be able to achieve very much unless they are the first to lead by example and accept criticism. To put it another way, this cultivation of a critical mindset also involves taking up the rear to be seen as one of the first. The second question is being prepared to doubt. A critical mindset may also be taught when someone shows themselves to be ready to doubt, when they reveal themselves to be an individual that is prepared to accept the first thing they hear or have the wool pulled over their eyes. In my opinion, lecturers that express doubts in front of their students are the ones that win them over, and no less importantly, they are lecturers that embody the profound meaning of being seekers of the truth, who can show their face announcing that they teach at a university. Naturally enough, one has to tweak that strategy; a readiness to question what one knows and

The Highs and Lows of a Hyperconnected University Identity

219

what one is exposed to should not lead to extreme skepticism, to what Chesterton described as doubting that a pig is a pig! The third question involves thinking outside the box. A critical mindset is not something that fits easily into a single subject or, depending on how you look at it, even into a specific curriculum. There is no particular critical mindset that applies to graduates in business management, or to veterinary studies, or even another for social education. It begins to be cultivated in those fields, of course it does, but its branches extend outside them. All knowledge in higher education is connected, it always has been, although it has been segmented to an extraordinary extent; a critical mindset is part and parcel of higher education, as simple as that. It is indeed a surprise, in the nicest sense of the word, to see that a lecturer does not dismiss that general nature of knowledge, collating it whenever the opportunity arises. Along these same lines, it is also comforting to see how lecturers are interested in what is going on in other departments, faculties and centers; in other words, they are paying attention to what is happening at the university as a whole. The fourth question is describing the actual life of a seeker of the truth. A lecturer’s life as a seeker of the truth is of considerable interest to students. Those personal, everyday experiences that helped a lecturer to cultivate their critical mindset have a profound effect on students, even more so when they are explained clearly, in a pleasant manner and with all honesty. A lecturer’s job is not only to teach what they know but also how they live and experience their knowledge, its advantages and drawbacks, and their hopes and fears. Needless to say, some confuse this approach with talking about their weekend barbeque, mainly on social media. This is not what we are advocating here, far from it, as that is a tremendous faux pas whichever way you look at it. What we actually mean is describing experiences in higher education for minds and souls that are also pursuing a higher education. The fifth question is to recommend culture. Closely related to the above, a university lecturer is also a cultural creature, someone that reads, visits museums, watches films, listens to music, etc. We all know that these activities go hand in glove with the cultivation of a critical mindset. They should not be the lecturer’s little secret but instead something to be put out there, in the middle of a conversation in any class. A vast amount of the content that is featured in our curricula is reflected in culture in one way or another, so why not cite them? Why not recommend them if they are pertinent? Something tells us that the narrative of higher education is full of these cultural references, of students that have been able to see the world with a more critical eye because precisely one of their lecturers introduced them to a given author, film director, musician, or painter. Furthermore, we should like to recommend those productions that the famous Italian writer and publisher Italo Calvino defined as follows: “classic is something that tends to relegate the concerns of the moment to the status of background noise, but at the same time this background noise is something we cannot do without.” [16]. The sixth question involves spreading harmony. A critical mindset is designed to spread harmony, and it is a pleasure to find this in someone seeking to cultivate it, not speaking badly of anyone, without sowing discord, without criticizing those that think differently, while understanding that one has to see the whole picture before giving an opinion. We do our students

220

F. E. Bara

little favor by taking the opposite view. It goes without saying that current circumstances are not having their finest moment in this aspect, as our social media are full of non-wholesome messages posted by graduates, and we can only imagine the number of lecturers that mistake 2 hours of class for a political rally or such like. These kinds of attitudes may mean that lecturers end the class thinking that they have been cultivating a critical mindset, but that may actually be the last thing they are doing, and what’s more, they are showing their students a lack of respect. Finally, the seventh and last question involves applying a sense of humor. Cultivating a critical mindset may be a pleasant experience when it involves a sense a humor. We need those cheerful critical mindsets rather than sad and angry ones. We are referring to a sense of humor that is intelligent, respectful, subtle, and refined, to those explanations that bring an educated smile to our lips. This can apply to any lecturer; there is no need to be a stand-up comedian. Today we are exposed to an endless stream of stories, jokes, anecdotes, and amusing situations that are in good taste and suited to higher education, and no one should stop us from using them in class to regale both mind and soul. Besides those matters of a more personal nature that can be undertaken without involving hyperconnectivity, there are also others of a more global or institutional kind. We should like to single out four. The first involves leaving the well-trodden path and heading out into open country. We already know how undergraduate and master’s degree courses are organized at many universities in numerous countries. We could say that specialized education begins in the first minute and continues right through to the last one. There are, of course, studies with broader fields than others, but in all of them the content is ring-fenced and clearly defined. Moreover, each one of our studies has its own domain, the private backyards of the university departments involved. The same can be said even if we are referring to double, triple, or quadruple degrees. Nevertheless, there is no critical mindset in higher education that is specific to business management, another for veterinary studies, and yet another typical of primary school teachers. One way of saying this is that a critical mindset in higher education has yet to find its place in the current academic structure. In the 1930s, Don José Ortega y Gasset [17] (1930) proposed a “Faculty of Culture,” as entity whose roots hark back to the Faculty of Liberal Arts at medieval universities, and which in one way or another may exist at universities in English-­ speaking countries. This faculty is designed to receive students heading for medicine, engineering, and the fine arts and, above all, to ensure they do not abandon mathematics, history, literature, music, sociology, psychology, and philosophy, in other words, all those subjects they initially had no intention of studying. Each one of these can provide the quintessence of the ideas that are now called for in any career and finding some meaning to life. The combination of science and culture, of rigorous, methodical and multidisciplinary knowledge, lies at the very heart of a critical mindset in higher education. A good teacher or doctor, for example, may know a lot about education and medicine, respectively, but it would be better if they also knew about other things. We realize that we are talking about something akin to passing a camel through the eye of a needle but also that a university’s DNA is programmed for these kinds of challenges.

The Highs and Lows of a Hyperconnected University Identity

221

The second matter involves the lecturer and student as the seekers of truth: taking research into the classroom [18]. Wilhelm von Humboldt [19, 20], considered by many to be the father of the modern university, frequently used the words Einsamkeit und Freiheit (loneliness and freedom) when referring to higher education. These two words encompass many meanings and different interpretations, but there is one that interests us above all in terms of a critical mindset. Humboldt affirmed that at university, as opposed to the stages of schooling preceding it, a teacher does not exist for a student, and the same can be said the other way around, but instead they are both there to contend with science and culture. Higher education should respect and encourage the fact that both students and lecturers are to dedicate themselves to the search for truth in a solitary and unfettered manner. It is fair to say that Humboldt’s advice has not fallen on stony ground, as this is the path taken by a significant number of lecturers and their students, as the classrooms at our faculties are brimming with science and culture. Nevertheless, it is not clear whether the former are not there for the latter or vice versa, and all together they are devoted to seeking truths. Lecturers tend to leave their research behind on their desks when they go into the classroom, presenting themselves as a teacher rather as a researcher. So much so, in fact, that it is not out of place to assume that many students could not name the scientific or cultural topics that their lecturers are interested in, upon which they are gathering information or investigating. Something tells us that the voice of higher education is asking us to conduct joint research in the classroom, by that indicating that students should feel they have before them a university soul and mind that also has its doubts and certainties, intuitions, and errors. We are not talking about resolving an issue that has indeed already been explained or posing a problem that has already been solved but instead introducing a class to unresolved issues that have no apparent solution or that depend on the way one approaches them. This is where hyperconnectivity may come into play, albeit as just another resource and carefully calibrating its uses. The third matter involves discovering those texts that never cease to say what they want to say: seminars on the reading of the classics. A reading seminar attended by a handful of students and a lecturer may be one of the foremost practices in higher education from numerous perspectives, and it acquires great significance when referring to the cultivation of a critical mindset. This does not simply refer to its format or structure, which may indeed vary, but also to the opportunity it provides for taking part in what Robert M.  Hutchins [21], president and chancellor of the prestigious University of Chicago from 1929 to 1951, called “The Great Conversation.” By this he meant the great books,1 the classic texts that every student should read before immersing themself in a specific field of knowledge. He imagined a kind of liberal arts that would help young people to throw off their shackles and not let themselves be enchained by anything, especially by the routinary and technical demands of the different professions. Unfortunately, his proposal never 1  We are referring mainly to collections such as Great Ideas, a series of one hundred books that changed the world, published in English by Penguin Books at the beginning of the twenty-first century and in Spanish by Taurus.

222

F. E. Bara

saw the light of day. From this point of view, a classic may equally be any nineteenth-­ century book or one published last year. The voice of the university will never stop talking about those books, and a critical mindset is also cultivated through them, alone in front of the page, and when we are far removed from hyperconnectivity, and we should be concerned by those students on any degree course taught at faculties of education that graduate without reading hardly any of those books we are referring to. The fourth and final matter involves those encounters that are typical of university life: individual tutorials. We are not discovering anything new when we affirm that personal tutorials in higher education today tend to be optional, at least on many campuses. Furthermore, most of them simply involve discussing exam results or similar topics. What Cardenal Newman [22] defended as a vital part of higher education has become a customer complaints desk or morphed into strange creations such as virtual tutorial action plans. It might even be said that today’s tutorials in higher education have become bureaucratic chores. History tells us that the first universities insisted that students should be assigned a tutor (Rüegg, 1992); in other words, there was no place for free agents in those communities of knowledge-­ seekers. Today, it is often the case that there is no one to assign anybody. These personal meetings are crucial for cultivating a critical mindset, provided that they involve a serious and engaged conversation that befits the setting, with the students being left with more questions than answers and, just as importantly, needing to read or consult other sources. We know when the conversation in a tutorial begins, but not when it ends, and what’s more, it would be desirable for it never to end, with students graduating from university with what we might call an unfinished dialogue.

4  Conclusions One cannot oppose hyperconnectivity in higher education; that would be senseless or, to put it another way, promote a university that is disconnected from the times we are living in. It would again be seen as an ivory tower, with all the issues that entails. We are not only dealing with a demand defined by these modern times, as hyperconnectivity enables higher education to achieve outstandingly good results. Nonetheless, there is a type of higher education that does not need it quite so much, among other things because education has an identity that, to put it one way, requires it to swim against the tide. We have referred to this identity as the cultivation of a critical mindset, the quest for knowledge, in sum, educating a student to be a rounded individual rather than a professional being. We are not, of course, dealing with exclusive forms of education; quite the contrary, they are complementary from many different viewpoints. Nevertheless, it should be acknowledged that one form is prevailing over the other, the highs presented by hyperconnectivity in higher education outweigh its lows, or if you prefer, our firm commitment to hyperconnectivity is not allowing to us see the wood for the trees; that is clearly how we are leaving behind the other form of higher education which is more personal and intimate. We do not want to be pessimists, quite the

The Highs and Lows of a Hyperconnected University Identity

223

opposite in fact, as we can see green shoots on the horizon. There is the hope that higher education may change the people within it and that those people have been called upon to create a world that is fairer, more equitable, and sustainable, and this optimistic view is being systematically repeated. We can only trust that such hope is not dashed, but instead is upheld, and we can provide a holistic higher education, with or without hyperconnectivity.

References 1. M. Oakeshott, La voz del aprendizaje liberal [The Voice of Liberal Learning] (Buenos Aires, Katz Editores, 2009) 2. J.  Scott, The Mission of the university: Medieval to postmodern transformations. J.  High. Educ. 77(1), 1–39 (2006) 3. H.  Fry, S.  Ketteridge, S.A.  Marshall, Handbook for Teaching and Learning in Higher Education (Routledge, New York, 2014) 4. D.  Shon, El profesional reflexivo: cómo piensan los profesionales cuando actúan [The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action] (Barcelona, Paidós, 1998) 5. J.  González, R.  Wagenaar (eds.), Tuning Educational Structures in Europe. Final Report. Phase One (Deusto University, Bilbao, 2003) 6. W. Rüegg (ed.), A History of the University in Europe, Universities in the Middle Ages, vol I (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1992) 7. W. Rüegg (ed.), A History of the University in Europe, Universities in Early Modern Europe, vol II (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1996) 8. A. Llano, Otro modo de pensar (EUNSA – University of Navarre, Pamplona, 2016) 9. R. Barnett, A. Fulford, Philosophers on the University (Springer, New York, 2020) 10. T. Premuzic, B. Frankiewicz, Does higher education still prepare for jobs? Harv. Bus. Rev. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2019/01/does-­higher-­education-­still-­prepare-­people-­for-­ jobs (2019) 11. A.  Hinojosa, A.  Cosio, Análisis psicológico del estudiante universitario [Psychological Analysis of the Student University] (La Prensa Médica Mexicana, Mexico City, 1967) 12. J. Balmes, El Criterio [The Judgment] (Espasa Calpe, Madrid, 1964) 13. H.  McEwan, Narrative reflection in the philosophy of teaching: Genealogies and portraits. J. Philos. Educ. 45(1), 125–140 (2011) 14. M. Recalcati, La hora de clase [The Hour of Teaching] (Barcelona, Anagrama, 2016) 15. F.-X.  Bellamy, Crisis de la transmisión y fiebre de la innovación [Transmission crisis and innovation feber]. Teoría de la Educación. Revista Interuniversitaria 33(2), 169–178 (2021) 16. I. Calvino, Por qué leer los clásicos [Why read the classics] (Siruela, Madrid, 2009), p. 19 17. J. Ortega y Gasset, Misión de la Universidad [Mission of the University] (Alianza Editorial, Madrid, 1930) 18. N. Obiols, Erich Fromm y la relación educativa [Erich Fromm and the educational relationship]. Teoría de la Educación. Revista Interuniversitaria 33(1), 51–69 (2021) 19. W. Humboldt, Sobre la organización interna y externa de los establecimientos científicos superiores en Berlín [On the Internal and External Organization of the Higher Scientific Institutions in Berlin] in: Various Authors (1959). La idea de la universidad en Alemania. Buenos Aires: Editorial Sudamericana, 210-219 (1959) 20. W.  Humboldt, Los límites de la acción del Estado [The limits of state action] (Tecnos, Madrid, 2009) 21. R.M. Hutchins, La Universidad de Utopía [The University of Utopia] (EUNSA – University of Navarre, Pamplona, 2018) 22. J.H. Newman, The Idea of a University (Image Books, Garden City, 1959)

Index

A Adolescents, 58, 95–97, 155, 159, 161–163 Advertisement, 49 Age of Digital Interdependence, 110 Ambient Assisted Living (AAL), 172 Analogue subjectivity, 35–37 cognitive capacity, 36 knowledge, 36 Anonymity, 79 Anthropological and sociological devices, 83 Anthropology, 19 Assistive technologies, 132 Attention economy, 117 B Big Brother, 42 Biodiversity, 190 Bourdieu’s linguistic capital, 78 C Carbon dioxide, 185 Center for Environmental and Artistic Activities (CIAM), 194–196 Childhood obesity, 187 Children’s Rights Council (CRC), 118 Christian principles, 63 Citizen collaboration, 190 Cognitive societies, 117 Cognitive stimulation, 171 Collaborative political agenda and digital governance, 111–113 Communicative-pragmatic modalities, 81

Community, 178 Content management systems (CMS), 114 Conversations, 53 COVID-19 pandemic, 54 Cultural diversity, 21 Cyberbullying, 82 D Digital applications, 197 Digital educational governance, 109 Digital environment, 118, 178 Digital governance political agenda and, 111–114 technologies and human rights at international level, 117–120 Digital identities, 178, 199, 200, 211 Digital language, 52 Digital learning market, 116 Digital natives, 78 educational perspective, 15 identity, 16 media and communities, 15 techno-cultural framework, 15 Digital platforms as generators of capital in educational governance, 114–116 Digital policy contexts and functions of, 110 Digital revolution, 113 Digital social identity, 26 Digital society students with disabilities in educational technologies, access to, 131, 132

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 J. M. Muñoz-Rodríguez (ed.), Identity in a Hyperconnected Society, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-85788-2

225

Index

226 Digital society  (Cont) ICT, 127, 128 ICT deployment for scholars, COVID-19 on, 132–135 inclusive education, and design, 128–130 students with disabilities in inclusive education, ICT, 135, 136 Digital subjectivity, 35 Digital technologies, 45, 141, 194 Digital transformation, 195 Digital world, 6, 10, 40 formats and spaces, 42 online, 43 privacy, 41 social networks, 42, 43 social relation, 41 Disabilities digital society, students with educational technologies, access to, 131, 132 ICT, 127, 128 ICT deployment for scholars, COVID-19 on, 132–135 inclusive education, and design, 128–130 inclusive education, ICT, 135, 136 E Ecosystems, 187 Education, 68, 70 Educational activity, 189 Educational digitalisation, 109 Educational governance digital platforms as generators of capital, 114–116 Educational processes, 10 Educational relationship, 141, 145–149, 151 Educational technologies, 131, 132 Empowerment, 120 Environmental Education Center, 195 Extimacy, 81 F Face-to-face education, 133 Family, 158, 159 Family mediation process, 160 Formal education, 190 G General Comment (GC), 118 Gerontechnology

ageing and technology, 168 areas, 169 communications technologies, 169 domains of life, 168 health, 170, 171 living environments technologies, 168, 169 personal mobility, 170 self-fulfilment, 171–173 technology, 168 transportation, 170 Girard’s mimetic theory, 83 H Harvard Business Review, 215 Human reality, 10 Human rights, 110 Human Rights Council and Advisory Committee, 110 Humanities approach, 71 Humanity, 11 Hyperconnectivity, 22, 141–143, 189–191 active pedagogies, 217 classroom, 221 constructivism, 217 critical mindset, 219–222 Faculty of Culture, 220 higher education, 214, 215, 217, 220–222 institution, 218 pedagogy, 217 self-criticism, 218 social media, 219 strategies/personal teaching methods, 218 teaching methods, 217 university education, 213, 214 university life, 222 university student, 217 virtual tutorial action plans, 222 Hyper-consumption, 10 Hyper-technological societies, 9 I Identity, 25, 27, 49, 50, 52, 78, 141–143 agency perspective, 19 analog technologies, 34 analogue and digital, 35 categorical and social localisation, 16 community, 19 conflict, 17 cultural and ethnic, 17 digital technologies, 34 fracture, 17 intrinsic, 18 mechanisms, 20

Index physical intimacy, 34 racial/national, 17 shape personal, 33 social communities, 22 social practices, 20 Identity-building process, 26 Inclusive education, 128–130 ICT, 135, 136 Individual identification process, 22 Individualisation mechanisms, 24 Individualisation processes, 24 Information and communication society vulnerability, 96, 97 Information and communication technologies (ICT), 127, 128 as possible tool for inclusive education, 135, 136 for scholars with disabilities, 132–135 Instagram, 50, 52, 57, 58, 75 Instructive mediation style, 160 Intercultural discourse, 142 Intercultural pedagogy, 142 Interculturality classroom, 139 communication technologies and hyperconnection, 140 communicative digital interaction, 151 Earth, 139 educational relationship, 149, 150 human beings, 140 hyperconnectivity, 141–143 hyperculture, 140 identity, 141–143 inclusion, 150 knowledge, 139 pedagogical perspective, 151 power relations, 149 semantic and syntactic impoverishment, 140 social and human plurality, 152 social and pedagogical field, 139 social dimension of education, 150 social life, 151 technocommunicative mediations, 140 technology, 139 virtual education, 149 virtual presence, 149 vulnerability, 150 International community, 118 Internet, 79 Internet universality, 112 Internet use, 45 Intimacy, 80 Intracultural diversity, 143 Invisible learning

227 age, 206, 209 assessment, 203 communication skills, 200 digital identities, 200 digital resources and technologies, 201 educational contexts, 199 face-to-face relationships, 201 gender, 206, 208, 209 kids, 199–201, 205, 211 Latin America, 210 learning ecosystem, 199 methods, 201–203 non-formal and informal environments, 201 online social communities, 200 resources, 201–203 social and educative transformation, 199 social networks, 199–201, 203, 204 Spain, 210 types, 205 K Knowledge Society, 139 L Language, 51, 52 Last Child in the Woods, 186 Learning, 186–188, 197 Learning content management systems (LCMS), 114 M Marcissism, 56 Materialistic approach, 65 Millennium development goals (MDGs), 214 Mimetic behavior, 88 Mimetic mediation, 85 Mimetic theory, 83, 84 Mobile app, 163 Mobile phones, 187 Modesty and intimacy, 80 Multi-sensory environments, 169 Multisensory perception, 187, 188 N Narcissism, 6, 55, 56 Narcissistic behaviors, 57 Narcissistic subjects, 6 Narrativity, 20 NASA’s GLOBE program, 191–193 Nature deficit disorder, 185–187

Index

228 Neo-Baptist messages, 68 Network society authority, 148 autonomy, 147 collectivity, 148, 149 discipline, 148 education, 144 emotional education, 145 freedom, 147 functionality, 147 influence, 147 intentionality, 146 Internet, 146 intrinsic relationship, 144 object, 146 respect, 148 responsibility, 147 singularity, 148, 149 social and cultural changes, 144 subject, 146 transformation, 144 trust, 148 Neuroscience, 10 O Older adults barriers, 173, 174 developed societies, 167, 168 emotional influence, 174, 175 emotional responses, 175, 176 information technologies, 175, 176 shaping digital identity, 177 Online communication, 26 Online culture, 88 Online interactions social identity and, 97, 98 Optical tools, 195 Oxford English Dictionary, 87 Oxford Internet Institute research, 199 P Pandemic-induced model shift, 134 Pedagogical redirection, 10 Pedagogy, 28 educational perspective, 29 educational process, 29 principle, 30 Performativity, 21 Personal identity, 23 humanisation, 3 pedagogical levity, 3

perpetual connectivity, 3 Pessimism, 29 Philosophy of higher education, 215 Philo-technological reductionism neuroscience, 10 social advances, 9 technological system, 9 Photo-trapping cameras, 195 Physical space, 194 Plants, 190 Political agenda and digital governance, 111–114 Post-metaphysical era, 82 Postmodern relativism, 64 Post-truth, 61, 62, 64, 67, 72, 82 politics, 63 Promethean mismatch, 7 Psychological problem, 39 Psychosocial development of adolescents social networks and, 98, 99 Publicity-privacy-intimacy, 23 R Regional Ministry of Education of Andalusia, 114 Rights, Openness, Accessibility and Multistakeholder participation (ROAM) for Internet universality, 112 S Secret, 45 in education, 46 Secrets, 37 Self-fulfilment, 171–173 Selfie, 49, 50, 58 conversation, 51 human intercourse, 51 identity, 49 language, 53 Oakeshott quotes, 51 Taylor’s work, 53 technological, 52 Self-regulation processes, 24 Senior Technology Acceptance and Adoption model (STAM), 173 Sexual/gender identities, 80 Shaping personal subjectivity, 44 Sharing, 37, 38, 43 Smartphones, 169 Smart technologies, 177

Index Social and educational reality, 197 Social and personal development, 158 Social expression, 25 Social group, 187 Social identity and online interactions, 97, 98 Social imagination, 64 Social industry, 65 Social media, 25, 27, 50, 53, 54, 56, 64–66, 70, 76, 77, 80, 81, 83–86, 89, 96 adolescents, 77 education, 67 infrastructure, 65 language, 76 mental and spiritual health, 77 networks, 66 objectification and quantification, 65 smartphones, 76 teenagers experiment, 77 Social networks, 45, 58, 65, 158, 185, 187, 199 and psychosocial development of adolescents, 98, 99 Social network sites (SNSs), 50 Social stimulation, 171 Social vulnerability youngest generations in, 95, 96 Socialisation communication, 155 family, 158, 159 forming identity, 156 gender, 155 gender stereotypes, 157 Internet, 155 media, 156 parental mediation and control, 160, 161 peer group, 156 reinforcement, 155 self-concept, 156 social changes, 156 social environments, 155 social group, 156 social networks, 155–158 socio-educational alternatives and responses, 161–164 stereotypes, 158 virtual environment, 156 Socialization, 75, 89 Special educational needs (SEN), 128 Stereotypes, 158

229 T Technological achievements, 69 Technological gadgets, 7 consumer society, 8 discomfort, 7 human communication, 7 socio-cultural practices, 7 Technology, 6, 186, 189, 191, 193, 197 Technology Adoption Models (TAM), 173 Teenager’s identity, 52 Teenagers, 77 Teenagers’ identity, 50 Television, 42 Traditional mechanisms, 16 Transportation, 170 Triangular relationship, 112 Truthfulness, 67, 68 post-truth, 62 Truths, 82 and politics, 63 types, 63 Type II diabetes, 187 U UN Secretary General, 110 UNESCO, 111, 128 V Video-conferencing tools, 190 Virtual assistant, 186 Virtual environment, 159 Volatile identities, 5 Vulnerability, 104 frequencies and percentages, 102 gender, identification perceived by, 104 information and communication society, 96, 97 method, 100, 101 perceived influence, 103 percentages of hours of connection per day, 102 study, 100 W WhatsApp, 195 Wikipedia, 82 Y Young people’s identities

230 influencers as influential figures, construction of, 99, 100 Younger generations online identity construction in frequencies and percentages, 102 gender, identification perceived by, 104 method, 100, 101

Index perceived influences, 103 percentages of hours of connection per day, 102 study, 100 Youngest generations social vulnerability of the, 95, 96