skip to main content
10.1145/3538969.3544425acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesaresConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Requirements for an Information Privacy Pedagogy based on the Constructivism Learning Theory

Published:23 August 2022Publication History

ABSTRACT

The protection of information privacy is a timely issue, as the penetration of the Internet overwhelms every aspect of individuals' lives. Internet users’ privacy knowledge is often low, potentially due to the lack of theoretically founded methods for awareness raising and education. To address this gap, we propose the design of privacy learning activities based on a widely accepted learning theory (i.e., constructivism) derived from the education science. Since there is no specific pedagogy that guides towards specific practices for the application of the constructivism learning theory, in this paper we discuss the principles of constructivism, and we develop a set of requirements towards this direction. We adopt these requirements in information privacy learning, and we present an indicative scenario about the way that each requirement can be adopted in an educational activity, in order to result in changes of individual's privacy attitudes and behaviors.

References

  1. Pitkänen, O., & Tuunainen, V. K. (2012). Disclosing personal data socially—An empirical study on Facebook users' privacy awareness. Journal of Information Privacy and Security, 8(1), 3-29.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. Papaioannou, T., Tsohou, A., & Karyda, M. (2021). Forming digital identities in social networks: the role of privacy concerns and self-esteem. Information & Computer Security.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Soumelidou, A., & Tsohou, A. (2019). Effects of privacy policy visualization on users’ information privacy awareness level: The case of Instagram. Information Technology & People.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Capistrano, E. P. S., & Chen, J. V. (2015). Information privacy policies: The effects of policy characteristics and online experience. Computer Standards & Interfaces, 42, 24-31.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Vemou, K., Karyda, M., & Kokolakis, S. (2014, October). Directions for raising privacy awareness in SNS platforms. In Proceedings of the 18th Panhellenic conference on informatics (pp. 1-6).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Soumelidou, A., & Tsohou, A. (2021). Towards the creation of a profile of the information privacy aware user through a systematic literature review of information privacy awareness. Telematics and Informatics, 61, 101592.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Gerber, N., Gerber, P., & Volkamer, M. (2018). Explaining the privacy paradox: A systematic review of literature investigating privacy attitude and behavior. Computers & security, 77, 226-261.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. IAAP (2017), The GDPR awareness guide, Retrieved May 4, 2022 from https://iapp.org/resources/article/gdpr-awareness-guide/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Informational Commissioner's Office, Retrieved May 4, 2022 from https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/accountability-framework/training-and-awareness/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Bada, S. O., & Olusegun, S. (2015). Constructivism learning theory: A paradigm for teaching and learning. Journal of Research & Method in Education, 5(6).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Richardson, V. (2003). Constructivist Pedagogy. Teachers College Record, 105(9), 1623–1640.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Wilson, M., & Hash, J. (2003). Building an information technology security awareness and training program. NIST Special publication, 800(50), 1-39.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Tsohou, A., Kokolakis, S., Karyda, M., & Kiountouzis, E. (2008). Investigating information security awareness: research and practice gaps. Information Security Journal: A Global Perspective, 17(5-6), 207-227.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Ertmer, P. A., & Newby, T. J. (2013). Behaviorism, Cognitivism, Constructivism: Comparing Critical Features from an Instructional Design Perspective. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 26(2), 43–71.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Bereiter, C. (1994). Constructivism, socioculturalism, and Popper's world 3. Educational researcher, 23(7).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Bednar, A. K., Cunningham, D. J., Duffy, T. M., & Perry, J. D. (1992). Theory into practice: How do we link? In T. M. Duffy & D. H. Jonassen (Eds.), Constructivism and the technology of instruction (pp. 17-34). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Siraj-Blatchford, I. (2010). A focus on pedagogy: Case studies of effective practice. In Early childhood matters (pp. 165-181). Routledge.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Alexander, R. (2008). Pedagogy, curriculum and culture. Pedagogy and practice: Culture and identities, 3-27.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Gage, N. L. (1985). Hard Gains in the Soft Sciences: The Case of Pedagogy.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Willis, J. (2000). The Maturing of Constructivist Instructional Design: Some Basic Principles That Can Guide Practice.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Heinich, R. (1984). The proper study of instructional technology. Educational Communication and Technology Journal, 32(2) 67-87Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. Reigeluth, C. M. (1989). Educational technology at the crossroads: New mindsets and new directions. Educational Technology Research and Development, 37(1), 1042-1629.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. Lebow, D. (1993). Constructivist values for instructional systems design: Five principles toward a new mindset. Educational Technology Research and Development, 41(3) 4-16.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. Honebein, P.C. (1996). Seven goals for the design of constructivist learning environments.in Constructivist Learning Environments: Case Studies in Instructional Design. Brent G. Wilson (Ed.). Englewood Cliffs: Educational Technology Publications: 11-24.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Partlow, K. M., & Gibbs, W. J. (2003). Indicators of constructivist principles in internet-based courses. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 14(2).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. Jonassen, D.H., Peck, K.L., & Wilson, B.G. (1999). Learning with technology. Columbus, OH: Prentice Hall.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Driscoll, M.P. (2000). Psychology of learning for instruction. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Dornisch, M.M, & Land, S.M. (2002). A conceptual framework for the integration of multiple perspectives with distributed learning environments. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 14(1), 3-27.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  29. Cunningham, D. J., & Duffy, T. M., Knuth, RA (1993). The textbook of the future. Hypertext: a psychological perspective. London: Horwood Publishing.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Knuth, R. A., & Cunningham, D. J. (1993). Tools for constructivism. In Designing environments for constructive learning (pp. 163-188). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  31. Tam, M. (2000). Constructivism, instructional design, and technology: Implications for transforming distance learning. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 3(2), 50-60.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Smith, J. K. (1993). After the demise of empiricism: The problem of judging social and educational inquiry. Ablex Publishing Corporation.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Willis, J. (1995). A recursive, reflective instructional design model based on constructivist-interpretivist theory. Educational technology, 35(6), 5-23.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Savery, J. R., and Duffy, T. M. (1995). Problem based learning: An instructional model and its constructivist framework. Educational technology, 35(5).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. Pande, M., & Bharathi, S. V. (2020). Theoretical foundations of design thinking–A constructivism learning approach to design thinking. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 36, 100637.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  36. Goolishian, H. A., & Winderman, L. (1988). Constructivism, autopoiesis and problem determined systems. The Irish journal of psychology, 9(1), 130-143.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Harjali, H. (2019). Building constructivist learning environment at senior high school in Indonesia. The Qualitative Report, 24(9), 2197-2214.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. Waxer, M., and Morton, J.B. (2012) Cognitive Conflict and Learning. In: Seel N.M. (eds) Encyclopedia of the Sciences of Learning. Springer, Boston, MA.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  39. Finn, R.L., Wright, D. and Friedewald, M. (2013), Seven Types of Privacy, In: Gutwirth S., Leenes R., de Hert P., Poullet Y. (eds), European Data Protection: Coming of Age, pp 3-32, Springer, Dordrecht.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. Kokolakis, S. (2017). Privacy attitudes and privacy behaviour: A review of current research on the privacy paradox phenomenon. Computers & security, 64.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. Cover Your Tracks, A Project of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, Retrieved May 4, 2022 from https://coveryourtracks.eff.org/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  42. Ghostery, a privacy and security-related browser extension and mobile browser application, Retrieved May 4, 2022 from https://www.ghostery.com.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. Jonassen, D. H. (1991). Objectivism versus constructivism: do we need a new philosophical paradigm? Journal of Educational Research, 39 (3).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Requirements for an Information Privacy Pedagogy based on the Constructivism Learning Theory

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Other conferences
        ARES '22: Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Availability, Reliability and Security
        August 2022
        1371 pages
        ISBN:9781450396707
        DOI:10.1145/3538969

        Copyright © 2022 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 23 August 2022

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article
        • Research
        • Refereed limited

        Acceptance Rates

        Overall Acceptance Rate228of451submissions,51%

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader

      HTML Format

      View this article in HTML Format .

      View HTML Format