to digital technology. It becomes a principle of activity in an uncertain world, a critical and social component in support of education. This research contributes to its understanding and its reflexive inscription in information, “academic” and societal behaviors.
Franc MORANDI
September 2021
1 1 Beck, U. (1986). La société du risque : sur la voie d’une autre modernité. Flammarion, Paris.
2 2 Capelle, C. (2018). Rapport final de projet de recherche eR!SK – risques numériques et école 2.0. Research report, IMS Laboratory, University of Bordeaux, Bordeaux.
3 3 Citton, Y. (2017). The Ecology of Attention. Polity Press, Cambridge.
4 4 Cordier, A. (2017). Les enseignants, pris dans des injonctions paradoxales. Hermès, La Revue, 78(2), 179-186.
5 5 Bruner speaks of implicit theories: “It is not enough to describe what the child is doing: we must be able to determine what they think they are doing and why”. Bruner, J. (1998). Le développement de l’enfant : savoir-faire, savoir dire. Presses Universitaires de France, Paris.
6 6 Dioni, C. (2008). Métier d’élève, métier d’enseignant à l’ère numérique : rapport de recherche pour l’INRP. INRP, Paris.
7 7 Capelle, C. and Rouissi, S. (2018). Représentations et stratégies de jeunes enseignants face aux réseaux sociaux. Les Cahiers du numérique, 14(3–4), 13–34.
8 8 RUDII: Représentation Usages et Développement des Ingénieries de l’Information, IMS: laboratoire de l’Intégration du Matériau au Système (IMS, CNRS UMR 5218). CNRS, l’Université de Bordeaux, INSPE d’Aquitaine (2016–2019). Projet eRISK: “Risques numériques et école 2.0 Éducation des jeunes générations et responsabilité des enseignants”. Hypothèses [Online]. Available at: https://erisk.hypotheses.org/category/projet.
9 9 Lave, J. and Wenger, E. (1988). Situated Learning. Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge University Press, New York.
Introduction
In recent years, the notion of digital risk has invaded the media. Numerous publications suggest that digital technology is a source of all sorts of threats, whether at the informational, psycho-social, ethical, cognitive, health, technical, socio-economic, legal or environmental level. For example, we can cite the denunciation of the risks of addiction and “techno-addiction” linked to screens among young people1 or the impoverishment of reading practices2 and thought3. This risk-based approach tends to solidify the description of individual and social practices in categories that do not reflect their evolution and diversity, nor the capacity of actors to innovate, which implies taking risks.
The intention of this book is to go beyond a stigmatizing approach to risk. Instead, it is to consider it as the center of discourses, representations and practices. It is necessary to deconstruct and understand it in order to propose tailored support.
According to Ulrich Beck, “risks designate a future that must be prevented from happening”. Real and imaginary at the same time, they are, in his view, “an event that has not yet occurred which motivates action”4. This “growing appearance of risk in the world” is also denounced by Patrick Peretti-Watel. For him, risk “is a danger without cause, a damage without fault, which nevertheless becomes predictable and calculable”5. The perception of digital risks therefore motivates individuals to act, but how? And in what ways? How do they critically assess their practices?
The term digital risk is often used to designate the dangers linked to the security of computer systems, particularly in computer science and management science. The field of law is also concerned notably around the problems of information security, personal data protection6 and e-reputation7. Other publications also concern ethical issues, in sensitive areas of personal information protection, such as health.
In psychology, digital risks are treated from the point of view of cognitive overload8 and addictions9. The notion of informational risk is often linked to knowledge management10, problems of manipulation and critical evaluation of sources11 and information asymmetry12. For the manager of a company, the digital risk is linked to the security of data, strategic information or the reputation of the company.
With regard to education and the perception of risks associated with the use of digital technologies, a report published by Christine Dioni in 2008, (The student’s job and the teacher’s job in the digital age), emphasized the problems of discrepancy between the perceptions of students and teachers, as well as between mutual perceptions and the reality of practices13. Just over 10 years later, what is the situation now?
The stakes of digital practices in terms of learning14 and the socioeconomic risks linked to the digital divide15 lead the actors of education to ponder effective means of confronting them. The idea of media risks is also used to denounce inappropriate content, such as violence, incitement to hatred or pornography on the Internet, calling for the establishment of standards16. The risk of ideological and political manipulation is currently back in the media spotlight through the analysis of conspiracy theories, the topic of “fake news” and young people’s susceptibility to propaganda.
For the educator, risk is also linked to the illicit use of information by students, in particular, the use of information that falls under law (law on the freedom of the press of 1881, law of July 13, 1990, known as the Gayssot law, prohibiting the dissemination of information of a revisionist, racist or sexist nature, or that promotes intolerance, for example). Many other uses can be problematic, such as disrespecting others, the privacy of teachers, education staff or other students. So-called “cyberbullying” situations via Web 2.0 tools are also problems that educators have to deal with (messages or video broadcasting via personalized and live channels on Snapchat or Periscope, for example). The digital practices of young people are all the more complex as they mix creativity and skills development, intimacy and self-exposure. What these multidisciplinary works have in common is that they seek to identify what digital technology does to the individual and to society in different contexts (educational, professional, political, etc.). The objective of this book is to compare the discourses on risk with the practices and representations of the actors in different professional fields and in the educational field, and subsequently, to explain their stakes in a digital context.
Our assumption is that individuals are armed with resilience17 in a changing world. The perception of digital risks can be a resource or a lever to develop a critical culture in a digital context18. The contributions in this book present the means we have today to move from risk perception to risk information, from information to knowledge, and from knowledge to action19. They will be of particular interest to teachers, trainers, mediators, information and media professionals.
The book is divided into three sections. The first section deals with the perception of risks in education and shows how the Internet currently constitutes an ecosystem in which the relationship between the teacher and their students is inevitably positioned.
Chapter 1 shows the impact of alarmist discourses on educational practices through a study on the representations of digital risks among young teachers. These discourses seem to have an important resonance with teachers when they start their career and can dissuade them from implementing any digital practice
