Exploring sustainable learning and practice of digital citizenship: Education and place-based challenges

Abstract

Digital citizenship is broadly viewed as the ability to participate effectively in online communities. Since information and communications technology is pivotal to societal participation and development, the role of digital citizenship is significant. Formalizations guiding learning and practice for digital citizenship foster ideals and concepts that are essential to development and participation. Because learning and practice occur within wider political, socioeconomic and educational settings, associated place-based struggles stand to influence their sustainability. These struggles are particularly challenging in developing and post-conflict countries. This article operationalizes notions of sustainable practice and learning for digital citizenship and explores associated challenges within wider environmental settings. Taking Lebanon as a case, data indicate that place-based challenges within socioeconomic, political and educational settings compromise sustainable digital citizenship practice and learning among public school students. Recommendations for moving forward are offered in light of this finding.

Keywords

Digital citizenship education Lebanon place-based challenges sustainable learning and practice

Purpose and scope

As information and communications technology (ICT) has become pivotal to societal participation and development, digital citizenship demands attention in related discourse. Mossberger et al. (2008) describe digital citizenship as ‘… the ability to participate in society online’ (p. 1). According to Ohler (2010), digital citizenship is tightly connected to citizenship and to local, global and online community issues. It essentially involves comprehending the opportunities and responsibilities of the digital age. Mossberger et al. (2008) define digital citizens as ‘those who use technology frequently, who use technology for political information to fulfil their civic duty, and who use technology at work for economic gain’ (p. 2). Therefore, in this work, digital citizenship practice is defined as practice that is continuous and in line with these core aims and ideals, including digital rights and responsibilities, civic and economic participation, and responsible behaviour. Learning for digital citizenship is significant here as it aims to foster such practice. According to Ribble (2012), ‘Today, more than any time in history, students need to become global citizens, and the use of technology provides a conduit for those connections. The themes within digital citizenship help educators to explain these ideas to students’ (p. 151).

Moreover, modern citizenship encompasses complex political and socioeconomic challenges (Isin and Turner, 2002), and struggles of this nature are particularly challenging for post-conflict areas and developing countries (Quaynor, 2012; United Nations, 2015). Smith and Sobel (2010) underscore these challenges in the relationship between citizenship and place-based education in connection to community issues. It then follows that consideration of these place-based struggles or wider environmental challenges is warranted in citizenship discussions. For educational research, Quaynor (2015b) emphasizes the researcher’s role in looking at influences on citizenship education that lie in the wider environment rather than solely in schools and in civics classrooms. As a core part of citizenship with similar overarching ideals, digital citizenship merits these same considerations.

Because learning and practice happen within the wider environment, which encompasses political, socioeconomic and educational settings, the exploration of place-based struggles in relation to learning and practice is indispensable. Graham et al. (2015) emphasize the importance of sustainable learning in these terms. They characterize sustainable learning as learning that lasts, is relevant, is inclusive, and pays attention to ‘students’ cultures and their relationships with places, families, and communities’ (p. 2). Drawing on Graham et al. (2015) and Quaynor (2015b), sustainable learning for digital citizenship is operationalized in this study as learning that lasts in practice, is relevant to place-based settings, is supported by the wider environment and is inclusive in terms of access.

The frequent use of technology, as highlighted by Mossberger et al. (2008), indicates sustained practice in digital citizenship activities. Enabling any form of continuous or sustained digital citizenship practice calls at the very least for access to ICT, which is subject to place-based challenges. Correspondingly, sustainability and place-based challenges are intertwined with development (United Nations, 2015), just as they are with practice in digital citizenship. Furthermore, practice must be in line with key digital citizenship themes and ideals that can be formally taught (Ribble, 2015) but are negotiated within wider environmental settings. Based on these notions, sustainable practice in digital citizenship is operationalized in this article as continuous practice that upholds associated ideals with support from the wider environment.

This research explores sustainable learning and practice of digital citizenship in the context of wider environmental settings. Environmental settings affecting Lebanese public schools and student approaches to digital citizenship in this context are studied as a case through primary data collected for this research. This work is guided by the following exploratory research question: How do place-based socioeconomic, political and educational settings stand to influence sustainable learning and practice in digital citizenship?

Literature

The literature presents place-based challenges in political, socioeconomic and educational settings with potential implications for sustainable practice and learning in digital citizenship. Related formalizations for education in digital citizenship are outlined in this context. Finally, challenging Lebanese settings are presented as a case in point.

Sustainable digital citizenship in the context of place-based challenges

According to Mossberger et al. (2008), digital citizenship embodies the ‘capacity, belonging, and the potential for political and economic engagement in society in the information age’ (p. 2). Because engagement, or practice, and learning happen within the wider environment, place-based socioeconomic, political and educational challenges stand to create contentions between digital citizenship ideals and common practices. Also for education, Graham et al. (2015) characterize and emphasize the importance of sustainable learning for meaningful practices with a view to wider environmental settings or factors outside the learner, including educational, socioeconomic and political settings. To further explore these issues, the following subsections provide an overview of pertinent place-based challenges for sustainable practice and learning in digital citizenship.

Place-based challenges to sustainable digital citizenship practice

As operationalized in this article, sustainable practice in digital citizenship is a continuous practice that upholds digital citizenship ideals based on established themes with support from the wider environment. Political and socioeconomic place-based conditions pose challenges in achieving sustainable practice of digital citizenship, especially for developing, conflict-afflicted and post-conflict countries. These challenges, as presented below, include weaknesses in political and legal systems and access barriers to ICT and digital media.

Political weaknesses influence all areas of citizenship, including digital citizenship. Post-conflict societies struggle to build social cohesion and robust political processes (Quaynor, 2012) and corruption, nepotism and limited freedom of expression are common (Quaynor, 2015a). In a review of literature on citizenship education in post-conflict contexts, Quaynor (2012) finds that a climate of cynicism about politicians and political parties appeared prevalent in Europe and in the Middle East. These place-based political struggles challenge sustaining meaningful online political participation that upholds overarching digital citizenship notions like rights and responsibilities, inclusion and safety. This has negative ramifications for participation in both virtual and ‘real’ or physical environments.

The impact of weaknesses in political processes and governance can be further illustrated with the key digital citizenship theme of intellectual property (IP) rights and responsibilities. It is widely understood that digital media piracy is a current global issue in socioeconomic, political and legal spheres (Cvetkovski, 2014). Higher piracy rates in developing countries (Business Software Alliance [BSA], 2016) have in part been associated with defunct legal systems, where often the only recourse for preventing piracy is the failing legal system, and ‘governments are put in difficult positions whereby they end up negotiating for or even protecting piracy’ (Chesterman and Lipman, 1988). Therefore, policy and enforcement are compromised, creating contention between digital citizenship ideals and practices for rights and responsibilities in the wider environment, arguably influencing their soundness.

Lack of access equity for developing countries can also be a factor in circumventing citizenship ideals. Ineffective governance and inadequate sustainable development can lead to shortcomings in infrastructure, which impede access to ICT. Access is highlighted in Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 9 (United Nations, 2015) and is a key requirement of digital citizenship. Furthermore, due to socioeconomic struggles, some cannot afford access. Such barriers to participation in digital life have created a form of exclusion or digital divide. The divide is widespread, varies among countries and is associated with development and socioeconomic problems (Mardikyan et al., 2015). Specifically, the price and availability of ICT and digital media products are problematic. To promote legal access, thus sustaining digital citizenship ideals in practice, quality services and affordable prices are needed for equity. In exploring online media viewing in three countries, South Korea, Brazil and India, Evans et al. (2016) state that global, place-based, ideal and actual dimensions are linked to how access and choice offer an ideal that may suffer shortcomings due to weaknesses in ICT infrastructure. High prices for media products, low income and a lack of affordable access to digital technologies motivate global media piracy (Karaganis, 2011). In a roundtable discussion, Cross states that piracy ‘shows itself in the everyday behavior of people struggling to survive … I see it as an expression of contentious politics that takes place not primarily in street protests but in household economies and informal social dynamics’ (Lobato and Thomas, 2012: 452–453). Thus, to bolster legal access over pirated access and provide supportive circumstances for sustainable digital citizenship practices, more work on equitable provision of access to ICT and legal digital materials is necessary.

Place-based challenges for sustainable learning in digital citizenship

Education in digital citizenship teaches students how to be good digital citizens; this includes activities ranging from engaging positively with others online to preserving IP rights (O’Brien and Stavert, 2011). It embodies ideas such as ‘safety and security, educational enhancement, ethical and legal behaviours, and becoming an effective member of digital communities’ (Hollandsworth et al., 2011: 38). As operationalized in the first section of this article, sustainable learning for digital citizenship is learning that lasts in practice, is relevant to place-based settings, is supported by the wider environment and is inclusive in terms of access. The following paragraphs provide further insight into these notions.

Prevalent education formalizations for digital citizenship include Ribble’s nine elements and the International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE) standards. Formalizations can help guide educators in supporting the development of sustainable digital community practices by fostering citizenship ideals. Ribble’s nine elements for digital citizenship comprehensively include digital access, digital commerce, digital communication, digital literacy, digital etiquette, digital law, digital rights and responsibilities, digital health and wellness, and digital security (Ribble, 2015). Core citizenship notions and values are inherent in these elements. For instance, digital access for full electronic participation in society is part of element 1. Access serves not only to determine inclusion and the extent of continuous citizenship participation but also as a prerequisite for inclusive learning in digital citizenship (Ohler, 2010; Ribble, 2015). Therefore, without inclusive access, learning for digital citizenship cannot be sustainable.

Another element, digital law, emphasizes IP rights and responsibilities. Undesirable behaviours such as ‘using file-sharing sites’, ‘pirating software’, ‘subverting digital rights management (DRM) technologies’ and ‘downloading copyrighted music from social networking or file sharing sites’ are described to illustrate illegal acts with a view to cultivating behaviours which sustain justice and prosperity in online communities. To sustain learning and relevance of these notions, IP law must also be upheld in the wider environment. This would appear problematic particularly in developing countries, where piracy rates are particularly high (BSA, 2016), equitable access is lacking (Karaganis, 2011) and governance is weak (Quaynor, 2012).

Furthermore, digital etiquette, which necessitates maintaining positive interactions with others, using respectful language and not engaging in hurtful actions, further supports favourable community ideals. However, unfavourable behaviours, such as cyberbulling, affect a significant number of young people (Patchin and Hinduja, 2013). Howard (2015) remarks on the importance of observing afterschool space, where the Internet, a plethora of applications and peers foster informal learning and the negotiation of ideals for digital citizenship. Smith and Sobel (2010) emphasize the tight link between citizenship and place-based education that recognizes community issues.

Overall, key themes in digital citizenship formalizations are generally similar in notion. The ISTE standard 2 for digital citizenship is a widely recognized formalization, which must be noted before moving on. To meet this standard, ‘Students recognize the rights, responsibilities and opportunities of living, learning and working in an interconnected digital world, and they act and model in ways that are safe, legal and ethical’ (ISTE, 2016). Key notions under this standard include digital identity and reputation; positive, safe, legal and ethical behaviour; an understanding of and respect for the rights and obligations of using and sharing IP; and maintaining digital privacy and security. Details on other notable formalizations with similar themes are found in United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO, 2015).

Ultimately, where educational settings face harsh challenges and shortcomings, learning for digital citizenship may not be sustainable or may be completely absent. For instance, the digital divide impacts access to ICT, a prerequisite to sustainable digital citizenship learning, on a place-based scale (Mardikyan et al., 2015). Furthermore, sustainable learning in digital citizenship is tied to implementing effective and well-rounded curricula, inclusive learning for all (Ribble, 2015) and support from the wider environment. Developing and post-conflict countries face problems in this area and have trouble providing quality education (Quaynor, 2012; United Nations, 2015). In this context, the next section presents marked place-based challenges for Lebanon that influence sustainable learning and practice of digital citizenship.

Challenges in the case of Lebanon

Sustainable learning and practice for digital citizenship face challenges in the Lebanese public schooling system and surrounding settings. Challenges include political weaknesses, socioeconomic difficulties, an outdated citizenship curriculum, no formal ICT standards or curriculum and uneven access to ICT in public schools.

Lebanon is a developing country that suffered an extended Civil War from 1975 to 1990 and a war between Hezbollah and Israel in 2006. Governance has been weak and observed an extended presidential vacuum from 25 May 2014 to 31 October 2016. In surveys, students expressed a lack of confidence in Lebanon’s politics and teachers remarked that the exercise of power in Lebanon was in contention with democratic citizenship ideals (Akar, 2007). Difficulty in developing robust and trusted institutions for governance and education is characteristic of such countries (Quaynor, 2012) and has ramifications for digital citizenship. For example, the software piracy rate for 2015 was over 70% (BSA, 2016), and limited available research indicates systemic shortcomings in addressing piracy cases, including inadequate enforcement of sanctions and weaknesses in court systems (International Intellectual Property Alliance [IIPA], 2012). Furthermore, due to the strife in neighbouring Syria, there are currently around 1 million documented Syrian refugees in Lebanon (UNHCR, 2018). Public health resources water supplies and sanitation facilities, which had shortcomings even before the refugee crisis, are now under extreme pressure (Blanchet et al., 2016). Moreover, 150,000 additional non-Lebanese children enrolled in public schools in the first quarter of 2016 alone (UNHCR, 2018), taxing public school resources. Settings like these constitute challenges in meeting SDGs (United Nations, 2015) and difficulties in providing the minimum of quality education (Quaynor, 2012).

To address education in more detail, the Lebanese National Curriculum (LNC), mandatory in all public schools, requires attention. The Lebanese National Civics Curriculum (LNCC), which addresses citizenship themes, is assigned 1 hour per week in the lesson schedule. With the objective of building social accord after the Civil War, it outlines nine overall aims for civic education, covering a range of topics, including Lebanese and Arab identities, democracy, civil participation, dialogue and conflict resolution, work ethics and equality (Akar, 2007). Although the Ministry of Education and Higher Education (MEHE) undertook a revision of curricular aims for shifting from content- to competency-based outcomes (Ministry of Education and Higher Education [MEHE], 2012), the curriculum and aligned textbooks are still outdated (from 1997), lacking themes related to the contemporary world such as digital citizenship. In addition, research shows that direct instruction and memorization rather than competency building are predominant classroom approaches in delivering the programme (Akar, 2016; Quaynor, 2012; United Nations Development Programme [UNDP] et al., 2008). Because digital citizenship is a highly practical competency, limiting learning approaches to memorization of content is unfitting.

It is therefore critical for the LNC to be revamped to provide opportunities for sustainable learning, particularly for digital citizenship. Ribble (2012) duly emphasizes that developments in technology give rise to new matters that change the foundation of education and effective integration of digital citizenship into the curriculum is tied to the development of well-rounded, current and relevant curricula: ‘Digital citizenship is not a topic separate from the rest of the curriculum, but spans across all areas of education’ (Ribble, 2012: 151). In addition, Ohler (2011) states that values must be defined for both the virtual and physical worlds of local communities. Without these definitions, sustainable digital citizenship learning and practice are compromised. The current LNC (see MEHE, 1997) falls short in addressing the virtual world, having no formal standards of curricula for ICT or digital citizenship.

In its National Educational Technology Strategic Plan (NETSP) for 2012–2017, the Lebanese MEHE has noted digital citizenship with a reference to the ISTE 2007 standards (MEHE, 2012), but the degree of student and teacher access to ICT in public schools is uneven, with some schools having no access at all for students (MEHE, 2012). Ohler (2010) highlights that Internet access is critical for teaching and learning about digital citizenship. The digital divide among Lebanese public schools, along with a lack of quality curricula, presents challenges for equitable access, inclusive learning and relevant learning and thus for sustainable learning. Simultaneously, if students have access to technology outside of school but not in school, then according to Ohler (2011), this is a ‘two-lives’ approach, which is undesirable; it leaves students without training in digital citizenship themes and deprives them of learning opportunities ‘which address personal, social, and environmental effects of a technological lifestyle’ (Ohler, 2011: 25).

Research design

Primary data for this work were drawn from field research at 17 public schools during the academic year 2015–2016. The sample schools covered geographically distributed areas of four out of eight Lebanese governorates: Beirut (eight schools), Mount Lebanon (three schools), North Lebanon (five schools) and South Lebanon (one school). Initially, 30 schools were randomly selected from a comprehensive list of public schools serving a range of grade levels. Ministerial permission to approach these schools was granted; however, a total of 13 schools, many of which were in the South and Mount Lebanon governorates, individually declined to participate. This limited the sample as described above. Due to project time constraints, it was not possible to wait for permission to access further schools.

To ensure suitability of the survey content and language level, the lowest participating grade level was grade 6. Students from one class, selected at convenience by the principal of each participating school, took the survey as a class activity. In total, 156 students completing their basic education (grades 6–9) and 184 students at the secondary level (grades 10–12) participated with a 100% response rate, yielding a sample of 340 students. With permission from school principals, the survey was done as a class activity overseen by teachers or supervisors from the schools and field researchers. Students received a study overview, were guaranteed anonymity and given the option to withdraw at any time before completing the activity.

Of the 17 participating schools, 11 had no Internet access for students, and 6 of those 11 schools had no computers for student use. In total, 264 participants did not have Internet access provided at school. At schools where computers and/or Internet access were available, the setup varied. One had only a single computer for the whole school. Others had a computer lab. Students at these schools would generally have around 1 hour of access per week.

Surveys included a series of five questions about student Internet use and digital citizenship practices, such as actions connected to good citizenship, media downloading and digital etiquette. The survey activity was conducted in Arabic; completed surveys were coded and professionally translated into English. A custom software was used to parse the survey data into a manageable format with codes to facilitate quantitative work and eliciting themes. Keyword density calculations were run to assist in the process of finding and tagging themes. The context of these keywords was examined for each record. Revision of the themes and associated keywords was repeated thrice.

Findings and discussion

This section discusses findings from the literature and primary data. The discussion centres around themes extracted from the data: Internet and digital media uses and access; the need for student agency: online activities embodying good citizenship; conflicting notions: law and IP rights; and digital etiquette and footprint: the need to establish values for the virtual community. These themes are discussed in terms of sustainable practices, learning and wider environmental influences.

Internet and digital media: uses and access

A total of 319 students (93.8%) reported that they use the Internet in some capacity. Students could note up to three activity types they most commonly engage in online (see Table 1). Associated with the first type, research and information, were pursuits such as learning, knowledge collection, education, and homework or school research. Students expressed a desire to use the Internet to learn and broaden their horizons. For entertainment and cultural media, activities primarily included playing games and downloading or streaming music and movies. Finally, communication and social-media-type activities took the general direction of communicating with friends and relatives. The following excerpts are representative:

Table 1.

Top 3 Internet usage types for students of Lebanese public schools.

Type of use	Count
Research and information	175
Communication and social media	172
Entertainment and cultural media	89

Chatting with my friends, research, playing. (School 14, Student 264, Grade 9)

Chatting with friends and relatives in Lebanon and abroad, research for school, listening to music. (School 11, Student 225, Grade 11)

Only 17 students (5%) mentioned using the Internet to keep up with the news or what is happening in their country and the world at large. Thus, the data indicate Internet use to support retrieve political information to perform civic duties, defined in Mossberger et al. (2008) as key to digital citizenship, by accessing the news, and keeping up with public affairs was not a top-ranking activity for students. Two students in total specifically mentioned following politics:

Chatting with friends, keeping up with the news, searching for information. (School 8, Student 174, Grade 11)

Research for homework, keeping up with what is happening in the world, entertainment. (School 16, Student 300, Grade 11)

Given that 264 students (77.6%) had no Internet access through schools, for the 319 students who reported answers in the top 3 usages in Table 1, the majority would have to find their own means of accessing the Internet. This is significant as Internet use that takes place mostly in the afterschool space fosters learning that occurs outside of school settings and is heavily influenced by the wider environment (Howard, 2015). Returning to Quaynor (2015b), the researcher’s role in looking at influences on citizenship education that lie in the wider environment rather than solely in schools and in civics classrooms is paramount. The unevenness of Internet and computer access among schools also creates a digital divide among students of different schools. Furthermore, if students have access to technology outside of school but not in school, then according to Ohler (2011), this is a ‘two-lives’ approach which is undesirable; it leaves students without training in digital citizenship themes and deprives them of learning opportunities ‘which address personal, social, and environmental effects of a technological lifestyle’ (Ohler, 2011: 25). Therefore, as emphasized in the research question for this study, how place-based environmental settings, namely, socioeconomic, political and educational, stand to influence sustainable learning and practice in digital citizenship is of primary concern here.

The remaining survey questions focus on online student behaviours and digital citizenship notions. Each item presented a closed-ended answer choice followed by an open-ended part, where students could choose to explain their answers. Table 2 shows the quantitative results for the closed-ended answers in questions 2–5. These results and the open-ended part are discussed thematically in the next subsections.

Table 2.

Survey results for questions 2–5: online behaviours and digital citizenship notions among Lebanese public school students.

Question	Yes	No	Maybe	No answer
2. Have you done anything online that made you a good citizen?	146	169	8	17
3. Is it wrong to download music and movies for free when you are supposed to pay for them?	61	190	58	31
4. Have you ever said or done anything bad to somebody over the Internet?	42	277	6	15
5. Have you ever posted stories, images or recordings of yourself that could upset others?	40	283	5	12

The need for improved student agency: online student activities embodying good citizenship

For question 2, 146 (42.9%) said they had done something online that made them a good citizen, while 169 students (49.7%) said they had not (see Table 2). For positive responses, the activities included sharing and supporting campaigns, such as anti-violence and anti-sectarian initiatives. Support for waste clean-up campaigns and charitable organizations was also reported. Other activities were sharing patriotic posts about Lebanon, including the national anthem, supporting the army, Independence Day and protecting Lebanon’s environment. Some explained they shared religious posts containing videos, pictures or texts, which they believed indicated good citizenship:

Yes, I posted picture to support #youstink campaign to get rid of piled up waste. (School 7, Student 127, Grade 10)

Yes, I posted the Lebanese national anthem. (School 16, Student 309, Grade 11)

Yes, I posted a photo calling for unity among all sects. (School 3, Student 76, Grade 8)

Yes, I posted some religious pictures and movies, and that made me a good person. (School 4, Student 105, Grade 6)

Yes, I shared a video about the Red Cross. (School 10, Student 208, Grade 10)

Yes, sometimes I post invitations for activities to help the sick, like encouraging the support of cancer patients by participating in a marathon. (School 9, Student 188, Grade 10)

I posted some videos on Facebook urging rich people to help the refugees. (School 3, Student, 67, Grade 8)

The data, however, do not show the extent of support or how actively engaged students were. ‘Good citizenship’ activities involved sharing and posting. Two-way communication and depth of engagement were not apparent in students’ answers. For instance, only four students reported personally creating posted materials, one reported signing a petition against the dog meat trade and one reported donating to the Red Cross online:

Yes, I did a project about the risks of environmental pollution at school and uploaded it on social media. (School 7, Student 146, Grade 10)

I do my best to oppose racism and bigotry and encourage everyone to love each other regardless of their race. I am preparing a project to make short clips that encourage peace and love. (School 16, Student 300, Grade 11)

I created a page for Gaza during the war. (School 8, Students 149 and 164, Grade 10)

Yes, I donated to the Red Cross online. (School 10, Student 217, Grade 10)

Yes, I invented a game and uploaded it to Google Play. (School 9, Student 194, Grade 10)

Yes, I signed a petition against killing dogs and eating them because it is a barbaric behaviour. Also, I participated in awareness campaigns. (School 12, Student 241, Grade 8)

It is significant that almost half of the participants reported they had never done anything online to make them good citizens. This alludes to shortcomings in sustainable practice of digital citizenship. Returning to Mossberger et al. (2008) and Ohler (2010), using the Internet to support informed civic engagement, deal with community issues and realize online opportunities and responsibilities is at the heart of digital citizenship. According to ISTE (2016), an emphasis on student agency in the digital citizenship standard focuses on responsibilities, rights and ‘communal investment’. Carrie James states that much work needs to be done to scaffold youth to think of themselves as digital citizens and to foster consideration of wider responsibilities and the effect of their actions in online communities (Hollandsworth et al., 2011, personal communication). To sustainably foster this type of agency in digital citizenship among public school students in Lebanon is challenging given the shortcomings of public educational settings, namely, the LNC (see MEHE, 1997) coupled with lack of and uneven access to ICT in many Lebanese public schools, documented in MEHE (2012). Access to ICT and implementation of quality curricula are pivotal to learning and practice in digital citizenship (Ribble, 2012).

Conflicting notions: law and IP rights

According to Ohler (2011), IP rights are a prevalent concern in digital citizenship and have been of central importance to teachers. Student participants exhibited different beliefs about the association between law and IP rights and access to digital media. For question 3, a total of 190 students (55.9%) said that downloading digital media for free when payment is required is not wrong (see Table 2). The essence of explanations for their views was the cultural dissemination of beneficial materials and the right to access media for free. Karaganis (2011) confirms that the dissemination of cultural media in their legal forms has been relatively slow in developing countries. Students also mentioned that it is easier to pirate these media than to obtain them legally. This is a place-based challenge that may impact access approaches and notions of what is legal or acceptable, which can, in turn, negatively impact the sustainable learning and practice of digital citizenship. It also appears that the feeling they had the right to access digital media – viewing these media not as someone else’s property but for the collective benefit – led students to justify illegal downloading and believe it acceptable. Furthermore, prices of legal materials appeared to be an issue in students’ explanations. Notably, presenting a study on piracy in five different countries, Karaganis (2011) reports that socioeconomic factors create conditions that encourage piracy. That socioeconomic situations deprive people of access to these materials was addressed by students and deemed unfair when explaining whether they thought illegal downloading was wrong:

No, because music and movies are entertaining, and some are educational since they teach us to stay away from bad things and bad people. Also, music gives us joy, and singing increases our talent. (School 3, Student 60, grade 8)

If I have the money, then it is my duty. But if the money is not available, then I don’t have to. (School 10, Student 202, Grade 10)

No, because everyone has the right to listen to music and watch movies and especially those who cannot afford it. It is not wrong to do so. (School 16, Student 308, Grade 11)

No, to help the poor develop and adapt with their community. (School 15, Student 285, Grade 10)

Students also cited corrupt legal and political settings as justifications for piracy. This reflects scepticism about political and legal systems in Lebanon, which hinders the development of sustainable digital citizenship. As Quaynor (2012) states, corruption is prevalent in post-conflict societies. She points to studies in Lebanon that reveal a lack of confidence in political processes:

No, we have a right to download for free because in this country, they are already stealing from us. (School 1, Student 6, Grade 12)

Because no one is stopping us. (School 2, Student 40, Grade 12)

Everything in the country is hacked. (School 11, Student 232, Grade 11)

In my opinion, it is not wrong, because it is a sign of shrewdness. (School 3, Student 86, Grade 8)

Therefore, weaknesses in the wider political environment appear to have influenced students’ beliefs, making sustainable digital citizenship practice challenging in a place-based context. Moreover, students expressed the incorrect notion that when media are available to download for free, regardless of the source, then it is acceptable to do so. They did not seem to distinguish between illegal downloading, which infringes upon IP rights, and legal downloading. Such misconceptions can undermine sustainable digital citizenship practice. Some students also believed that they should be able to access materials for free simply because they were paying for an Internet connection. Opportunities for sustainable learning in digital citizenship are needed to help students discern these differences and apply appropriate ideals in their environment for online activities:

No, because if this were wrong, it would not have been available online. (School 7, Student 148, Grade 10)

No, if we have the opportunity to download movies, games and music for free, then why not? (School 5, Student 117, Grade 8)

It’s not wrong to download them. There is no need to pay for a programme when I’m already paying for the internet connection. (School 3, Student 98, Grade 8)

A number of students did express that downloading copyrighted digital materials without paying for them was wrong. In total, 61 students (17.9%) said it was categorically wrong, and 58 (17.1%) said maybe (see Table 2). Their explanations reflected beliefs stemming from ethical, legal, patriotic and socioeconomic positions:

Yes, because that’s trade. (School 7, Student 146, Grade 10)

We have to pay for what we download to prevent corruption even if it’s an individual effort. (School 16, Student 310, Grade 11)

Yes, download music or movies for free instead of paying for them is considered stealing. (School 14, Student 267, Grade 9)

Yes, we have to pay for them because that’s stealing and a sin. (School 3, Student 102, Grade 8)

Yes, it’s a programme like any other. (School 4, Student 109, Grade 6)

Yes, when we download a song for free, we violate the artist’s rights. Maybe this is beneficial to us, but the artist has worked hard for it. (School 10, Student 206, Grade 10)

Yes, because revenues from music and movies are important for the treasury, so we have to pay to download them to help our country. (School 12, Student 144, Grade 8)

Among students who selected the ‘maybe’ answer and gave an explanation, conflicting ideals were apparent with justifications for illegal downloading:

Maybe, when one downloads music or movies for free, he does wrong to someone else, but they are beneficial for him. (School 10, Student 205, Grade 10)

Maybe we should pay, but the easiest way is to download them for free. (School 7, Student 131, Grade 10)

Sustainability of learning and practice in law and IP rights for digital citizenship becomes complex when coupled with such negotiation of ideas in unsupportive place-based settings. As noted earlier, because the majority of students had no school Internet access, reported usage (see Table 1) would mostly need to occur from outside of school settings; therefore, learning and practice that take place in the afterschool space must be considered (Howard, 2015). Because high piracy rates and the wider environmental challenges of a weak legal system are apparent in Lebanon (BSA, 2016; IIPA, 2012), learning and practice occurring in the afterschool space is not necessarily in line with digital citizenship ideals and stands to affect sustainability negatively. Moreover, Ohler (2011) highlights that for digital citizenship in schools to be effective, values or ideals must be defined for the virtual community, not just the physical community. Although digital citizenship is mentioned in the MEHE’s NETSP (MEHE, 2012), the LNC presently fails at integrating it (see MEHE, 1997), making current educational settings unconducive to sustainable learning in digital citizenship. Furthermore, ensuring that any formal learning opportunities for digital citizenship are relevant and address discrepancies in learned ideals and practices in the wider environment would be desirable for sustainable learning. For instance, in a study of student conceptualizations of civic education, Akar (2014) contends that individualized pre-conceptualizations of civics should be addressed in the classroom. Quaynor (2015a) argues that teachers should be equipped to help students face discrepancies between the formal curriculum and their afterschool experiences and lives. This approach would make learning more relevant and sensitive to what is happening within communities, which is important for sustainability; it follows that the place-based political and socioeconomic issues so avidly pointed out by students merit consideration in learning for digital citizenship.

Digital etiquette and footprint: the need to establish values for the virtual community

Maintaining a positive digital footprint or trail of online activities is important (Internet Society, 2014), requiring proper behaviour and etiquette. Patchin and Hinduja (2013) state that a considerable proportion of young people are affected by negative online behaviours, such as cyberbullying. For question 4, 42 students (12.4%) said they had done something hurtful or offensive to others online, and for question 5, 40 (11.8%) reported they had posted media of themselves that were upsetting to others (see Table 2):

I made fun of an old girlfriend. (School 16, Student 307, Grade 11)

Yes, I posted on Facebook a photo of [celebrity] as a cow ‘La vache qui rit’. (School 10, Student 201, Grade 10)

Yes, I stole someone’s Facebook account and started posting bad things in his name. (School 2, Student 53, Grade 6)

Posted photos and videos to express my opinion concerning the Syrian crisis (God, Syria, Bashar). (School 7, Student 148, Grade 10)

Yes, I posted some provocative pictures to get back at those who upset me. (School 16, Student 304, Grade 11)

Of the 277 (81.5%) and 283 students (83.2%) who said they had never done anything online to upset others or posted potentially offensive media of themselves (see Table 2), respectively, answer explanations generally cited ethical reasons and values for abstaining from such behaviour:

No, because this is not appropriate. (School 2, Student 46, Grade 6)

No, because if I posted stories that upset others, I would be disrespectful. (School 3, Student 54, Grade 8)

No, I consider that the internet should be used to serve the community and provide information on different cultures. (School 9, Student 190, Grade 10)

No, I don’t like to bother anyone or be bothered because everyone is equal in dignity and in rights. God gave them intelligence and consciousness, and we must treat each other well. (School 10, Student 202, Grade 10)

These answers align well with citizenship ideals and values transferred from the ‘real’ environment for which learning opportunities are present through the current LNCC and other avenues such as religion. However, formal guidance in establishing ideals for the virtual community is needed (Ohler, 2011). The importance of school-based responses to cyberbullying must also be stressed while underscoring the value of creating a caring and positive culture to counter such behaviour (Hinduja and Patchin, 2013; Patchin and Hinduja, 2013). Lacking established school policies and values in virtual communities, the possibilities for sustainable practice and learning of such ideals are limited at best. Absence of a curriculum for digital citizenship, coupled with major shortcomings in ICT access in Lebanese public schools, as seen in the sample schools and the MEHE’s NETSP (MEHE, 2012), limits learning opportunities for digital citizenship in this context and schools’ means to respond to cases of negative student behaviour. Without proper guidance, students also risk creating undesirable digital footprints.

Recommendations for sustainable practice and learning of digital citizenship in place-based contexts

Numerous place-based challenges influence sustainable digital citizenship learning and practices among public school students in Lebanon. These stem from educational, political and socioeconomic settings. Given the shortcomings in the current LNC and the digital divide in ICT resources among public schools (MEHE, 2012) illustrated by the fact that no student had Internet access at 11 of the sample schools in this study, opportunities for sustainable learning in digital citizenship are compromised. Overall, findings indicate contentious notions of what constitutes acceptable practices. Therefore, recommendations addressing challenges to sustainable digital citizenship to provide better support to students are given below:

Curriculum and values. The LNC is dated and missing themes from the digital age (see MEHE, 1997). If civics remains as a standalone subject, integration of contemporary topics like digital citizenship would be important. If ICT standards or curricula are to be added to the LNC as indicated in the NETSP (MEHE, 2012), sustainable digital citizenship would also require due consideration here. Because digital citizenship spans all disciplines (Ribble, 2012), cross-disciplinary integration of digital citizenship themes could provide for a more enriching experience. Since access to ICT is pivotal to digital citizenship, the digital divide among public schools in Lebanon, shown by uneven distribution of ICT in schools (MEHE, 2012) and the participating schools in this study, makes it problematic to adopt common standards and complete curricula for digital citizenship, challenging the establishment of values and ideals for online communities. Lack of access at sample schools indicates that reported Internet usage for most students would only occur in the afterschool space, which Ohler (2011) calls a ‘two-lives’ approach leaving students unsupported in dealing with a digital environment and negotiation of ideals. Students in the sample communicated different understandings of ideals and values in digital citizenship, such as misconceptions of IP rights and responsibilities. Resources are required to ensure that students have equal access to ICT and support at school, so an inclusive curriculum encompassing values for the virtual and not just for the ‘real’ world can be established.

Competency-based teaching. Research shows that competencies are compromised in favour of rote learning and memorization for the LNCC (Akar, 2016). As operationalized in this work, sustainable digital citizenship requires continuous practice that upholds associated ideals with support from the wider environment. Therefore, aligned learning opportunities would ideally foster competence in such practice and not simply rote learning to recite content. This is in line with the MEHE’s aim for a working competency-based curriculum (see MEHE, 2012).

Addressing wider settings causing contention. Students expressed awareness of the weaknesses in their environmental settings by voicing a lack of faith in the political and legal system; this is one way they justified the idea of breaking IP laws. Characterized in the operationalization of sustainable learning and practice of digital citizenship, and further drawing upon Quaynor (2015b) and Akar (2014), supportive school programmes showing relevance to place-based issues are desirable. This requires reconciling or addressing wider settings that cause contention between digital citizenship ideals or formalizations and afterschool learning and practice. Furthermore, students cited socioeconomic issues including inability to afford the high prices for original materials and their ‘right’ to access digital materials for cultural dissemination as possible justifications for illegal downloading of digital media. Schools can help counter these problems by ensuring adequate ICT access to provide students with legal forms of digital media and licensed software materials together with a digital citizenship curriculum. As school resources are already taxed (UNHCR, 2018), this is a challenge.

Conclusion

This research explored how place-based socioeconomic, political and educational settings stand to influence sustainable learning and practice in digital citizenship. Notions of sustainable practice and learning for digital citizenship were operationalized, encompassing access, participation, relevance and supportive environmental settings for upholding ideals. This research is significant as it provides documented evidence on Lebanon as a representative case, highlighting place-based challenges to sustainable learning and practice of digital citizenship and answering calls for consideration of wider contexts that can impact formal learning (e.g. Akar, 2014; Graham et al., 2015; Quaynor, 2015b). Prevalent challenges include political and legal weaknesses, socioeconomic difficulties, an outdated civics curriculum focusing on rote learning, absence of formal ICT and digital citizenship standards and uneven access to ICT in public schools. This study is also significant because it provides a first-of-its-kind snapshot view of digital citizenship notions and practices for a sample of public school students in Lebanon. Surveys indicated that students used the Internet; however, 11 out of 17 sample schools confirmed no Internet access was provided for students. This creates an undesirable digital divide among schools and a two-lives approach to digital participation (Ohler, 2011). In a limited number of cases, a sense of corruption in Lebanon led students to justify misconceptions of IP law and digital rights. The affordability of digital media was a significant issue reported by students, and their values were characterized by a sense of entitlement to cultural dissemination and media access. Furthermore, shortcomings in student agency and notions for digital citizenship require the development of sound educational responses in digital values, rights, responsibilities and etiquette. Although a larger sample would enhance generalizability, recommendations for sustainable digital citizenship are supported by both the literature and findings from the survey. These include the integration of a competency-based approach to digital citizenship themes within an updated civics curriculum and across disciplines. A relevant programme, which addresses the disparity between digital citizenship ideals, wider environmental settings and student learning and practices after school, is also necessary. As a prerequisite, sufficient and inclusive access to ICT among public schools is essential to build a programme for sustainable digital citizenship.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD

Maria Ghosn-Chelala

References

Akar

(2007) Citizenship education in Lebanon: an introduction into students’ concepts and learning experiences. Educate∼ 7(2): 2–18.

Akar

(2014) Learning active citizenship: conflicts between students’ conceptualisations of citizenship and classroom learning experiences in Lebanon. British Journal of Sociology of Education 37(2): 288–312.

Akar

(2016) Dialogic pedagogies in educational settings for active citizenship, social cohesion and peace building in Lebanon. Education, Citizenship and Social Justice 11(1): 44–62.

Blanchet

Fouad

Pherali

(2016) Syrian refugees in Lebanon: the search for universal health coverage. Conflict and Health 10(1): 1–5.

Business Software Alliance (BSA) (2016) Seizing opportunity through license compliance: BSA global software survey. Available at: globalstudy.bsa.org/2016/downloads/studies/BSA_GSS_US.pdf (accessed 10 October 2016).

Chesterman

Lipman

(1988) The Electronic Pirates: DIY Crime of the Century (A Comedia Book). Abingdon: Routledge.

Cvetkovski

(2014) The farcical side to the war on media piracy: a popular case of Divine Comedy? Media, Culture & Society 36(2): 246–257.

Evans

McDonald

Bae

et al . (2016) Universal ideals in local realities: online viewing in South Korea, Brazil and India. Convergence 22(4): 408–425.

Graham

Berman

Bellert

(2015) Sustainable Learning: Inclusive Practices for 21st Century Classrooms. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

10.

Hinduja

Patchin

(2013) Social influences on cyberbullying behaviors among middle and high school students. Journal of Youth and Adolescence 42(5): 711–722.

11.

Hollandsworth

Dowdy

Donovan

(2011) Digital citizenship in K-12: it takes a village. TechTrends 55(4): 37–47.

12.

Howard

(2015) Digital citizenship in the afterschool space: implications for education for sustainable development. Journal of Teacher Education for Sustainability 17(1): 23–34.

13.

International Intellectual Property Alliance (IIPA) (2012) Special 301 report on copyright protection and enforcement. Available at: http://www.med-media.eu/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/2012SPEC301LEBANON1.pdf (accessed 29 September 2015).

14.

International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE) (2016) Redefining learning in a technology-driven world: a report to support adoption of the ISTE standards for students. Available at: https://www.iste.org/docs/Standards-Resources/iste-standards_students-2016_research-validity-report_final.pdf?sfvrsn=0.0680021527232122 (accessed 1 October 2016).

15.

Internet Society (2014) Digital Footprints: An Internet Society Reference Framework. Geneva: Internet Society.

16.

Isin

Turner

(2002) Citizenship studies: an introduction. In: Isin

Turner

(eds) Handbook of Citizenship Studies. London: SAGE, 1–10.

17.

Karaganis

(2011) Media Piracy in Emerging Economies. New York: Social Science Research Council.

18.

Lobato

Thomas

(2012) Transnational piracy research in practice: a roundtable interview with Joe Karaganis, John Cross, Olga Sezneva, and Ravi Sundaram. Television & New Media 13(5): 447–458.

19.

Mardikyan

Yildiz

Ordu

et al . (2015) Examining the global digital divide: a cross-country analysis. Communications of the IBIMA 2015: 1–11.

20.

Ministry of Education and Higher Education (MEHE) (1997) Curricula of General Education and Their Aims. Beirut: Center for Educational Research and Development.

21.

Ministry of Education and Higher Education (MEHE) (2012) Teaching and learning in the digital age: Lebanon’s National Educational Technology Strategic Plan. Available at: http://www.mehe.gov.lb/uploads/file/tlsp.pdf (accessed 10 December 2014).

22.

Mossberger

Tolbert

McNeal

(2008) Digital Citizenship: The Internet, Society, and Participation. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

23.

O’Brien

Stavert

(2011) Creating good digital citizens. In: Mendez-Vilas

(ed.) Education in a Technological World: Communicating Current and Emerging Research and Technological Efforts. Badajoz: Formatex Research Center, 115–119.

24.

Ohler

(2010) Digital Community, Digital Citizen. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

25.

Ohler

(2011) Digital citizenship means character education for the digital age. Kappa Delta Pi Record 47(Suppl. 1): 25–27.

26.

Patchin

Hinduja

(2013) Cyberbullying research standing on the shoulders of international giants. In: Smith

Steffgen

(eds) Cyberbullying through the New Media: Findings from an International Network. New York: Psychology Press, 265–272.

27.

Quaynor

(2012) Citizenship education in post-conflict contexts: a review of the literature. Education, Citizenship and Social Justice 7(1): 33–57.

28.

Quaynor

(2015a) ‘I do not have the means to speak’: educating youth for citizenship in post-conflict Liberia. Journal of Peace Education 12(1): 15–36.

29.

Quaynor

(2015b) Researching citizenship education in Africa: considerations from Ghana and Liberia. Research in Comparative and International Education 10(1): 120–134.

30.

Ribble

(2012) Digital citizenship for educational change. Kappa Delta Pi Record 48(4): 148–151.

31.

Ribble

(2015) Digital Citizenship in Schools: Nine Elements All Students Should Know. Arlington, VA: International Society for Technology in Education.

32.

Smith

Sobel

(2010) Place- and Community-based Education in Schools. New York: Routledge.

33.

United Nations (2015) Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. New York: United Nations.

34.

United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), Ministry of Education and Higher Education (MEHE) and Council for Development and Reconstruction (CDR) (2008) Education and Citizenship: Concepts, Attitudes, Skills and Actions: Analysis of Survey Results of 9th Grade Students in Lebanon. Beirut: UNDP.

35.

United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) (2015) Fostering Digital Citizenship Through Safe and Responsible Use of ICT: A Review of Current Status in Asia and The Pacific as of December 2014. Bangkok, Thailand: UNESCO.

36.

United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) (2018) UNHCR Syria regional refugee response. Available at: http://data.unhcr.org/syrianrefugees/country.php?id=122 (accessed 8 March 2018).