skip to main content
10.1145/3670653.3677509acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesmundcConference Proceedingsconference-collections
short-paper

"I Don't Want Parents to Watch My Lessons" – Privacy Trade-offs in the Use of Telepresence Robots in Schools for Children with Long-term Illnesses

Published: 01 September 2024 Publication History

Abstract

Telepresence robots offer great opportunities for children with long-term illnesses to continue attending school. Consequently, they are already used if children are absent for long periods. When designing such systems, the privacy of various stakeholders must be considered. However, conflicts often arise because the privacy requirements of different user groups cannot be fulfilled simultaneously. In this paper, we analyze the corresponding trade-offs that have to be made when designing telepresence robots under conflicting privacy requirements. We analyzed previous literature and held three workshops with different user groups (children, parents, teachers, head teachers, media educators, and supporting personnel) with and without experience with telepresence robots in schools. Based on the literature and the workshop results, we present four major privacy trade-offs we identified and discuss design approaches for them. With this work, we contribute to the design research on telepresence robots in schools by revealing the major privacy-related conflicts and potential design approaches to overcome the conflicts.

References

[1]
A. Page, J. Charteris, and J. Berman, “Telepresence robot use for children with chronic illness in Australian schools: a scoping review and thematic analysis,” International Journal of Social Robotics, vol. 13, no. 6, pp. 1281–1293, 2021.
[2]
V. Ahumada-Newhart and J. S. Olson, “Going to school on a robot: Robot and user interface design features that matter,” ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI), vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 1–28, 2019.
[3]
T. Powell, J. Cohen, and P. Patterson, “Keeping Connected With School: Implementing Telepresence Robots to Improve the Wellbeing of Adolescent Cancer Patients,” Frontiers in Psychology, vol. 12, 2021, [Online]. Available: https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.749957
[4]
L. E. Johannessen, E. B. Rasmussen, and M. Haldar, “Student at a distance: exploring the potential and prerequisites of using telepresence robots in schools,” Oxford Review of Education, pp. 1–18, 2022.
[5]
P. L. Weiss, C. P. Whiteley, J. Treviranus, and D. I. Fels, “PEBBLES: A personal technology for meeting educational, social and emotional needs of hospitalised children,” Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, vol. 5, pp. 157–168, 2001.
[6]
V. A. Newhart, M. Warschauer, and L. Sender, “Virtual inclusion via telepresence robots in the classroom: An exploratory case study,” The International Journal of Technologies in Learning, vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 9–25, 2016.
[7]
V. A. Newhart and J. S. Olson, “My student is a robot: How schools manage telepresence experiences for students,” in Proceedings of the 2017 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems, 2017, pp. 342–347.
[8]
M. Weibel, “Back to school with telepresence robot technology: A qualitative pilot study about how telepresence robots help school-aged children and adolescents with cancer to remain socially and academically connected with their school classes during treatment,” Nursing Open, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 988–997, 2020.
[9]
L. Gallon, A. Abénia, F. Dubergey, and M. Negui, “Using a Telepresence Robot in an Educational Contex,” in 15th Int'l Conf on Frontiers in Education: Computer Science and Computer Engineering (FECS 2019), 2019.
[10]
S. Büttner, P. Neumann, D. Reinhardt, L. H. Acosta, and M. Prilla, “Towards Privacy-friendly Telepresence Robots for Schoolchildren with Long-term Illnesses – User Needs of Relevant User Groups,” presented at the 10. Usable Security und Privacy Workshop @ Mensch und Computer 2024, Karlsruhe, Sep. 2024.
[11]
J. K. Burgoon, “Privacy and communication,” in Communication yearbook 6, Routledge, 2012, pp. 206–249.
[12]
S. M. Lyman and M. B. Scott, “Territoriality: A neglected sociological dimension,” in People and buildings, Routledge, 2017, pp. 65–82.
[13]
I. Altman, “Privacy – a conceptual analysis,” Environment and behavior, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 7–29, 1976.
[14]
A. F. Westin, “Privacy and freedom,” Washington and Lee Law Review, vol. 25, no. 1, p. 166, 1968.
[15]
R. Parrott, J. K. Burgoon, M. Burgoon, and B. A. LePoire, “Privacy between physicians and patients: more than a matter of confidentiality,” Social science & medicine, vol. 29, no. 12, pp. 1381–1385, 1989.
[16]
H. Leino-Kilpi, “Privacy: a review of the literature,” International journal of nursing studies, vol. 38, no. 6, pp. 663–671, 2001.
[17]
D. I. Fels, L. A. Williams, G. Smith, J. Treviranus, and R. Eagleson, “Developing a video-mediated communication system for hospitalized children,” Telemedicine Journal, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 193–208, 1999.
[18]
J. Yeung and D. I. Fels, “A remote telepresence system for high school classrooms,” in Canadian Conference on Electrical and Computer Engineering, 2005., IEEE, 2005, pp. 1465–1468.
[19]
D. I. Fels, P. Weiss, J. Treviranus, and G. Smith, “Videoconferencing in the classroom: Children's attitudes,” presented at the CybErg 99, 2 International Cyberspace Conference on Ergonomics, Citeseer, 1999.
[20]
NoIsolation, “AV1-Präsentation.” May 29, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://av1-admin.noisolation.com/resources
[21]
L. E. Johannessen and M. Haldar, “Kan en robot hjelpe langtidssyke barn? Erfaringer med AV1 i skolen,” Skriftserien, 2020.
[22]
NoIsolation, “Technical specifications AV1.” [Online]. Available: https://help.noisolation.com/en/knowledge/technical-specifications-av1
[23]
T. Wernbacher, “Trine: telepresence robots in education,” 2022.
[24]
C. Lutz, M. Schöttler, and C. P. Hoffmann, “The privacy implications of social robots: Scoping review and expert interviews,” Mobile Media & Communication, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 412–434, Sep. 2019.
[25]
T. Heuer, I. Schiering, and R. Gerndt, “Privacy-centered design for social robots,” Interaction Studies, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 509–529, 2019.

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Why does the robot only select men? How women and men perceive autonomous social robots that have a gender biasProceedings of Mensch und Computer 202410.1145/3670653.3677492(479-484)Online publication date: 1-Sep-2024

Index Terms

  1. "I Don't Want Parents to Watch My Lessons" – Privacy Trade-offs in the Use of Telepresence Robots in Schools for Children with Long-term Illnesses
            Index terms have been assigned to the content through auto-classification.

            Recommendations

            Comments

            Information & Contributors

            Information

            Published In

            cover image ACM Other conferences
            MuC '24: Proceedings of Mensch und Computer 2024
            September 2024
            719 pages
            ISBN:9798400709982
            DOI:10.1145/3670653
            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 the author(s) 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: 01 September 2024

            Permissions

            Request permissions for this article.

            Check for updates

            Author Tags

            1. Design
            2. Privacy
            3. Robot
            4. School
            5. Telepresence

            Qualifiers

            • Short-paper
            • Research
            • Refereed limited

            Funding Sources

            • Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung

            Conference

            MuC '24
            MuC '24: Mensch und Computer 2024
            September 1 - 4, 2024
            Karlsruhe, Germany

            Contributors

            Other Metrics

            Bibliometrics & Citations

            Bibliometrics

            Article Metrics

            • Downloads (Last 12 months)36
            • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)11
            Reflects downloads up to 17 Jan 2025

            Other Metrics

            Citations

            Cited By

            View all
            • (2024)Why does the robot only select men? How women and men perceive autonomous social robots that have a gender biasProceedings of Mensch und Computer 202410.1145/3670653.3677492(479-484)Online publication date: 1-Sep-2024

            View Options

            Login options

            View options

            PDF

            View or Download as a PDF file.

            PDF

            eReader

            View online with eReader.

            eReader

            HTML Format

            View this article in HTML Format.

            HTML Format

            Media

            Figures

            Other

            Tables

            Share

            Share

            Share this Publication link

            Share on social media