OVERVIEW OF COURSEWORK


To meet the full-time requirements of the Master of Arts in Human Rights and Social Justice, I undertook the following courses:

HRSJ 5010_Foundations of Human Rights
HRSJ 5020_Indigenous Ways of Pedagogies and Practices
HRSJ5110_Genocide in the 20th Century
HRSJ 5030_Problem Solving in the Field
HRSJ5130_Body Rights: Systems and Social Movements
HRSJ 5230_Emergence of Global Capitalism
HRSJ 5040_Field Experience: Practicum
HRSJ 5940_ Master of Arts e-Portfolio
HRSJ5150_Truth to Power: Promoting Social Change on Stage and Screen
HRSJ5160_Social Justice and Network Culture: Digital Communications Mediated Identity and Online Journalism

Course Title: HRSJ5130_Body Rights: Systems and Social Movements

This course considers the concept of bodily autonomy – or the right of self to make decisions independent of outside influence for self– and how such a principle is problematized through both law and social norms.
I was able to analyze how certain groups—particularly women, LGBTQ+ individuals, people with disabilities, and racial minorities—face systemic oppression that restricts their body rights.
The course explores various social movements, such as feminist, LGBTQ+, reproductive rights, disability rights, and civil rights movements, and how they have challenged and reshaped societal norms around bodily autonomy.
Drawing from sociology, law, political science, and history, the course encouraged me to critically assess the role of institutions like the healthcare system, legal frameworks, and cultural practices in regulating bodies.
This course also addresses the global perspective of body rights and examines how different cultures and countries handle matters dealing with bodily autonomy, access to healthcare, and human rights.
This course gave deeper insights into how body rights are socially constructed and contested in various legal and political arenas, with the important role that may be played by social movements in pressing such claims.
During the course, I successfully submitted a comprehensive person-centered assignment titled “Lost Childhoods: Examining the root causes of child trafficking in Ghana’s fishing industry” https://lillianoteng.trubox.ca/wp-content/uploads/sites/2726/2024/12/Lost-childhoods_Lillian-Oteng-1.pdf to add voice to the global concerns on child trafficking, a significant violation of children’s rights. This project assignment aimed to unearth the underlying causes of child trafficking in Ghana’s (a small country in West Africa) fishing industry. Putting some human rights in perspective, the study investigated the complex interaction of economic, cultural, political, and global factors that contribute to child trafficking in this context.
The assignment used a desktop review approach, with a thematic analysis of peer-reviewed literature, reports, and policy papers on child trafficking in Ghana’s fishing industry, to gain a holistic understanding of the causes, challenges, and aspirations of young traffickers. I then used this information to create a personalized story that addressed their needs in areas like health care, education access, and community resources.
Seeing how the person-centered approach empowered the individual to take control of their goals made this assignment so impactful. This project reinforced the importance of tailoring support to an individual’s needs and gave me hands-on experience in fostering independence and inclusion.


HRSJ5150_Truth to Power: Promoting Social Change on Stage and Screen

In retrospect, the course “Truth to Power: Promoting Social Change on Stage and Screen” was an exploration of how performance art and media—be it theater, film, or digital storytelling—can amplify voices, challenge systems of oppression, and inspire tangible social change. It delves into the creative processes behind impactful storytelling in the theories of social justice and the power dynamics inherent in visual and narrative representation.
It’s a space where art meets advocacy, and where participants are encouraged to think critically about how they can use their craft or appreciation for storytelling to push boundaries, ignite conversations, and demand justice.
The reading of some theatrical works such as “The Laramie Project” was an impactful way to understand how art could be used to drive social change. This was a play created by Moisés Kaufman and the Tectonic Theater Project, which probes into the 1998 hate crime murder of Matthew Shepard, a young gay man in Laramie, Wyoming. Yet it demonstrates how the pervasive intolerance that killed Shepard is openly confronted, as many residents give insight into their community’s struggle to deal with grief, denial, and self-reflection.
What makes “The Laramie Project” integral to my course study is its very special way of storytelling. Documentary-style, the play weaves around actual interviews to give a raw and multi-dimensional account of hate and its aftermath. This reading demonstrates just how theater can be used not only as a storytelling tool but also for building dialogue and accountability among communities. This, in turn, reflects the gamut of reactions from empathy to indifference making an audience review their stance regarding the perpetuation of or challenging prejudice.
The course challenged us to develop scripts, visual pieces, or other forms of creative media which was designed to provoke thought and inspire change.
I was able to come up with a play titled “In the belly of the Earth” https://lillianoteng.trubox.ca/wp-content/uploads/sites/2726/2024/12/LILLIAN-OTENG-IN-THE-BELLY-OF-THE-EARTH-A-ONE-ACT-PLAY_FINAL-SCRIPT.pdf to navigate the power dynamics in art and understand the ethical considerations of leadership and collaboration in creative social justice projects.
To sum up, I have learned more about how art may provoke reflection and mobilize collective action, which is priceless regarding the role that storytelling plays in human rights education. See the attached Stage play.

Course Title: HRSJ5160_Social Justice and Network Culture: Digital Communications Mediated Identity and Online Journalism

The Social Justice and Network Culture: Digital Communications Mediated Identity and Online Journalism course dives into the transformative role of digital communication in shaping identity, amplifying social justice movements, and influencing journalism in the realm of human rights. It bridges the gap between traditional human rights advocacy and the rapidly evolving digital landscape, where online platforms, social media, and networked cultures play a pivotal role.
Through interactive sessions, critical readings, and project-based learning, I explored the intersection of technology, identity, and justice. The course also challenges me to critically assess the power dynamics of digital media and to use these tools effectively for advocacy and social change.
Participating in this course I better understand and critically evaluate how digital platforms shape cultural identities and collective action. Also, I can assess the role of online journalism in shaping public opinion on human rights issues, including ethical considerations and the spread of misinformation. Most importantly it has enabled me to apply digital communication strategies to advocate for social justice effectively, using tools like social media, blogs, and multimedia storytelling. Last but not least I can identify and critique the implications of tech monopolies, algorithmic bias, and digital divides in human rights discourse.
Studying this course engaged me in thought-provoking debates about the ethics of digital surveillance and data privacy in human rights. Drawing insights from leading digital activists and Scholars like Kate Crawford, Sasha Constanza-Chock, and Shoshana Zuboff brought a real-world perspective to the classroom. For the first time, I was challenged to make a podcast on a real-world human rights and social justice issue, “Reimagining Digital Democracy on Public Spaces. A workpiece inspired by Sasha Constanza-Chock’s work Hard-Coding Liberation which sensitizes us as users, advocates, policymakers, etc. to embed values like transparency, equity, and accountability into every line of code and user interface rather than just technical solutions- a call for collective action, demanding a reimagining of our digital public spaces, balancing innovation with the preservation of democratic values. This course Social Justice and Network Culture: Digital Communications Mediated Identity and Online Journalism equipped me with the tools and confidence to turn my ideas into action. Whether through crafting a hard-hitting blog series, leading a social media campaign, or critically engaging with the ethics of digital journalism to use the digital world to fight for justice.
I pride myself on this practical skill of writing a compelling podcast script, infographics to analyze digital data for advocacy, and managing social media strategies.
Attached is the Podcast for your perusal.


The Data Extraction Dilemma This segment critically examines the transformation of online interactions into economic commodities, drawing on Kate Crawford’s seminal work on digital surveillance. The core argument is that digital platforms have evolved from mere communication tools to sophisticated data extraction mechanisms (Crawford, 2021). The key insight is that every digital interaction – from a simple like to a shared post – is no longer just a social act, but a valuable piece of economic data. Facebook’s algorithmic design exemplifies this trend by strategically promoting content that maximizes user engagement, often through emotionally provocative or polarizing material. This approach reveals a deeper systemic issue where user experiences are algorithmically manipulated to generate maximum economic value. The supporting data is particularly illuminating: algorithmic content curation increases user engagement by 50% while simultaneously amplifying political polarization by approximately 30% (podcast transcript). This statistic underscores the profound societal implications of algorithmic design. Crawford’s powerful quote, “We are no longer users of platforms—we have become the raw material they refine” (Crawford, 2021), encapsulates the fundamental shift in how digital interactions are perceived and monetized. Interestingly, the transcript also presents counter-perspectives from scholars like Zuboff and Srnicek (2017), who argue that users voluntarily participate in this data exchange, receiving personalized digital services in return. This nuanced view suggests a more consensual model of data monetization, where transparency and user control can mitigate potential exploitation. Algorithmic Democracy The second segment, drawing heavily on Zeynep Tufekci’s research, explores how algorithmic recommendation systems fundamentally reshape democratic discourse. The central argument challenges the notion of algorithmic neutrality, positioning these systems as active political actors rather than passive filtering mechanisms (Tufekci, 2017). Tufekci’s research reveals a critical insight: algorithms do not merely present content but actively construct users’ understanding of reality. By prioritizing engagement metrics over informational accuracy, these systems can inadvertently amplify misinformation and restrict exposure to diverse perspectives. The supporting data is stark: during the 2020 US election, 68% of users reported encountering politically biased content through algorithmic recommendations. This statistic illustrates the potential for algorithmic systems to distort democratic information ecosystems. The segment presents a range of scholarly perspectives. While some scholars like Gillespie and Pasquale (2018) argue for algorithmic neutrality, others like Jenkins suggest these systems might actually enhance democratic engagement by exposing users to diverse viewpoints. Tufekci’s provocative statement that “Algorithms are not just sorting mechanisms—they are powerful political actors” encapsulates the segment’s core argument about the profound political implications of algorithmic design (Tufekci, 2017). Designing Liberation The final segment, inspired by Sasha Costanza-Chock’s concept of “hard-coding liberation,” offers a constructive approach to reimagining digital platforms (Costanza-Chock, 2020). The key proposition is that technological design is inherently political and can be intentionally shaped to embed democratic values. The segment challenges the presumption of technological neutrality, arguing that every interface and algorithm embeds specific values. By consciously designing platforms with principles of transparency, user agency, and democratic participation, we can transform digital spaces. Empirical evidence supports this approach: platforms implementing user-controlled privacy settings experienced a 40% increase in user trust and a 25% reduction in reported privacy concerns. This data suggests that user-centric design can successfully address digital privacy challenges. However, the segment also presents critical counterarguments. Scholars like Fuchs emphasize that market dynamics often overshadow social considerations, with platforms prioritizing engagement metrics over meaningful interaction. Morozov warns against technological solutionism, cautioning against oversimplifying complex social challenges. The overarching message is that digital platform design is not a neutral technical process but a profound act of political and social engineering, with significant implications for democratic discourse. References are drawn from the original podcast transcript, including works by Crawford (2021), Costanza-Chock (2020), Tufekci (2017), and others, providing a rich scholarly context for the discussion. References Crawford, K. (2021). AI as Technology of Extraction. Yale University Press Costanza-Chock, S. (2020). Design Justice: Community-Led Practices to Build the Worlds We Need. The MIT Press. Tufekci, Z. (2017). Twitter and Tear gas: The Power and Fragility of Networked Protest. Yale University Press. Zuboff, S. (2023). The age of surveillance capitalism. In Social theory re-wired (pp. 203-213). Routledge. Srnicek, N. (2017). Platform capitalism, Polity Press, pp. 171. Annali del Dipartimento di metodi e modelli per l’economia, il territorio e la finanza, 1-2. Pariser, E. (2011). The filter bubble: What the Internet is hiding from you. penguin UK. Brynjolfsson, E., & McAfee, A. (2014). The second machine age: Work, progress, and prosperity in a time of brilliant technologies. WW Norton & company. Gillespie, T. (2018). Custodians of the Internet: Platforms, content moderation, and the hidden decisions that shape social media. Yale University Press. Pasquale, F. (2015). The black box society: The secret algorithms that control money and information. Harvard University Press. Jenkins, H. (2006). Welcome to convergence culture. Henry Jenkins, 19. Feenberg, A. (2002). Transforming technology: A critical theory revisited. Oxford University Press. Morozov, E. V. G. E. N. Y. (2014). To save everything, click here: the folly of technological solutionism. J. Inf. Policy, 4(2014), 173-175. Fuchs, C. (2019). Karl Marx in the age of big data capitalism. In Digital Objects, Digital Subjects: Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Capitalism, Labour and Politics in the Age of Big Data: Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Capitalism, Labour and Politics in the Age of Big Data (pp. 53-71). London: University of Westminster Press. Acquisti, A. (2014). Privacy in the Age of Augmentation. Chun, W. H. K. (2011). Programmed visions: Software and memory. The MIT Press.

“Where. after all, do universal human rights begin? In small places, close to home – so close and so small that they cannot be seen on any world maps…such are the places where every man, woman and child seeks equal justice, equal opportunity, equal dignity without discrimination. Unless these rights have meaning there, they have little meaning anywhere” – Eleanor Roosevelt