Parenting in a Technological Age

  • Geertrui SmedtsEmail author
Part of the Educational Research book series (EDRE, volume 4)


Education is marked by continuity in thoughts and approach mostly (Depaepe, 1998). It nevertheless also bears in it the tendencies of its time. The education of the 19th and 20th centuries’ children was marked by upcoming educationalization (Depaepe, 1998) and medicalization (Petrina, 2006). Although these tendencies are still present today, as continuity is education’s main feature, there is also the upcoming trend of technologization. Education has inevitably become highly technological in the era of information and communication technology (ICT) in life in general. At school, computers and the Internet are being introduced in more and more classes to support subject learning. Teachers do their best to keep up to date with ICT, while in the home parents are urged to reflect upon how to integrate ICT in the education of their children too.


Technical Reason Artificial Language Expert Advice City Wall Practical Judgement 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Abbs, P., et al. (2006). Modern life leads to more depression among children. The Daily Telegraph — 2006, (accessed December 23, 2006).
  2. Arcilla, R. (2006). Perfectionism’s educational address. Paper presented at conference on Cavell, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  3. Byron, T. (2008). Safer children in a digital world. The report of the Byron review. Nottingham: DCSF Publications.Google Scholar
  4. Cavell, S. (1999). The claim of reason. Wittgenstein, skepticism, morality, and tragedy. Oxford: University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Conrad, P. (1992). Medicalization and social control. Annual Review of Sociology, 18, 209–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Couchman, G. W. (1983, Autumn). Miscellany. An informal survey. Parenting – American Speech, 58, 285–288.Google Scholar
  7. Depaepe, M. (1998). De pedagogisering achterna. Aanzet tot een genealogie van de pedagogische mentaliteit in de voorbije 250 jaar. Leuven: Acco.Google Scholar
  8. Dreyfus, H. L. (1998). Why we do not have to worry about speaking the language of the computer. Information Technology and People, 11, 281–289.Google Scholar
  9. Dreyfus, H. L. (2001). On the internet. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  10. Feenberg, A., Higgs, E., Strong, D., & Light, A. (Eds.). (2000). From essentialism to constructivism: Philosophy of technology at the crossroads. Technology and the good life (pp. 294–315). Chicago: University Press. (accessed November 20, 2006)Google Scholar
  11. Fenton, B. (2006). Junk culture ‘is poisoning our children’. The Daily Telegraph – 2006, (accessed December 23, 2006)
  12. Heidegger, M. (1993). The question concerning technology. In D. F. Krell (Ed.), Martin Heidegger. Basic writings (D. F. Krell, Trans., pp. 311–341). London: Routledge. (original work published 1954)Google Scholar
  13. Introna, L., & Zalta, E. N. (Eds.). (2005) Phenomenological approaches to ethics and information technology. The stanford encyclopaedia of philosophy. Stanford: Stanford University. November 22, 2005)Google Scholar
  14. Lambeir, B. (2004). The educational cyberspace affaire. A philosophical reading of the relevance of information and communications technology for educational theory. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, KU Leuven, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, Department of Pedagogical Sciences, Centre for Philosophy of Education, LeuvenGoogle Scholar
  15. Lambeir, B., & Ramaekers, S. (2007). The terror of explicitness. Philosophical remarks on the idea of a parenting contract. Ethics and Education, 2, 95–108.Google Scholar
  16. Lingis, A. (1994). The community of those who have nothing in common. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Mulhall, S. (1996). Knowing and acknowledging. In S. Mulhall (Ed.), The Cavell reader (pp. 47–71). Cambridge: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  18. Noddings, N. (2003). Caring: A feminine approach to ethics and moral education. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  19. Pardoen, J., & Pijpers, R. (2005). Mijn kind online: hoe begeleid je je kind op Internet? Amsterdam: SWP.Google Scholar
  20. Pardoen, J., & Pijpers, R. (2006). Mijn kind online. Hoe begeleid je je kind op Internet? Amsterdam: SWP. Parenting, (accessed November 26, 2007)Google Scholar
  21. Petrina, S. (2006). The medicalization of education: A historiographic synthesis. History of Education Quarterly, 46, 503–531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Pirsig, R. M. (1974). Zen and the art of motorcycle maintenance: An inquiry into Values New York: William Morrow.Google Scholar
  23. Sennett, R. (2008). The craftsman. London: Allen Lane.Google Scholar
  24. Smith, R., (2006). Technical difficulties: The workings of practical judgement. In P. Smeyers & M. Depaepe (Eds.), Educational research: Why ‘what works’ doesn’t work (pp. 159–170). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  25. Suissa, J. (2006). Untangling the mother knot: Some thoughts on parents, children and philosophers of education. Ethics and Education, 1, 65–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Van den Boomen, M. (2000). Leven op het net. De sociale betekenis van virtuele gemeenschappen. Amsterdam: Instituut voor publiek en politiek.Google Scholar
  27. Wintour, P. (2008, March 27). Parents to be shown how to protect children online. New codes of practice for social network sites and video games. The Guardian, pp. 1–2.Google Scholar
  28. Wubs, J. (2004). Luisteren naar deskundigen. Opvoedingsadvies aan Nederlandse ouders 1945–1999. Assen: Van Gorcum.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Katholieke Universiteit LeuvenLeuvenBelgium

Personalised recommendations