When I graduated High school 3 years ago, Internet school programs were in their infancy. My grades were returned to me and it was generally up to me to transmit this knowledge to my parents (if one performed poorly, the teacher could access the parent directly by phone, but such was left to the discretion of the teacher and usually dependent upon a pattern of poor performance) Although many of our lessons called for us to go on the internet for information about a particular topic, the school was rarely the producer of such content; we were the consumers of another’s information, we were not the object of information. With the advent of “internet school programs” such as First Class, this relationship has changed somewhat.
The student is now both a consumer and an object. The student is no longer the sole recipient of their grades, as their parents may logon to this program and have access. This ability has allowed the parent to become an even more complete holder of knowledge of their child. We can consider this relationship in one of two ways, either as a direct action or as a response, both of which pertain to childhood as a distinct phase of life.
In the former, these programs represent an ever-present desire for parents to have control over their children. In this conception, the parent is looking to have their children under their absolute control as a means of molding them in whatever image they see fit. In the latter, these actions are a response to the growing independence of children. Here, the children have used technology as a means of breaking out of the subordinate phase of childhood, and parents are looking to re-impose the constraining power of this phase. In both cases the objective of these programs is the same: greater control. The question is whether the call for disciplinary power is being levied because of its insatiability, or because of threats to its persistence.
No comments:
Post a Comment