Literature Review

James Flanders

Professor Goff

English 1010

28 July 2014

Parents and Technology

More and more each year, technology plays a bigger role at home. The topic of technology can be confusing and many parents lack knowledge on how to confront the challenges of the digital world. When technology arises in discussion among educators, parents, and children, the conversation often turns to an issue of parental views, parent’s perspectives, parental responsibility, and technology use at home.

Davies explores how children respond to parental attitudes about the use of technology in the home for learning. Some of the parental concerns are safety, accuracy and quality of information found in the internet. The question that is asked is whether parental attitude towards technology use limits the extent to which their children develop autonomous uses of technology for learning, especially as children grow older. Subsequently, parent’s involvement in children’s learning and use of technology decreases. The findings in this paper emerge from research carried out between 2008 and 2010 in association with a larger research project the United Kingdom led. Two hundred and sixty two youth with ages ranging from 8 to 17 took part in data gathering and interviews. The youth were asked how technology played a role in their lives and education. Additionally, they were asked about their parents interactions with their technology use. The research indicated the interactions between a parent and child can move in many directions in regards to home technologies. Davies concludes that we need to consider the long term effects of negative attitudes which are just as important as risks of unquestionably positive attitudes.

Plowman, McPake, and Stephen discuss parental feelings on technology use and its perception as threat to children. These can be broken down in three vast categories of social cultural, cognitive, and well-being. The categories which are the backbone of the study indicate parental fears are not as prevalent as media coverage leads people to believe. The study involved 346 families and 24 case studies over an eighteen-month period with children between the age of three and four. In these studies there were no attitude differences between those who were middle class and those were disadvantaged. Most were uncertain about the effect of technology on children’s health and development. The biggest concern was achieving balance in their child’s activities.

This chapter by Anne Collier also deals with parental perspectives on the digital age. Many parents lack knowledge on how to confront the challenges of the digital world. This lack of knowledge creates fear and encourages the feeling of helplessness. As a result parents can turn a blind an eye to youth’s involvement in the digital world. Additionally, the author describes how parents are receiving negative messages instead of the positive potentials that can engage children. She also describes how positive research is drowned out by the media. Coupled with parental fears about external influences on their children, these factors can be attributed to a lack of exposure to the digital age. Many parents feel this generation is different from other generations that have come before. Collier quotes Davis Fockner, saying that “The generation gap is more perception than reality” (251).

Hollingworth also looked at a generational divide. He used the work of Pierre Bourdieu to compare parental views on technology and their children learning in the home according to social class through three themes. The first theme discusses a digital divide between certain families. For most families, technology was omnipresent. The second theme describes navigating the harms and risks of technology. The research indicated many parents discussed technology through lenses of negativity. The research also affirms there is no difference in social class when it comes to looking at technology as a danger vice a learning tool. There is a viewpoint that parents who have internet access tend to speak more positively about it while those who don’t have access stress over finding their children access to internet. The last theme described a generational divide where it was evident through discussion with parents that generation gaps were connected to negative impacts of technology. This can be contributed to the parent’s lack of exposure to technology as children because it did not exist. Further, lower income families tend to feel the generation gap is unbridgeable. In spite of parental concerns, many parents see a technology as tool in education.

Many countries such as the United Kingdom already have policies in place for the use of technology in education. Plowman, Stevenson, McPake, Stephen, and Adey mention policies that are in place that focus on children over the age of eight to get access to technology at home. The paper attempts to identify the implications for similar polices for preschool children discussed through three studies involving 54 families. The authors reviewed a series of studies that encompassed different types of technologies children encounter at home, what forms their learning takes and the family support for learning. The first study focused on the impact of technology and children before formal education. The second study’s focus was narrowed to the competencies needed with the use of technologies. These two studies indicated children had a plethora of experiences with technology. The final study had a wide focus that included children’s interactions with technological toys. The research indicates that family ownership of technology is not the most important factor of technology use by preschoolers. Factors depend on parental attitudes, educational goals for their children, and amount of supervision.

Stevenson expounds on factors of technology use in the home through a case study of eight families. He examined parents buying technology for educational potentials. When, in fact, it is only one of many social dimensions that are mixed in with those potentials. Those social dimensions complicate the issue of using technology for education. The study demonstrates a need for focus on how technology is actually used, not based on what could or should happen in the home. Parents described that family life and work life have blurred with the introduction of the internet. Not only that, home and school life is also blurred. It is always thought that computers appeal to young children regardless of what there used for, but this is not always the case. Regardless of what computers are used for, most families established rules on how they are used, for instance time rules. Such rules are subject to family values. These rules are used to regulate the relationship of family members and technology. Parents even use technology to enforce those rules.

One of the most common technology tools available to help parents enforce rules is the “V-Chip.” Fahlquist and Van De Poel discuss technology and parental responsibility specifically with the V-chip. The V-chip is a tool parents can use to control what their children are watching on television which has been used since 1997. There is also a discussion of this technology tool and others such as content-controlled software to block material on the internet with respect to parental responsibilities. Unlike content-controlled software, the V-Chip relies on a rating committee. It further discusses the delegation of parental responsibility in regards to the V-chip. Does the V-chip reduce responsibilities for children or it is a tool to exercise that responsibility? The authors argue that there are three notions of responsibilities underlying those questions, and they should be kept separate. The first notion is how responsibility distributed between humans could be delegated to technology. Specifically, does the V-Chip redistribute responsibility? Second, responsibility can be referred to as control. In regards to parents, they have more control over what their children watch. Finally, there is a reference to a deeper concept of responsibility called virtue. This involves the very core of what it means to be a parent.

Many parents believe technology is a valuable tool for education. They struggle finding balance in using it within family. They are concerned how technology affects the physical and mental development of their children. Safety appears to be a great concern as well. Many parents did not grow up with this type of technology and had a different lifestyle. This is the first generation where technology is widely available. Continual study is needed as technology use grows in the home. Parental views, parent’s perspectives, parental responsibility will change with this growth and next generation.

Work Cited

Davies, C. "Digitally Strategic: How Young People Respond To Parental Views About The Use Of Technology For Learning In The Home." Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 27.4 (2011): 324-335. Academic Search Premier. Web. 27 June 2014.

Fahlquist, J., and I. van de Poel. "Technology And Parental Responsibility: The Case Of The VChip." Science & Engineering Ethics 18.2 (2012): 285-300. Academic Search Premier.

Web. 27 June 2014.

Hollingworth, S., et al. "Parents' Perspectives On Technology And Children's Learning In The Home: Social Class And The Role Of The Habitus." Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 27.4 (2011): 347-360. Academic Search Premier. Web. 27 June 2014.

Jordan, Amy, and Romer Daniel. “Perspectives on Parenting in a Digital Age.” Media and the Well-Being of Children and Adolescents. Oxford University Press, 2014. 247-251 Web. 27 June 2014.

Plowman, L., et al. "Parents, Pre-Schoolers And Learning With Technology At Home: Some Implications For Policy." Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 27.4 (2011): 361-371. Academic Search Premier. Web. 27 June 2014.

Plowman, Lydia, Joanna McPake, and Christine Stephen. "The Technologisation Of Childhood? Young Children And Technology In The Home." Children & Society 24.1 (2010): 63-74. Academic Search Premier. Web. 27 June 2014.

Stevenson, O. "From Public Policy To Family Practices: Researching The Everyday Realities Of Families' Technology Use At Home." Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 27.4 (2011): 336-346. Academic Search Premier. Web. 27 June 2014.