Towards a healthy education: Humanizing education and the educationalisation of health

When speaking about the "educationalisation of social problems", theoreticians not seldom are condescending about it. Given their confidence with postmodern and poststructuralist perspectives, the educationalisation of social problems is easily perceived as a set of questionable interventions of governments in educational practices. For to what extent can a political agenda do justice to public education? Indeed, from such a perspective, schools are first and foremost subject to modernist mechanisms and Foucauldian control systems. And democratic governments appear to be slightly totalitarian when educationalizing or 'over-schooling' social reality. However, it is unclear to us whether much would be left of an education freed from the burden of social problems. Or even stronger, is it to be considered a burden after all? After having described at least four running meanings of the concept of educationalisation, we discuss three popular criticisms, i.e. the argument that educationalisation is based on a modernist idea of education, that it is a way in which governments dispose themselves of their political responsibilities, and that educationalisation almost equals with (or is symptomatic of) processes of governmentality. In reaction to this criticisms, we argue that education cannot be completely freed from the educationalisation of social issues (unless perhaps with a radically different concept of it). In that respect, one might wonder whether a democratic ordainment always bears something of a totalitarian regime in it. And suppose that social problem are banned from schools, what kind of education would we end up with. These and other issues are investigated while referring to concerns about and initiatives in health education in order to exemplify this.no ISBNstatus: publishe

The limits of "Blackboard" are the limits of my world: On the changing concepts of the university and its students

This article focuses on the changing concepts of the university student and teacher, of learning and teaching, and of the university as such because of the use and integration of electronic learning environments. This mode of digital learning implies important changes in established practices in which students and teachers inevitably take part. Hitherto familiar practices are at stake. The way we understand these changing practices suggests that the implementation of the digital learning environment encompasses more than just a mere instrumental change in the processes of teaching and learning. What at first sight only seems to be a simple material intervention puts a number of familiar concepts and noble intentions under stress. Without wanting to decline the use of information and communications technology in higher education, the authors argue that it is far from self-evident to accept an electronic learning environment as effectively supporting a student's self-intuition, or as stimulating learning as a critical and sustained activity.02status: publishe

The terror of explicitness: Philosophical remarks on the idea of a parenting contract

The new idea of a 'parenting contract', explicitly taking as its point of reference the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, is meant primarily to protect children's rights, and specifically the right to a proper upbringing. The nature of the parent-child relationship is thus drawn into the discourse of rights and duties. Although there is much to be said for parents explicitly attending to their children's upbringing, something of the uniqueness of the parent-child relationship seems to be occluded by the language of rights and duties as that relationship becomes narrowed down to the confines of a contractual agreement. What comes to be foregrounded in the parent-child relationship is a defence of the various parties'--the parents' and the child's--interests. By drawing on the work of Annette Baier, we argue that this has considerable consequences in terms of trust and distrust, and parental engagement. It is questioned whether the concept of the parenting contract brings about the positive climate of engagement which it is meant to promote.status: publishe

The Terror of Explicitness: Philosophical remarks on the idea of a parenting contract

Recently the concept ‘parenting contract’ or ‘parenting promise’ has been launched and developed. The idea behind this concept goes back to a specific understanding of recent developments regarding the so-called nuclear family and the child-rearing that is supposed to take place there. This promise or contract explicitly takes as its point of reference The Convention of the Rights of Children, and is meant primarily to protect children’s right, c.q. the right to a proper upbringing. An important consequence of introducing such concepts is that the nature of the parent-child relationship is drawn into (if not occluded by) the discourse of rights and duties. Evidently, there is not much wrong in defending the rights of children, and at first sight there seems to be a certain obviousness to the idea of parents explicitly engaging themselves with respect to their children’s upbringing. But something of the uniqueness of the parent-child relationship seems to be left unspoken in the language of rights and duties. This will be shown in this paper by pointing out what follows from the introduction of the idea of a parenting promise or contract: if we mean what we say, what, then, follows? And, after realizing that, do we still want to mean what we say? It will be argued that by bringing the parent-child relationship into the discourse of rights and duties by installing the practice of expressing a parenting promise, this relationship is narrowed down to the confines of a contractual agreement. What comes to stand foreground in the parent-child relationship is a defense of (parental versus the child’s) interests. By drawing on the work of Annette Baier, it will be shown that this has considerable consequences in terms of trust/distrust and parental engagement. It is questioned whether the concept of parenting contract brings about the positive climate of engagement which is said to promote.status: publishe