{"title":"The impact of the pandemic on the school-family relationship","authors":"Bram de Muynck","doi":"10.1177/20569971211069295","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"One of the remarkable issues on which the COVID-19 pandemic has shed new light is the relationship between school and family. For countries that have not had wars on their own soil for a long time that would prevent children from going to school, the pandemic has turned the firmly established relationship upside down. What kind of relationship are we talking about? To say the least, the relationship seemed untouchable. Ever since schools became institutionally embedded in society and ordered according to the standards of modernity (in most Western countries since the 19th century), the dominant partner in that relationship was the school. Parents had a duty to send their children to school, and the school then asked parents to support the learning process as best they could. The pedagogical context of the parents complemented the pedagogical context of the school (DeMuynck, 2021). However, this relationship is exactly the opposite of the ideal usually promoted in the Christian tradition, which views schools as providing a service to the primary educators—the parents. The inverted relationship—the dominance of the school in which parents serve the school—has proven effective. Indeed, many projects on parent involvement have found that positive messages parents give to their children about schools enhance school success. And support by parents given at home for the learning at school is one of the most effective aspects of parental involvement (Van Voorhis, 2011). The pandemic brought attention back to the original teaching role of parents. Children’s learning often became entirely dependent on their parents’ efforts to teach their children. Even where homeschooling was illegal (e.g. in Germany), teaching at home suddenly became normal. Many parents turned out to be capable of much more than they thought possible. Schools suddenly played a subservient role to that of parents again. However, parents were only able to help their children properly if the school communicated adequately. Thus, the circumstances of the times directed attention away from what was most effective to what was most fundamental. Parents are not an extension of","PeriodicalId":13840,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Christianity & Education","volume":"26 1","pages":"3 - 5"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Christianity & Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20569971211069295","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
One of the remarkable issues on which the COVID-19 pandemic has shed new light is the relationship between school and family. For countries that have not had wars on their own soil for a long time that would prevent children from going to school, the pandemic has turned the firmly established relationship upside down. What kind of relationship are we talking about? To say the least, the relationship seemed untouchable. Ever since schools became institutionally embedded in society and ordered according to the standards of modernity (in most Western countries since the 19th century), the dominant partner in that relationship was the school. Parents had a duty to send their children to school, and the school then asked parents to support the learning process as best they could. The pedagogical context of the parents complemented the pedagogical context of the school (DeMuynck, 2021). However, this relationship is exactly the opposite of the ideal usually promoted in the Christian tradition, which views schools as providing a service to the primary educators—the parents. The inverted relationship—the dominance of the school in which parents serve the school—has proven effective. Indeed, many projects on parent involvement have found that positive messages parents give to their children about schools enhance school success. And support by parents given at home for the learning at school is one of the most effective aspects of parental involvement (Van Voorhis, 2011). The pandemic brought attention back to the original teaching role of parents. Children’s learning often became entirely dependent on their parents’ efforts to teach their children. Even where homeschooling was illegal (e.g. in Germany), teaching at home suddenly became normal. Many parents turned out to be capable of much more than they thought possible. Schools suddenly played a subservient role to that of parents again. However, parents were only able to help their children properly if the school communicated adequately. Thus, the circumstances of the times directed attention away from what was most effective to what was most fundamental. Parents are not an extension of