Bilgi ve iletişim teknolojilerinde hızla meydana gelen gelişmeler, bireylerin gündelik yaşamında önemli bir yer edinmiş, bu durum vatandaşlık biçimlerine yeni bir soluk kazandırmıştır. Yaygınlaşan dijital teknolojilerin artan kullanımı ile birlikte her birey adeta dijital dünyanın vatandaşı konumuna gelmiştir. Bu durum yeni etkileşim biçimleri ve sorumlulukları da beraberinde getirmiştir. Dijital vatandaşlık eğitimi bu bakımdan her geçen gün önemi daha fazla artan bir ihtiyaç haline gelmiştir. İşte bu kitap, iyi bir dijital vatandaş yetiştirmede kullanılacak bir başvuru eseri olması amacıyla hazırlanmıştır. İçerisinde bölümler olarak sunulan oturumlar her bir dijital vatandaşlık boyutunu okuyucuya kazandırarak, neticesinde de iyi dijital vatandaşlar olmanın anahtarını sunmaktadır.

It is one of the complaints of the schoolmaster that the public does not defer to his professional opinion as completely as it does to that of practitioners in other professions. At first sight it might seem as though this indicated a defect either in the public or in the profession; and yet a wider view of the situation would suggest that such a conclusion is not a necessary one. The relations of education to the public are different from those of any other professional work. Education is a public business with us, in a sense that the protection and restoration of personal health or legal rights are not. To an extent characteristic of no other institution, save that of the state itself, the school has power to modify the social order. And under our political system, it is the right of each individual to have a voice in the making of social policies as, indeed, he has a vote in the determination of political affairs. If this be true, education is primarily a public business, and only secondarily a specialized vocation. The layman, then, will always have his right to some utterance on the operation of the public schools.

The art of teaching grew up in the schoolroom, out of inventiveness and sympathetic concrete observation. Even where (as in the case of Herbart) the advancer of the art was also a psychologist, the pedagogics and the psychology ran side by side, and the former was not derived in any sense from the latter. The two were congruent, but neither was subordinate. And so everywhere the teaching must agree with the psychology, but need not necessarily be the only kind of teaching that would so agree; for many diverse methods of teaching may equally well agree with psychological laws.

To know psychology, therefore, is absolutely no guarantee that we shall be good teachers. To advance to that result, we must have an additional endowment altogether, a happy tact and ingenuity to tell us what definite things to say and do when the pupil is before us. That ingenuity in meeting and pursuing the pupil, that tact for the concrete situation, though they are the alpha and omega of the teacher’s art, are things to which psychology cannot help us in the least.