"...curriculum itself is a mediation: it is a constructed representation of the world, not a neutral reflection of it."
"... the potentially threatening nature of the kinds of 'critical thinking' that are inherent in media education."
As I looked back over my notes today, these were the quotes that I kept coming back to. I like to begin my first U.S. History unit by having my students participate in a chalk walk. For those not familiar, a chalk walk is an activity in which I place posters with various quotes and pictures on a given subject around the classroom and students respond to the quotes and pictures by writing on the posters. For this first chalk walk, I include quotes and pictures from a contemporary of Columbus about the Native American people who were enslaved and killed by Columbus and his men. It tends to be a very effective way to show students that what we view as "history" is very much colored by who is telling the story. I feel that helping students to recognize that the curriculum they study in a history classroom-- or in any of their other subjects for that matter-- is not value neutral or objective information should be one of the great goals of education. For that reason, I would embrace a shift that helped students to develop those type of critical thinking skills but then I'm in this program so you probably already knew that. The difficulty comes in convincing others that media literacy can build those skills and furthermore that this is a desirable goal.
The idea that students need to be protected from ideas is still far too common in education. I've been very lucky the last two years in that I work at a school were I'm given a lot of leeway in the choice of media I use in my classroom but I am very aware that not every teacher is so lucky. I do think there are a lot of people out there-- both professionals in the education field and lay people-- who think that students should be taught critical thinking as long as they come to the "right" conclusions. Of course, I am guilty of this myself at times so I can see why it has the potential to be an obstacle in media education.
I feel like I've really focused in on one kind of narrow idea from this week's reading and I'm sorry for that because I really enjoyed these chapters. I felt like Buckingham laid out an excellent case for what elements should be considered essential in a media education program as well as giving lots of good practical solutions for how to teach those elements in the classroom. I'm just hung up on this idea of the rejection of media education because it teaches kids to be critical and evaluate the information they are given--no matter the method of delivery-- and that for some people that is a bad thing.
2 comments:
I do think that one of the main obstacles that media education faces (as you pointed out) is the idea that we're essentially teaching students to question media texts, and by extension, the teachers who introduce them to those texts. I think that this is potentially scary, but I don't feel like it will ruin education--it will make students more responsible for what they are learning.
As an undergrad, when I would tell people that I studied film, they would often respond, "Oh, so you're one of those people who ruins movies for everyone else." When we first go into classrooms in Hands on a Camera, some students get the idea that analyzing a movie somehow "ruins" it. Ultimately though, as nearly every student in an introduction to film class discovers, questioning media texts is fun, because it leaves the viewer feeling empowered. Similarly, acknowledging biases in the curriculum (and those we have as teachers) doesn't leave students lost: it empowers them. I don't see how this can be construed as a bad thing.
Like Erika, it floors me that some people see critical evaluation of information as a bad thing, but I had to say it - it is true. Particularly when it runs against their "better" judgment and grates against their personal opinions which they take as fact. But, as a teenager it wasn't until I caught the vision of how things are constructed and their intent to inform, persuade, manipulate, etc. that the world opened up to me. Suddenly, I was able to understand art, literature, history (all of which were my favorite subjects in high school). Films came alive for me at the time. I remember the switch in my thinking when a teacher had us watch "Chariots of Fire" (which I had found totally boring) and got us to think about the implications of the film: boom! I was hooked on all the nuances and layers of meaning behind the texts of history and media and storytelling. This made studying and learning all the more interesting. Media education is a great way to open up the world to the eyes of teenagers and adults. I think it a "desirable goal" just for that fact alone and I too wish others could see and understand that.
Post a Comment