Self Reflection & Innovative Pedagogy - Equipping students and New Media

Henry Jenkins comments on media convergence are particularly resonating for me.

One thing that I have learnt, quite simply, is that I am a “learner”. Of course learning is a lifelong process, but in the context of my education practice, for the first time ever, my teaching role is in the midst of change. As Sonia Livingstone suggests; children are, for the first time in history, seen “as a source of wisdom rather than innocence and ignorance” (2009 p. 181), particularly in the areas of New and Digital Media and the emergence of participatory culture, of which film and television is still a part. The media landscape is changing and rapidly.

Back in the mid 1990s, I was involved in a short television project, funded by The Australia Council, about “Interactive television”. It was broadcast as part of a short film series on SBS and was a very exciting experience.  I remember thinking how farfetched it seemed, but at the same time I was open to that fact that this could very well be a reality. I just probably did not expect that to be in just under a decade. Now, film and television has indeed converged with online technology, and often I find myself accessing YouTube to watch long lost videos and music clips, see innovative animations from new film makers and enjoy movies. Not only can I just watch these programs, but I can comment on online communities and give my opinions to others and meet like minded audience members. In a strange way, although I may never meet these people, film and television has become a social experience other than just one I enjoy with my family in the living room or share with a class.

Teaching media literacy is at the very core of my subject area. One reason I elected to take this subject in Youth, Popular Culture and Texts was to update my knowledge in this arena, particularly as media converges.  I acknowledge that this will be fundamental content to my teaching practice and that it will also impact on pedagogy.  I use these technologies as a layman, and in my regular everyday activities, but understanding the context for its use in education and learning with young people is vital. Although I have trained in film and television and been involved in various media productions, before embarking in a career in the education field, my knowledge will always need to be current.  I am a learner in the world of New Media and as Frances Willard, an American educator of a bygone era once said:
"No matter how one may think himself accomplished, when he sets out to learn a new language, science, or the bicycle, he has entered a new realm as truly as if he were a child newly born into the world."  ~Frances Willard, How I Learned to Ride the Bicycle

My students, born as “digital natives” (Prensky 1991) are the experts.  However, as Jenkins (2009 p. 15) says “children and youths do indeed know more about these new media environments than most parents and teachers. In fact, we do not need to protect them so much as to engage them in critical dialogues that help them articulate more fully their intuitive understanding of those experiences”. Students still need adult guidance and facilitation in their learning. Another thing that is interesting is that debates about media literacy are not new, but they are no longer restricted to the media education classroom. As Livingstone (2009 p. 198) asserts “once a rather specialist issue for media practitioners and educators...media literacy is now a central issue for everyone concerned with people’s – not only children’s – critical, participatory and creative engagement with all forms of media and communications” . It is being realised, just how important media literacy is, just not in a Film, Television and New Media classroom, but across the entire school curriculum.

Given these issues in mind, this relates to a few things I would like to bring into the media education classroom. It would be fascinating to observe how a project or unit could be spread over several different media types – a thematic unit. Rather than students doing isolated tasks on each media form (such as an animation or a singular video as part of a unit in Australia film for example), it would be exciting to see how a film/video project from production practice could be made from conception to upload on YouTube and blogged in process and review.  In production practice, where students may have usually have kept a written journal of the process, this component of a task could be moved to a blog. Students could share with their production group and exchange video links and ideas. A Critique section could also be done via blog, rather than a submitted via hard copy assignment allowing students to provide actual film and television excerpts as reference. Where permission would allow, a mash up of videos could be produced for a unit like Teenage film or music video,  where students could change the meaning of a video text by mashing it together and juxtaposing different images together to create another meaning. But unlike the editing suite, they would upload this to another source for informal comment and use existing texts and share their production more widely. Blogs could also allow students to exchange and incorporate ideas like a scrapbook and provide feedback for each other. This could be particularly interesting in topics such as ‘advertising’ or ‘propaganda’. 

Another thought was to take advantage of students knowing more than their elders in some areas, and to develop a unit that focuses on this, to assess prior knowledge, to not only realise any possible “participation gaps” (Jenkins 2009) in the class, but to develop a collaborative way to teach others using New Digital Media in a peer learning environment. Additionally, it would be good to run community forum software off a school’s website, to allow students to discuss their favourite television and films and as a result, base an assessment task around an interest shared community like this. The opportunities of teaching with New Media are boundless. Collaborative learning would move beyond the classroom and online. Students could share ideas whenever they came to them, and work on production tasks with a more flexible approach. As Jenkins (2009) and Quin (2003) assert that educators have always known that students learn best through experimentation and observation – basically learning by doing, rather than by reading a text book or attending a lecture. Simulations, like those suggested above, would help broaden their experiences in learning and their understanding of various media texts.

My part of this blog has focused largely on media and moral panics, and issues that concern youth. Moral panics still occur today, and I did encounter some, via parental concern with units that I taught. Being a parent now myself, I do understand a lot more why parents may be concerned about various issues, and this unit has allowed me to think about New Media and popular culture, not just with my educator’s hat on, but as a parent as well. It is a very exciting time for education with the advent of New Media, and it something that provides boundless opportunities. Once we lay the critical foundations in place with our students through analysis and critique, the new media technology can be used to best advantage in the classroom and provide students with the resources for fantastic learning experiences.

Elizabeth

REFERENCES:
Jenkins, H. (2009) Confronting the Challenges of Participatory Culture: Media education for the 21st Century. United States. Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Jenkins, H. (2006) Convergence Culture: Where old and new media collide. New York. New York University Press.

Jenkins, H. (Speaker) Henry Jenkins [streaming video recording] Retrieved: October 1st 2010. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibJaqXVaOaI

Livingstone, S. (2009) Children and the Internet. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Prensky, M. (2001) Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants. On the Horizon. (9) 5 pp. 1-6.

Quin, R. (2003) Questions of Knowledge in Australian Media Education. Television and New Media. (4), 439-460.

Teen comedy films: patriarchal privilege and the white, middle-class male



Infantile manhood of the privileged white male: the boys from American Pie

Film, like most media, not only constructs particular youth identities, it shapes the audience's understanding of them (Mallan & Pearce, 2003).  Representations of youth, particularly young males, foster a certain "patriarchal privilege" (Steinberg & Kincheloe, 1998) that provides a basis for exploration of masculine identity.  This is specifically observed in vulgar teen comedy films, where youth identities are defined through conflict with the world around them.  Moreover, this conflict reflects the social and economic context of youth at the time of the film's production.  This entry responds to Speed (2010), whose article, 'Loose Cannons: White Masculinity and the Vulgar Teen Comedy Film', explores how social forces influence the type of male youth on screen and his heroic qualities.  The article tracks the progression of teen comedies from the 1970s to the late 1990s, focusing on gender identity formation and, specifically in relation to the male characters, the pursuit of sexual mastery.  Ultimately, it will be shown that such representations of (young) men are limited, but educators can use such films as valuable teaching resources.

While there are some marked differences in contemporary vulgar teen comedies, some elements have remained unchanged.  Speed (2010, p. 821) identifies three specific 'cycles', each with their own characteristics.  Teen comedies of the 1970s, largely influenced by the social movements of the 1960s, foreground the "defiance of institutional authority" (ibid.), usually by young men rather than teenagers.  In the 1980s, films such as Porky's portrayed teenagers engaging in more sexual activity with less focus on resisting social institutions; there was an "absence of belief in youth's capacity to expand social and cultural boundaries" (p. 824).  By the 1990s, vulgar teen comedies, such as American Pie or Road Trip, privileged the "pursuit of sex over subversive acts" (ibid.) with an increasing "suburbanization" of teenage sexuality.  Furthermore, the chief problem to resolve in such films was the "failure of the male sexual quest" (ibid., p. 825).  Despite differences in social contexts, two assumptions about youth masculinity remain constant through the cycles.  Firstly, teen boys have a cultural space of their own in which they can revel and rebel, seemingly immune from any consequence.  Greven (2002, p. 15) explains that teen comedies "exploit this special zone of identity" for male characters.  Secondly, the type of masculinity that is privileged in all films is one that is dominant and "terrorizes those who are weak and/or different" (Steinberg & Kincheloe, 1998, p. 125).  Given their popularity, vulgar teen comedies are worthy of critique, particularly with respect to the repeated messages consumed by generations of young male viewers.

A regular moral panic is that popular culture is responsible for the disappearance of childhood; in other words, it is corrupting our youth (Brooks, 2008).  It could be argued that teen comedies shape this perception as the world of the film is often represented in a similar way.  At the core of teen comedies is the crisis of youth masculinity for the comfortable, middle-class white male.  Being so intent on "proving maleness" (Steinberg & Kincheloe, 1998, p. 112), there is a decline in social advancement and an "absence of social perspective" (Speed, 2010, p. 828).  Unlike earlier cycles, teen comedies from the 1990s onwards project characters whose purpose is detached from any social or political agenda.  Characters are launched on a quest for sex, often as a road trip, as a means of transitioning into adulthood.  Such representations can easily be blamed for contributing to the "toxic effect" (Brooks, 2008, p. 3) of popular culture on youth.

Speed (2010) asserts that for male characters in vulgar teen comedies social freedom is derived from the hedonistic adventures of the road trip.  These white, middle-class young men can be understood as the archetypal "maverick heroes" (Steinberg & Kincheloe, 1998) who do things their own way and exist outside regular social boundaries.  While they elicit sympathy at first, viewers often end up repulsed by the attitude that, as privileged males, they are "entitled to misbehave" and have the capacity to "recreate chaos and destruction" (ibid., p. 109) without any ramifications.  Such depictions work to "imprint a hatred and fear of youth" (ibid., p. 111) beyond the film, which is counterproductive and fuels unease about the place of media in the lives of young people. 

As well as being a privileged, white, middle-class male, it is the favourable representation of a patriarchal order that is also of concern in vulgar teen comedies.  Conflict is often linked to encounters with differences in class or gender, in that those who live and behave outside the familiar territory of the protagonist suffer (Speed, 2010, p. 831).  For example, in pursuit of their manliness, women are violated and exploited without any consequence for the male character: "women ultimately exist as sexual objects to 'service' male needs" (Steinberg & Kincheloe, 1998, p. 114).  Indeed, some female characters, such as in American Pie, educate their male friends to help them on their sexual quest.  Likened to sitcoms featuring mismatched couples, such representations of gender "encourage viewers to accept patriarchy as a 'natural' male trait and trivialize sexism as a laughing matter" (Walsh, Fursich & Jefferson, 2008, p. 123).  As one of the recurring depictions of male characters, it is also one of the most confronting.

Vulgar teen comedies repeat messages of masculinity that serve to perpetuate attitudes and beliefs about being a 'real man'.  In an exploration of cultivation theory, Shanahan and Morgan (1999, p. 15) expose "media's role in social control" as it defines our assumptions and nurtures particular worldviews.  For youth, who are the receivers of countless messages about gender at a time when they are searching for their own expression of identity, the adult world seems strange and dull (Greven, 2002, p. 15).  The final destination of the road trip is the metaphoric adult world; however, the behaviour of men in the adult sphere is hardly different from the immaturity of younger generations.  Indeed, the rise in vulgarity and juvenile humour has been ascribed to teen comedies as they continually represent an "infantile stage in...manhood" (ibid., p. 21), particularly in recent decades.  With the repetition of such identities, young viewers' understanding of gender identity becomes devoid of any "insight into its social positioning" (Speed, 2010, p. 837) and consumed with individual rather than group priorities.

The main point to take from Speed (2010) is that youth masculinity is still in crisis.  Each cycle of films embeds specific social and political concerns of the day into the characters' actions and attitudes.  The notion of privilege within white middle-class is something of which we should be critical, as it carries assumed entitlements that are unjust, insensitive and often immoral.  Being aware of these issues would help educators see such films as opportunities to connect with students and engage in meaningful discussion about cultural assumptions and gender constructs.  Some claim that most men are "more insecure with their masculinity than they let their peers, parents and teachers know" (Steinberg & Kincheloe, 1998, p. 124).  As such, a deliberate exploration of masculine identity beyond the narrow representations in comedy films is needed.  Alternatively, a study of how humour is used to construct characters and social scenarios would be worthwhile.  Moreover, the texts need to be viewed with a goal for greater understanding of difference, diversity and justice.

Greg

REFERENCES

Brooks, K. (2008). Consuming innocence: popular culture and our children. St Lucia, QLD: UQP.

Greven, D. (2002). Dude, where's my gender? Contemporary teen comedies and new forms of American masculinity. Cineaste, 27(3), 14-21.

Mallan, K., & Pearce, S. (2003). Introduction: tales of youth in a postmodern culture. In K. Mallan & S. Pearce (Eds.), Youth cultures: texts, images, and identities (pp. ix-xix). Westport: Praeger.

Shanahan, J., & Morgan, M. (1999). Television and the viewers: cultivation theory and research. Cambridge: Oxford University Press Cambridge.

Speed, L. (2010). Loose cannons: white masculinity and the vulgar teen comedy film. The journal of popular culture, 43(4), 820-841.

Steinberg, S., & Kincheloe, J. (1998). Privileged and getting away with it: the cultural studies of white, middle-class youth.  Studies in the literary imagination, 31(1), 103-126.

Walsh, K., Fursich, E., & Jefferson, B. (2008). Beauty and the patriarchal beast: gender role portrayals in sitcoms featuring mismatched couples. Journal of popular film and television, 36(3), 123-132.

"Racy" Teen Drama - A very short retrospective.

IS GLEE TOO RACY? Seattle Times Article.
One of the popular teenage drama programs at the moment is Glee. A television show about a glee singing club in an American high school.


It deals with issues such as teen pregnancy, bullying and homosexuality. It is broadcast at 7.30pm on Channel 10 and is classified "PG" (Parental Guidance). But some critics have said that the show is too racy. The Parents Television Council in the United States have slammed Glee as being unsuitable and "explicit". However, compared to some 1980s and 90s teen television drama, it barely scratches the surface.

When I was in my early teens, one of the popular teenage dramas at the time was a Canadian program called Degrassi Junior High . The young teens (and pre teens) came across as relatively authentic and they seemed to deal with "real issues". The program, and the sequel series Degrassi High, was made between 1987 and 1991 and was broadcast as part of the afternoon children's television line up on the ABC. It dealt with issues including teenage pregnancy, drugs, suicide, homosexuality, abortion and AIDS. Although, incidently Degrassi did encounter some moral panic in the UK, when the BBC refused to broadcast any more of the series, due to the program addressing the topic of homosexuality . However, only a couple of years later, the UK had the popular teenage drama Press Gang that dealt with similar controversial issues relevant to teenagers, such as solvent abuse, child abuse and teenage suicide. This too became part of the ABC's afternoon children's line up in the early 1990s. Additionally, Australia produced its own gritty teen drama, that also dealt with such topics, called Heartbreak High. It was critically acclaimed for its openness to deal with these issues.

As with anything like this, Lumby and Fine (2006 p. 71) point out "like all activities, television watching needs to be supervised by adults. It needs to be limited in a way that is age appropriate... and adults need to be available to talk to kids about what they have just seen". So, yes, these shows may be controversial, but that is the point. They aim to generate critical discussion about sensitive issues that are relevant to teenagers and bring these out into the open for dialogue between parents and trusted adults.

Elizabeth

REFERENCES:
Lumby, C. & Fine, D. (2006). TV villains: media panics. In C. Lumby & D. Fine (Eds.), Why TV is good for kids: raising 21st century children (pp. 55-96). Sydney: MacMillan

Noveck, J. (2010) Is Glee to racy for tweens? The Seattle Times Sunday May 23rd 2010. Retrieved October 1st 2010 from http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/television/2011922968_glee24.html?syndication=rss 

Wikipedia (2010) Degrassi Junior High retrieved October 1st 2010 from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Degrassi_Junior_High