Justifying Media/Film Study in the Curriculum
In many school districts, media/film study is perceived as peripheral or even irrelevant to teaching "basic skills" or "subject content." It is further assumed that classroom time should not be devoted to viewing videos or DVD's when students are or can view media texts "outside" of the classroom or if such viewing is simply being used by teachers to entertain students or substitute viewing for "instructional" activities.
Media education is taken far more seriously in other countries. In Australia, students study media from K - 12th grade. In Britain, students take national exams in media studies. In Ontario, media education has required in grades 7-12 since 1987.
It is also assumed that viewing lacks the intellectual rigor of having to respond to, compose, and discuss print texts, particularly if students are perceived to lack "literacy skills" and are failing the basic skills tests. As reported in the Minneapolis StarTribune, a school board member of the Eden Prairie School District complained that teachers in the district were using videos and DVD's inappropriately:
To me, showing movies is a pretty low skill level. I would
rather that teachers use the skills
they have to get students involved in reading and discussing topics. . . . If
we're showing a
lot of videos in the classroom, then I view it as a problem. We do get parents
calling us,
saying: 'Why are they showing "Schindler's List?" Why are we showing
"Pippi
Longstocking?"
If you were a teacher in the Eden Prairie district, how would you respond to this perception of the "problem?"
There are a number of problems with these assumptions, problems related to limited notions of "literacy" and "texts." These assumptions presuppose a clear distinction between "reading" and "writing" as related to print texts and "viewing" as related to media texts. However, in responding to media texts, viewers are employing a range of "reading"practices-comprehending messages, defining links, critiquing assumptions, etc. Moreover, they may also be actively "writing" in composing their own response to or versions of media texts.
There is also the assumption that there's clear distinction
between print and non-print texts and that schooling should be focused on teaching
students to learn to "read" print texts. However, many texts could
now be described as "hybrid texts" (Stroupe, 2000). Many texts--Web
pages, magazine articles, CNN news broadcasts, computer games, etc., combine
images and print, along with sound and digital clips. Responding to these "hybrid
texts" requires a new set of literacies associated with learning to respond
to and create these texts. (For is discussion of
multiple/hybrid literacies-integrating literacies into different subjects:
http://www.edc.org/spotlight/mosaic2/newmedia.htm
Students are learning how to attend to relevant visual and print cues in order to not only infer a text's message, but to also discern the underlying agenda behind that message-what is this text trying to do or sell to me? how is this text trying to position or construct me as audience? Learning to comprehend these messages requires not only the ability to understand the language of the text; it also requires the ability to critically analyze the images of the text and how those images are intersecting with the language.
Another underlying assumption, reflected in the Eden Prairie school board member's comments, is that the activity of viewing videos or DVD's is an intellectually vacuous exercise because audiences are perceived to be passively absorbing visual stimuli in a manner that requires little or no active construction of meaning associated with reading print texts, or, no critical analysis. This "active"/"passive" distinction fails to appreciate the degree to which audiences, while they may not be vocalizing or expressing their response, are still involved in responding to media texts by attempting to interpret and interrogate meanings, as well as define modes of engagement, connections with other texts, explain actions, or judge quality. The degree to which an audience or reader adopts an "active" or "passive" stance is often a function of their own purpose or agenda for responding. In many cases, readers read print texts simply to extract "correct answers" on a test, a stance that does little to encourage "active," critical response. And, in other cases, viewers do simply "veg-out," in front of a television set, engaging in little or no active participation with the text.
It is further assumed that the more difficult or complex a text, the more likely students will be engaged with that text on an intellectual or "academic" level. Therefore, studying a television program such as The X-Files is assumed to provide little intellectual involvement as opposed to The Great Gatsby. While it is certainly important for English teachers to provide students with exposure to fine works of literature, it does not follow that students cannot engage in relatively high-level critical analysis of media texts.
Given the fact that students do devote considerable amount of time to responding to media texts, it could be argued that one purpose of media education is to encourage students to think strategically or critically about the various media texts in their lives. One strategy for fostering such a proactive stance is to encourage students to be continually creating their own media texts as part of making sense of their own lives and identities as constructed through participation with these texts in the mediascape. Adolescents who define themselves as fans of a particular rock band often assume roles as participants on that band's fan club chat room.
Another assumption is that school should entail serious,
hard work, and that participation with media texts is simple, pleasurable entertainment.
This reflects a suspicious about having students engaged in pleasurable, enjoyable
activities as inconsistent with the rigor of school work. It is important in
all aspects of media education not to lose sight of the ways in which media
afford pleasure. It is also important that pleasure can derive from rigorous,
analytical response to media texts-that students can learn to engage in critical
analysis of film or television in a manner that affords them pleasure in, for
example, critiquing the racist elements of prime-time television.