Public Media, Public Education, and the Public Good: An Interview with Heather Chaplin (Part Two)

Editor’s note: This is my last post of 2009. See you in the new year. I am going to take some time off with my family.

Much of your discussion centers around the impact of public media on public education. How would you describe the ideal learning environment for the 21st century and what blocks us from achieving that ideal?

One could write a book on that topic! Well, one of the intriguing things about creating a more intimate relationship between public media and public education is that public media is in possession of a national treasure of historical materials. Part of NPL would be assisting public media in digitizing that material and retooling it for teachers to use while teaching.

So imagine a science class where the teacher can pull out a segment from Nova on the spot to illustrate the answer to a particular question asked by a student. Or using a bit of an interview from a Jim Leher interview to make a political point. The examples could go on for ever. And, unlike the archives of corporate-owned media, these arches belong to the American public. We paid for them and we should take advantage of them.

There are also real opportunities for public media to be involved teaching kids media skills. Imagine a local PBS station also being a hub where kids could take classes on video editing, or putting together sound pieces, or making videogames. Part of public media 2.0 calls for local stations to take a greater role in serving their local communities directly.

In terms of the classroom of the future in general, I see digital media as a huge opportunity. I don’t believe, however, that digital media tools replace things like smaller teacher-to-student ratios. And I do worry, on some level, about having so much of our lives mediated by machines. I see these digital media tools being used when appropriate to enhance the teaching experience and not as a replacement for teacher to student contact. For example, the idea of using 3-D models of molecules to teach science: that’s probably just a better and more effective way of teaching what a molecule is than giving a lecture on one. Therefore, since it’s something we can do, we should. On the other hand, discussing a great novel is probably best done by teacher-student discussion. That should go away. It’s a matter of understanding the technology now at our disposal and making good choices of when to use it.

What blocks us from achieving these goals? A lot of things. The public school system in this country is messed up almost beyond belief and on every level. Bush’s push towards more standardization certainly didn’t help – it meant teachers teaching kids to pass certain standardized tests, and not teaching them to be critical thinkers, to be genuinely literate in the sense of being able to create meaning. Our schools are wildly underfunded, and even when money is available, the resistance to change is staggering. I asked one former state school superintendent what she’d do to fix the public education system in this country and she – a mild-looking women in a tweed suit – said she’d blow the whole thing up and start from scratch.

What’s so scary is how high the stakes are. Democracy requires an educated citizenry. Without that, you regress to mob rule. Part of being free is knowing how to use your mind.

You are calling for improvements in the broadband infrastructure to bring richer media content into schools but schools are also seeking to police the flow of content into the classroom, blocking off access to social networking and media sharing sites, for example. How might we resolve this tension between the desire to broaden and to regulate access to information in the 21st century classroom?

Another excellent question and I wish I had the answer. It is true that schools and teachers fear the Internet desperately. In part, I think people fear the lack of control the vastness of the Internet implies, I think they fear the new, and I think on some level they simply fear and distrust new technology. People tend to think the things they didn’t grow up with are somehow bad.

To me, however, it’s like we’ve built a high-way system, said hey! our whole world is now going to be based on this new highway system – but we’re not going to teach anyone to drive. It’s sheer lunacy.

I think schools need to learn to teach kids how to use the Internet, not hide them from it. The reasons for this are too numerous – and too well elucidated by you, Henry!, to even go into right here. As to some sort of solution, I can’t help but think the answer is working with teachers and parents.

We need to educate people as to what 21st century literacy will require – because being literate in the 21st century is going to be very different from being literate in the 20th century. You simply will not be literate in the future if you don’t know how to handle the Internet in a meaningful way. I teach journalism, and I do several classes where everybody brings in their lap top and we do experiments on Internet research, for example. But then that’s at the college level and I have freedom over what I get to teach. Again, I can’t say enough how high I think the stakes are.

Think of the kid growing up in a small rural town that doesn’t even have Internet access. How is that kid going to manage as an adult competing against kids who’ve been using the Internet since they were toddlers? If the schools don’t take this on, children in rural and poor areas will suffer the most and will be left behind even more than they already are.

You argue that concerns about “station by-pass” have sometimes placed public television at war with the new digital tools and participatory culture. Explain. How might we resolve this conflict?

Local public media stations are afraid for their existence. If everything is digital and handled via the Internet, and broadcast becomes a thing of the past, the question does arise of why they even exist. What is their purpose?

The answer to this lies in re-envisioning the role of the local station in its community. A lot of the public media community is starting to image the local station as a community hub, doing serious local journalism, creating forums and town-hall-style meetings, and providing resources for solving local problems. Also, as I mentioned above, taking a greater role in teaching youth to be media literate. The network of local stations is an infrastructure aimed at serving the public good already in place; we shouldn’t waste it. But we do need to re-imagine it.

A decade ago, the push to respond to the digital divide led to the wiring of classrooms often without adequate pedagogical goals or professional development. We wired the classroom-now what? How do we avoid the replication of this same problem where the expansion of technical infrastructure outstrips the educational vision needed to use these tools towards meaningful pedagogy?

This is another great question and I feel woefully unqualified to answer it. It’s so easy to say what ought to happen, and another thing entirely to actually make something happen.

I think you put your finger on it before when you asked about teachers’ wanting to keep the Internet, social networking, etc. out of the classroom. Or Jim Gee talks very eloquently about classrooms very methodically making kids leave everything they’re interested in at the door, thus essentially ensuring the kids will be uninterested in the classroom, and, most obviously, failing to take advantage of a kid’s natural interests to facilitate learning. Or I love the example I’ve heard you give of your Moby-Dick project getting stymied because the word “dick” had been blocked by school administrators from Internet searches.

I totally agree with you that having fancy technology is of no use whatsoever if there’s no vision of how to use it.

Part of what NPL advocates is also providing content for teachers to use in the classroom and a major push for teacher training when it comes to digital tools. But I know that’s kind of a cop-out answer, because how do you actually implement these things? How do you inspire vast change in a system notoriously mired in bureaucracy and seriously allergic to change? This is one of those questions of the ages.

It’s probably worth remembering that we are in a period of transition. In another ten years or so, the people signing on to become teachers will have grown up with digital technology and may feel more comfortable using it. In the meantime, I think an assault from all sides is necessary – pressing the Obama administration, which seems pretty savvy and progressive regarding digital technology, to get involved; working with parents to understand what’s at stake in terms of their kids’ education; educating teachers, etc

.

Educational games figure prominently in this report. This is not surprising given your previous work on games. Why might games be a particularly rich test case for the kind of expanded public media system you are describing?

Yes, I am very passionate about using games to teach and foster civic engagement. One example: right now simulations exist at all levels of the government for all kinds of things, from weather predictions, to budget issues, to military scenarios. Simulations can be incredibly powerful tools for learning how things work – why not take these simulations, which already exist and which we, as tax payers, financed, and turn them into games made available to the public to play with?

It would be cheap, could reach vast amounts of people quicly and easily, and could educate people about important things like how tax cuts or break will effect the economy, what the potential outcomes of military decisions might be, etc. In other words these could be powerful tools for fostering transparancy, which is key to a real democracy. We now have more data than we know what to do with.

Making games so that people can play with the data is one way to help people make sense of everything that is out there. Government data should be available to the public so that we can make informed decisions about what our government ought to be doing. Taking something that already exists- government-created simulations – and making them available as games to people seems a really obvious way to foster democracy.

I also think public media needs to begin funding games in the same way it funds educational television. The inspiration for the act of Congress that funded the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and created PBS and NPR in the first place was this idea that here was this new media – TV – and that we ought to be using it for more than just entertainment purposes. Well, that was 1967. It’s more than 30 years later and there’s a new new media on the block and that’s the videogame. Why leave such a powerful tool in the hands of corporate entertainment companies? As a society we want it in our arsenal of tools to educate the next generation of Americans to be active and engaged participants in our democracy.

Heather Chaplin is a professor of journalism at The New School and author of the book, Smartbomb: The Quest for Art Entertainment and Big Bucks in the Videogame Revolution. She recently participated in a Ford Foundation grant looking at issues of the public interest in the next generation of the Internet. She also works with the Corporation for Public Broadcasting on issues of digital literacy and journalism. She has been interviewed for and cited in publications such as The New Yorker, The Atlantic Monthly, The New York Times Magazine, Businessweek, and The Believer and has appeared on shows such as Talk of the Nation, and CBS Sunday Morning. Her work has appeared in The New York Times, The Los Angeles Times, GQ, Details, and Salon. She is a regular contributor on game culture for All Things Considered.

Comments

  1. john ranta says:

    I am a high school media arts teacher, fortunate to be teaching in a school that is well-supported with technology tools. Ms. Chaplin makes many great points, one of which I’d like to expand on.

    It would help if Ms. Chaplin was more specific when she says things like “our public schools are messed up beyond belief”. Such generalizations do not provide a lot of support or guidance for those of us working in (or paying attention to) public education.

    Our public educational goals and philosophy today (in 2010) are defined by leaders who were students themselves in the 1970s, 1980s (and to some extent) 1990s, people whose education was based almost entirely on books, and whose education was completed before the personal computer and the internet made it out of the labs. There’s a huge gap between the “new media” public education that Ms. Chaplin imagines, and the realities of today’s public high schools.

    Some of us in public education agree with much of what Ms. Chaplin proposes, but the implementation seems a long way away. We should not underestimate public schools’ readiness to tackle a “new media” makeover.

    In the past few years our school (and many of our peer schools) have instituted major efforts to improve “literacy”, an initiative that is driven by stagnant or slipping standardized test scores in reading and writing. “Literacy” is defined as a set of skills in reading and writing words. This is a major investment for us, an “all hands on deck effort” focused on improving literacy skills of all students, in all classes.

    For public schools to focus on “new media”, as Ms. Chaplin suggests, means that we have to expand our definition of literacy to include not just texts, but video, social web sites, podcasts, wikis, etc. Our text-focused literacy initiative is a huge undertaking. Evolving that to a “new media” literacy effort creates many, many challenges. Middle-aged educators’ immediate reaction to such a push would be to worry about the decreased emphasis on “book learning”, at a time when they are being pushed to increase text literacy. Standardized tests neither track nor reward such efforts. Educators who are not fluent themselves in new media need a lot of help developing skills and tools to integrate new media in their classrooms. The majority of schools which are not as fortunate as we are would face major capital ($$) investments to install high speed networks, hundreds of computers and lots of software, with a concomitant investment in technical support and training.

    We public educators who understand that our students are swimming in a “new media” ocean, and who want to make it an integral part of our classrooms, could use Ms. Chaplin’s help specifically with two things. We need our communities (tax payers and other stake holders outside of the school walls) to understand and embrace the importance of “new media” in the public schools. And we need training and tools for teachers who want to integrate new media into their curricula. Thought leaders like Ms. Chaplin (and Mr. Jenkins) can help us most by taking on those efforts. Help us convince our taxpayers, school boards, and superintendents that our literacy efforts should include all media, not just books and text. And create workshops and teaching materials based on new media (projects, rubrics, etc) for the social studies/math/science/language teachers to use confidently in their classrooms.

    That’s all :) – thanks! JR

  2. I’d been obsessed with my free porn videos younger sister’s sex life for almost two years when I finally found the courage and mobile porn the means to take a part in it. In fact, my obsession had probably been developing for quite some time before that without my noticing it free porn tube, my teenage unconscious taking in the form of her developing body, her budding breasts, her pheromones and whatnot since the onset of her puber

    ABB728019395

  3. In search of attempting on the internet for one high-quality read pertaining to the following topic . Scouting in Yahoo I lastly discovered this blog post. Reading this info I’m just glad to mention that I’ve got a really good feeling I came across the very things I was ready for. I’ll ensure to remember this blog and go here consistently.

    burberry outlet chi sleep apena

    gvf

    Coach Outlet yon sleeping remedies

  4. Helpful piece of writing. I can consider it be the case of course not normally. I usually don’t publish though I would like to chime in this time and let you know I appreciate the blog.Coach Outlet

  5. create a blog says:

    That is quite cool must say

    x hamster

  6. I am actual amorous about application amateur to advise and advance borough engagement. pass4sure 1z0-533 One appropriate now simulations abide at all levels of the government for all kinds of things, pass4sure 000-979 from acclimate predictions, to account issues, to aggressive scenarios. Simulations can be abundantly able accoutrement for acquirements how things plan pass4sure 1z0-518 why not yield these simulations, which already abide and which we, as tax payers, pass4sure 642-979 financed, and about-face them into amateur fabricated accessible to the accessible to play with?

  7. free games says:
  8. Robinson says:

    Very good post. Made me realize I was totally wrong about this issue. I figure that one learns something new everyday.

    Child Behavior Problems

    Potty Training Boys

    Potty Training Tips

    Potty Training Regression

  9. Pleased to visit your site,just good job.Thanks for sharing the wonderful experience.i also like LV wallets and some other 2011 louis vuitton.

  10. Interesting conversation, I have just read part 1 as well. Thanks for sharing.
    franchises for women