Girl Rising: Misguided Motivations for Change

Girl Rising is a prime example of Castells analysis that networked social movements are an emerging pattern. Although it’s not focused on politics or change in government, it follows much of the same outline. The film follows nine girls across the globe that face varying injustices, but the proposed solution is the same: education.

I struggled with the documentary because it feels more like an advertisement. This makes it a bit different from typical social movements because many are mobilized over the Internet by sharing injustice through social media. It is important to note that this movement has been mobilized by motivated individuals organizing showings of the film. The requirements are to find a willing theater and enough participants to support a film viewing. The primary motivation seems to be money because of this, not just awareness… because once aware, the only suggested solution is donations to the group that made the film.

"Movements are local and global at the same time." Castells describes how there are things going on within a community connecting to the internet, but it's also global "because they are connected throughout the world, they learn from other experiences, and in fact they are often inspired by these experiences to engage in their own mobilization." (Castells, p. 223) Girl Rising fits because the local movement is those organized theater groups. It is inherently global because education for women is an issue affecting the whole world as portrayed by the various women in the film.

"In terms of genesis, these movements are largely spontaneous in their origin, usually triggered by a spark of indignation either related to a specific event or to a peak of disgust with the actions of the rulers." (Castells, p. 224) The movie does not present hope with the stories. It “creates a council of despair” (Simon and Giroux, p. 24) by only presenting problems—women who are raped, impoverished, destined for servitude, or arranged to be married before they’re even teenagers. There are few triumphs for the women in this film, and the depressing facts dispersed between stories seem to manipulate emotional outcome. It only presents hope through donating to pay for their education. While the intentions are noble, and fundraising is necessary for non-profit organizations, and the education of women like those shown in the film; I feel a more sincere approach would have been possible.

"There is a much deeper connection between social movements and political reform that could activate social change: it takes place in the minds of the people. The actual goal of these movements is to raise awareness among citizens at large, to empower them through their participation in the movement and in a wide deliberation about their lives and their country, and to trust their ability to make their own decisions in relation to the political class." (Castells, p. 236) I have seen this social change take place in my roommate. She latched on to this documentary and has since voiced her support of the film, and even bought a pendant from the website, which proceeds' also go to education for women. It worked for her, but it didn't quite work for me. I believe in more of a policy approach. It is listed as an option in things one can do to “join the movement,” but it doesn’t do more to inform which policy makers to contact or real solutions that can be done to change government. There is awareness and empowerment through participation, but there’s a lack in relating it back to the political class, and decisions we can make to make a difference.

I think the biggest things it has going against itself and the ideal of a social movement is that it’s somewhat inaccessible. One must wait to have enough people to organize a screening or wait until someone else has organized one. It’s a creative method, but it goes back to a financial motivation. If they were really motivated by awareness, a method like the one used for Kony 2012 would be more effective. Because of the aesthetic nature, I think it will appeal to more people, but it has to reach more people in order for something to start happening.

Sources:
Castells, Manuel, "Changing the World in the Network Society."
Simon and Giroux. "Schooling, Popular Culture, and a Pedagogy of Possibility."
Girl Rising. Directed by Richard Robbins. 2013.

Media Literacy & Diamond Fork Junior High: My Experiences Teaching and Learning

When we observed the Mr. Ryan’s seventh grade English class, we learned that they were learning about research so we structured our lesson plan around that. We took into consideration Freire and other educational philosophies as well. We wanted to engage and enlighten. We decided that we would relate research to them and to us, and bring it around to media.

Lesson Plan & Presentation

The objective of our lesson had two parts: “Learn how what you’re already doing can help you research,” and ”learn how movies shape our opinions, including what should happen to ‘bad guys’ and why we need to be careful.” We organized the lesson into the introduction, explanation, and application of these objectives. We started by finding out what they “know,” i.e. what they liked, their hobbies and topics of interest. Then we asked how they learned about those things. YouTube videos, friends, practice, books, and Internet searches were some of their responses. Then we shared our personal experiences doing research for our social issues, including watching movies. I included how a movie I wanted to watch became a primary source for my “Story for Change” and accompanying annotated bibliography. Mack was able to present his research and his project. We prompted them to reflect on the message the media was sending with what happens to the antagonists. They were then able to think about media they’d consumed and re-write the endings. We asked them to continue to consider what can be done if they don’t like what they view or read.

Comparison and Reflection

The problem-posing theory recommended by Freire involves student involvement and teachers learning from the students; the students also teach. I felt this was done by “tapping into what they already now, rather than reminding them of what they don’t know.” (Scheibe and Rogow, p. 70) We learned about their interests and helped them relate it to research. We pointed out that they’d been researching all along and that it was actually fun. “Often the deepest insights will occur with media that your students already use regularly but haven’t thought much about, and students themselves can be encouraged to bring in examples from the media that they find intriguing, inspirational, confusing, misleading, or just plain wrong.” (Scheibe and Rogow, p. 67) We implemented this by having them do their own story for change. We asked them to choose something where they didn’t like the ending and remix it. The students were able to explore and apply what they were learning as encouraged by Dewey in “Democracy of Education.” What they are learning should not stray too far from real life so it feels useful and important.

I know they were being prompted to think critically and reflect because as they were stuck on what story to change, we went around and posed questions. “The teacher initially provides scaffolding through the use of questions and follow-up probes for evidence.” (Schiebe and Rogow, p. 64) As we posed questions about what they had watched or read recently and what they would have done differently in the story, light bulbs came on and they were able to develop their ideas.

In our lesson we also tried to apply Freire’s theory of ongoing learning. “Problem-posing education affirms men and women as beings in the process of becoming…. It affirms women and men as beings who transcend themselves, who move forward and look ahead.” (Freire, p. 84) I don’t know if we helped the students of Mr. Ryan’s transcend themselves, but we did ask them what they would and could do with what they learned. Some said “re-write endings!” We also recommended the options including to continue talking about what they’re watching with their friends and family, to break it down and find the messages implied by the media, or to produce new stuff of their own. One thing I thought of applicable to their age group was Facebook posts. If they don’t like what their friends are posting, they can start discussions in the comments or post and produce different things, like their stories for change.

“In some approaches to media analysis, the instructor guides students to a particular interpretation or understanding of the messages. This approach is commonplace in critical studies, semiotics, and protectionist forms of media literacy, but, in general, is not the most effective way to help students develop their own analytical skills.” (Schiebe and Rogow, p. 65) We could've done better at helping them come to their own conclusions on Mack's story for change. Although we did well at setting it up on what to look for, it was almost too guided. The noticed how the bad guys were treated in each segment, but they did not go beyond that analysis because we didn't let them. We could have learned more from them if we had allowed for more of a creative analysis different than our own. In this case, we followed the "banking education" style, which Freire warns against, assuming that we had more knowledge than the students. In the future I want to “help students to analyze and evaluate media messages free from your judgments” ( Schiebe and Rogow, p. 72) by asking questions that aren't leading and presenting an example of analysis only after they have offered theirs.

More on Our Class

“This process of deep reading, including hearing the opinions of classmates, challenges students to go beyond their initial (and sometimes superficial) responses or interpretations. And because students are expected to justify their conclusions with specific, document-based evidence, discussions tend to be respectful, even as students compare diverse opinions.” (Scheibe and Rogow, p. 65) I felt that our class assignments facilitated this very well. We all had lots of opinions, but when they were validated by the readings (whether it was in our blog posts or class discussions) they became much more meaningful. I know I always got more out of the movie when I did the reading ahead of time, and I was able to make more valuable comments after the same manner.

We were even able to have “civic” involvement as Hobbs recommends in his chapter on teaching with current events. We researched contemporary social issues were inspired on ways to change things, and then we were presented with the opportunity to teach what we’d learn to others in classrooms across Utah county.

Early on in the semester as we were introducing our big ideas we addressed the dilemma that sometimes awareness perpetuates the problem. This was particularly the case with the Abby’s topic on body image, the professor’s on masculinity and mine on feminism. “Lessons about stereotypes or prejudice should be approached with sensitivity because by showing examples of negative stereotypes, you are repeating them, which may reinforce rather than undermine their power.” (Scheibe and Rogow, p. 73) This even prompted discussion outside the classroom. As I talked with my teaching group appropriateness of media clips we were using, one of them said something profoundly obvious. “Sometimes it depends on your audience.” Even if it’s taught in the right way it depends on how the audience deals with it. But I believe if media literacy is taught more often, then people will have the tools necessary to evaluate what they’re consuming just as we taught the students of Diamond Fork Junior High.

Teaching: It’s not just a job.

As Giroux and Simon list their ideal of pedagogical practices, a sense is gathered that it demands a lot from the teacher. They even recognize this: “Given the fact that the practice of critical pedagogy requires a substantial personal investment of time and energy, does it require the near abandonment of a teacher’s ‘private’ life?”  (Giroux & Simon, p. 24)

In Freedom Writer’s, Ms. Gruwell is told by her husband and her father that her teaching position is “just a job,” but because of her goals and teaching methods it becomes so much more important and she becomes so much more involved. She sacrifices her marriage to remain an influence in her student’s lives. One can argue whether it was worth it or not, but the effectiveness of her approach is evident in the results of her students’ lives and the book they produced and contributed to the educational community.

Ms. Gruwell had to sacrifice so much because of the lack of support from the school administration.  The administration operates under an idea suggested by Hobbs: “Unfortunately, some teachers believe that only advanced students can engage with challenging contemporary issues and pedagogical approaches that put much of the classroom intellectual work on the students’ shoulders.” (Hobbs, 158) Fortunately teachers like Ms. Gruwell have ideals and follow them. She is not afraid to challenge her students and does so by relating to them and helping them think critically.  Hobbs talks about making them more politically aware through media, and inspiring civic action. Ms. Gruwell does more so to make them socially aware—what they can rise above and overcome, and that they are not alone, historically speaking.  They end up changing their community by changing themselves; the internal effects of their education affect the external environment.

“By providing a way to engage students in further analysis, media literacy education offers a way to diffuse the situation or even turn a negative event into a positive learning experience.” (Scheibe and Rogow, p. 74) Ms. Gruwell intercepts a racist caricature of one student draw by another. She realizes how they might be able to personally relate to it when she makes the connection of the students’ racial stereotypes to the stereotyping of the Jews, and she turns this into a teaching moment and relates their hatred toward one another to the Holocaust.  As “Educational experiences… can link personal experience, historical knowledge, and rhetorical sklls, deepening students’ understanding of how social power and influence shape social action in ways that may propel social change.” (Hobbs, 148) That social change happens in room 203 of their public high school, but it reaches out because the students change their role within the community and become productive instead of destructive. The end up making a literary compilation of their own to share their experiences. “Students can learn about the power of media to connect us emotionally to others and to express complex and multifaceted points of view when they create politically meaningful messages that reach real audiences.” (Hobbs, 158) They are able to turn their social awareness around and create a product that causes others to be aware of their social reality. Because of Ms. Gruwell’s creative pedagogical practices, her students become engaged in and outside of the classroom, and she ultimately saves their lives because she abandons her private life for her "job." She takes an interest in her students and how to get through to them by relating different forms of media, and in turn they take an interest in their education.

Teach by Example: Problem-Posing, Problem-Solving

I prescribe to the problem-posing theory for the most part. I know that students are not empty banks waiting to be filled with the coins of knowledge a teacher has to bestow. I realized this early on when I started teaching at the Missionary Training Center. I thought, "I've served a mission. I have the information these missionaries need to know to become effective teachers in the field." But there is a principal we teach to missionaries in order to prepare to teach investigators, and it dawned on me that it applies to me, too: "Teach People, Not Lessons." For example, with a previous district, simplification of gospel topics was the main struggle of the class, whereas in a recent district, they struggled more to implement and feel their purpose at all times. The curriculum was the same for each, but I conducted different activities according to their needs. Not only does this concept affect application, but it also affects discussion. These missionaries come with testimonies that they’ve received in their individual experiences. As we talked about gospel principles, they shared what their experiences and I shared mine. At other times, there were moments that I addressed them more one-sidedly. In trying to teach people, not lessons, a teacher must incorporate multiple styles and philosophies, including lecture, discussion, and application.

As Simon and Giroux discuss the dominant discourse of pedagogy they summarize it “simply in the terms transmission and imposition.” (p. 15) They speak of a teaching philosophy that does not incorporate popular culture, but I also feel it is an attack on the convention of lecture as a more traditional practice in pedagogy, where an educator dispenses information of their politically right-winged ideologies. However, it seems hypocritical because the basis of the article is that they’re dispensing their leftist ideologies, and posing what seem to be only problems and no solutions, especially with the plethora of questions they present in the end. The fact is there is no black and white way to do things. The presenting of information (and questions) is an important step in the educational process, but it can’t stop there. A teacher must also lead the way in forming solutions.

Simon and Giroux even state, “Sometimes when students and teachers engage in a critique of existing social practices or forms of knowledge, a feeling of powerlessness comes over the group. Doing critical pedagogy can turn an education setting into a ‘council of despair.’” (p. 24) But that’s what they do. The solution is to go beyond just the critique. In the MTC, we introduce challenges in teaching the investigators, but we don’t leave them with all these unanswered questions. (We also don’t answer every question.) We start with discussion of addressing issues through doctrine. Communication is key here; it “is the way in which [we] come to possess things in common.” (Dewey, Chapter 1: Section 2) We learn how to address concerns of investigators together with me sharing what I did on my mission, and with them sharing what they’ve done to address their own concerns and concerns of their friends. Together we begin to possess solutions.

The next step is application. “Problem-posing education bases itself on creativity and stimulates true reflection and action upon reality.” (Freire, p. 84) In the MTC this is done through role-playing. But we don’t expect them to know how to do it on their own right away. We have activities called demonstrate teaching where we provide an example-teaching situation, and then they take what they learn and apply it in a different lesson.

Relating this pattern to media literacy education, a teacher must first make the students aware of the existing problems in media representation. A critical discussion may follow, and then the teacher should provide examples on how these problems might be remedied. Then the students participate in remedial action. An educational experience needs to be created “that not only prepare[s] people to read the media more critically but also encourage them to access, make use of, and even create alternative sources of information that aid in civic mobilization.” (Leistyna, p.4) It must be “multimodal.” I see my philosophy being played out ineffectively and effectively as I reflect on experiences in my media classes. In my introduction to communications course, I only remember being presented with information, the lecture on the system. In my introduction to film class, I was taught how to analyze, discuss, and think critically of this system. Awareness was not enough; I needed to learn to question what I was consuming. In my current Media Literacy Education class we have covered each step: first, learning about the existing problems in media education; then, discussing the issues and critically applying them to popular culture and film; and, finally, we had the opportunity to create. Our professor provided an example and then we were encouraged to “establish an authentic form of thought and action” (Freire, p. 83) with our stories for change and our lessons to younger students on these issues.

“Problem-posing education affirms men and women as beings in the process of becoming.” Even after the pattern of lecture, discussion, and application has occurred, there should be encouragement for ongoing learning. Something should always be left to consider at the end. Like a movie, if you start it with the right tools and thoughts, you’ll continue thinking about it after. If the objective is clear then the “commitment” after can cause the thought process to continue. In our teaching experience to the Junior High students we challenged them to continue considering the stories they consume and discuss them with family and friends, and to think about the messages they’re being fed by the media. In the MTC, after ever practice teaching, they are given the challenge to pursue studies on the respective gospel topic and to apply what they have learned in all teaching situations. This philosophy acknowledges the incompleteness of the lesson after lecture, discussion, and application. There must be continued activity for a transformation to really occur through education. (Freire, p. 84)

Is school enough?

Clearly it’s not based on the readings and the film. Every student is individual, whereas school is standardized. Needs aren’t being met. Simon and Giroux point out how school is just an apparatus for the dominating ideological system. It exists to reinforce existing corporate values. “They view schools as a particular way of life organized to produce and legitimate either the economic and political interests of business elites or the privileged cultural capital of ruling class groups.” (p. 10)  Right now “pedagogy is simply the measurable, accountable methodology used to transmit course content.” (p. 11) Simon and Giroux ask about how this can be remedied and allude to its complicated nature with no quick fixes. Their ideal is a “critical pedagogy” where popular culture is incorporated into curriculum instead of being seen as an imposing monster of subversive moral ideas [when in fact it is the dominant discourse to use transmission and imposition (p. 15)]. Critical pedagogy directs education at “enhancing human possibility and establishing a just and caring community.” (p. 23) Much like Dewey’s theory, it calls for communication, and like Freire’s theory, it calls for a recognition and validation of the students’ experiences as important to the discussions being had at school.

While Simon and Giroux present a lot of the problems affecting our current pedagogical system, Leistyna offers solutions. Awareness if the first step, knowing the powers that control the flow of information. Simon and Giroux bring up the fact that having this awareness might perpetuate problems by making the ideologies stick out, but it also incites discuss and critical thought on how things are and how they should be. Other solutions Leitstyna presents include alternative forms of media, or getting information from a different, and  using new media to  bring “about revolutionary changes in the art of consciousness raising and organizing.” (p. 4)

The documentary “Is school enough?”  provides examples of practical application of these ideas. The first group of students we see use technology (new multimedia)  to help in a real world situation of preparing an environment for the arrival of an elephant. Instead of popular culture “occasionally explored for the incidental motivational ploy that might enhance student interest in a particular lesson or subject” it is part of the curriculum. The curriculum embraces the use of an iTouch and internet sharing. Then there’s the other school group in Boston that is afforded an opportunity to participate in political discourse in their community after creating a movement  online, much like Leitstyna’s hope that cyber-tools are “effective in educating the public on critical social issues, forging and mobilizing communities, coordinating events… and influencing policy.” (p.4) As a result of their online experience, they are invited to speak with their school board.  “We want to bring our discussion to bear more directly on classroom reality by presenting a list of problems that have been raised by students and a diverse group of educators.” (Simon and Giroux, p. 22)

Simon and Giroux recognize this is difficult and requires a lot more of the educators, not just of the students. We can see this in the example of the girl who wanted to become a natural doctor. Her teachers had to adapt curriculum to meet her needs, and sometimes they had to dig a little deeper to help get answers. “Given the fact that the practice of critical pedagogy requires a substantial personal investment of time and energy, does it require the near-abandonment of a teacher’s ‘private’ life?” It is a balancing act to reform education to make it meaningful with experiences outside the classroom incorporated into the classroom, and to still include previous worthwhile practices and curriculum as well.