Week 6, Another Brick in the Wall.

We don't need no education
We don't need no thought control
No dark sarcasm in the classroom
Teachers leave those kids alone
Hey! Teachers! Leave those kids alone
All in all you're just another brick in the wall.
All in all you're just another brick in the wall.

(Pink Floyd: Waters, Rogers)

Break down the wall. Let the kids out of the classroom and into the world in which they will live, lead and create.

I want to re-frame the assignment. The question isn't "why should we bring popular culture into the classroom?" The question of the week really is, "why isn't the world the classroom?"

Social efficacy, taken to it's logical end means that classroom bound, textbook driven, ideologically based TEACHING must give way to some sort of open, critical, inquiry driven system. Taken to an extreme? That if we can figure out how to support the developmental needs of children and young people, we can not only offer every kid a chance to meet their own amazing potential, we can energize and inspire culture and society today.

As much as I agree and cheer the authors of this week's readings, and pretty much all of the educational/social-reform oriented writers we've encountered in this class (strongly recommend for my own community) I don't believe they go far enough.  The social studies classroom, or science classroom or gymnasium is not the proper context for an adolescent. The world is.

Why don't we let kids out of the classroom? Dr. Moravec's innovation future of education (cite and web site) ties this freedom from blackboards to world-changing web 2.0 and beyond technologies. (His class, this lecture has inspired this thinking) 

Society 3 0

View more documents from John Moravec.

He also, and I laughed when I heard this, claims that to society (parents) today, the school's primary value is as baby-sitter -- a semi-productive and safe place to put kids during the work day. I found his perspective cynical until MEA week where "no-school" days during the work week caused havoc with a project schedule that impacted me -- and I don't have kids!

The bottom line, even among the youth serving, health and education communities, is that engaging young people this way is a major hassle. It's not part of my core responsibility as a professional, or outside the context of being a parent or aunt, so it is simply not a priority. "Youth engagement" in general and specific strategies like "youth action research" are hot, hot, hot in the public health community (Is there an equivalent in the education field? I'm probably just not engaged in it deeply enough, but I haven't seen comparable approaches.

Even these readings (thinking of media literacy, too) -- pretty radical to the mainstream system --  neglect the idea that involving youth in the decision making, programming, system that impacts them is the right (effective and "just"). I point this out because it impresses me that the public health community, even some segments of the broader research community are at least heading in the right direction. That said, adoption of these strategies is weak, at best. It's hard. We don't necessarily have the skills. Too busy. Lots of excuses for the fact that it just isn't a priority.

But it should be.

And the subject of popular culture is a particularly fruitful area to explore  what's possible when we look at how young people are engaged, taught, included.

Fact of the matter is that in the US, kids largely interact with the world through popular culture. The opportunities we offer them for broader interaction with the world are limited -- except for popular culture. After all, if school is a babysitter, what is TV? Describe another societal institution where young people are integrated with adults! Shopping? Arguably popular culture. Entertainment? Surely popular culture. And the areas where youth are segregated? Work. Education.

School and family just can't, by definition, meet all the developmental needs of a young person. Consider Gisela Konopka's requirements:  Where does a kid explore their own identity? Where are conflicting values discussed? Where are they likely to express themselves? Communicate their  feelings? Experience art? (GK).

The "popular culture in education" apologists point out (as do media literacy advocates, education reformers and technology enthusiasts), as the youth-serving community knows all too well, that young people meeting their developmental needs largely through popular culture is a very scary proposition. Moral panic! SEX! Bad health habits. Commercialism. SEX! Lack of consequences. SEX! We resent the impact that popular culture has in our lives, yet we, as adults, seem powerless to change it.

I believe that when it comes to popular culture and the media, young people have the power to change it.

Because isn't popular culture largely youth-driven?

Yet created by adults? Shaped by corporate interests? Framed by our experiences from a time that is past, compared to a the time that is now?

Engaging young people in the process of directly interacting in the world -- directly creating popular culture -- is and will be the only way to break through the cycle of sameness and repetition that is our mainstream media. What will happen to this vast echo chamber when 100 voices are chiming in, creating new, specialized echos that maybe don't reach everybody, but speak really well to a specific group?

This is already happening, to large degree, on the web.

But on TV or radio (only remaining large scale intrusive media) it's mostly the same old same old. Opportunity exists -- cable with all the specialized, interest oriented channels and programming. The fact that now we have entire news networks dedicated to different party affiliations is both disturbing and potentially thrilling. If I can find a political blog that matches my exact political interests and needs, why not a broadcast news program. Or the fact that community access TV makes it possible for an eighth grader's documentary on her experiences with race appear two channels away from the acclaimed CNN special?

Understanding, creating and redefining the content, priorities and methods of popular culture's media is the perfect setting for youth learning and enagagement.

Selling it.
I haven't entirely hijacked this assignment, have I? We were to write our defense of popular culture in the classroom, but I rejected the classroom, so ...

The second part of the assignment was to actually walk the walk, incorporate popular culture into your teaching/training.

I've had some experience with this, teaching media literacy to kids in school and afterschool programs, to adults through my professional trainings.

But the real questions for me in terms of application, and for my professional community, is 1) how to sell it and 2) how to implement effectively.

The rant above is the outline for the sales pitch. The popular culture advocates make a strong case, but I'm trying to find a compelling reason that actually benefits the larger community. Something that speaks to them. As it is, my "improve media" case will probably only interest those in the industry, which is a good start but not broad enough.

What would convince you -- reader -- to put 10% of your work time into guiding, training, mentoring, teaching a kid (that isn't yours) in your field, job, area of expertise, interest?

I suspect that its about more than a single message or training. I suspect that our own underlying attitudes toward young people get in the way. And that our funding systems and processes simply make it impossible, right now.

The idea that my coworker and I are pursuing is along these lines. In lieu of a lesson plan, here's the rough idea.

Use of web 2.0 technology is problematic for the public health community because of the steep learning curve, negative adult perceptions, lack of resources. Biggest barriers are internal policies which prohibit use!

As a work-around, we are proposing to micro-fund a project in a state or two that would engage young people (college aged?) through a youth-serving agency to collaborate with the health department on ways to use technology to reach their adolescent health goals. Besides funding, we'd assist with the collaboration and add a strategic overlay with our public health and communications backgrounds. We'd be looking at it as a big professional development project, where all the parties are learning to work well with each other and building each others' capacity. Imagine young people teaching public health professionals how to blog? Or creating a "What's hot on the web this week." The idea of a 18 year old instructing a gray-haired epidemiologist thrills me.

At the same time, it would be a proving ground (we hope) for viable youth engagement in public health -- it could change administration/management attitudes and perceptions that could open up new opportunities to support it at a systemic level.

Like state funding for similar projects.
Like requiring youth engagement for grantees.
Like re-evaluating technology policies.
Like re-considering the belief that young people have nothing to contribute.

We don't have to be another brick in the wall.