Reflections on Module 2 Readings.

I want to start off with the very first question we came in contact with once this module opened. The very first question was from Joel Barker , who asked, and studied “where children learn their sense of identity, value and place in the world.” When thinking about this, the first word that came to mind was everything. Children are constantly picking up their identity from the people, and experiences they come into contact with everyday. If someone tells a child that they are useless, because they didn’t quite get a homework assignment right, or because they are being forced to do something they’ve never done before and didn’t quite grasp the concept they are more than likely going to feel as though they don’t have a value, place, or a worthy identity.

I think this is a great start to tie in my reflections, beginning with the section On Visibility, power and Media Literacy. It’s interesting to make the connection between the way media delivers its messages (i.e. message contents, such as words or phrases, the people in it, the objects in it, the scenery, etc.) the way children perceive their value, and the ideas of power and visibility, especially in the hands of media conglomerates. It’s interesting to think about how that connection affects us, affects children, and empowers or dis empowers a particular medium when they are being called out.  In Dr. Tollefson’s book, Volatile knowing, in chapter 6, the first paragraph under the heading Spotlighting accountability, not Possibility, on page 125 really opened my eyes about how we basically accept the idea that corporations are more perceived as more valuable than the public good. We form our schools agendas with the ultimate goal of producing a child who is ready to enter the workforce, doesn’t question things, and is basically a blank slate to be trained as the employer sees fit. Anyone who starts to think outside the box is punished or ridiculed for having an outlandish opinion that couldn’t possibly be accurate because it isn’t the popular opinion. More often than not, this starts at a very early age as well.

I can’t remember off the top of my head which article I remember reading this from in Module 1, but I believe if it was the University of Michigan Health System article about Your Child, in which it states that children’s programming often contains more acts of violence than adult TV programming. (Pg. 4) When thinking about this set of data,  in terms of visibility, I want to connect it to the 5 questions we should be asking as media literate individuals that we learned in module 1. One of the questions in particular, that is preceded by the statement “media does not represent the values of the country, it represents the values of the person who created the media,” asks “What values, lifestyles, and points of view are represented in and from this particular message.” When we think about where children gain their sense of identity, Dr. Tollefson mentioned that according to ourselves, (the population as a general whole) we believe that media is the most influential. While others may disagree, I definitely think this is true when it comes to Generation Z, mainly because of their incredible dependency on technology. Their identities are constantly being built, almost exclusively through technological means, with virtual friends from all over the world. When something exciting happens, they must “experience” the moment by taking a picture of the events, and then posting it on their Instagram or Tumblr. Instead of learning about the rises and pitfalls of a working friendship through face to face interaction, they instead choose to talk with friends via Facebook messenger. It’s no surprise then that children are picking up their sense of identities from what they are surrounded by the most: their technology.

It’s important to think about then, the agenda of media corporations. As stated before, television is teeming with children’s programming that portrays violence, deception, individualization (which isn’t necessarily a bad thing, but when coupled with ideas of intense competition just to better than others, that’s when it creates problems), tons of sexual references, and more often than not, cut-throat practices. This is not just opinion, but also from experience. I have two younger siblings, one who is just a year younger than me, and another who is about 12 years younger than me. Me and my sister grew up watching shows like Pokemon, Sailor Moon, Fosters home for Imaginary friends, and even more adult shows such as South Park, and once in a while we would be able to catch Adult Swim on cartoon network (this is a variety of live action and cartoon shows created for older audiences, think TV shows where the main themes were raunchy, sarcastic humor). When I compare the programming me and my sister watched as children, to the TV shows that are available to my younger brother, it absolutely blows my mind with what they’re allowing to be viewed by children. I honestly thought that I was watching Comedy Central or another adult-centered channel, and not Cartoon Network, at 3pm when children are just getting home and winding down with some TV.

With these experiences, and the idea of visibility, and identity, it’s no wonder that so many children are confused. Most parents try to raise their kids to become epitomes of well-behaved children; but fail to realize that the media they allow their children to experience (and usually spend the most time with), tends to preach the very ideas that parents try to protect their kids from. It doesn’t help that children, especially Generation Z have lived nearly their whole lives online, and because of it, have created an identity where they feel the most comfortable when they have technology at their disposal. The Internet, Movies, TV, these all contribute heavily to the concept of identity within youths.

Pop culture has always been such a large part of youth culture. Growing up, you weren’t cool if you didn’t have the latest trends, the newest cool toy, clothes, or for kids now– tech. In our textbook, Sternheimer mentions one medium in particular, social media, and the ideas of whether it is affecting the lives of those in the cyber age. As a more technological attuned individual, I have quite a bit to say about this section but will try to keep it short because this post is getting a little long. I mainly want to comment on the specific question Sternheimer raises about the safety of social media (pg. 47). I became a very prominent user of social media at the age of 12 where I joined forums for video games that I would play. Throughout the years, I’ve witnessed many positives of social media, but I think I’ve witnessed more negative interactions, and I’ve had the chance to get to know some of these individuals (both those getting cyber bullied, and doing the cyber bullying). While others may disagree, I definitely think that social media is a safe platform for individuals, at least in the sense of you can somewhat control what content people see. As Sternheimer said “people of all ages are still learning how to navigate [the internet],” (pg. 62) and this is very true. Children are learning what is safe for them to post, through the experiences of feedback from others, and adults are using the internet as an extension of already familiar mediums such as email or letters. There’s also no doubt that many people use the internet in ways it was perhaps not intended. Some seek information about illness, others use the internet as a way to vent, without second thought that they more often than not are taking their anger out on individuals who do not deserve to be treated in such a way where they are put down by strangers. Still, a majority use social media as a way to connect, bring together people with similar ideas, and create safe spaces for people with similar interests to gather and discuss without repercussions.

For this final portion of my reflection, I want to focus on chapter 4 of our readings from the textbook. I think chapter four hit on some key points that is inherently intertwined with the ideas of visibility and power. Sternheimer explains that youths have always been the center of ridicule, often mocked and put down because older generations believe that children now-a-days have no clue about anything in the world.(Sternheimer, p.85) While I believe that there is certainly a trend that seems to be happening, especially in low-income areas, where more and more children are becoming illiterate (I’ve seen it first hand in elementary school, all the way to some of my college classes, where students struggle to keep a steady pace, and often have to stop for assistance for understanding or pronouncing a 6th grade vocabulary word). While some seem to be attributing that incline of illiteracy to increasing TV and new media use, other studies have concluded that TV does not affect literacy, and I think I can positively agree with this. For children, there are many TV shows dedicated to teaching kids how to read, and talk. Sesame Street, Dora the Explorer, Between the Lions, Super Why, Word World, and many more are examples of programming dedicated to increasing literacy among children specifically. While some questions can be raised about certain aspects of these shows, such as agendas, portrayal of certain “scandalous” situations (the first that comes to mind is the Sesame Street episode with Katy Perry that garnered a lot of negative attention from many parents), I think that these kinds of shows are very beneficial to children who may be in a low income area.

I personally grew up reading books, and playing a lot of video games over watching TV. I may be a little biased because of my own personal experiences, but I believe that video games, especially those where you are interacting with other human players, can be so much more beneficial than TV watching. I have several online friends from different non-English-speaking countries who, because of their interactions with English-speaking players have been able to bring themselves to a fluent status in their speaking and understanding abilities. If an adolescent who has never spoken English can learn how to read and write through the use of interactions in video games, I think it can be even more beneficial for children to use these methods as well. Especially when you throw in all of the other benefits that playing video games can introduce into an individuals skill set (such as motor skills, logic, and creative thinking skills, and more).

The biggest draw back to literacy and media literacy is the sad fact that we just don’t put in enough resources for teachers to effectively teach. Instead of small classes where teachers can give more one on one interaction and attention, classrooms are a 40:1 ratio of children per teacher. This leads to having to standardize everything in order to get around to assessing each child, but in the end, the methods are also standardized, and children aren’t praised for their individual strengths, instead they’re punished for their weaknesses, not being able to keep up with the class. Classroom agendas are standardized, children leave the classroom each day with the same or less information than their peers. There’s no individual learning, no critical thinking. What teacher wants to read 40 five to eight page papers? It becomes a burden, and so teachers resort to bare minimums, they align their classrooms to standards set by districts, which in turn have been set by the local or state government by some politician with their own agendas. I remember a couple of year ago when “unschooling” became a popular method where parents would homeschool their children and let them do what they wanted. It reminded me of my childhood. My family often multiple cross country trips, and I missed a lot elementary school, and was in middle school for a total of 1 month before I was pulled out. When we finally settled down in a small town in Tennessee, I had to take a placement test because I had been out of school for so long that they weren’t sure if I was ready to enter high school. After a very long and noisy (the school had me out in the hallway in a tiny wooden desk, and class was released twice during my testing! I’m sure you all can remember high school, the halls filled loudly with kids chatting with friends as they walk to their next class) 3 hours, the test results determined that I was proficient enough in all areas except math (I had to take remedial classes) and was allowed to enter high school. After the first semester, I also took standardized tests given to students to evaluate performance. I scored advance in all areas (English, Sciences, Social Sciences) but still had trouble with my math where I earned an average score.

I’m curious about the opinions that people have for my ideas on chapter 4. I know a lot of people are cynical of video games, argue they’re a waste of time, and that they influence kids to turn aggressive and shoot up schools (definitely NOT the case!). After hearing about my experience where I was out of school, and relied solely on video games, books, and traveling to places such as national parks, do you think this kind of approach, of “unschooling” is more effective than traditional schooling, where children are essentially bred to be the same, blank slate as everyone else. Where they learn skills that only translate to a 9-5, where you spend the rest of your awake time that isn’t dedicated to making a living, and enjoying entertainment mindlessly.

This reflection ended up way longer than I expected to write, but for me at least, it has really helped me bring together concepts I didn’t even make connections to before. I also had the pleasure of getting to talk about some of these aspects with Kam before I wrote this post, and that helped me narrow down some of the ideas from this module I wanted to talk about.