Praxis 2.0: Escaping the edu-travelogue
Remix artist Pogo’s Disney remix “Alice”
In 2009, I came across the inspiring work of self-taught Australian remix musician Nick Bertke (aka “Pogo”). As a media teacher doing remix in my own media production classes, I was interested in learning more about Pogo and his creative process. So I interviewed him about it.
What I learned from Pogo, beyond his inspirations and process, is the central role of the philosophies that inform remix. Philosophies that come into direct conflict with the policies and practices of institutional learning. This distinction is one of many that got me thinking about the differences between the real creative production process (i.e, the world I worked in as an early adopter and new media creator prior to teaching), what we’re permitted to do in school. This post isn’t so much about remix but how remix constitutes a site of struggle (and insight) between formal and informal learning.
While many educators have since adopted some of the practices of remix as a component of education (a wonderful thing), the acceptable remix products produced in a classroom are still mediated by explicit and implicit rules and expectations, many of which “nullify” the kind of authentic artistic expression that exists within real affinity spaces of maker culture and transmedia. As Henry Jenkins points out:
“It is not clear that the successes of affinity spaces can be duplicated by simply incorporating similar activities into the classroom. Schools impose a fixed leadership hierarchy (including very different roles for adults and teens); it is unlikely that someone like [maker artist] or [maker artist] would have had the same editorial opportunities they have found through fandom. … Even the most progressive schools set limits on what students can write compared to the freedom they enjoy on their own” (Henry Jenkins, Convergence Culture)
As well, truly situated cultures are rarely authorized within education unless they are unpacked by a teacher “expert” (i.e,. one with extensive “teaching” background v. lived experience with the tool or practice) or else reified by novel classroom projects that reflect the teacher’s interests, values or priorities rather than those of the learners.
My lived experiences of these differences – as a learner, adopter, maker and teacher – speak to much larger questions about what is really possible within institutional learning at a time of unprecedented access to the figures, communities and tools that allow learners an alternative means of learning that doesn’t involve “qualified” teachers, institutional spaces or curriculum selected on their behalf. As I see it, we can choose to deny this reality or attempt to find our place with in it.
CONTINUE READING [below]
Situated creativity
Real learning in action is a form of (praxis). It is embodied, experienced and known in ways that are often social, physical and tangible. I knew this as a student and as cultural producer, but had to relocate these instincts when I went to teacher’s college, where I learned about the externally defined and institutionally inscribed processes of teaching and learning (pedagogy).
Getting back to remix, and drawing on the contrast between my lived experiences of media production and those of the classroom variety, I was stuck by several null, hidden or explicit curriculum variables that limited or negated what the students and I were able to do. These are just a few I observed:
1) School doesn’t encourage breaking the law: We can view a movie or hear about a remix artist who breaks the law. We can discuss and debate and reflect on these things. But when it comes to openly and honestly sharing our own positions on subjects that involve transgression, how much agency do we have in a context of assessment and evaluation – that is mediated by an assessor whose own beliefs or positions may be explicitly or implicitly known via their disposition, identity or expressed affinities?
2) Neutered production (de-contextualized simulation): We can use some of the practices and tools of a real remix artist but what about their materials (i.e., we cannot take images, music, content that is meaningful to us if it is copyrighted). The choice and selection and use of particular content is as integral to remix as the act of editing and changing the meaning of those materials.
3) Using “original” v. copyrighted material: Often, teachers are encouraged to have students create “original” material of their own in order to create remix content. This is perfectly valid (Pogo did so … with pro tools that aren’t available to students in most schools). Unfortunately, this is also held up as an ideal, situating the use of copyrighted material as somehow less “creative” than making our own. We need to stop fibbing, and be honest about why we can and cannot do things in school. Only then can we say our students are “empowered” to do or think anything.
4) The public domain is not the same as the stuff they want to use: I love the public domain content. And as a consequence of my school board’s policies on creating works from copyrighted material, I had students use the internet archive as the source for their remixes. The reaction was: “this sucks. The music/video/etc I want to use is not here.” While I’m not allowed to encourage students to break the law I am permitted to tell them what they can and cannot do at school versus what they may or may not do with their own tools, in their own homes, with their own internet providers – and share with them the potential consequences of doing so. If, after viewing the consequences they choose to break the law it is not because I have encouraged them to do so but they have chosen to enact their own political and civic identities outside of school. But, again, what we do in the classroom is mediated by the law. It is a far cry from what is happening outside of school. And they know it.
Rather than rationalizing, defending or avoiding this problem (a disempowered position that most of my colleagues have felt forced accept), I’ve chosen to address it via contrasts with situated learning and transgressive/critical pedagogy — in hopes that we can: A) illuminate it for what it is; and B) start asking questions about what’s really missing from learning experiences in school and the ways we can address this. Some if it will likely involve establishing a network between formal and informal learning spaces – where null curriculum is permitted and encouraged and some of it will interrogate the policies and practices that presently define professional pedagogy and practice.
Showandtellagogy v. situated exploration
If the classroom and school serve to hinder authentic self-directed exploration, then we need to find new ways to acknowledge or accredit the learning that is happening outside of school (though not necessarily via schooly assessment processes) or else find ways for situated and formal learning to coexist in a meaningful way that also validates lived experience. A travelogue is not the same as traveling.
Real innovation has little to do with software or technology – though these tools can certainly be employed in the process. Innovation is really about thinking, disposition and motivating utopia. Reggio Emilia, Ivan Illich, Paulo Freire and others promoted the ideas I’m relocating here long before any of the so-called revolutionary tech emerged. So why don’t we hear anything about this kind of pedagogy in Twitter or at educational conferences? It’s partly because of the belief that we can use new tools while maintaining old power laws. Unfortunately, new tools don’t transform a normative disposition into a transgressive one or conventional pedagogy into situated learning. But this may be difficult for some: As bell hooks argues:
“We found, again and again, that almost everyone, especially the old guard, were more disturbed by the explicit recognition of the role our political perspectives play in shaping pedagogy than by their passive acceptance of ways of teaching and learning that reflect biases” (hooks, Teaching to Transgress)
At some point, we need to get beyond teacher-directed showandtellagogy and actually go places, meet new people and do things that may not increase our social or professional capital or be validated via qualifications or professional status. This isn’t so much about teachers “dipping in” to cultures unlike their own (we already do enough of that – it’s called tokenism). It’s about acknowledging their existence, respecting the existing knowledge, values and skills within those spaces and seeking the expertise of those within those cultures rather than attempting to colonize and reify these spaces for use in our classrooms.
One way of doing this is to actually go to these spaces and take part in them – authentically. Another way is to listen to and engage those who already teach and learn there and think about how our learners can situate their learning within those spaces (co-op, etc). The learning that happens in these situated spaces is messy. It’s sometimes unfriendly. You might even get hurt. You will be and feel like a noob. And it doesn’t come with catering. Just ask Gever Tulley, who proposes REAL tools, in REAL spaces learning. Tulley’s 5 Dangerous Things TED talk helps to articulate the problem with inauthenticity as a mode of learning and challenges us to explore the difference:
QUESTIONS FOR TEACHERS:
Given some of the context and examples above – null curriculum, reification, situated learning – I’m interested in asking teachers how they are either transgressing or reinforcing the issues above. The questions below are intended as a provocative prompt to get us (myself included) thinking about the environment in which we teach and how that environment reinforces and hinders authentic learning or expression. It’s also intended as a prompt to start thinking about just how empowered our students are to truly speak their minds in the school environment if we ourselves are not permitted to do so.
Q: Learning culture: How often do you solicit ideas or questions or examples from your students about curriculum or culture prior to or during the planning of your units? (daily, hourly, monthly) How much of what you’re doing strongly reflects your students identities, cultures or lived experiences (versus your own interests, preferred tools, communities)? What are your students teaching you (or their peers) about media cultures? What opportunities do students have for ‘scaffolding’ ‘showing’ ‘articulating’ ‘sharing’ ‘instructing’ or ‘empowering’ your/their peers learning, skills or knowledge [note: these words are typically applied to the things we “give” /”provide” for students, situating us as the source and origin of their empowerment (empty cup thinking). What is your advice for teachers who wish to engage their students cultures or lived experiences in a meaningful way?
Q: Content policy: What are your school’s policies on the presence of provocative content (i.e., violence, nudity or other “inappropriate” stuff) in your own curriculum and your students spoken, performed, written or produced expressions? What words and/or images are not permitted in their works? What are the consequences of the presence of inappropriate material in their expression or your choices of curriculum (that contains this material)? How does the absence or presence of particular cultural forms, texts or subjects limit or empower what students learn in your classroom? If you teach in an alternative school, what are your recommendations for teachers in mainstream schools – in relation to “transgressive” or inappropriate content?
Q: Tools and Technology: How much agency do you have as a teacher to select specific tools and software for your classroom – how long does a request take to process? How many open source tools do you presently use in your classroom? If you are without the tools and technology you need, how does this mediate the options you provide for the students? Do you encourage students to use their own personal tools or resources and how do you support those who cannot afford their own technology or tools? What is your advice for teachers who would like a more agile process of obtaining the tools they need?
Q: Ideology and self expression: Is your school administration, culture or local community ideologically, socially or culturally diverse? Are students, staff, administration or parents supportive of the free expression or inquiry into diverse, radical or transgressive? Do you model, embody or promote empowerment (or conformity/assimilation)? How much freedom do students in your school/classes to express diverse identities or beliefs within the dominant culture of your school/community? What are the conditions required of a truly empowered classroom where creative works may contain ideas or expression that challenges the status quo? Those of you who do enjoy this freedom, please explain how or why your school culture does so and how you would recommend other teachers cultivate the same kinds of freedoms in their schools/classrooms.
Q: Situated learning: What creative communities of practice (groups, communities, spaces or forums) are you presently exploring that are outside of your existing social, educational or professional capital? What kinds of things did you learn about learning (in that space)? How are these spaces different from institutional learning settings in terms of what you can say, do or create within? If you are a media teacher, what investment are you currently making into the media cultures or sectors you teach? How do you scaffold these explorations and practices among your students?
As an artist, I remix when I make collages. As an educator, the restrictions are sharper, harder to navigate. My work in part is to clear a lot of those obstacles out of the way of teachers. It is difficult to do as those who block the way are usually really misinformed. None the less I keep at it.
Wow! Melanie there is so much here to take in and I want to jump in and comment on every line, but I am not sure that is the best way to go about this Herculean task. I have read the post over several times and each time another aspect of your thoughts triggers something with mine. Forgive me, if I jump about a bit and poke around your post. I, unlike you, maybe not be too clear and focused, but let’s see where we end up after a few minutes of exploration and conversation:
You make a great point about the fact that teachers cannot encourage students to break the law, even if that law is unjust. This level of subversive teaching is where many teachers find themselves. Depending on each teachers situation, we are faced with school boards, administrations, parents, and other culture hand cuff which dictated what we can and cannot do. However, I think you nailed it when you said,
We can expose students to the concept and power of remix cultural both aesthetically and politically, show them what it can do. Why it does what it does? We can help them analyze remixed material and even show them how to do with legal material, and hope that they go home and do it for real. I think that is true for all pedagogy.
No self-respecting teacher will teach from the pulpit. We simply share, expose, prod, and hope that kids go home forced to see the world in new ways.
As to why we don’t have these discussion on Twitter and at conferences? I think in large part we do. Look at us right now. Like you said, “Innovation is really about thinking, disposition and motivating utopia.” I think many teachers did not get into this game to do bring about a global revolution. That is a shame, but thank goodness some of us did.
I agree with you that teachers need to break the bubble and explore what else is out there. I would love to see professional development that would send teachers to events in other fields.
Great post. Thanks for occupying my brain all day long.
Mary Ann,
The obstacle is most often the institutional structure itself. But made much worse by a coercive culture that demands teachers to be silent about what’s not working and being ‘on message’ with a board’s mandates or memes. When the the institution talks about being innovative they mean the implementation of new tools and trends (along with their own particular focus: “effectiveness” etc) and not reconstructing all those pieces that really do need changing – and make the other stuff really moot.
When you’ve got at risk students (many of whom have kids themselves and jobs) trying to attend a 5 day, 8:30 am to 3pm school day at a location that may be hours from their home, it’s hard to pass courses that don’t account for the real challenges in your life and make appropriate accommodations. What better argument for part online, part offline learning than the real circumstances of our student’s lives. These students aren’t going to pass with the provision of an ipad program or wireless. They need a complete overhaul of a system that has failed them their entire lives. They need a holistic education model that allows for situated and formal learning to be integrated in meaningful ways. Co-op is one way the boards do this but it’s not enough. And the structure of co-op programs and online learning presently offered by our boards is disengaging, uninteresting and uninspired. A student recently showed me one of his online high school courses via the board website. It was essentially a static webpage with a drop box of assignments. No video, no interactivity. Just an email interface to send messages to the teacher, which the student claimed rarely replied. Who knows these things? Students. Where is their voice? nowhere. What role do students have in curriculum development or teacher education programs or board intiatives? none. And when they ARE solicited for their feedback, as they recently were on cell phone use, they’re giving it within a context of surveillance and assessment. Do we honestly think they would give the same answers if asked OUTSIDE of school?
A teacher said to me the other day: But the students themselves don’t want cell phones. They said so in the recent survey. MY response: ‘did anybody unpack what we mean by mobile use or how it would be implemented? or simply just say how about using your phone?’ If their only current context for phones is playing games and texting they’re not really being given the proper context in which to evaluate that question are they?
This is my problem with how things are currently being done within the system and though I work within it, I will continue to challenge it and advocate for better ways. Otherwise public education as we know it will surely perish.
Jabiz,
Thanks for stopping by! One thing I’d like to make explicitly clear – if I didn’t do so in the post – I’m not in any way shape or form suggesting that students are justified in breaking the law on their own computers, etc. I *am* suggesting that they may choose to do so regardless of what we tell them. And that many of my students expressed as much when I asked them their position (after watching the documentary and engaging in the unit on copyright/copyleft). Many of them said, as Lessig and others have argued [ http://www.ted.com/talks/view/id/187 ] that they do not “care” about these laws and are breaking the law every day when they download music, tv shows or software via peer to peer sites. And that “everybody” is doing it. Do I challenge them on this? You bet. The part I challenge them on is not the political part but the “everybody does it” and the I don’t “care” part. Those are more worrying behaviours that really don’t tie to any real convictions one way or another.
And this is a point I should have made in my post: that the politics and dispositions of remix artists is that of creative individuals whose sensibility is highly original, transgressive and inquisitive. These qualities also need to be cultivated in any learner who is asked to be “creative” and at present a lot of that is missing in a learning paradigm that is mostly extrinsic, mostly about reward and mostly perceived as a game. The creativity, inquiry and curiosity we often seek to cultivate isn’t there because the learning environment and structure that surrounds these “projects” is often counter productive. Students who are creating in a (usually normative, hegemonic and power mediated) context of competition, grades and evaluation are not engaging in creativity in the same way as those who create art in maker spaces – or outside of school. And that’s what I’m getting at about the importance of situated learning. Situated learning removes a lot of the forces that are acting *against* creativity and personal expression. Like James Gee says about the virtues of games: we can fail over and over and over and over again in a no stakes context of “play” and exploration where we are continually building a skill that we build in a context free of assessment, judgment and high stakes consequences. Schools aren’t like that. Boards package a course load of learning into a time frame that may or may not work for the learners with increasingly large class sizes with only one teacher attempting to scaffold the learning of over 30 students. And then they talk about that same teacher “differentiating” for all of those students in a context where they will have a limited amount of time to master any given skill or knowledge piece and then receive a high stakes evaluation on their learning. This is broken, this is fail, this is totally unlike any condition of real learning that exists in nature, mind or environment outside of education. It’s not how we learn. It’s counter to how we learn. And we talk about “improving” a system that is itself the source of the problem. Again, we need a radical new model of education – and, for now, the kinds of ideas I’m talking about may serve to help those within the system to do so but won’t really change things unless we’re ready to change the system, how we teach and hire teachers, the development/delivery of curriculum, assessment and evaluation of (in school and out of school learning) and the structure of the school week/day and year.
This is an epic post, and it is now required reading for ds106.us (thanks to Martha Burtis and, in turn, Jabiz for pointing it out). You outline a whole way of interrogating the limits of education as a model for transgression and it in many ways is the vision against which I want to measure ds106. Amazing!
Thanks Jim — I would be thrilled if you used my post in your course! I would love to see what you make of it.
Some context:
Part of the reason I wrote this post was to flesh out some of the ideas I’m currently putting into my book. It’s a way of working through ideas and sharing a few of them prior to publication.
I know you know this but I just wanted to reiterate this – for anybody who reads the post: I think where a lot of teachers may go wrong with remix (due to the nullification) is to focus on editing skills because it’s a convenient direction if you can’t really deal with the political issues that inform this media. Returning to Pogo, his love of Disney and children’s films as the materials and texts he wishes to work with are not arbitrary – but in choosing copyrighted materials he also took on a bigger battle. This was not simply about his editing, music or storytelling skills but also (and this is the key thing) his selected materials. So what worries me more than nullification is the “on message” consensus that is often concealed in workaround practices. I wanted to try to flash a few of these workarounds for what really are – and how they devalue and deskill the creative process (as a component of art and learning).
Thought I would leave this post to the discussion. Seems connected some how:
http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/03/20113685813934602.html
You can find Jonathan on Twitter as well. @radicalbytes
[...] the same time, this week I read this post by Melanie McBride about teaching the practice of remix within the confines of traditional educational systems which [...]
Melanie, you’ve given us so much to chew on here… I don’t know where to begin. The questions you pose at the end are very important ones to begin the process of rethinking schools. I especially love your point here:
This reminds me of something I blogged about a year or so ago while I was reading games research. I came to the conclusion that one of the reasons games will never work *in* schools is because schools are not third places. We require students to be there, and it’s impossible to replicate that third space feeling you get in a MMORPG in an environment where attendance is mandatory.
That’s not to say that games have no place in schools, or that schools have no place in gaming — just that we need to rethink that remix, which is I think what you’re poking at here.
Lots more to say, but that will suffice for now. I suspect we’ll chat more about this in the future. :)
Adrianne,
Thank you so much for this perspective. THIS is fantastic:
“This reminds me of something I blogged about a year or so ago while I was reading games research. I came to the conclusion that one of the reasons games will never work *in* schools is because schools are not third places. We require students to be there, and it’s impossible to replicate that third space feeling you get in a MMORPG in an environment where attendance is mandatory.”
What intrigues me here are the words “never work” this is the basis of what I’m looking at right now. I agree about MMORPGs. I’ve done MMO play with teachers and I’ve done MMO play with hardcore gamers outside of teaching. There’s a huge difference. And you’re right. it absolutely cannot be located in the classroom in quite the same way — although a very few have done so – meaningfully. Lucas Gillespie’s WoW in school comes to mind. But I’d argue that part of the success is due to the fact that Lucas himself is a gamer (not merely a teacher who has played games) and is a highly knowledgeable WoW player. I think this could be reproduced by another educator with similar authentic affinities within gaming culture but they have to be authentic … and authentic mastery/affinity isn’t something you can pick up at a PD session or an additional qualification or conference presentation.
Right now, schools/education dominates the credentialing process of learning. So really the real question is why is education the only place learning is legitimized or credentialed and whether this could occur in spaces/communities where there is an existing culture – or perhaps scaffolded by teachers who are part of those communities. This project is something the Peer to Peer university and Mozilla are working towards – and I’m behind that.
When I think of the traditional model of education and, indeed, teaching it’s pretty much one of Empire and colonization. I..e, we can, because of our “special training” colonize any subject area and unpack it meaningfully (and even assess the related products and knowledge) without really ever having a real affinity, passion, lived experience or deep engagement with that subject. It’s a “we know better than you do” about your own cultures, practices, experiences, perceptions. Right down to the way that we unpack critical theory – from our own particular perspective on that subject (and we ask the students, who we claim to not possess “critical skills” to see their culture through our eyes.
There’s so much more I want to say but I have to save it for the book. Thanks again for engaging.
[...] this post by Melanie McBride, Praxis 2.0: Escaping the edu-travelogue. I want you to consider the ideas she’s presenting in this post, and how she’s [...]
[...] Melanie McBride’s article “Praxis 2.0: Escaping the edu-travelogue,” she encourages educators to rethink the way the creative process is presented to students. She [...]
[...] http://melaniemcbride.net/2011/03/05/praxis-2-0/ [...]
[...] as well as the problems faced by educators trying to implement them. The first article, “Praxis 2: Escaping the edu-travelogue” focused mostly on the issues educators face when trying to introduce students to some of the [...]
[...] where it is due. If things are open and attributed, we can always see where the source started. Melanie McBride explains that students often are still not able to do mash ups because they are not allowed access [...]
[...] to think about that. This is such a well written post so I want to make sure I do it justice. Praxis 2.0 by Melanie Mcbride deals directly with what can be deemed creative limitations in today’s [...]
[...] for class we got to read Praxis 2.0: Escaping the edu-travelogue. I liked the article and it just further confirmed the fact that I really have no desire to be a [...]
[...] articles, Dr. Mashup; or, Why Educators Should Learn to Stop Worrying and Love the Remix and Praxis 2.0: Escaping the edu-travelogue. It’s interesting to note that DS106 more or less consists entirely of remixes and mash-ups [...]
[...] other; Whether it be peers, teachers, colleagues, etc. In Melanie McBride’s article about Escaping the Edu-travelogue, she points out that we now have modes of learning that don’t involve [...]
[...] reading these articles (by Melanie McBride and Brian Lamb), especially Melanie McBride’s, I was wondering if it would be an interesting experiment (or assignment) to have a number of [...]
[...] they did with it. Now let’s switch gears a little and talk about the article by Melanie McBride, Praxis 2.0: Escaping the edu-travelogue. She says in her post, “As a consequence of my school board’s policies on creating works from [...]
[...] I heartily agree with Melanie McBride on her ideas on self-directed exploration, outside of the classroom. Traditional learning can and should be supplemented by a free-er, less [...]
Skype-chat snapshot, synchronous, as I read this post:
[Student]
hey mr. b, in our imperialism project do we need to include the four questions on the wiki page about colonialism?
Clay B 4/2/11 9:54 PM
Not in a checklist sort of way. But we should see connections to at least a couple of those issues.
[Student] 4/2/11 9:55 PM
oh okay, thank you
[Student] Hi Mr. B its ur favorite student. Me and
[Student] would just like to make sure that our plan makes sense. weve put together a series of pictures showing how Europe treated slaves differently then America, and today it is a mix of the two treatments. “Slaves” today are payed much more then they were, but still not enough for there work load. They are also given food and board in Singapore. We wrote a paragrah explaining this is it ok?
Clay Burell 2:40 PM
sounds interesting. if you think it’s worth showing to the class, and does make sense, then it’s all good.
(I know this is unclear. The first time through we’ll use it to come to agreement on whether free projects can even be done in school for graded work. I’m saying “be creative and show your understanding,” and students are saying “but what about grades grades grades.” So I’m not sure creativity works in grade-factories like SAS. We’ll see.)
[Student] 2:43 PM
ok well try to be creative
Clay B 2:43 PM
” and show your understanding,”
[Student] 2:45 PM
thank you Mr. B
[...] reading these articles (by Melanie McBride and Brian Lamb), especially Melanie McBride’s, I was wondering if it would be an interesting experiment (or assignment) to have a number of [...]