Brief notes
on: Alvarado, M. (1981) 'Television
Studies and Pedagogy', Screen Education
38:56-67
Dave Harris
[This begins with a review of Masterman's classic
textbook. Masterman argues against simple
evaluative responses of the effectiveness of
teaching as a disincentive for further analysis,
and one which forces individual stances and
personal responses.]
The problem with Masterman's book is that it sees
the contents of media studies as ideology, as a
separate matter from form, and from pedagogy,
which is seen as a neutral methodology.
Instead, pedagogy is 'an indivisible part of what
is being taught' (59). Masterman's naive
faith in progressivism prevents him from seeing
this. Alvarado is not so sure of the
suitability of the discussion method, especially
as a form for analysis. The general interest
in deschooling is also mistaken: competitiveness
is all right if it leads to [personal, political]
transformations, and is anyway necessary if there
is to be a wider struggle. Even examinations
have a good side. Masterman is naive to
think that schools could opt out of the
examination system anyway. It is not enough
to encourage pupil experiences, rather we need to
get beyond them.
Alvarado suggests instead that we: (a) select
suitable elements of experience rather than
relying on it completely; (b) pursue a definite
methodology, even though this might be seen as
'theory' by teachers and often rejected. The
progressive critique needs to be widened to
include a critique of contents [of experience?]
(64); (c) institutional structures of the media
are important but often neglected by
teachers. This may be 'boring' on occasion,
but even so it should not be ignored: pupils often
have a 'knowledge' about institutions that really
do need to be combated, and Alvarado talks of a
student member of the National Front who 'knew'
the media were all a Jewish conspiracy.
Finally, we have to realise there can never be a
perfect pedagogy because the pupils always
transform it.
If the teacher is to be well organized and present
a clear outline of the work to be covered, this
involves a necessary dualism in their approach to
children. They must recognise their own [and
the school's] power, the importance of present
structures, and the need to work successfully
within them (67). They must recognise the
importance and potential power of all forms of
oppositional knowledge, and this should lead
pupils to realise the importance of passing
examinations [in other subjects as well as in
media studies?]. This in turn requires
direct and economical teaching in tandem with
critique. This duality needs to be 'made
explicit, discussed, kept in tension and used
analytically'
[Masterman was able to reply in Screen
Education 40: 88-92. Alvarado is too
theoretical and we need to know what he actually
does in practice. Alvarado should actually
find out what pupils are learning as a result of
direct instruction. The issue is what should
be done about exams—a weak accommodation with the
examination system simply denies the effects that
it has,how it can produce the structured failure
of whatever teachers try to do. He agrees
there can be no simple successful practice in
areas of teaching, especially in areas that cover
the institutional context]
more education
studies stuff
|
|