Putting the social (justice) in social media pedagogy
For months, I’ve been trying to connect my wired educator network with ideas from critical pedagogy while looking to traditional academics (specialising in critical pedagogy, social justice and anti-oppression education) to share the key questions that might inform a meaningful assessment of web2.0 tools in relation to social justice, equity and diversity.
Here are a few of the questions, challenges and priorities as I see them.
Among the questions that interest me:
1) Privacy, data-mining and the ethics of teaching in corporate social space
Are corporately datamined and surveilled commercial social networks (like Facebook) the same as community-developed, open source spaces for learning and teaching? What does it mean to use commercial spaces versus community spaces?2) Open Pedagogy and the need for safe spaces
With the increasing emphasis on openness and transparency online – the open sharing of our work, identities, interests and associations – what are the hidden risks for marginalised, exploited, oppressed or politically active users? How can those who promote Open models and spaces ensure that our privacy rights are both respected and protected? Do youth, kids and at-risk groups face different challenges and consequences for “sharing” than power holders (see danah boyd’s “Just because we can doesn’t mean we should” for further analysis).3) Personal technology, classism and brand bullying
How could the use of personal tech in the classroom reinforce classism, brand bullying and inequity? How are educators and educational institutions going to avoid reinforcing classist inequity while staying current by allowing “personal” tech? Who pays for the “personal” tech (dataplans, etc)?4) Assessing equity and diversity in web2.0 social spaces and technologies
What are the primary questions we have to ask when assessing the use of a new technology in relation to anti-oppression and differentiated learning? For example, if we promote the use of a blog have we properly scaffolded the various hidden curriculum pre-requisites that blogging requires (i.e., entitlement to a “voice,” confidence to speak and have an opinion, traditional literacies and communications skills – that might be assumed but not present in all learners, awareness of the social and behavioural codes that mediate online community spaces, etc). Aside from access or ownership of technology, are we using tools that privilege a particular class, cultural bias or cognitive learning style (at the expense of differentiated instruction)?5) Beyond “ed tech” skills: Equity2.0 as professional development
Aside from “technical” knowledge, what kinds of social justice, equity and diversity *competencies* should 21st Century educators have? How can we facilitate a greater alignment towards equity and social justice pedagogy among the next generation of wired educators – who may be more excited by the media than the social (of social media).
The questions above led me to write a post about the hidden curriculum of 21st Century Literacies but this is only the beginning of an inquiry that I plan to develop in more depth and possibly as a handbook for digital critical pedogogy – assessments and questions for the future.
So now I turn my questions to you – in hopes to find ways to bring critical pedagogy further into the forefront of classroom2.0.
Questions:
1. What are the KEY questions that you, an educator aligned with critical pedagogy, would apply to any new tool or use of that tool for teaching?
2. What should wired teachers be considering when implementing social and participatory media in their classrooms?
3. Identify 5- 10 forms of diversity present in your classrooms – and how you are currently differentiating your use of web2.0 tools to reflect their identities, interests and unique learning needs.
4. What training or resources are currently available in your school or board that define or support teacher use of social and participatory media? Has your board provided guidelines on the professional, ethical and pedagogical use of social media?
5. What are the key areas of inequity present within your community or school and how has your use of social media contributed to addressing or exploring these issues?
Great post, Melanie (no surprise). You make me want to drop everything I am doing to really, really focus on this area. It may have to wait until sabbatical 2011 though. :-)
A couple of small things.
- in “2)Open everything and the need for safe spaces” (and I know we’ve had back-and-forths on this), I feel that this piece cannot be addressed without considering two things. i) Can this be considered without the types of affordances/benefits/empowerment that could come from ‘being open’ (for both individuals and groups). I think there is a need to balance the question. ii) As well, in this balance, when one asks “what are the hidden risks for marginalised, exploited, oppressed or politically active users?”, what about the hidden risks for those with a perception of privilege & authority. And what would it take for one’s status to shift (beyond gender/sexuality/ethnicity)?
One more small thing, I avoid words such as ‘KEY’ as they evoke the seminal/germinal debate for me. For me, I feel this is oppressive language in a non-oppressive framework. And yes, I understand the irony of pointing out something like this in your use of language. :-)
These are really important questions, Melanie, and you are really lighting a path forward in asking these question in the context of social media. I hope to someday spend more time in this journey with you.
Thanks for what you do.
Alex,
You’re so very right on all of those points and yes, I will remove “key” from my vocab ;)
Among all of the educators I follow, your perspective on “open” is the most intriguing. Not only because you’ve been on the cutting edge of this stuff for so long, have applied it in your teaching and career but also because you are doing so within teacher ed. But mostly because you’ve also been equally sensitive to the kinds of issues people like danah boyd have raised around privilege and equity. This combination of priorities is very meaningful to me. So thank you for taking a moment to comment here and share your thoughts.
Thanks for what you do. We’re already on the journey together – now it’s just a matter of making connection with all the others camped out along the trail.
Twitter Comment
“key questions … a meaningful assessment of web2.0 tools in relation to social justice, equity and diversity.” [link to post]
– Posted using Chat Catcher
I am really interested in this. Have diigoed and tweeted links just now. I am library media specialist in an independent school with a big drive for web 2.0/digital literacies education focus this year; with teachers, parents and students. For example, we had the first facutly meeting conversation about teachers on FB and whether to friend students or not just last June. We have a long way to go. Thanks for publishing.
Hi Andromeda,
I’m glad to hear that emergent literacies are a priority at your community/school.
That’s frustrating when boards or schools don’t have clear policies on social media (given how long it’s been around). But this is just one of many problems produced by the lag within institutions to not only adopt but merely accept (in many cases) that this change occurred (a surprising many are still in denial).
Conversely, those of us who consider ourselves to be rah rah enthusiasts need to pay really close attention to the social understandings and behaviours already present in our schools and communities – if we have problems in Facebook with bullying, oppression, inequity and classism it’s likely because we have not dealt with these problems very well offline.
I think character education is a good step towards these issues but I think the more important work has to do with media and cultural literacies – understanding the larger ideas that influence human behaviours (rather than dealing with the end results).
It’s one thing for us to talk to students about being empathetic – to show them what it looks and feels like and have them dutifully repeat back to us that “empathy is good.” It’s quite another to have students analyze media, advertising and entertainment to identify the promotion of certain behaviours – and to ask, explicitly, who (or what) benefits from the promotion of these behaviours? (jealousy, aggression, gossiping, competition, status-seeking, popularity, etc). Combined with character education, media and other literacies are critical to genuinely preparing young people for a great future. We cannot merely teach them “good values” we need to provide them with the tools to assess the world around them – not just memorize and repeat back to us what is we need them to say.
Out of curiosity are you elementary or secondary?