Difference between revisions of "Production 4 Response MS"

Latest revision as of 19:23, 10 February 2020

How do the authors interweave inquiry-driven learning and learning outcomes to video production (the process of ‘analysis and production)? How does the reading address the ‘paradox’ of teaching ‘curriculum outcomes’ (Common Core Standards; EQAO) and open-ended inquiry and production-based learning? How can educators create conditions for students to enact and/or even exceed the ‘standards’?

In the readings, both Young (2011) and Doerr-Stevens (2017) highlight the enriched learning that can occur through the process of video/media production. Through this process, students have the opportunity to fully engage with a topic as they conduct research inside and outside of the classroom. Video production can create opportunities for hands-on learning experience where students are exposed to using different equipment, conducting interviews, and editing while creating a meaningful learning experience. The hand-on experimental process creates a learning platform that uses “situated learning” where “the learner has an active role in learning” (Young 2011, p. 2). It creates an environment where students can learn through their own experiences within the different parts of the production process. It also has the ability to promote inquiry-driven learning because students are able to continually question their research throughout the process. Doerr-Stevens (2017) explains that during the creation of the documentaries, the students tended to engage in a “recursive inquiry process” in which they were seen to revisit and revise tasks from earlier in the production process as they deepened their understanding of the topic (p. 58). Video production therefore allows students to change their original ideas and ways of thinking as they learn and use the editing process to make adjustments. The shift in thinking that can occur throughout their process moves away from the traditional mindset that learning happens in a linear fashion.

Another unique feature of the video process is that students have the ability to “combine various modes of expression (visuals, sound, narrative, etc.) into a single digital media text with focus and purpose” (Doerr-Stevens, 2017, p. 56). The variety of options available to students creates a broader platform for students to add their own creativity that can enhance their learning while still meeting various curriculum expectations. This can be extremely important because as educators, it is our job to ensure that we are teaching students the standards set out by the province, but there is a common misconception that to meet those standards, we must use the traditional teaching style in which learning is teacher-directed. However, Doerr-Stevens (2017) highlights that the teachers studied for the article “continuously connected the analysis and production of documentary to CCSS [Common Core State Standards] for analyzing nonfiction and writing narratives” (p. 58). Therefore, through video production, teachers have the ability to meaningfully address the curriculum standards in a non-traditional manner. Furthermore, in relation to curriculum outcomes, one of the things I found interesting about video production is that it can be cross-disciplinary. Within one production students are able to incorporate elements of language, art, media, music, etc. In the traditional setting, students tend to learn each subject independently or if there is overlap between disciplines, the cross-curricular connection has been previously decided by the teacher. In video production, however, this overlap happens naturally. For example, last class we were asked to create a short video using prompts from the ideation decks to trigger inspiration. In my group, we chose to create a how-to video that incorporated elements of humor and parody. In the final edits of our film, we decided to add music in the background. It wasn’t until all the groups shared their videos that I realized the importance of the music selection. It added another layer to the video that added to the tone and purpose being portrayed to the audience. I didn’t realize until later that unintentionally we were also fulfilling curriculum outcomes. I looked through some of the official curriculum documents and found several learning outcomes that were met just based on the rational for a particular music selection within the music, language, media and drama curriculum. From the drama section specifically, it states “B1.4 communicate feelings, thoughts, and abstract ideas through drama works, using audio, visual, and/or technological aids for specific purposes and audiences” (The Ministry of Education, 2009, p. 151). For me, this was an important realization that related to my production-based learning experience.

Video and media production provides educators with an engaging alternative to the traditional static teaching model. It moves away from the idea of a “one-size-suits all curriculum” towards a method of that teaches suggests that it is okay if their learning is ‘messy’ and changes as they go (Cope & Kalantzis, 2009, p. 188). Video production, like “a pedagogy of multiliteracies allows alternative starting points for learning” further permitting students to connect to their own understanding (Cope & Kalantzis, 2009, p. 188). Through video production students are able to engage in what is viewed by the students as a less limiting learning experience which in turn, makes learning more meaningful (Young, 2011, p. 6). I think that it is this change that will create the environment for students to succeed well beyond the ‘set curriculum standards’. Therefore, creating a dynamic, ‘messy’ learning environment allows students to deepen their own learning as shown through the experiences of the students in both articles.

References

Cope, B. & Kalantzis, M. (2009). ‘Multiliteracies’: New literacies, new learning. Pedagogies: An International Journal, 4(3), 164-195.

Doerr-Stevens, (2107). Embracing the Messiness of Research: Documentary Video Composing as Embodied, Critical Media Literacy, English Journal, 106.3 (2017): 56–62.

The Ministry of Education. (2009). The Arts [PDF]. Queen’s Printer for Ontario.

Young, J. (2011). Pedagogies of production: Investigating What works for teaching media literacy. Research for Action Foundation.