Not the Film that I've Been Waiting For

 

I was very disappointed by We Are The People We've Been Waiting For, premiered at Leicester Square last night. I first saw an extract back at the launch of the Curriculum Foundation, when David Puttnam previewed the opening sequences, and I had been looking forward to seeing it since. The potential of a full-length documentary feature about education (backed by Oscar-winning producer, Lord Puttnam, and supported by various sponsors including independent education foundation, Edge) seemed like a great opportunity to move discussion about the challenges and vision of a 21st century education system, further into the public arena....The film was heralded by its publicity as 'an inconvenient truth' about education, but the truth about this film is that it’s a disorientating muddle of half-baked ideas. It’s muddled about what it thinks is wrong (and not wrong) with the current education system. It’s muddled about what ought to be done about it. It’s muddled about what our vision of the future of education ought to be. And it’s muddled about the extent to which the five Swindon-based teenagers featured in the film, were victims of a failing system, or a tribute to a satisfactory (albeit imperfect) one.

The film was stuffed-full of many of the great and the good of the education system of the past decade. And although many big themes were raised, none of them were developed: the educational challenge of big issues like climate change (we saw the polar bears), or fundamental extremism (yes, we saw the twin towers too); Ken Robinson’s ideas for a broad and balanced curriculum; alternatives to a curriculum determined by an examination syllabus; and so on. Any number of these themes, fleetingly alluded to, could have made a thought-provoking and provocative film. (Indeed, David Puttnam’s own journey and perspective on education could have made a great story.) But the film does none of these things. It’s simply a porridge of a wide range of, often contradictory (and mainly negative), opinions about today’s education system, woven together by a highly polemical narrator (the voice of John Hannan). And by the way, if you’re going to put polemics into the mouth of a narrator without patronising an audience, it should be an authored film - a Michael Moore or an Al Gore.

If there is a single message buried in all this, it’s probably that the traditional academic route is not the only path to success (a view that is implicit in most of the changes in our education system of the past half-dozen years or more). Maybe for some people, that’s a radical and provocative message. But I don’t know many of them. For me, it was an opportunity missed, and certainly not the film that I’ve been waiting for.

Read more!

The perfect storm in a tweacup

 

What a weekend! At around 2.00pm GMT on Saturday, the UK’s most famous user of Twitter, announced (in no more than 140 characters,) his withdrawal from the world’s favourite micro-blog. Actor, author and lifecaster, Stephen Fry, had been engaged in an exchange with ‘follower’ @brumplum, who had commented: ‘much as I admire and adore the chap, they [Fry’s tweets] are a bit... boring.... (sorry Stephen)’. Fry, in a depressed state, took it to heart and signed-off with the words: ‘You've convinced me. I'm obviously not good enough. I retire from Twitter henceforward. Bye everyone’....

By Sunday morning, however, Fry was tweeting again, full of remorse and ‘feeling very foolish’. So the entire incident turned out to be a storm in a tweacup. Except that when your followers number nearly a million on Twitter, that cup’s a very large one. In the intervening hours, the twitterstorm had gathered considerable debris, making BBC news within minutes (BBC: ‘Fry ponders leaving Twitter site’) and with all the inevitable concern, disbelief, and outrage echoing around the twittersphere, with hashtags like #savestephen #stephendontleave #savestephenfry and #pleasestaystephen.

I can think of no more perfect storm to illustrate the big dilemma posed by Twitter. On the one hand, it is an innocuous, highly personal medium for instant messaging, ideal for gossip, opinion, passing on trivia, and taking umbrage. But at the same time, under the right conditions, it can become a potent instrument for a form of mass communication, often transmediated, that incites collective indignation (and potentially, collaborative action) at incredible speed.

Author and academic, Clay Shirky has done much to highlight the real and potential power of social networks for collective action (Here Comes Everybody ), and a great deal has been written about the benefits of the perceived democratising and empowering effect of these technologies: global awareness of the unrest in Sichuan following the massive earthquake in May 2008; the world’s attention brought to focus on the disaffection in Iran following recent elections that in turn, fuelled and strengthened that protest; and the success of the Obama presidential campaign online. All are examples of the newly discovered power of social networks.

Perhaps the most dramatic example of this in the UK was as recently as October this year, when Alan Rusbridger, editor of the Guardian newspaper, posted a tweet alluding to a High Court ‘super-injunction’ obtained by lawers Carter-Ruck on behalf of oil-trading firm Trafigura. The decision prevented the media from reporting a parliamentary question on the subject. The idea of an oil company attempting to gag the reporting of parliament, particularly on a subject as inflammatory as the dumping of toxic ‘slops’ in Ivory Coast, had all the hallmarks of a John Grisham novel. The outrage and indignation of twitterers was palpable. What couldn’t be printed in a newspaper, was whispered, gossiped and shouted about across the blogesphere, making the injunction untenable. Within hours, Trafigura had withdrawn its objection, and the story was being widely reported in full. In short, the battle for justice and freedom of speech appeared to have been won thanks in no small way, to Twitter.

However, what was positioned by many as a triumph for democracy, worried others. As the online editor of PC Pro, Barry Collins, expressed it at the time (‘Did Stephen Fry and Twitter really score a victory for free speech?’):

Stephen Fry and the Twittering classes may yesterday have overturned what appears to be an outright infringement of free speech, but they need to wield their new-found power with great care. Perhaps in between his self-congratulatory tweets, Mr Fry should remind his audience that what interests the public isn’t always in the public interest. Twitter is a great tool for free speech, but it’s a terrible means of dispensing justice.

To reframe this concern in a different way: what happens when the voices of the largely liberal-minded, educated, and socially aware early adopters, are replaced by the voices of intolerance, extremism, and spite? Fry himself is well-aware of this dilemma, and has publically reflected on it only recently in a thoughtful article (‘Poles, Politeness and Politics in the age of Twitter’) :

Twitter may seem to some to be dominated by bien pensant, liberal spirits at the moment. Will I be so optimistic about it when these spirits are matched by forces of religiosity and nationalism that might not accord with my chattering-class, liberal elite preferences? When the political machines march in and start recruiting and acquiring millions of followers, giving them the power to close sites with DDOS slashdotting campaigns, what will I say then?

For me, what all this reveals is a lack of both research and understanding about how this new media really works, and at its heart, what precisely is the role and influence of the unelected, unaccountable, new breed of opinion leaders – those with the loudest voices in the blogesphere . Old models of understanding media production, distribution, and consumption, conceptually derived from a Cultural Studies tradition, seem to have little to offer here. The Twitterati is not a reincarnation of the ‘gatekeepers’ of the broadcasting era. They represent something entirely new and something we urgently need to understand better.

Read more!

Learning Technologies...

 

Well September has rushed by and October is vanishing into November. Over the past few months I have attended some great conferences and events and it's about time I started to share some of the highlights....Alt C conference 09. ‘In dreams begins responsibilities’ This conference was looking at the use of learning technologies in the higher education sector. I heard two great keynote speakers Micheal Wesch made me think about digital identities and why they are so important with the younger generations’. Martin Bean made some interesting points about change in the education sector. One point which struck a chord was how his presentation could have been delivered online before anybody even attended the face to face event!!!

With costs flying out for event platforms I can concur with Martin, the way that face to face events are being delivered has changed. It’s now about moving conversations and learning forward, by providing materials and presentations before an event to ensure people can gain the most from it. As a learner I like time to reflect and think about things, do a bit of my own research and then prepare questions. Being able to do this in advance of an event will ensure I get the most from the face to face experience.


But can these techniques be applied in the corporate training world? Recently I have been part of corporate social responsibility, team building programmes for one of our clients. The corporate teams attend a charity for the day and produce a new garden, or decorate a room with the help of Splash Projects . They film the event and reflect on the roles they take on board for the day. The question I am left with is: How can technology facilitate reflection in the workplace after an experiential project day? How can the events video footage be used to create learning objects which add value to the real life experience?

Answers on a postcard please to …

Read more!

Challenge of media ‘procurement’ in the new digital landscape

 

Two things happened last week that gave me cause to reflect. On the face of it they were entirely unrelated. But it was their very disconnectedness that struck me as significant. The first was a long discussion at a large government department about future media ‘procurement’: how might media services be organised, contracted, and managed in the future; how could they be ‘future-proofed’? The second was the moment that a low budget film on the dangers of texting while driving suddenly went global......The former involved a large organisation, used to buying, owning and controlling its media content, trying to work out what the implication of the current convergent media landscape might be for its commissioning ‘frameworks’. The latter was a cheaply-made, spontaneously distributed, freely available media asset, suddenly – and in the space of hours and days - becoming the focus of an uncontrolled explosion of interest that’s already proved to have dramatically changed young people’s attitudes to texting while driving, right across the world.

The reality is that media technology has changed so far and fast beyond the confines of the old procurement models of the past, they almost inhabit a different universe. This is a challenge not only for organisations wanting to communicate, but for the media profession itself. What is our role when everyone can be a content producer and publisher? What does it mean to be a media professional, when media produced by non-professionals may actually have an advantage in terms of cost, access, immediacy, or authenticity? This democratisation of communication has enormous social ramifications, far beyond the media world. As Clay Shirky suggests in his book, Here Comes Everybody , as new media becomes normal, ubiquitous and so pervasive as to be invisible, so it becomes potent. From the Obama campaign, to unrest in Iran, there are now more and more examples of online communication moving from user-sharing and conversation, to genuine collaboration and a completely new form of collective action.

In the world of education, we’ve scarcely begun to scratch the surface. The possibilities for learning in this context are so far ‘out of the box’ as to make the box an irrelevance. These are extraordinary and exciting times: a time for experimentation and for original and creative applications of these emerging technologies for education in its broadest sense. And the only certainty is that there is no certainty. Constant change is here to stay, and absolutely nothing is ‘future-proof’.

Read more!

DCSF needs to act on diploma

 

The DCSF has got a serious communication problem. Whatever the reality, the perception is persisting that the new national diplomas are not going to work. If this becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy, tens of millions of pounds of tax-payers money will have been wasted, not to mention the personal cost to kids that find they made ‘wrong choices’....The constant drip-drip-drip feed of negative news is corrosive. We’re constantly being reminded that: top Universities are, at best, ‘reserving judgement’ (or demanding supplementary A’ levels) - largely based on ignorance; many teachers don’t understand them (or even acknowledge that there’s a need for more applied learning) - again a position based largely on a lack of information about them. And now – surprise, surprise – according to a new report from Reading University, teenagers themselves are having cold feet.

If it emerges that there are genuine problems with the breadth or rigour of the new diplomas (as has been suggested by Prof Alan Smithers and others), then of course this needs to be addressed. But it’s such early days, there’s really not enough evidence to know. It’s all conjecture. But the persistently negative press needs a massive and immediate counter-action, or this will become spin out-of-control. The Department needs to act quickly and decisively, and not leave it to Peter Mandelson’s DBIS. Diplomas simply can’t be allowed to become the Millennium Dome of education.

Read more!

Little Princess Fundraiser film goes live

 

The Little Princess Trust provides real hair wigs to children suffering hair loss due to cancer treatment. For a parent, discovering your child has a serious illness like cancer, is devastating, and the trauma for both parent and child can be increased by worrying about the side effects, particularly hair loss. For many children, particularly girls, this can be incredibly upsetting. Each year, Little Princesses helps hundreds of children....In July we did some filming for the charity. We have now produced a seven minute film - introduced by the Trust’s ambassador, Gail Porter, telling the story of 14 year old Melissa who has lost her hair during treatment for her Rhabdomyosarcoma or RMS cancer. The film will be used to help gain much needed funds as well as show fundraisers how their efforts really can make a difference.

It’s been a great project to be involved in, an inspiration to meet Melissa and her family, and a joy to meet and work with the people behind the scenes who put in so much of their own time and effort to help others. The feedback has been amazing, and the client says it’s definitely the most important development in the charity’s growth so far.

To find out more and to view the film go to The Little Princess Trust.

Read more!

Our Life, Our Curriculum - Year 2 Begins!

 

In 2008 I was involved in the development of a ground breaking set of films for the Specialist Schools and Academies Trust which explored the reactions, feelings and aspirations of learners embarking on their secondary school career - at a time in which important changes were being made both to what children learn, and the way in which they learn. ...Rather like an educational version of World In Action’s ‘7UP’ series, 20 children were carefully chosen, of varying backgrounds and from across the country to follow through the next 7 years of their secondary education; to map their hopes and aspirations and the challenges that they face as they grow up with the New Secondary Curriculum. Through twenty individual profile videos and one 20’ combined film, we explored the very different experiences of each child as they made the transition from Primary to Secondary, and set the scene for the next 7 years. The films are being shown around the country in conferences, focus groups and training sessions and are also available to view on the SSAT website.

On the back of the success of last year’s project I am delighted to say we’ve been awarded year two of ‘Our Life, Our Curriculum’. In the last week of July all twenty children (and parents) met for the first time in Birmingham, and took part in a workshop to kick off this year’s filming. It was a very successful day and as the Producer / Director, I was actually quite amazed by how much some of the children had changed over their first secondary year in terms of their attitudes to school, their hopes for the future and their confidence. The workshop involved painting exercises and presenting their artwork to the group, and in the afternoon, circus skills where many of the children proved to be far more coordinated than their parents! Plate spinning, Diablo, and devil sticks; of all the group, both Obri and Tresvan impressed everybody with their ability to pick up the skills with ease.

We’ll catch up with them again when we spend a day filming with each child from September – December, when they will be starting Year 8. No longer the youngest in the school, I am sure we will see even more physical and emotional changes as they grapple with becoming teens, and face difficult decisions over subject choices.

Read more!