Media education in Estonia: reasons of a failure and success

1. Media education in Estonia: reasons of a failure and success Kadri Ugur Institute of Social Studies University of Tartu

2. Educational system of Estonia • Mandatory education starts at 7 years and lasts 9 years or until pupil is 17 • Primary and secondary education is free of charge • High scores in PISA and TIMSS tests • Tertiary education is free for students (2013) • 88% adults have high school diploma or equivalent

3. Estonian youth in the internet • EU Kids Online II • All children in Estonia use Internet • 96% have broadband connection at home • 50% of our kids have had problems because of being too long online • 40% of children have experienced bullying or other online risks • Digital literacy is a little higher than in European average • Parental mediation is reactive, not proactive

4. ML in Estonian curricula • Cross-curricular theme since 2002 • Traditions to teach creating media texts as a part of classes of mother tongue • Possibility to teach 35 hours in gymnasium level as voluntary subject • 2011 national curriculum • CCT “Media education” => “Information environment” • Mandatory course “Media and influences” in gymnasium level Estonian

5. ME in school praxis • Everything depends on school’s will and teacher’s competency • No reports about reality of media education • Teacher’s understanding about media literacy varies greatly • Pupils are introduced to the media they do not use • Newspapers, TV-news, talk radio

6. Research program • “Implementation strategies of cross-curricular themes in Estonian schools” 2009-2011 • Based on old national curricula • Representative sample of 10 schools • Several research instruments • Analysis of school’s curricula • Interviews with schools’ stuff • Teachers’ survey • Pupils’ survey • Lesson observations (only media education)

7. Results • Teachers interpret cross-curricular themes as natural part of educational process and do not reflect on their own actions or words. • Teachers do not feel ready to deal with media education. • Pupils are interested for media, but critical about the ways media is mentioned at school.

8. Why did we fail? • In 2011, media education as CCT was in weaker position than other CCT-s. • No prove of positive change since • Research did not explicitly reveal reasons of failure • Combination with other research results allows to make suggestions

9. Reason 1: lack of cognitive models • During pre-service education teachers have got no training for implementing CCT-s • How does teaching CCT differ from “time consuming chit-chat about what the kids saw in TV” • Attitudes towards media vary in generations and in persons • Is media worth of our attention?

10. Reason 2: overloaded curricula • System of assessment supports good factual knowledge, not critical thinking • Schools are rated by the results of standardized assessment • Teacher concentrate on what they assume will be asked in the tests

11. Reason 3: lack of critical reading competency • Traditional approach to texts is normative, not critical • Methodological mousetrap – if you teach kids to critically listen and read media, they will use that skill on you • Teacher’s inner insecurity

12. Reason 4: traditions • Literacy = reading and writing and that we can already • Media educations = writing news story + using internet • If we have one “media crazy” teacher at school, other teachers are “safe” • Media is connected to language, not to social sciences or arts

13. Reason 5: school culture • Teacher’s cooperation is not supported • What happens in the classroom is defined by teacher’s choice and ability, not by pupil’s needs • The walls between subjects are too strong

14. Reason 6: different media usage • Generational gaps, differences in media usage • No reflection habits • Prejudices and misbelieves about media • Verbal vs visual processing?

15. Reason 7: text books • Media is “handled” in text books of many subjects • Mostly in out-dated key • Simplified concepts are spread constantly • Teachers are not able to correct printed misunderstandings • Media has changed since last textbook issue!

16. Course “Media and influence” • Gymnasium level Estonian • One compulsory + one semi-voluntary practical course • 35 + 35 hours • Teachers are NOT PREPARED to teach this course • Verbal vs audiovisual media, media production etc

17. Good practices • Schools have some free lesson resource and some freedom in curriculum development • Media is taught as voluntary subject in several schools by professionals • Under the name “media” you may find great variety of content • From history of journalism to multimedia production

18. Good vibes • Many media professionals are interested in teaching at schools • Courses at bachelor level • Media education in secondary school • Focused on media as cross-curricular theme • Media education in gymnasium • Focused on 35hour course • Media didactics • Focused on media production and supportive editing

19. School media • Long traditions of school newspapers and radio • NMK (Youth’s media club) production camps • Other forms of non-formal education • Separate projects and competitions for motivated students

20. Changing teacher education • Communication skills are trained, not lectured • Mediated communication is considered • Media didactics is still missing in pre-service training • Audiovisual training techniques are used • Possible positive influence

21. In-service training • Association of Media Educators • NGO • Lack of resources and devoted people • New national curricula = endless amount of courses for teachers

22. “Circle of life” or the way out?

23. Suggestions • Media education must be built up based on pupils’ needs and media experiences, not from teachers’ competence or existing text books. • Creating cognitive schemas during pre-service training of teachers

24. Sources • National curricula • http://www.hm.ee/index.php?1512622 • http://www.hm.ee/index.php?1512619