A student response to the Manifesto for Media Education

Karl Rawstrone, Lecturer in Media Practice, University Centre Yeovil

To be honest at the outset, I’m not sure that a manifesto for Media Education (capitals intentional) is possible or even advisable, although I believe in the value, socially, personally and, yes, economically of media education (lack of capitals equally intentional) – otherwise I wouldn’t be teaching it. But the reason I can teach it (post-16 at any rate) isn’t that it needs teaching, it’s that students want to do the courses.

I find it surprising how many new undergraduates on the foundation degree I run don’t actually know what they are doing here or what they want to do with the rest of their lives. Some of them expect to be making ‘films’, some want to ‘do animation’, others just don’t know. But still, something brings them there.

At last year’s Media Education Summit, Marc Prensky asked, “Where are the students?” There is a lot of talk about students being more media-literate, media-engaged and digitally-native than we are as educators but there seems to be very little engagement of students in debates about media education.

So, given that this manifesto project can’t just be about defending our assaulted grants, departments, jobs and self-esteem and it must really be about working out how to better develop the personal and social capital of those we educate, I thought they should see what was being said about their subject.

I gave my first-years a morning to read and discuss the site and then to get together and talk about what they wanted out of the course, why they thought media education was good for them and why they did it. They pulled out some broad categories they agreed on and got together to produce this response. In total, including discussion and planning time, they had about 6 hours.

I think what the result shows is that they have as many varied ideas about how media education is good for them as the contributors to the site do. I think reading the contributions gave some of them new ideas about what the value of their education could be, so I hope it’s been a positive little exercise for them. I also hope that it shows the value of engaging students in the media education debate.

1 Comment

This entry was posted in Karl Rawstrone and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.


  1. Trevor Browning says:

    The graphic image of Karl with the projected image of ‘Chaos’ across his forehead is powerful and thought provoking. It (to me) depicts McLuhan’s thoughts of the global village creating disharmony and conflict.

    What astonished me is that Karl says he is surprised that students don’t ‘know what they are doing here or what they want to do with the rest of their lives’. Who does? Most people I know and work with meander through education and their working life.

    I believe Karl should be applauded for bringing students to this forum and encouraging them to participate in the debate of media education. Do you listen and will it have an impact?

    I find the video response engaging and well constructed especially given the time constraints. I am not convinced that it fully answers the question Karl posses; ‘What they wanted out of the course, why they thought media education was good for them and why they did it?’ In many parts it seems to regurgitate the views of Henry Jenkins and David Gauntlet. My feeling is that it fails to reflect individuals aspirations. Perhaps it would have been better to pose the question, making the response without reading the academic views and then compare the honest, earthy views of students with those of the teaching fraternity.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *