I woke up this morning with a strange feeling that “something was wrong”. After receiving feedback, including yesterday’s tutoring, I decided to include preteens the project’s beneficiaries, as experts and stakeholders in the intervention. Although involving children raises ethical considerations that need objective attention, it is simpler to demonstrate progress with them than to devise solutions with professionals. I found this approach both appealing and easy, and I felt relieved for the first time in a long time that the time of contemplation was over, and all that was left to do was execute.
First of all, I asked myself if this was due to fear of execution. My answer was no. I had already contacted the local library and received a positive response, and I had been recommended by parents (a former teacher and someone with experience working with children) to look after the children during the intervention, so it was literally a matter of taking action.
My discomfort perplexed me, and I took it as a cue to re-examine my motives. I began by contemplating why I aimed to discover a pragmatic solution with an expert team, although it was exploratory and did not involve children directly, which is a limitation of my research, leaving the children as the beneficiaries.
I don’t want to see children as data. My main objective was to avoid treating children as mere data, and I aimed to refrain from using or manipulating their emotions and cognitions to substantiate my research. Television programmes and films that claim to target children can be easily found, but some fail to consider the potential impact of their content. While children have varying levels of innate resilience, environmental factors can greatly influence them.
I approached this research project to investigate multimodal literacy for preteens, specifically how to read images. My aim was to provide children with specialist support to understand the hidden intentions and purposes of photographs and videos and to identify the media environment in which they live so that they become agents of their own culture rather than mere consumers.
However, in this current media landscape, my research’s educational nature reminded me of the tactics used by tobacco companies, like Philip Morris International, targeting students through various marketing strategies, often under the guise of educational programmes. They have run programs purportedly aimed at preventing youth smoking. However, these programs, with sponsoring corporate social responsibility (CSR) programs, actually serve to promote the brand among young people and may even encourage smoking. By presenting themselves as responsible companies caring for the well-being of children, they aim to improve their public image while subtly promoting brand awareness.
Often very sophisticated, these strategies exploit psychological and social vulnerabilities in young people, leading to positive brand associations, curiosity, and potentially the uptake of smoking. In my own experience, something similar happened. In my junior high school days, we constantly saw food companies introducing new snacks and beverages, seeking our opinions. Eager to assist the adults who appeared to ‘need our help,’ we engaged wholeheartedly, not recognizing the underlying strategy. Unbeknownst to us, we were selected as a target group to assist global brands in tailoring their products to Korean palates that hadn’t fully embraced Western flavours yet.
The message ‘Try this and let us know what you think’ serves as a method of engaging students, allowing them to voice their opinions about the brand or product, making them feel like they are part of the brand. This approach can be effective in building brand loyalty, allowing consumers to interact with the brand and feel an emotional connection to the product. However, it’s also a way to raise awareness about the product and generate word-of-mouth among consumers, functioning as part of marketing activities related to new product launches.
How will the preteens experience my intervention? Preteens are at a delicate stage of cognitive and emotional development. Their brains, being impressionable and adaptable, absorb their surroundings like a sponge. Teaching digital media education at this phase could be viewed as timely, guaranteeing that they are digitally literate and protected online. Nonetheless, the ramifications, which I am concerned about, are frequently underestimated.
As we inevitably move towards an era dominated by digital media, there is a growing need to include digital media education in the learning curriculum, even for preteens. At first glance, this educational model appears necessary, even a saviour, to equip young minds with the navigational skills necessary to navigate the digital maze into which they’ve been born. However, upon introspective evaluation of its execution, specifically for preteens, I cannot help but perceive some disturbing repercussions that follow the apparent advantages.
Excessive screen time is an immediate concern. Over the summer, I pondered ways to boost screen time quality via research and interventions. However, I have found myself caught in a loop. While digital media education is well-intentioned in teaching critical thinking, online safety, and technological skills, it inadvertently contributes to increased screen exposure. Research consistently warns us about the detrimental effects of excessive screen time on sleep, physical health, and cognitive development. We may unintentionally compromise other facets of their holistic development to create digitally savvy individuals.
In addition, preteens’ emotional and social growth may suffer. At an age where social skills and emotional intelligence are developed through face-to-face interactions and physical play, digital media education’s emphasis on virtual interaction poses a threat. We’re trading the playground for the tablet screen, and in the process, preteens may miss out on essential life skills that digital platforms simply cannot replicate.
The question remains: are preteens developmentally ready to grasp these concepts? And if not, are we exposing them to potential threats before they can understand and handle them?
Reflecting on these side effects doesn’t discredit the immense potential of digital media education for preteens. Instead, it underscores the necessity for a balanced, carefully considered approach. Digital skills are undoubtedly essential for the future, but they shouldn’t overshadow basic childhood necessities: play, social interaction, and physical activity. Perhaps the solution lies in a blended approach, integrating digital media education with traditional learning methods, thereby mitigating the side effects while preparing preteens for the digital age.
We (the side of me who wants to take action and execute ideas quickly and my more thoughtful side who prefers to take a moment to consider the situation) must ask ourselves at every juncture: are we creating a balanced learning ecosystem for our preteens, or are we tipping the scales, neglecting the very essence of childhood? The answers may not always be clear-cut, but the questions are necessary. After all, education, in any form, should first and foremost consider the child’s holistic well-being.
………
Digital and Social Media Literacy/Understanding of Content Creation/Analyzing Messages /Recognizing Techniques
Encouraging Healthy Skepticism/Creation of Counter-messages/Understanding Regulations and Rights