UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Legitimating media education : from social movement to the formation of a new social curriculum Lee, Alice Yuet Lin 1997

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-ubc_1997-250881.pdf [ 19.6MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0064553.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0064553-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0064553-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0064553-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0064553-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0064553-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0064553-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0064553-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0064553.ris

Full Text

LEGITIMATING MEDIA EDUCATION: FROM SOCIAL MOVEMENT TO THE FORMATION OF A NEW SOCIAL CURRICULUM by ALICE YUET LIN LEE B.S.Sc, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, 1981 M.Phil., The Chinese University of Hong Kong, 1987 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES (Department of Educational Studies) We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BfeTlSH COLUMBIA August 1997 ® Alice Yuet Lin Lee, 1997 In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make it freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of my department or by his or her representatives. It is understood that copying or publication of this, thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. . ' Department of Educational Studies The University of British Columbia Vancouver, Canada Date August 18,, 19 9 7 DE-6 (2/88) Abstract The purpose of this study is to understand why and how media education became legitimate in the Ontario educational system in the 1980s. The theoretical focus is on how a new social movement (the new social movement in Ontario) led to the legitimation of a new social curriculum (the media education program). This study on media education in Ontario is contextualized in the epochal shift to the information society. Adopting the approach of historical sociology, it documents the influence of those social forces which gave rise to media education and investigates how key individuals brought media education into schools. In the 1970s and 1980s, the societal shift brought with it rapid development in media technologies and induced new social tensions. This study finds that the conceptualization of the mass media as "invisible curriculum," the ideology of techno-cultural nationalism and the moral controversy over media sex and violence directed public attention to the importance of media literacy. The media literacy movement in Ontario subsequently placed media education in the formal school curriculum. Legitimating media education can be regarded as a social and educational response to the technological changes in the information age. This study also indicates that less powerful groups in the community and the educational field were able to put a body of low-status knowledge into the formal school curriculum. In order to analyze the process from social movement to subject formation, a theoretical framework is put forward identifying strong justification, effective lobbying, proper positioning and unofficial support for curriculum-building as the four key elements for legitimating a new social curriculum. Instead of justifying media education in terms of ii utilitarian and academic values, the advocates emphasized the pragmatic solution provided by the new curriculum to social problems. The manipulation of public support by creating a "climate of opinion" was vital to the success of lobbying. "Subject inhabitancy" was an effective way to find a curricular niche for a new social curriculum. Finally, the advocates' support for the curriculum development and implementation played an important role in strengthening the government's confidence in mandating a new program. iii Table of Contents Page Abstract ii Table of Contents iv List of Tables viii List of Figures ix Acknowledgement x Chapter One Introduction 1 1.1 The Importance of the Study of Mass Media 3 1.2 New Social Curricula in a Postindustrial Society 9 1.3 Statement of Problem 15 1.4 Organization of the Dissertation 17 Part I: Theoretical and Methodological Approaches Chapter Two Legitimating a New Social Curriculum 21 2.1 Postindustrial Society, New Social Movements and New Social Curricula 21 2.1.1 The shift to postindustrial society 24 2.1.2 The characteristic features of the new social movements 26 2.1.3 The emergence of the new social curricula 33 2.2 Social Conflict Theory of Curriculum Making 42 2.3 Knowledge-Power, Boundary Work and Legitimation 48 2.3.1 Foucault's power-knowledge 48 2.3.2 New sociology of education 50 2.4 Analytical Framework of Legitimating a New Social Curriculum 52 2.5 Defining a Social Movement 66 2.6 Summary 71 Chapter Three Methodology 73 3.1 Historical Sociology 73 3.2 Case Study Design 84 3.3 Document Analysis (I): Primary and Secondary Sources 89 iv 3.4 Document Analysis (II): Content Analysis Projects 92 3.5 Indepth Interview 97 3.6 Summary 100 Part II: Setting the Stage: Historical Development of Media Education Chapter Four The Socio-Historical Background of Media Education 105 4.1 Screen Education: The Prelude 106 4.1.1 Entering the electronic age: A new invisible environment 107 4.1.2 Screen education in Ontario 112 4.1.3 The legacy of screen education 119 4.2 Germination of Media Education in Ontario 126 4.2.1 Technological advancement 128 4.2.2 The moral panic of media sex and violence 131 4.2.3 American cultural penetration and techno-cultural nationalism 137 4.3 Summary 151 Chapter Five The Media Literacy Movement in Ontario 154 5.1 Initiatives for Media Literacy 154 5.2 Defining Media Literacy Movement as a Social Movement 156 5.3 Media Literacy Movement as a New Social Movement 181 5.4 A Call for the Legitimation of Media Education in Schools 189 5.5 Summary 191 Part III: A Theoretical Frame for Legitimating Media Education Chapter Six Justifying Media Education: To Counter the Invisible Curriculum 193 6.1 Mass Media as an Educational Force 194 6.2 The Invisible Curriculum of Mass Media 198 6.3 The Responsibility of the School to Teach about the Media 207 6.4 The Changing Concept of Literacy 211 6.5 Critical Dimension of Media Literacy 214 6.6 Summary 217 Chapter Seven Lobbying for Legitimacy: Making Use of Public Pressure 220 7.1 Lobbying the Ministry of Education 220 7.2 Political Strategies of the Lobbyists 227 7.3 The "Public Pressure" Perceived by the Government 236 7.4 Summary 242 v Chapter Eight Positioning Media Education: Finding a Curricular Niche 244 8.1 Curriculum Politics and Subject Inhabitancy 244 8.2 English Teaching and Media Education 255 8.2.1 Historical link 255 8.2.2 New literacy 263 8.3 English as a Host Subject 266 8.3.1 The political aspiration for teaching the media 266 8.3.2 Being a nurturing host 271 8.3.3 Being an official host 275 8.4 Media Education as Literacy Training 280 8.5 Limitations of the Media Literacy Training Approach 285 8.6 Summary 288 Chapter Nine Supporting Curriculum-Building: To Form a Critical Curriculum 292 9.1 Unofficial Input on Curriculum Development and Implementation 292 9.2 Influencing Forces on the Media Education Curriculum 300 9.3 Ideology in Ontario Media Literacy Textbooks 306 9.3.1 Mass media as mass deception 306 9.3.2 Undermining Canadian cultural identity 314 9.3.3 Media literacy for deconstructing mass media 317 9.3.4 Media literacy for developing cultural consciousness 318 9.3.5 Critical autonomy and liberal values 320 9.3.6 Student-centred pedagogy 322 9.4 Responses to the Media Education Curriculum 323 9.5 A Shifting Paradigm 329 9.6 Summary 332 Chapter Ten Conclusion and Discussion 335 10.1 Media Education as Social and Educational Response to Technological Changes 337 10.2 From Social Movement to Curriculum Formation 340 10.3 A Postindustrial Subject 351 10.4 The Cultural Uniqueness of the Ontario Media Education Program 359 10.5 The Social Purpose of Media Education 362 10.6 The Future Direction of Media Education 365 Bibliography 377 vi Appendix 1 Code Book of the Quantitative Content Analysis of the Canadian Journal of Communication 414 Appendix 2 Sample Interview Questions 417 Appendix 3 Interview List 420 Appendix 4 Abbreviations 423 vii List of Tables Table 4.1 Topics of Sampled Articles in Canadian Journal of Communication 139 Table 4.2 Table 4.3 The Major Communication Discourse in Canadian Journal of Communication 139 Frequency Counts on Argument Statements in Canadian Journal of Communication 140 Table 4.4 Table 9.1 Frequency Counts on Value Judgment Phrases in Canadian Journal of Communication The Reference Models for Media Education in Ontario 140 330 viii List of Figures Figure 3.1 Interviewees 'Links with the NFB-McGill Summer Institute 102 Figure 3.2 Interviewees' Links with Marshall McLuhan 103 Figure 3.3 Interviewees' Links with Organizations 104 Figure 4.1 The Ideological Structure of Techno-Cultural Nationalism 141 Figure 9.1 The Ideological Structure of Media Education Textbooks 304 Figure 9.2 Mass Media as Mass Deception 305 ix Acknowledgement Without the enlightened guidance, critical challenge and kind support from my thesis committee, I do not think I could pull this dissertation together. I would like to express my deep gratitude to Drs. Donald Fisher, Jim Gaskell and Charles Ungerleider. In the past few years, they generously offered me help and encouragement whenever I was in need. I thank them from the bottom of my heart. Dr. Fisher's penetrating comments on my analytical framework urged me to work harder to achieve more theoretical depth. I wish to particularly thank him for his academic nurture throughout my entire doctoral program and for his care, patience and time spent on guiding me to write this dissertation even at the time when he was on sabbatical leave. The insightful advice given by Dr. Ungerleider was essential for helping me formulate my research question. He always reminded me to use the case I study to shed light on larger theoretical issues. In addition to offering me valuable comments on the content of my thesis, Dr. Gaskell was pivotal in teaching me how to better organize my dissertation. He let me know I should present my data around a focal theme in each chapter in order to sharpen my arguments. I am also indebted to all the interviewees and people who assisted me in collecting the data for this research. It is difficult for me to forget their kindness and patience. Many of them not only offered me their time and assistance, but also shared with me their personal copies of historical documents. The 38 interviewees were key figures who played significant roles in the Ontario screen education and media literacy movements. Their dedication to educational innovation was the primary source of motivation which encouraged me to document and analyze the case of media education in Ontario. My family, particularly my husband Clement, supported me patiently all along in the prolonged journey of writing this dissertation. I would like to let them know how much I treasure their love. Furthermore, many thanks to my friend Chang Yang for his assistance in transcribing interview tapes. I am also grateful to the fellowship granted by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. The fellowship gave me the financial resource for conducting this research and encouragement for developing serious scholarship. Finally, I would like to dedicate this dissertation to my late mother who in the past constantly showed her support for my further education. x Chapter One Introduction Since the 1960s, a new school subject, "media education," has emerged which is the study of theories, criticisms and debates about the mass media with the goal of promoting media literacy (Lusted, 1991). In 1973 the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) posited the following definition: Media education is the study, learning and teaching of, and about, the modern media of communication and expression as a specific and autonomous area of knowledge within educational theory and practice, distinct from their use as aids for the teaching and learning of other areas of knowledge, such as mathematics, science and geography (IFTC, 1977b, p. 3). In the past 20 years, media education has developed from a fringe concern to a global movement. Teaching and learning about the mass media have rapidly been introduced to school and college curricula in many countries including Canada. In Ontario, the Ministry of Education mandated media education as part of the English Curriculum in 1987. This mandated media education program earned Ontario a reputation for being "a national leader, and indeed a recognized leader internationally in the area of media education" (Kennedy, 1993, p. 2). This study examines the legitimation of media education in the Ontario educational system as a social and educational response to the challenge imposed by new communication technologies. The focus is on how the media literacy movement in the province of Ontario led to the formation of the curriculum subject, media education. The study is worthwhile because media literacy has become an essential life skill in contemporary society and has 1 attracted world-wide educational concern. Moreover, the legitimation of media education has profound theoretical implications for the examination of subject formation of new social curricula in a postindustrial information society. A central component of the theoretical discussion is on the emergence of new social curricula and their relationship to the new social movements in Western society in the 1970s and 1980s. In the past century, social scientists examined the social consequences of the historical transition to industrialism. It is perhaps the right moment for a new generation of social scientists to study the transition to the postindustrial age and the challenge brought about by this change. Most of the developed Western nations have entered an information society. Predictably, media education is emerging in these countries as a new subject of study in an increasingly high-tech era. In my study, media education is put in the context of such a societal shift. Although my research covers the years from 1960 to 1990, the major focus is on the 1980s when Canada was moving into an information society. In 1987, Communications Canada released a report saying that "Canada is in the midst of a profound shift in the foundations of its economic and social life" (Communications Canada, 1987, p.6). The report claimed that in the past three or four decades, Canadians have increasingly depended on the creation, communication and consumption of information as a source of jobs and social development, and less on the utilization of raw materials and physical labour. Thus, Canada has become an "information-based society" (p. 6). 2 1.1 The Importance of the Study of Mass Media From the introduction of television in the 1950s to the widespread availability of videocassette players, cable television and satellite television in the 1980s, the mass media took on a central role in modern society. As the electronic media became the dominant mode of communication in the Western world, considerable concern has been demonstrated regarding the electronically mediated culture. Advances in new communication technologies had a profound social impact in the 1970s and 1980s. First was the high rate of media consumption. Massive quantities of information were made available for consumption through advanced electronic media (Jarvis, 1985). Second was the mediation of contemporary culture by the mass media. The information received was saturated with certain values and ideologies that originated in the process of transmission (Thompson, 1990). Third was the replacement of print by electronic media as the dominant form of communication. Television, video, computer-generated images and other new electronic media became the most influential communication technologies. A change in the dominant media has a tremendous impact on the whole society. Printing technology ended the monopoly of the Catholic Church's definition of knowledge and provided the means for cultural shifts in both the Renaissance and the Reformation (Jensen, 1991). Similarly, new electronic media significantly reshaped the society and influenced the educational sector. By the 1980s, schools were addressing a new and different generation of students (Green & Bigum, 1993). These students were shaped by complex forces which were no longer limited to the experience of schooling. Green and Bigum (1993, p. 119) referred to students as "aliens in the classroom." Rather than focusing 3 on the school, there was a call for paying attention to the electronic mass media as a "critical socializing context" (Hinkson, 1991). There is a long history of debate among educators about the inclusion of media studies in curriculum. In this century, moral consternation over various popular media, including comic books, films, television crime programs and indecent video gave impetus to media education (Clark, 1990). In Britain, as early as the 1930s, Leavis and Thompson (1933) asked teachers to teach about the media so that students could be trained to discriminate and resist. During the same period in the Unites States, the authors of the Payne Fund Study on the effect of movies on children recommended the teaching of the moving picture in schools (Luke & Roe, 1993). But it was the emergence of television that really caused educators around the world to give serious thought to media education. From the 1960s to the 1980s television was seen by many to have created a new social environment. In this new age, the family and the community could no longer constrain young people's access to information. Children grew up fast or even lost their childhood (Meyrowitz, 1985; Postman, 1982). They looked at the world in a remarkably different way from their parents. Schooling could no longer afford to ignore the profound influence of the mass media, particularly television, on the young (Luke & Roe, 1993). Against this background, media literacy was regarded as a survival skill for the young in a media saturated world. Since the mass media were accused of constructing a pseudo reality "in which people live largely unreflectively and without self-determination" (Bennett, 1977, p. 29), media literacy was very often used to arm students against manipulation from the media. However, Roncagliolo (1992, p. 211) at the UNESCO conference argued that media literacy should not be a "communication aspirin" and should be a means to "expand 4 the possibilities of freedom in society." Nevertheless, the general objective of media education was to help young people develop a critical awareness about the impact of the mass media and make independent judgments about the media messages (Minkkinen, 1977). Many countries have developed media education programs. The promotion and support from UNESCO made media education a global movement. The idea of media education as the study of moving images with a critical mind was proposed by UNESCO in 1964 (Bazalgette, Bevort, & Savino, 1992a). Since then UNESCO has been promoting media education, especially in Europe. In 1973, a meeting of the member organizations of UNESCO produced the first official definition of media education quoted above. As a result of that meeting, the International Film and Television Council (IFTC) was responsible for publishing the first international survey on media education called Media Studies in Education (IFTC, 1977b). In 1989, the 25th session of the UNESCO General Conference included "Development of Critical Media Education" in its program (Suzuki, 1992). The Conference emphasized the importance of the development of critical awareness and the ability to analyze any kind of information. Members of the Conference were encouraged to promote media education in their own countries. The contribution of UNESCO to the global development of media education was twofold. One was to provide opportunities for international exchange on media education. With UNESCO's support, media experts, educators and media practitioners gathered together on a number of occasions to discuss their common concerns and debate their differences. For example, in 1982 UNESCO sponsored an international symposium in Grunwald, West Germany on educating the public about the use of the mass media (Brown, 1991). In 1990 UNESCO, together with the Council of Europe, supported an international conference on 5 "New Directions in Media Education" held in Toulouse, France. The Conference was attended by over 200 media educators from 45 different countries (Bazalgette et al., 1992a). A second contribution from UNESCO was to promote media education by publishing surveys and reports on media education. Four important documents on media education published by UNESCO are worth mentioning. The first is Screen Education: Teaching A Critical Approach to Cinema and Television (UNESCO, 1964). This report is possibly the first international publication to put forward the concept of critical media consumption. The second document entitled Media Studies in Education is a survey report on media education initiatives around the world (IFTC, 1977). It defined media education and emphasized that media education is a specific and autonomous area of knowledge within educational theory and practice. The third document called Media Education might be a unique one because it explores the conceptual difference between the media systems and educational systems (Morsy, 1984). It highlighted the threat of mass media to schools and suggested the possibility of integrating the two knowledge distributing channels. The fourth is a book entitled New Directions: Media Education Worldwide (Bazalgette, Bevort, & Savino, 1992d), which reported on the latest developments in media education around the world. In recent years, media education has become a worldwide phenomenon. However, it is still more developed in industrialized, technologically advanced countries. Globally, the development of media education can be divided into four categories (Butts, 1992). First are countries in an advanced stage of media education development, such as Australia, Britain, Canada (especially Ontario), Finland, France, Norway, Sweden and Switzerland. In these countries, media education has gained a firm foothold in either national or regional curricula. Some of the media education programs are a mandatory part of the school curriculum while 6 others are offered as an option. In Wales and England, media studies has become a course for public examination. Second are countries where the development of media education depends largely on individual teacher initiatives or outside agency support. The United States, West Germany and Israel fall into this category. The development of media education fluctuates. Little recognition or funding has been obtained from national or regional educational authorities. Third are countries which have small-scale initiatives in media education. These initiatives usually come from church organizations. Japan, the Philippines, India and some Latin American countries belong to this group. Media education does not get recognition from the educational system. It depends on individual initiatives and lacks funding. Fourth are countries such as the former Soviet Union and Yugoslavia, where recent political or social changes have opened up new opportunities for media education. Media education is strong worldwide. Initiatives are found in many countries and advocates are lobbying intensively to achieve recognition for media education in the formal educational system. Struggling to establish media education "as an entitlement for all children within formal education" is regarded as the primary task of the media education movement (Bazalgette, Bevort, & Savino, 1992c, p. 188). My analysis of the UNESCO reports on media education indicates that in the 1960s and early 1970s, numerous initiatives for media education grew out of the concern about the advancement of new communication technologies. However, media education did not receive much formal recognition from the educational authorities. From the mid-1970s and through the 1980s, when mass media were perceived as a competitor to school, media education became part of the formal school curricula in many countries such as Australia, Britain, Canada and Norway. In the 1990s, lobbying for media curricula in school is on-going. The history of the development of media 7 education can, therefore, be regarded as a struggle for legitimation. The breakthrough in education came in the 1980s. This finding is significant for the analysis of the legitimation of media education in Ontario, Canada. Canada is one of the world's leading countries in media education (Bazalgette, Bevort, & Savino, 1992b; Butts, 1992; Pungente, 1993a). As part of a world trend, media education started in Canada in the 1960s under the banner of screen education. It lost momentum in the early 1970s, yet, from the late 1970s onwards, it grew stronger and stronger, particularly in the province of Ontario. In the past decade, six media literacy associations were founded in Ontario, British Columbia, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Nova Scotia and Quebec. In 1992, the Canadian Association of Media Education Organizations (CAMEO) was established as a national umbrella organization. The purpose of these organizations is to promote media literacy across Canada. The CAMEO has mounted a major campaign to place media education in the provincial school curricula. Legitimating media education is always on the top of their agenda. As pointed out by Emery (1987) and Pungente (1993a), many ministries of education in Canada have moved to introduce media education into their school curricula. The Quebec Ministry of Education gave its approval to teach media literacy in both French and English studies. Since 1982, "viewing" has been one of the strands (along with reading, speaking, listening and writing) that is required across the Alberta curricula. Language arts teachers in Manitoba are encouraged to integrate media into their teaching by examining the messages coming from television advertising. Recently, media education was included in the school curriculum in British Columbia. However, prior to 1995, Ontario was the only educational authority in Canada to make media education a mandatory part of the secondary school curriculum. In 1987, the Ontario Ministry of 8 Education revised the Secondary English Curriculum and developed a media education requirement for students in grades 7 through 12 (Ministry of Education, Ontario, 1987). This mandated media literacy program symbolized the recognition of media literacy not only by the educational community and the general public in the province but also by the provincial government. Although media education as a significant social and educational initiative has status and strength in Canada as well as in many other countries, there has been no systematic research done on the rise of media education. This study attempts to fill this research vacuum by examining the social construction of media education in Ontario. Special attention is paid to the educational response to the development of new media technologies. 1.2 New Social Curricula in a Postindustrial Society In 1964 Daniel Bell proposed the term "postindustrial society" to describe the coming societal shift from an industrial society (Bell, 1964, 1973). In recent years, analysts have replaced the industrial labels and have claimed that Western countries have already moved into the information society. It is theoretically interesting to link the societal shift with the emergence of a number of new social curricula in secondary schools in the last two decades. The 1970s and 1980s witnessed a dramatic increase in new school programs. Examples include environmental education, gender education, peace education, multicultural education, health education and media education. In Britain, these new initiatives are called "cross-curricular themes." 9 Educators in some European countries identify them as "cross-curricular subjects" (Boeckmann, 1992; Pungente, 1985). In the United States, they are sometimes labelled as "mini courses" (Senesh, 1981). Whatever the nomenclature, this group of subjects has a short history when compared with traditional subjects which have stayed on school timetables for almost a century. Many of these newly emerging subjects are social in nature because they try to educate students about society. Dufour (1990c) labelled them the "new social curricula." The word "new" also distinguishes these curricula from the social science courses of the 1960s. Moreover, the label excludes educational initiatives put forward early this century, such as the Scientific Temperance Instruction (Sheehan, 1986) which was also social in nature. Another outstanding characteristic of the new social curricula is their "subject transgression." They are independent bodies of knowledge that permeate existing subjects or become integrated into existing school programs. They are cross-curricular in nature and are not constrained by subject boundaries. Lash's (1990) work informs the study of the transgressive nature of new social curricula. Lash put forward a concept called "de-differentiation of cultural production." The concept refers to the blurring of genres and boundaries which demarcate theory and knowledge. Disciplinary conventions collapse in the postindustrial age. McLaren (1993) interpreted the collapse as the de-differentiation of knowledge. McLaren tried to explain how the territorial boundaries of school subjects shift under the condition of de-differentiated knowledge. For McLaren, the central questions are as follows: What kinds of "curriculum differentiation or de-differentiation" will follow from a shift towards a more postindustrial cultural existence? (p. xix); "What kind of subject disciplines will emerge in the process?"; "Who will be the new challengers?" (p. xviii); and 10 "How will these new subjects reflecting such de-differentiation gain legitimacy?" (p. xx). Lash and McLaren's work alert us about curriculum development in a postindustrial society. McLaren concentrated inquiry on new school subjects. The question of legitimation provides a new way of looking at curriculum formation in a postindustrial world. The rise of new social curricula can, therefore, be regarded as a type of curriculum reform based on knowledge de-differentiation. Further, the new social curricula differ greatly from traditional school subjects in their methods of gaining a foothold in the school curriculum. The core subjects and the foundation subjects all pursue distinct subject identities. The majority of them aim to promote their academic status (Goodson, 1982). Their existence symbolizes strong knowledge demarcation historically and across levels of education. Specialization and disciplinarity safeguard their place in the compulsory curriculum. On the contrary, although new social curricula have clear "identity," they do not emphasize their uniqueness but show their adaptability in knowledge integration. These curricular themes linger at the periphery of the school curriculum, waiting for opportunities to be picked up and integrated. Thus, their survival very much depends on their successful adherence to the existing school curriculum. It is interesting, therefore, to see how these new educational initiatives position themselves in order to gain entry and subsequently earn a secure place in the curriculum. The way in which these new social curricula adhere to other school subjects marks a new curriculum formation strategy which has significant theoretical implications. As noted above these new social curricula are closely related to the new social configuration of postindustrial society. Most of these new educational initiatives sprouted from social movements or pressure group activities in the postindustrial era (Dufour, 1990b). 11 For example, gender education and environment education grew out of the feminist and the environmentalist movements. Social movements in recent decades represent new social conflicts in a new societal stage. The impetus invariably came from the optimistic era of the 1960s as they promoted social change for greater equality and justice. European social theorists (Offe, 1985; Melucci, 1985, 1994; Touraine, 1985) label them new social movements to distinguish them from the old social movements of the industrial society. The curricula that developed from these new social movements or pressure group activities to a great extent reflected the values and social imperatives of a postindustrial society. Since the curriculum changes were usually promoted by movement advocates, pressure groups and professional organizations, they were "bottom-up" educational initiatives rather than government initiatives. These bottom-up initiatives are considered to have had a great impact on school curriculum because they stimulated the interest of teachers and pupils. Yet the exact relationship between the emergence of these social curricula and related social movements has still to be investigated and "at present this can only be the subject of speculation" (Dufour, 1990b, p. 3). How new social movements lead to the emergence of new social curricula has significant theoretical implications for the inquiry on the legitimation of new social curricula in a postindustrial age. Although not all new social curricula grew out of social movements, it is worthwhile to explore the relationship between the new social curricula and new social movements. Media education is a typical new social curriculum (Dufour, 1990b). It grew out of wide social concern about the social and educational impact of the new communication technology. In most cases, media education developed as a response to campaigns by 12 pressure groups instead of being imposed from above. At the international level, with encouragement from UNESCO, media education was promoted as a global educational movement. In an international conference on media education held in 1990, Roncagliolo (1992, p. 210) concluded that "we are present at the launch of a vast social movement which assuredly points... to wards education for freedom and critical sensibility." In Britain media education was promoted by individual teachers (Alvarado, 1977). Unlike many educational innovations that come from government officials, the media education initiative "arises from the grass roots," reflecting the concern of teachers at all levels about the way students deal with the mass media (Fuller, 1987, p. 51). In Denmark, the whole development of media education came from "the bottom," shaped by teachers and pupils and not by a decree from the educational authorities (Pedersen, 1977, p. 48). In these countries, the development of media education was described as the media education movement. In Ontario, Canada, media education grew out of the media literacy movement of the 1980s. This case study provides an excellent opportunity to examine the role of new social movements in the legitimation of new social curricula. Media education has become a specific and autonomous field of study. However, like many new educational initiatives, it falls into the category of cross-curricular themes. Even in countries where media education has been included as a mandatory part of the school curriculum, it is not yet accepted as a core or foundation subject. Nowhere is media education established at the core of primary and secondary school curricula as a subject in its own right (Kress, 1992). Typically, media education permeates other school subjects. According to UNESCO documents, media education has adopted the following strategies to gain a place in the school curriculum. First is total permeation: media education 13 is a cross-curricular theme to be taught in all school subjects. Examples are media studies in Austria, Denmark and France. Second is partial permeation: media education is a cross-curricular theme to be taught in some school subjects. In Finland media education is a pervading subject of some other school subjects such as Finnish, art, history, social studies and environmental studies (Minkkinen, 1977). Third is attachment: media education is a teaching unit in a natural subject base. For examples, in Germany media education is attached to social studies (Bennett, 1977); in the Netherlands it is under art education (Swinkels, 1992); in some English speaking countries such as Britain, media education is attached to English. Fourth is integration: media education combines with some other existing subjects and becomes an integrated course. In Norway, media education has recently combined with computer studies and is taught under the label of "media and computer studies" in some primary schools (Dahl, 1992). Fifth is replacement: media education is to replace an existing school subject. There is an attempt in Australia to replace English with media or cultural studies (Kress, 1992). It is apparent that media education has the characteristic which I call "subject transgression." Subject transgression describes all five strategies mentioned above. How one strategy becomes established depends on the outcome of curriculum politics. In Ontario, as in Australia and Britain, media education was attached to English. I label this curriculum-making strategy "subject inhabitancy" and argue that it is a common curriculum formation pattern for new social curricula. In summary, the Ontario case of media education involves a number of theoretical issues related to new social curricula. These theoretical issues include the link between new social movements and new social curricula, the curriculum formation pattern of "subject 14 inhabitancy" and the postindustrial values in new social curricula. Therefore, the legitimation of media education in Ontario is an important topic of study not only because media education is a significant educational initiative which demands scrutiny, but also because the theoretical issues involved can enrich our understanding about the formation of new social curricula in an information age. 1.3 Statement of Problem This is a study about the legitimation of media education. The purpose of the study is to describe and analyze why and how media education became part of the formal school curriculum in Ontario. The object of concern is the way a new social movement lead to the formation of a new social curriculum. The study hopes to advance our understanding of the legitimation and classification of new social curricula. An examination of what has been excluded as well as required in official curricula clearly reveals, in country after country, that the popular media have consistently been criticized by educators and denied access to the school curriculum. Lusted (1985) described the process as "a history of suspicion" while Masterman (1983) called it "a history of discrimination." The present trend of formally including media studies in the school curriculum is a significant curriculum change. Curriculum revision has always been regarded as piecemeal, a give-and-take process where one piece is taken out and replaced by another in a pie of relatively fixed size. Adding media education usually means that some existing curriculum is in jeopardy. This 15 process demands a strong justification from those who advocate the new curriculum and inevitably involves a fierce struggle among the subjects concerned (Goodson, 1982). If the time available for cultivating youth is limited and only socially valued forms of knowledge should be transmitted in school, then why did media knowledge, which was discriminated against and excluded from the classroom, become an acceptable part of the school curriculum in Ontario in the 1980s? As Canada shifted from an industrial society to an information society, the intensification of media impact resulted in moral alarm and stimulated new cultural conflicts. The emergence of media education possibly indicates that educational institutions and the community at large were responding to the socio-cultural changes and challenges brought about by new communication technologies. Recognition of the need for a new body of knowledge, however, does not mean that it automatically becomes part of the school curriculum. Relevant literature indicates that seeking access to the school curriculum is a complicated and highly political process (Garvin, 1992; Goodson, 1982). Goodson's research on curriculum change documents serious territorial disputes among varied school subjects. The struggle for a niche in the curriculum is tough. The most outstanding feature of the fight for legitimation of media education in Ontario is that the lobbying was backed by the media literacy movement prevalent in the early 1980s in the province. The media literacy movement placed media education into the school curriculum. The central research question of this dissertation is, therefore, "How did the media literacy movement in Ontario lead to the legitimation of media education in the Ontario school system?" A framework is put forward to analyze the process of legitimation which includes the following elements: 1. Justification: Adopting a problem-solving approach 16 2. Lobbying: Making use of public pressure 3. Positioning: Employing the strategy of subject inhabitancy 4. Curriculum-building: Offering unofficial support to curriculum design and implementation 1.4 Organization of the Dissertation This study will first analyze the media literacy movement in the 1980s in Ontario as a new social movement which addressed the social conflict caused by media technological development in a postindustrial age. It moves on to describe and analyze the legitimation of media education through the framework outlined above. The media education curriculum is also analyzed to see whether it shares the values of postindustrial society. Following the introductory chapter, this dissertation is divided into three parts, totalling 10 chapters. Chapter One introduces the case of media education in Ontario and states the purpose of the study. It also explains the theoretical and policy significance of this research. Part One includes two chapters. Chapter Two concentrates on theory. It explores the theoretical link between the emergence of postindustrial society, the development of new social movements and the rise of new social curricula. Based on the social conflict theory of curriculum-making, this chapter aims at building a framework to analyze the legitimation of new social curricula characterized by knowledge de-differentiation. The framework includes four elements of legitimation. Chapter Three examines the methodology. It explains why this research adopted the research approach of historical sociology. In essence, historical 17 sociology is preoccupied with epochal interpretation so it is especially appropriate for the research on media education which concerns the societal shift towards postindustrialism. This research follows a case study design. In-depth interview and document analysis are the major means of data collection. Part Two, consisting of two chapters, reports the historical development of media education. Chapter Four sets the stage for the analysis of the emergence of media education in Ontario. This chapter traces the historical roots of media education back to the 1960s. The screen education movement at that time was considered to have planted the seeds for the development of the media literacy movement in the 1980s. The chapter also examines the socio-cultural climate of the 1980s which gave rise to the quest for media literacy in the province. The moral alarm about pornography and media violence is found to have given much impetus to the media literacy movement. The concern about cultural penetration from the United States through the mass media is also found to be an important reason to justify the need for critical awareness of the impact of mass media. A theoretical concept, "techno-cultural nationalism," is introduced to explain how the way Canadians think about technology informed the development of the media literacy movement. The objective of this chapter is to provide a picture of how Ontarians responded to the technological impact of the new electronic media on their society. Chapter Five is a detailed description of the media literacy movement in Ontario. It analyzes the motivation and aspirations of the social groups which were actively involved in the movement and illustrates their advocacy strategies. The most important objective is to interpret the media literacy movement in the light of new social movement theory. The chapter attempts to show that the media literacy movement emerged to address the new social problems in an information society. The media literacy movement 18 shared most of the characteristics of other new social movements and was embedded in distinct postindustrial values and praxis. Part Three, Chapters Six through Nine, describes and analyzes the legitimation process of media education through the proposed analytical framework. This framework tries to depict and explain the role of social movements in curriculum formation. Chapter Six deals with the first element of legitimation: justification. This chapter addresses the social conflict generated by the ever-expanding media industry. It shows that mass media were conceptualized as an "invisible curriculum" which became a rival of the ordinary school. Proponents believed in the existence of an urgent social need to develop students' critical awareness about the mass media. According to this view, as Canada entered the information age, the concept of traditional literacy had to be extended to include media literacy. Media literacy was perceived as a life skill and the school had a responsibility to cultivate this critical awareness skill. The argument for media literacy in schools was based on the emphasis on social need. The language of justification adopts a "problem-solving approach," suggesting the use of media literacy to counter mass media manipulation. It differs greatly from the arguments for many other traditional school subjects which stress either the utilitarian value or the academic merit of the subject. This phenomenon corresponds with the call which calls for more cultural curricula in postindustrial society. Chapter Seven describes the lobbying strategies employed by the media education advocates. The advocates gained most of their bargaining power from the media literacy movement. Although the advocates were informally and loosely organized, they galvanized tremendous public support. The educational bureaucracy was under great public pressure to include media literacy into schools. 19 Chapter Eight focuses on the third element of legitimation: positioning. Media education, like other cross-curricular themes, was not able to establish itself as an independent subject in the school curriculum. Instead it had to append to one or several existing school subjects to gain entry. In Ontario, media education attached itself to the English curriculum to earn a place in the school timetable. In this chapter, I introduce the concept "subject inhabitancy" to explain the positioning of media education and the tactics of subject permeation in the form of "attachment." I also argue that "subject inhabitancy" is common in the curriculum-making of new social curricula. Chapter Nine describes the fourth element of legitimation: curriculum-building. This chapter highlights the importance of the curricular support from the movement activists. If media literacy advocates had not contributed to writing the Media Literacy Resource Guide and had not assisted in the teacher training and implementation programs, the legitimation of media education would have been inhibited. In this chapter, the ideology in the curriculum built by the movement advocates is analyzed and the characteristics of the curriculum are displayed. Chapter Ten is the conclusion and discussion. Special attention is given to the bridging role school teachers played in the media literacy movement and the legitimation of media education in schools. The discussion section focuses on the future direction of media education. 20 Chapter Two Legitimating A New Social Curriculum Grounded on both literature review and empirical research, this chapter outlines a theoretical frame which identifies justification, lobbying, positioning and curriculum building as key elements for legitimating a new social curriculum. Before proceeding to the analytical framework, the chapter introduces the coincidence of the emergence of new social movements and new social curricula in postindustrial information society. Although the distinction between old and new social movements should not be seen as rigid and the continuity between them should not be ignored, a number of unique characteristics of new social movements are identified. Meanwhile, the new social curricula are also found to share some outstanding features. Social conflict theory of curriculum formation is put forward in an attempt to establish the theoretical link between new social movements and new social curricula. 2.1 Postindustrial Society, New Social Movements and New Social Curricula Much discourse was generated since 1964 by Daniel Bell's designation "postindustrial" for the coming transformation in society. Parallel to this, new forms of collective action were emerging in advanced industrial societies. Collective action bringing together people with the same interests or shared goals proliferated in the 1960s and beyond. The student and peace movement of the 1960s and 1970s led to the social movements of 21 feminism, gay rights, pro-abortion and pro-life, antinuclear and environmentalism. These contemporary movements create "problems of interpretation" because they involve different activists, are concerned with different issues and employ different methods of confrontation. They have provoked a reconceptualization of the meaning of social movement (Johnston, Larana, & Gusfield, 1994, p. 3). These contemporary movements are distinctive because they do not display the characteristics of the traditional movements which were essentially class-based. In the past, the working class was the "necessary basis" for a radical social movement (Klandermans & Tarrow, 1988, p. 2). Participants of the contemporary movements however cut across class lines and their issues of concern also shift away from party politics and class struggle. Literature on social movements uses terms such as "new politics" or "alternative movement" to describe how they differ from the traditional movements (Offe, 1985). Classical theories on social movements strongly rooted in an industrial capitalist society such as structural functionalism, collective action theory and Marxist theory are not able to give these new social phenomena a satisfactory explanation (Eyerman & Jamison, 1991). For Marxists, for example, social movement must be based on social class. They are unable to address a social movement which is detached from class struggle (Scott, 1990). The new social movements are different from the old in a number of ways (Offe, 1985; Scott, 1990). In the old movements socioeconomic groups were the key actors, while in the new social movements the major participants come from the new middle class. In terms of objective, the old social movements aimed at political integration and a fight for economic rights, but the new social movements, the goal is generally to bring about change in values and life-style. In terms of organizational structure, the old social movements were 22 formal and hierarchical while the new are informal and network-based. Regarding social location, the old movements functioned within the polity while the new social movements operate in civil society. Economic growth and distribution were the major concerns for the old social movements, but the new movements largely address issues of everyday oppression and discrimination. Since functional theory and collective action theory place too much emphasis on viewing the social movement as a "breakdown" of the social system, they are not informative about the patterns of oppression experienced in everyday life, which is the central concern of the contemporary movements (Maheu, 1995). Two schools of thought have emerged to fill the theoretical vacuum. One is the resource mobilization approach developed by North American social movement scholars and the other is the new social movement approach proposed by European social theorists. The former examines contemporary social movements by looking at the ability of related organizations to mobilize resources for taking rational action (McCarthy & Zald, 1977; Tilly, 1978). The latter tries to link up contemporary social movements with the structural changes brought along by postindustrial society (Melucci, 1994; Offe, 1985; Touraine, 1977). Resource mobilization theory explains "how" different forces converge and organize collective action but it fails to tell "why" action occurs. Although the new social movement approach does not explain the way a movement is created, it is able to ask why a social movement arises (Melucci, 1985). Moreover, the approach places contemporary social movements in a wider socio-historical context. Apart from offering an explanation for the emergence of the contemporary movements, new social movement thinkers also identify some common characteristics in contemporary social movements and describe how these new movements differ from the old movements (Eyerman & Jamison, 1991; Johnston, Larana, & 23 Gusfield, 1994; Melucci, 1989). They give the name "new social movements" to collective action which has arisen since the 1960s in order to distinguish them from the old class-based social movements. The label "new social movement" has already been widely adopted in social movement literature to refer to movements which emerged in the past 30 years in Western industrial societies. Although some effort has been made to synthesize the resource mobilization approach and the new social movement approach (Cohen, 1985; Klandermans & Tarrow, 1988), it is clear that the latter approach has set the agenda for the current debate and research on social movements. 2.1.1 The shift to postindustrial society The primary concern regarding the new social movements is "What social and cultural changes have led to the emergence of such movements?" (Johnston, Larana, & Gusfield, 1994, p. 9). New social movement theorists answer this question by analyzing the structural factors. Touraine (1971, 1985, 1995), Habermas (1987) and Melucci (1985, 1994) tried to establish a connection between the new forms of movement and the emerging structure of postindustrial society. Touraine posited four major components of postindustrial society: research and development, information processing, biomedical science and techniques, and mass media. Postindustrial society is defined by "the technological production of symbolic goods which shape or transform our representation of human nature and of the external world" (Touraine, 1985, p. 781). Melucci (1994) also conceptualized postindustrial society as "post-material society" and "information society," arguing the productive systems "no longer concern the sole production of economic resources but also the production of social 24 relationships, symbols, identities and individual needs" (1981, p. 179). These broad structural changes have characterized postindustrial society and led to new social conflicts i which activated new forms of collective action. The new social movements were said to be located within a new historical epoch. New social movement theorists argued strongly that as we are moving into the postindustrial society, we are engaged in a very different kind of social conflict. Touraine even suggested that "in a given societal type there is only one central couple of conflicting social movements" (Touraine, 1985, p. 773). The conflicts and concerns involved in varied social movements, such as women's liberation, environmental protection, abortion rights and ethnic minorities protests, were considered to have common elements. The central conflict in postindustrial society was identified as to "deal less with labour and economic problems because the domination which is challenged controls not only 'means of production' but the production of symbolic goods, that is, of information and images, of culture itself" (Touraine, 1985, p. 774). Although Touraine was criticized for his arbitrary attribution of a particular type of movement to particular types of society (Pickvance, 1995), it was generally agreed that in postindustrial society social conflicts have shifted from the political ground to the cultural ground (Melucci, 1985, 1994; Offe, 1985). The problem we face today is not a political crisis but a cultural democracy crisis (Maheu, 1995; Touraine, 1995). As a result the new social movements in postindustrial society, instead of concerning themselves with class struggle and the allocation of economic resources, challenge the symbolic control of the new society. 25 2.1.2 The characteristic features of the new social movements Social theorists have described the characteristic features that separate the "new" from the "old" movements. These common features of the new social movements are identified in terms of issues, activists, aims, values, social location and organizational patterns. Issues: New social movements are issue-oriented. Their concerns are usually restricted to one or a few issues. The movements tend to be organized around a distinct theme such as environment, health or civil rights (Scott, 1990). The nature of these issues is social and cultural. As new social movements engage primarily in cultural and symbolic issues, they differ from the traditional workers' movements which are basically political in nature. In postindustrial society, according to Offe (1985) and Melucci (1994), social control is no longer limited to the manipulation of external constraints of individual behaviour but intervenes in the control of the symbolic infrastructure of informal interaction. Habermas (1987) called this the "colonization of the life-world." The dominant issues of new social movements involve personal and intimate aspects of human life (Johnston et al., 1994). They are concerned with people's physical territory, personal rights, life-styles, consumer patterns, personal behaviours and natural environment. Movements such as those involved with gay rights, abortion, alternative medicine and ecology all reflect the entry of social movements into areas of daily life. In Touraine's words, it is the "privatization of social problems" (Touraine, 1985, p. 784). The issues raised by new social movements are also beyond the scope of the nation-state. Many of them are global issues such as the anti-nuclear movement and environmental 26 protection, or issues which have an universal appeal such as women's rights, animal rights and anti-violence. New social movements address global and universal social problems. Activists: New social movements are not class-based. In the old movements activists had a clear socioeconomic identification and acted out of class interest. In contrast, activists involved in the new social movements do not define themselves in terms of a socioeconomic class (Cohen, 1985; Offe, 1985). Two groups of people tend to participate in new social movements (Klandermans & Tarrow, 1988; Offe, 1985). The first group includes people who are particularly sensitive to the new social conflicts emerging in postindustrial society. Their values and needs motivate them to participate in collective actions. They come mostly from the new middle class. Some are well-educated youths (e.g., university students), middle class housewives and retired people with a more flexible time-budget. New middle class is defined here as a socioeconomic group in possession of educational and technical qualifications (Abercrombie, Hill, & Turner, 1984). It is responsible for symbolic control (Fisher, 1993). Different from the "old" middle class, which refers to small landlords and merchants a century ago, the new middle class includes what Turner (1994, p. 123) called the "upper-middle white-collar" (high-salaried professionals or successful business persons who have accumulated some wealth), "solid middle white-collar class" (respectable income, some investment in pension fund and home equity) and "lower white-collar middle class" (modest income, few accumulated assets). The interesting point is that the new middle class acts as a class but does not act on the basis of class interest. Its demands, according to Offe (1985, p. 833), are "highly class-unspecific" and "universalistic in nature." The issues it raises, such as peace, environmental and abortion rights, are irrelevant to class interest. The second group includes "victims" of modernization. Most of them have been marginalized by 27 societal developments and have been confronted with some specific social problems. These people cannot be defined in terms of social class. Since the activists in new social movements are primarily recruited from the new middle class, Eder (1995) called it middle-class radicalism. However, as Offe points out, the new middle class politics is "a politics of a class" but not "on behalf of a class." In this sense, the new social movements are not class movements at all. The composition and the orientation of the participants in the new social movements inevitably have an impact on the movements' aims and concerns. Aims: All social movements attempt to generate social change. For Scott (1990, p. 17), the aim of new social movements is to "bring about change through changing values and developing alternative life-styles." Social change here has a specific meaning different from the one in the old movements. New social movements do not ask to share power with the state or the establishment. According to Touraine (1985, p. 777), new social movements "do not pretend to transform society," they simply aim at lowering "the level of social control and integration." They strive for cultural diversity and the capacity to do "otherwise." Similarly, for Offe (1985, p. 827), activists in new social movements are sometimes not overly concerned with gaining acceptance of their specific values. What they really want is "to be allowed to enjoy the rights and freedoms." The gay rights movement is a prime example. In other words, new social movements oppose social oppression and work for a change in values and life-styles, but do not usually strive to transform the party structure or gain economic right. Values: All the new social movements share a fundamental belief in liberation and personal autonomy (Eyerman & Jamison, 1991; Melucci, 1994). In varied ways, they call 28 for an end to unfair social manipulation and centralized control. Terminology used in the social movement literature to refer to this basic value includes "personal and collective emancipation," "individual freedom," "personal autonomy," "self-management," "self-government," "opposition to manipulation," and "opposition to control and dependence." This urge to develop a sense of personal integrity and autonomy was explained by Melucci as a necessity in postindustrial information society. In a world of high density information, "individuals and groups must possess a certain degree of autonomy and formal capacities for learning and acting that enable them to function as reliable, self-regulating units" (Melucci, 1994, p. 101). The stake of action in social movements has changed from "freedom to have" in the past to "freedom to be" at present (Melucci, 1989, pp. 177-178). An ideological theme of the new social movements which is related to the notion of autonomy is "anti-authoritarianism. " The anti-authoritarian character of the new social movements leads movement participants to focus on grass-roots actions and direct democracy (Scott, 1990). While these values are not new, they have been articulated and become central to the value system in new social movements (Offe, 1985). Another value aspect of the new social movements is the quest for personal and collective identity. In recent decades, the collective search for identity and personal transformation have become the central themes of many social movements. The questions "who are we" and "who am I" reveal that people are increasingly reflective about their social position and cultural experience. One of the negative consequences of industrialization is the loss of identity. As people are moving into the new historical era of postindustrialism, the quest for identity may be a natural reaction to fill this gap. 29 New social movement ideology is also characterized by the notion of antimodernity. According to Klandermans and Tarrow (1988, p. 7), new social movements "do not accept the premise of a society based on economic growth" and there is a dramatic change from "materialist to postmaterialist values." They wish to establish a new relationship with nature, the opposite sex and with consumption. Offe also viewed the new social movements as the modern critique of further modernization. All the major concerns of the new social movements were said to challenge the "blind dynamics of military, economic, technological and political rationalization" (Offe, 1985, p. 856). Social Location: New social movements are located within civil society and do not intend to challenge state power. They are very different from the old movements which operated within the polity. Contemporary movements increasingly have the civil society as a primary domain of influence rather than the state or economic institutions (Cohen, 1985; Offe, 1985; Scott, 1990). Touraine insisted that a separation should be made between the concepts of civil society and the state. In the postindustrial era, social movements aiming at changing civil society do not necessarily target the transformation of the state. Social movements should not be identified with political actions aiming at controlling state power. New social movements are "attempts of 'society' to liberate itself from 'power'" (Touraine, 1985, p. 775). They prefer the idea of structural reform and defense of civil society to the revolutionary dream of abolition of the existing political and economic system (Cohen, 1985). Organization Patterns: While the old movements tended to bring about change through political mobilization, new social movements attempt to introduce change by cultural innovation such as the advocacy of new values, norms and life-styles. Accordingly, as the 30 old social movements were mobilized by formal and hierarchical organizations, new social movements stress informal networking and grass roots participation. The organizational structure of new social movements is usually described as loose, informal, ad hoc, discontinuous, small-scale, segmented, diffuse and decentralized (Johnston et al., 1994; Klandermans & Tarrow, 1988; Offe, 1985). This tendency is due to their anti-authoritarian ideology and their great proximity to the grass roots (Scott, 1990). The mobilization of new social movements depends heavily upon preexisting private social networks (Johnston et al., 1994). Strong friendship ties are especially important to help motivate commitment and sustain membership (Offe, 1985). No consensus has been reached by social theorists about what constitutes the "newness" of new social movements (Buechler, 1995). The above discussion, however, has shown the most commonly discussed characteristics of the contemporary social movements. Critics suggested that we should not overlook the continuity between some old social movements and new social movements and should question the rigid division between the new and old movements. For Tarrow (1991) and Plotke (1990), many new social movements are not really new and new social movement literature overstates their novelty. Other scholars suggest there is continuity between the old and new movements (Johnston, 1994, Larana, 1994, Shin, 1994). They pointed out that all contemporary movements "have important historical predecessors that span at least the twentieth century and sometimes reach much further back into the nineteenth century" (Buechler, 1995). Ferree and Hess's (1994) study on the new feminist movement clearly shows this movement's historical link with the suffrage movement in the 1920s. 31 Many new social movement theorists suggested that contemporary movements are culturally-oriented instead of politically-oriented. Plotke (1992) accuses this new social movement discourse of selectively depicting their goals as cultural and overstating their detachment from conventional political life. Buechler (1995) argued that all social movements are political in nature. New social movements, such as the feminist and environmental movements, are deeply political and seek to change power relationships and law. In my view, it is undeniable that the new social movement theorists put too much emphasis on the cultural dimension. Their bias may be due to their tendency to perceive new social movements as reformative instead of transformative. But it is noteworthy that few of the new social movement theorists overtly claimed that new social movements are completely apolitical. Thus, we should recognize the political nature of all new social movements. I think it is necessary to explain that these movements are not political only in the sense of party politics and class struggle. In fact, these movements' urge for social consciousness-raising certainly exerts political effect on society. I agree with the views that there is continuity between old social movements and new social movements. I also accept the argument that the new social movements are not a unified sociological phenomenon and that there is a high degree of diversity among the new movements in terms of their aims, values and mobilization strategies. However, these critics are not able to deny the fact that new social movements do have some distinct features and their emergence is closely linked to the structural change towards postindustralism. 32 2.1.3 The emergence of the new social curricula A central concern of this study is the relationship between new social movements and the emergence of new subject disciplines during the same period. Cultural studies, ecological studies, ethnic studies and women's studies are gaining a foothold at the university level (Aronowitz & Giroux, 1991; McLaren, 1993). They represent the new paradigm of social and cultural knowledge. As the traditional emphasis on natural science as legitimate knowledge was further challenged, human science became the model for social and cultural investigation (Aronowitz & Goroux, 1991). It followed that the legitimacy of the human sciences was extended in the 1960s into the secondary school curriculum. A most interesting phenomenon is the development of a large group of new social curricula which reflect social concerns of the 1970s and 1980s. They include environmental education, gender education, global education, health education, human rights education, media education, multicultural and anti-racist education, peace education, personal and social education, trade union education, and vocational education. These new educational initiatives are regarded as new bodies of knowledge responsive to the prevailing social forces. According to Dufour (1990b), many of these new social curricula grew out of major social movements in Western society. For example, gender studies, peace education, environmental studies and health education generate from the feminist movement, the peace movement, the environmental movement and the health movement respectively. However, Dufour did not probe into the relationship between the social movements and the new social curricula. Ample evidence exists to link the new social movements to the new social curricula. In his analysis of environmental education, Huckle (1990, p. 153) concluded that 33 "Environmental Education developed alongside the wider environmental movement" in Britain and elsewhere. Hicks (1990) also found that peace education in Britain was encouraged by the rapid development of the peace movement in Europe, North America and other countries. In gender studies, according to Why Id (1990, p. 103), "the consistent pressure from feminists active in politics and the unions" contributed greatly to the inclusion of equal opportunities as one of the aspects in curriculum revision. Once the new social movements had established themselves in the social and political arena, they moved to permeate the educational system. From the movement advocates' point of view, the social issues addressed by these movements are so important that schools should assist in spreading the vital message. For example, health education in school should help to prevent drug abuse and the transmission of Aids. Furthermore, literature on new social curricula indicates that the involvement of teachers in social movements helped to introduce new social curricula into schools. In recent years, these new social curricula have been at the centre of intense lobbying by many subject associations (Dufour, 1990b). As the idea of curriculum change does not come from the educational authority, the new social curricula are often referred to as "bottom-up" initiatives. Since the new social curricula emerged along with postindustrial society and have close links with the new social movements, I would argue that these initiatives reflect the concerns and values of a new historical epoch. The new social curricula in general have the following characteristics: Newness: The new social curricula have a short history when compared with traditional subjects that have been in school timetables for almost a hundred years (Dufour, 1990c). They also differ from the "older" social curricula such as social studies, sociology, 34 economics and political science. Many of them are still in the formulative stages of theory and pedagogy. Because of their newness, little research has been conducted on them and our knowledge about them is limited. Most present studies on school subjects focus on core academic subjects such as biology, geography, mathematics, English and physics. This bias is possibly due to the historical preference for academic subjects which are regarded as high-status knowledge (Kirk, 1992). Studies on new social curricula are important because the legitimation of these subjects reflects current social transformation and shifts in cultural and educational priorities. It leads us to better understand what kind of education knowledge is socially approved and how it is socially constructed at the present time. Social and Cultural Content: The new social curricula are social and cultural in nature because they study human society, human relationships, social institutions and social behaviours (Dufour, 1990b). Most importantly, the new social curricula touch on many aspects of students' personal daily lives, such as media consumption, recycling, race relations, gender relations, health problems, sex orientation and life style. They offer practical and realistic knowledge which attempts to help students make sense of their social world (Dufour, 1982). The postindustrial age is characterized by a great demand for relevant cultural curricula (McLaren, 1993). Lash (1990) concluded that knowledge in postindustrial society should be highly relevant to people's everyday life. New social curricula place emphasis on social and cultural curricular content and this focus is an attempt to meet the needs of postindustrial society. Moreover, like the concerns of the new social movements, the social issues or problems these curricula address are universal and global in nature. This global concern parallels the recent world trend of globalization. 35 Critical Objective: All new social curricula possess a critical dimension which may be due to their origin in social movements which strive for a just society. The major aim of these curricula is to develop in young people "a more critical and balanced social awareness" (Lawton & Dufour, 1973, p. 18). In Dufour's view, the inclusion of more social curricula into schools might be regarded as a necessary measure to offer students useful knowledge in a changing world. He noted: "Children ought to know something of the social sciences for their own sake as part of relevant modern education but also to enable them to think more clearly about the complexities of modern society." (Dufour, 1982, pp. 94-95). For example, Global Education is a response to the pressing need to inform students about the increasing interdependence and rapid change in the modern world (Pike, 1990). Environmental education is vital to urge students to critically examine the environmental crisis and do something about it (Huckle, 1990). Compared with traditional subjects, the new social curricula are sensitive to time. They educate students about things happening around them at present so the knowledge students acquire forms the base of their everyday social action. The new social curricula lead students to inquire about the status of their environment, media choice, human rights and many other current affairs. According to Stehr and Ericson (1992), knowledge is the foundation for action. In a postindustrial society or so-called "knowledge society," people's life chances, life-style and social influence very much rely on the availability of the stock of knowledge at hand. As such, the timely and critical knowledge provided by the new social curricula would be useful for students living in a rapidly changing world. Liberal Values: New social curricula, particularly those generated by social movements, ground their theory and practice in the philosophy of social equality and justice 36 (Dufour, 1990b). As discussed above, these curricula are developed for students' personal use and self-management. Personal autonomy is one of the values embedded in the curricula. Democracy and liberty are an intense part of the curricula. Like the new social movements, the new social curricula are also anti-authoritarian and anti-modernity. They de-emphasize the authority of the teacher in the educational process and stress the importance of social critique. Human Rights Education, Peace Education and Environmental Education are examples illustrating these value aspects. Autonomous Area of Study: Many new social curricula have developed their own educational theories and pedagogy. Related professional subject associations have been set up. Each subject or theme has become a specialization area with its own literature and expertise. They are bodies of knowledge with specific territories. Gender studies and environmental studies are themes which have developed as autonomous areas of study. Nevertheless, few new social curricula are treated as independent subjects in schools. Subject Transgression: New social curricula are not constrained by subject boundaries and I would label this characteristic "subject transgression." According to Pike (1990, p. 138): A feature of new social curriculum must surely be its preparedness to transgress rigid subject boundaries, and to positively encourage the cross-fertilisation of concepts, perspectives and practices to the point where "ownership" of a particular idea or approach becomes far less important than the impact it has upon other areas or themes. Although new social curricula are independent bodies of knowledge, they are cross-curricula in nature. It is appropriate for the Department of Education and Science (DES) and Her Majesty's Inspector (HMI) to name them "cross-curricular themes" (HMSO, 1987). By 37 their nature they tend to permeate other subject areas. Moreover, they are highly integrative. They have, what I call, "high subject adaptability." They are able to permeate other subjects and accommodate themselves to new subject environments. Weak classification and a permeable boundary make these knowledge units highly adaptable. Paisley's analysis of "variable field" and Bernstein's conceptualization of "integrated code" can help us understand the transgressive nature of the new social curricula. Paisley (1984) divided social science disciplines into two categories: level field and variable field. Anthropology, sociology and psychology are level fields which respectively conduct behaviorial analysis from cultural, social and personal level. According to Paisley (1984, p.6), "whereas a level field encompasses a wide range of human behaviors at one level of analysis, a variable field gives its attention to one category of behavior, such as communication, across many levels of analysis." Communication research, cybernetics, systems research, business research, education research and other social science subjects are classified as variable fields. For Paisley, these disciplines cut across the level fields, as columns cut across the rows of a matrix. Each variable field has a focal variable. Compared to the level fields, the variable fields are younger and possess a mode of thought aiming for critical analysis. New social curricula are similar to what Paisley called variable fields which have specific focuses of study. For example, gender studies examines gender issues, while environmental education investigates environmental problems. Their analyses are conducted from different approaches or levels by cutting across subject boundaries. Therefore, new social curricula can be regarded as transgressive subjects. Bernstein (1971) proposed that there are two types of curricula: collection type and integrated type. The contents of the former are clearly bounded and insulated from each 38 other while the latter stand in an open relation to each other. He also put forward two concepts: classification and frame. Classification refers to the relationship between contents. According to him, "Where classification is strong, contents are well insulated from each other by strong boundaries. Where classification is weak, there is reduced insulation between contents, for the boundaries between contents are weak or blurred" (Bernstein, 1971, p. 205). Frame refers to "the strength of the boundary between what may be transmitted and what may not be transmitted in the pedagogical relationship" (p. 205). In Bernstein's view, any organization of educational knowledge which involves strong classification and strong frame is called collection code, while that involves weak classification and weak frame is named integrated code. New social curricula apparently belong to the category of integrated code. They are characterized by their weak boundary maintenance between contents and their weak frame. The new social curricula's permeation pattern can be very flexible. In Ontario, media education was attached to English, but in British Columbia it was included in the school curriculum as a cross-curricular subject. Some cross-curricular themes interweave and become an integrated area of study. In Britain, Earthrights: Education as if the Planet Really Mattered (Greig, Pike, & Selby, 1987) linked up the themes of environmental, development, peace and human rights education and encouraged teachers to explore environmental issues in a broader context. The book also offered advice for teachers to work across subjects. Huckle (1990, p. 156) quoted the premises of the book as follows: The thinking of those at the broad focus of each field (Environment, Development, Peace and Human Rights Education) is increasingly marked by a shift away from a compartmentalised view of reality to an acceptance of the interconnectedness of all things and what has been called the "permeability of boundaries." 39 No wonder Dufour (1990b) described the new social curricula as a group of dynamic and changing subjects. I argue that the "subject transgression" and "subject adaptability" features of the new social curricula make these curricula agents of knowledge integration. They challenge the rigid demarcation of subject knowledge and they facilitate the "border-crossing" of academic theory and practice. The emergence of new social curricula represents a trend of knowledge de-differentiation in the postindustrial world. Student-centred Pedagogy: Most new social curricula are based on the pedagogy of student-centred learning. For instance, peace education puts great emphasis on active student-centred learning (Hicks, 1990). In human rights education, the learning process is based on a co-operative dialogue between teacher and students and has the same status as the content (Selby, 1990). In global education, the teacher is "a facilitator of change and learning" (Pike, 1990, p. 133) and in environmental education, the teachers "act as partners rather than authorities in the learning process" (Goodson, 1993, p. 108). The new social curricula do not define teachers as experts. They adopt active learning methods such as the use of surveys, collaboration and resource-based learning. It is believed that a free exchange of ideas between teachers and students will benefit the students. Moreover, the new approach encourages independent thinking. On the other hand, new social curricula initiate students to a style of critical thinking which helps students develop critical social awareness and avoid bias. According to Dufour (1982, p. 95), the process enables students to "transcend common-sense ideas held by the vast majority of the populace who had not studied social science." Indeed, critical thinking is essential for social survival in an information-overloaded, modern society. 40 Peripheral Status: Most of the new social curricula remain at the periphery of the general school curriculum and face the possibility of exclusion. They are still regarded as low-status knowledge and, therefore, expendable. Whyld (1990) complained that gender education suffers from a low priority in British schools. Garvin (1992) reported that consumer studies has a problem with implementation in Vancouver. Human rights education receives only minimal attention (Selby, 1990) and global education does not fit smoothly into a subject-bound, content-oriented curriculum (Pike, 1990). The new social curricula linger at the periphery of the school curriculum. Their rise and fall in popularity are linked to the shifts in political and educational priorities. Emerging from a new historical epoch, the characteristics of the new social curricula distinguish them from traditional school subjects. New social curricula as a group constitute a hitherto amorphous curricular area which has great potential in fostering the integration of knowledge. Should these curricula be called a subject or a theme? In Dufour's (1990a) opinion, there is no intrinsic difference between cross-curricular themes and traditional subjects. The distinction is simply the result of the politics of knowledge-a distinction between high-status knowledge and low-status knowledge. Goodson's (1982) analysis of school subjects also implies that only well-established academic subjects are "real subjects." Here, real implies that they have legitimacy and cognitive authority. Since these new social curricula have the characteristic of "subject transgression" and always appear as a part of other subjects instead of standing alone, this image does not quite fit the ordinary concept of "subject," which is characterized by distinct knowledge demarcation. New social curricula blur the concept of subject boundary and invade the sovereignty of subject territory. That is why some people hesitate to call them "subjects." In my view, they should still be regarded 41 as subjects because they are autonomous and coherent bodies of knowledge. Nevertheless, I find the term "cross-curricular theme" useful, as it can bring out their distinct feature of "subject transgression." Therefore, in this study I will continue to address them as new social curricula or cross-curricular themes. Not all new social movements generate new social curricula. Likewise, not all the new social curricula originate from new social movements. However, as analyzed above, quite a number of new social curricula grew out of pressure group activities associated with major social movements and social forces. The new social curricula are a group of new school subjects with unique characteristics; they are important educational innovations in a postindustrial world. It is worthwhile to examine how a social movement or the activities of a smaller-scale pressure group lead to the legitimation of a new school curriculum. 2.2 Social Conflict Theory of Curriculum Making Almost all previous studies on school subject and curriculum change are based on the theory of cultural reproduction of school knowledge (either the direct reproduction thesis or the hegemony thesis). Instead, this study adopts social conflict theory to look at subject formation because this theoretical perspective allows us to examine the role of social movement or pressure group activities in formulating a curriculum. Cultural reproduction theory argues that curricular content is "socially constructed" and this construction is not arbitrary but tends to act in the interests of particular classes (Apple, 1979; Luke, 1988). Coined by Blackledge and Hunt (1985, p. 134), "direct 42 reproduction theory" emerged in the 1970s. It holds an instrumentalist view of the State, claiming the State acts on the direct instruction of the bourgeoisie. Education is part of the capitalist society's "state apparatus" (Althusser, 1971). Education helps reproduce or maintain the capitalist economic system. Bowles and Gintis (1976) concluded that the educational system shapes students' values, beliefs, and aspirations in such a way that they readily fit into the existing relations of production. Later works in cultural reproduction, however, use the concept of hegemony to reframe the base-superstructure analysis and propose a selective tradition thesis (Apple, 1979; Blackledge & Hunt, 1985; Luke, 1988; Williams, 1989). They argued that individuals in schools are "incorporated," often non-coercively, into the suppositions, beliefs and practices of the dominant culture. School curricula present dominant culture as "the tradition" and reproduce social order in a hegemonic way. Because of this, education is unable to act as a force for social change promoting greater equality and social justice. Curricular response to social change is regarded as an activity which keeps up with the times to avoid social instability. The object of adapting new school subjects to meet the needs of present-day society is welcomed by the dominant class because this makes education better serve its interests (Clark, 1968). Curriculum development becomes a change to further social control. In their book about the formation of American school subjects, Popkewitz (1987) and other scholars begin with the assumption of direct reproduction theory that school subjects fitted the need of the dominant class. For example, Freedman (1987a) found that the rise of art education in 19th century America was based on the request of industrialists to include drawing in the formal curriculum of urban public schools whose pupils were largely from immigrant and working class families. Similarly, Sleeter (1987, p. 210) found that special 43 education (learning disabilities class) "was created by white middle class parents in an effort to differentiate their children from low-achieving, low-income and minority children." The work by Young (1971) and many other scholars also held the view of social reproduction. For Goodson (1993), the State exercises control by indirectly promoting examinable knowledge and academic subjects. Through the alliance among academic subjects, academic examinations and able pupils, subject groups in school promote their subject to be viewed as an "academic discipline." Goodson wrote that teachers are not self-interested individuals, but the bureaucratization and structuration of schooling set the stage for groups to pursue status and resources. Teachers' material interest unwittingly contributes to the pattern of their own domination. McLaren (1993, p. xi) remarked that by stressing domination as a contradictory and often self-effacing process, "Goodson understands the formation of school subjects to be part of the process of hegemonic articulation." I find the cultural reproduction theory of educational knowledge, particularly the direct reproduction theory, unsatisfactory in explaining the relation between the State and the education system. Assuming the State and the dominant capitalists are one monolithic entity, it fails to distinguish the interest of the State from the interest of the dominant groups. It also holds a mechanical view, treating schools as hegemonic tools. Regarding subject formation as directly manipulated by the ruling class, it sees no hope in curriculum change for promoting social equality and cultural democracy. Departing from the direct reproduction theory, Goodson's work shows that the teaching professionals in groups construct their institutions and at the same time they are constructed by the structuration. Applying Antonio Gramsci's work in the analysis of the State, many people began to see that 44 the State does have relative autonomy (Poulantzas, 1975). However, the analysis of the relation between state and education is still within the limit of reproduction theory. Social conflict theory, however, adopts a very different assumption about the State and looks at the function of state education and subject formation from a very different viewpoint. By offering an explanation of modern education from a dialectical perspective, social conflict theory regards social movements as playing a vital role in affecting educational policy (Carnoy & Levin, 1985). School curriculum is seen as not only reproducing dominant ideology, but also reflecting social demands, and many social demands are articulated by social movements in modern society. This theoretical perspective is based on the assumption of the self-determination of the State. Rejecting the view that the State would consistently support the dominant groups, the social conflict model alleges that the capitalist state must try to fulfil two basic and often mutually contradictory functions-accumulation of capital and legitimation (Panitch, 1977). A capitalist state that openly uses its coercive forces to help one class accumulate capital at the expense of other classes will lose its legitimacy and hence undermine the basis of its loyalty and support. Thus, the State is subject to the competing dynamics both of a capitalist class attempting to reproduce capitalist relations of production and of social movements trying to expand their economic power and social and political rights. There is no guarantee that the State will serve the interests of the dominant class. Rather, the State is a site of struggle and negotiation; it is a sphere of political action where the interests of less powerful groups (workers, women, minorities) can be partially institutionalized and realized (Apple, 1993). 45 Education, as one state apparatus, is also an arena of social conflict. It is a place where social movements try to meet their needs and the dominant class attempts to reproduce its hegemony. In his book The State and Education Policy, Dale (1989) went beyond the economic determinism of the political economy of education and the assumptions of pluralism which see the state as an instrument of capital or as a neutral umpire. Both Apple (1993) and Carnoy (1989) agreed that, since the State tends to balance the opposing interests of different segments of social groups, "there would be times when state educational policy is genuinely progressive" (Apple, 1993, p. 67). While education is a site of conflict, compromises have to be reached and that would permit at least partial victories for less powerful groups. Following this analysis, subject formation is contingent on the influence of two forces: one is the "reproductive force" of the dominant groups; another is the "democratizing force" of the pressure groups (Carnoy, 1989). Social movements can therefore penetrate the educational arena and official knowledge may include democratic elements. Social conflict theory is significant in the analysis of the new social curricula of media education because it highlights the important role social movements play in curriculum formation. Unlike the reproduction theory and hegemony theory, it holds an optimistic view on curriculum development and sees the possibility for new school programs that promote social justice. The social conflict theory provides the theoretical support to the link between social movement and subject formation. However, few empirical studies have examined the process whereby a social movement energizes a new school subject. Therefore, ih the following section, I will formulate an analytical framework based on social conflict theory to investigate the legitimation process of media education. 46 Before moving on to the framework, I would like to point out that I do not agree with Carnoy and Levin's (1985) approach of constructing social conflict theory of education based purely on class analysis. In their social conflict theory model, the social movements are described as collective behaviours that "demand more public resources for their needs and more say in how those resources are to be used" (Carnoy & Levin, 1985, p. 47). If we accept the view that in postindustrial society the social struggle has already shifted from competition for the control of economic resources to control of symbolic goods, we must not limit the concept of social movement to interclass, material struggle. It makes better sense to interpret social conflict from a broader perspective to include collective actions initiated by divergent social groups for particular reasons. From social movement to subject formation, the struggle is not only social and political at the educational policy level of the government, but also a competition for subject territory at the school subject group level. Curriculum construction is politically mediated by various stake holders in the educational system and curriculum making essentially becomes a process of political negotiation. Goodson's (1982) study on school subject development documents the politics involved. All subject groups want to win legitimacy and secure their places in school by protecting or expanding their subject territories. For McLaren (1993, p. xii), "the struggle for curriculum is a never-ending process." Given the unique characteristics of the new social curricula and their special origins from social movements and pressure group activities, the legitimation of a new social curriculum takes a very special -route. 47 2.3 Knowledge-Power, Boundary Work and Legitimation School knowledge is not politically and culturally neutral but embodies and communicates the intent and values of those parties who have a major hand in constructing the school curriculum. Scholars of new sociology of education are particularly concerned with the ways society selects, classifies, transmits, and evaluates educational knowledge (Bernstein, 1971; Fisher, 1993). What is the social motive for producing official knowledge? How is the power-knowledge relationship established through the school subject codification and classification process? Fisher (1990, 1993) maintained that it is important to explore the relationship between boundary work and knowledge legitimation. Boundary work incorporates legitimation and cognitive authority. In this sense, the investigation of the transformation of media knowledge into official knowledge will be illuminated by the theoretical discussion on power-knowledge as well as knowledge demarcation. Here the works by Foucault and some scholars in sociology of curriculum are relevant. 2.3.1 Foucault's power-knowledge Foucault made a sophisticated analysis of the relationship between power and knowledge. According to him, knowledge does not reflect power relations but is inherent in them (Foucault, 1980). Power is immanent and diffused throughout society and on all levels (Foucault, 1975, 1976). Foucault's research on penal history and his experience at Attica prison led him to reformulate his thought on the effects of power. Power is not merely 48 negative, repressive and prohibiting, but can sometimes be positive, productive and explicitly bound to knowledge (Lemert & Gillan, 1982; Fisher, 1993). One important aspect of Foucault's work is his analysis of how knowledge regulates human practices. Power and knowledge regulate practices, he claimed, by highlighting what are known to be acceptable actions. To know is to exercise the power of subjection and domination (Lemert & Gillan, 1982). For example, knowledge of sexuality regulates people's sexual behavior, prohibiting acts such as incest. It manifests social control and power over life. Foucault's power-knowledge concept implies that all forms of knowledge have a political dimension (Jones, 1990) and that knowledge automatically leads to domination. Accordingly, psychology, clinical medicine, the human sciences, criminology, population theory, political economy, modern biology, psychoanalysis and modern psychiatry are each implicated in modern society's attempt to shape and control people. For Foucault, discipline is a double-edged practice: the control of knowledge and truth (e.g., clinical medicine as a discipline) and the control of bodies and people for social purposes (e.g., the use of medical and economic theories to control the size and behavior of population). Foucault's work is relevant to the study of knowledge and power in the school setting. Do school subjects, like those academic disciplines analyzed by Foucault, exercise control on students? What kind of knowledge politics is going on in school? In examining how power-knowledge regulates social practices, Foucault put great emphasis on the process of classification and division. Ball (1990) commented that the dividing practices are clearly central to the organizational processes of education in society. In The Archaeology of Knowledge, Foucault (1972) provided a schema for tracing the emergence of discursive 49 formations of knowledge. According to Fisher (1993, p. 21), "these discursive formations emerge as part of the overall process of knowledge differentiation" and Foucault's analysis on the demarcation of academic disciplines symbolizes "the progressive inscription of power into the boundary" (p. 22). 2.3.2 New sociology of education Many studies in sociology of knowledge and sociology of education focus on the relationship between knowledge and power. For example, Young (1971) suggested that consideration of the assumptions of knowledge by those in positions of power may be a fruitful perspective for raising sociological questions about school curricula. Education may help to reproduce or maintain the capitalist economic system (Bowles & Gintis, 1976). Based on Gramsci's work, Williams (1989) maintained that schools serve to select knowledge, skills and competence for transmission. He characterized the process of selection as "selective tradition" which supports the domination of hegemony. Hence, from reproduction theory (Apple, 1979; Apple & Weis, 1983; Bourdieu, 1973; Young, 1971,) to resistant theory (Apple, 1982; Giroux, 1983) and social conflict theory (Apple, 1993; Carnoy & Levin, 1985), these works contend that curriculum is not politically, economically or culturally neutral. School knowledge is socially produced to support a particular social order. A number of studies on school subjects illustrate that the aim of various school subjects is to produce "good" citizens and to maintain social stability. For example, Skau (1988) concluded that the aim of social studies is to train socially responsible citizens. The 50 emergence of special education in Ontario, Woodill (1991) claimed, was to settle the poor and handicapped with the objective of social control. The curricular rhetoric was heightened by the moral, economic and political fears of the upper class. The primary goal of developing the subject of home economics was to nurture good citizens who would then have better home-making skills (Thomas & Arcus, 1988). Computer studies was pushed by the business and industrial sectors to suit their needs for a better workforce (White, 1987). In the late 19th century, art education was used for developing skills for a labor market (Freedman, 1987a). While all these studies indicate that the power structure in society affects the selection and legitimation of school knowledge, other studies show that power penetrates the knowledge system through boundary work (Fisher, 1990, 1993). Fisher's study on the creation and growth of the Social Science Research Council (SSRC) in the United States is part of a larger study on the social sciences. The history of the SSRC illustrates the struggle to demarcate the social sciences from the natural sciences. Fisher's findings indicate that the attempt to create a new boundary around the social sciences failed due to varied power struggles among the State, philanthropic institutions and social scientists. The power-knowledge relationship was embedded in the process of boundary classification and legitimation. For Karl Popper (1965), a boundary is socially constructed as illustrated by the boundary made between social science knowledge and everyday knowledge. Many people have put a great deal of effort into the creation and maintenance of the boundary between social science and other knowledge. Cozzens and Gieryn (1990) also claimed that neither science nor social science is separate or distinctive. Their distinctive status is the end result of persuasion by practitioners and their patrons. In this sense, the study on boundary work is 51 important not because the boundaries are real but because of the political interests involved. In discussing the typology of educational knowledge, Basil Bernstein (1971) stressed that there is nothing intrinsic to the relative status of various subject contents nor to the relationships between contents. For him, "their classification and framing are social facts" (Bernstein, 1971, p. 204). The literature cited indicates, on the one hand, that the examination of the legitimation and classification of educational knowledge cannot exclude power analysis, and on the other hand, shows that power permeates the legitimation process through knowledge demarcation and boundary work. 2.4 Analytical Framework of Legitimating a New Social Curriculum Based on the theoretical assumption of the social conflict theory and the above literature review of knowledge legitimation and classification, I put forward a framework to study the process by which a new social movement or pressure group works to legitimate a new social curriculum in school. The framework includes four elements of legitimation: justification, lobbying, positioning and curriculum-building. Justification: Adopting a Problem-solving Approach The establishment of a new school subject demands strong justification. Previous studies on subject formation show that the success of the legitimation of a new school program depends heavily on whether the "need" of the subject is well-articulated and whether the "climate of opinion" is favourable to the new initiative (Goodson, 1988; Popkewitz, 1987; Reid, 1985). 52 Most of the new social curricula seem to employ a new and different approach from the traditional subjects to justify their "need" of being included in the school timetables. Historically traditional school subjects entered the school curriculum by emphasizing either their utilitarian value or academic value. Mathematics was included in the school curriculum for its academic value. In Britain, biology won its place in the school because of its usefulness in educating people about fishing, agriculture, animal breeding and insect-fighting. Geography also gained its entry for utilitarian reasons. As travelling and trading became common, it was necessary for students to learn map-reading and understand something about the world (Goodson, 1993). In the United States, art education won legitimacy in schools because it was useful in developing drawing skills for a labour market. The industrialists requested the inclusion of drawing for all urban public school children (Freedman, 1987a). On the contrary, the new social curricula could not justify their existence in terms of utilitarian worth. They are of little use in production. Nor did they emphasize their academic value for intellectual training. They are not scholarly subjects. Rather, they articulated the social and cultural needs of a changing society. They claimed a place in the school curriculum by arguing that children need more social knowledge to develop critical social awareness and problem-solving skill in a complicated modern society. Thus, as many traditional subjects won legitimacy for contributing to the socialization of children and their preparedness for life in an expanding industrial world (Popkewitz, 1987), I would suggest that many new social curricula demonstrate their importance by acclimatizing children to a new, postindustrial society. As social struggles have shifted from the control of material production to the manipulation of symbolic codes in the new society, new social curricula interpret the social 53 and educational "need" in this new dimension. Advocates of new social curricula articulate the new social conflicts and social problems in contemporary society and urge the search for solutions. They include the environmental crisis, nuclear threat, drug and alcohol abuse, aids epidemic, media deception, gender friction and racial conflict. As part of the solution to all these urgent social crises, advocacy groups press for environmental education, peace education, health education, media education, gender education and multi-cultural education. The school is pushed to take responsibility for preparing students to learn to handle the social problems and conflicts of everyday life. The new bodies of knowledge about human rights, gender equality and health consciousness are suggested as important social survival skills fundamental to the education for responsible citizenship. Moreover, as these social issues are universal and global in nature, schools are not given the option of ignorance. In the early 1970s the debate on hidden curriculum was in full swing. The justification of media education in the educational system was related to the tackling of hidden curriculum because the mass media was regarded as an hidden educational force. According to Vallance (1983, p. 11), hidden curricula are "those nonacademic but educationally significant consequences of schooling that occur systematically but are not made explicit at any level of the public rationales for education." For Jane Martin (1976, p. 131), a hidden curriculum "consists of those learning states of a setting which are either unintended or intended but not openly acknowledged to the learners in the setting unless the learners are aware of them." Educators have been called to pay close attention to hidden curriculum because it has long been regarded as powerful educational force. The most striking characteristic of hidden curriculum is its invisibility. As "covert" or "latent" curriculum, it is not openly 54 acknowledged but it can be more effective than the formal curriculum (Vallance, 1983). The learning process is unintended, therefore Martin (1983) called it "unintended learning states." In spite of unintended learning, students may find the norms, values and beliefs transmitted by the hidden curriculum useful in their everyday lives. According to Snyder's (1971) study, hidden curriculum governs students' social conduct. Students learned from the hidden curriculum about what they can avoid doing, knowing where the risks are minimal and the cost is modest. From a critical sociologist's point of view, hidden curriculum is not neutral and it is even manipulative. According to Greene (1983, p. 4), the norms transmitted by the hidden curriculum are "in conflict with the values publicly affirmed by an ostensibly free society." Mediated through the hidden curriculum, in Giroux and Penna's view, the social and economic conditions distort social construction of meaning. The aim of hidden curriculum is to "socialize students to conform to the status quo" (Giroux & Penna, 1983, p. 112). The role of hidden curriculum in social reproduction of knowledge is, therefore, related to the notion of false consciousness. Hidden curriculum has no specific subject matter. What it teaches varies according to different settings. The content which constitutes a hidden curriculum is not limited to a specific object (Martin, 1983). But it is important to note that what is transmitted by the hidden curriculum occurs systematically. In other words, it has a powerful accumulating effect. Further, the effect of hidden curriculum is not evaluated and therefore the consequences are easily ignored. As students are not aware of the existence of the hidden curriculum, some enthusiastic teachers want to make it visible. Giroux and Penna (1983) wanted the hidden curriculum to be eliminated or minimized. In answering the question of how to deal with hidden curriculum, both Martin (1983) and Greene (1983) thought 55 "consciousness raising" is the most important strategy. Greene believed the promotion of the critical consciousness of the hidden curriculum could empower students to resist hegemony and gain personal control. Are mass media a kind of hidden curriculum? Are they a manipulating educational force? Is it necessary to tackle the hidden curriculum of mass media? I propose that new social curricula justify their existence by adopting a problem-solving approach. What this means is that the advocates (the proponents) of the new social curricula give some assurance that the proposed subject will be an attempt to lead to the solution of social conflict. In Chapter 6, I will analyze the justification of media education through the conceptualization of mass media as invisible curriculum. Lobbying: Making Use of Public Pressure According to Freedman (1987b), the formation of school subjects involves the struggle of various social and political interests which seek to use the school to express particular purpose and value. The central concern of the politics of knowledge is, therefore, about who finally wins the right to define what knowledge is worthy of being included. Based on social conflict theory, democratizing forces represented by social movements also have an opportunity to use the school to express their purpose and value. They have an opportunity to define the social reality, the educational needs and what knowledge is deemed worthwhile for learning in schools. However, this right is not granted but sought by vigorous lobbying. In order to admit the new body of knowledge into the official school curriculum, advocates must employ effective lobbying strategies to convince educational officials and policy makers. 56 Lemessurier (1988) distinguished the concept of lobbying from that of advocacy. She pointed out that advocacy is a deliberate effort to raise awareness of a topic, but lobbying has a different meaning: A lobby is a well organised, ongoing series of communications with all levels of government. Its aim is to persuade government to start new policies, change existing ones, or increase government support (including dollars) for a program or group. This is called "influencing" government (Lemessurier, 1988, p. 41). Therefore, the essence of lobbying for a new social curriculum is to persuade government officials to mandate a proposed curriculum. Since the lobbying impetus comes from pressure group activities related to social movements, the success of the lobbying relies less on the bargaining power of individual lobbyists or lobbying organizations, but rather on the impact of the movement. The wider the influence the movement has on the society and the greater the support the movement obtains from the public, the better is the chance of the initiated curriculum getting into the school curriculum. For Offe (1985, p. 849), new social movements are grounded on values such as autonomy, social equality, liberties, human rights, peace and balanced physical environment which are essentially uncontroversial. These underlying values of new social movements "leave their intellectual and political opponents rather defenceless." Similarly, new social curricula growing out of the new social movements seldom face strong overt opposition. Their legitimation very much depends on whether they can find a curricular niche and convince the government to grant the mandate. Government support is crucial to the legitimation of new social curricula (Dufour, 1990b). What the movement advocates must do is to exercise public pressure to get the curriculum through. 57 New social movements operate within civil society and do not intend to challenge state power. The new social curricula grew from these movements and are not offensive to the political establishment. In return, educational authorities have little reason to oppose these new educational initiatives. In Britain, the Department of Education and Science (DES) and Her Majesty's Inspector (HMI) in 1987 devised a name (cross-curricular theme) and a place (the themes should be taught through foundation subjects) to protect them from being squeezed out of the curriculum (HMSO, 1987). However, the mandate does not come easily. Skilful manipulation of public opinion and use of lobbying tactics are important. As Goodson (1982) pointed out, educational initiatives must suit the "problem of the moment" and "climate of opinion" in order to be considered as a new subject. Positioning: Employing the Strategy of Subject Inhabitancy It is not easy for a new body of knowledge to squeeze into the already crowded curriculum. This is particularly the case for low-status knowledge like those cross-curricular themes which are mobilized by social movements or pressure group activities instead of being initiated by the socially powerful groups. In order to gain entry, new social curricula have to employ special strategies. Subject permeation seems to be the most effective way for them to establish territory in the formal school curriculum under the new pattern of subject formation. I put forward a concept "subject inhabitancy" to describe the new phenomenon. In the late 20th century, the curricular environment is totally different from that in the 19th century and breeds new patterns of subject formation. In recent decades, we can see a phenomenon of "subject inhabitancy," which is an innovative way of accommodating a new body of knowledge into the secondary school curriculum. Subject formation takes the form of inhabitancy in which the new subject emerges as a "guest" of one or several existing 58 subject(s). The host(s) provide(s) a "habitat" for the newcomer. Protocooperation is the term to describe the symbiotic relationship between the guest subject and the host subject(s). The term needs to be clarified. For symbiosis or protocooperation, the host nurtures the guest on a mutual benefit basis. They are mutually dependent but can survive without the other (Cheng, 1970; Read, 1970; So, 1992). A large number of studies on curriculum history have been conducted in recent years. From this pool of literature, a clear distinction emerges between the studies on social origin of the old school subjects which emerged in the late 19th century and those on the emergence of new school subjects which came into being after the mid-20th century. The former put emphasis on the social conditioning of school subject formation by examining how the social, economic, political and cultural dynamics gave shape to the emerging school subjects. Little or no discussion is included on subject group conflict. By contrast, the latter highlight the struggle among subject groups as an important dimension of subject formation (Garvin, 1992; Goodson, 1993). The most outstanding example is Goodson's investigation of environmental studies in Britain in which political struggle among subject groups is central to his analysis. The shift of research focus is not simply a difference in research style. It reveals that the pattern of subject formation in the late 19th century differs from that in the late 20th century. It seems that subject group politics was less visible in the past but this is not the case in contemporary schooling. Nowadays, school subjects grow from both the current social forces and the political struggle among subject groups, which have become key political players in the process of curriculum making. Subject groups have become key political players in subject formation because the school environment has changed over the past hundred years. In the late 19th century, 59 public schooling was still in its infant stage. First, the issue of what was central to students' learning was still open for discussion. School curriculum was in a state of flux, waiting to be moulded and fixed. Second, space existed in the curriculum. Third, many school subjects were newly formed. Their primary task was internal development, not external expansion. Territorial disputes, therefore, were seldom raised. Competition among subject groups was not intense. In the post-war period, public schooling has expanded rapidly and public schools became sophisticated bureaucratic institutions. What is central to students' learning has been decided. A list of academic and utilitarian subjects have been mandated as core and elective school subjects. School curriculum is very crowded. Adding a program to the curriculum means that some existing materials have to be taken out. Under such a zero-sum game situation, it is very difficult for a new body of knowledge to squeeze its way into the school curriculum. Yet, it is worth mentioning the "ceiling effect." The ceiling of public education was raised as mass education expanded into the tertiary level, thus creating some openings both vertically and horizontally. But it is still difficult for a new body of knowledge to get into the official curriculum. Thus, recognition of the need for a new body of knowledge does not mean that it can automatically become a part of the school curriculum. Seeking access to the school curriculum is a complicated and highly political process which involves a fierce struggle among the subjects concerned. So, if a new body of knowledge can find an academic "niche" in the school curriculum but there is no physical "space," an alternative strategy is to attach itself to an existing subject. It is like renting a room in someone else's house as there is already no more land for new housing construction. Since the new social curriculum has 60 the characteristic of "subject transgression" and high "subject adaptability," it is easy for it to move into other subject areas given the unfavorable curricular environment. I would argue that "subject inhabitancy" is the way new social curricula nudged their way into schools. Take environmental studies as an example: according to Goodson (1982), when it emerged in Britain in the late 1960s, it was lumped with biology, geography and rural studies. In the case of consumer studies in British Columbia, Canada, it was "assigned" to the business education department (Garvin, 1992). Development education is under the jurisdiction of history, social studies and home economics (Dufour, 1982). Gender education, global education and health education all go across the curricula. All these examples indicate that subject inhabitancy is a common phenomenon in secondary schools. As a new curricular theme emerges, the first question the education authority asks is "Who will teach it?" (Goodson, 1993, p. 112). In other words, they are going to select a suitable host from the existing school subjects. However, curricular themes do not usually shop around for a host. Instead, the existing school subjects are looking for potential guest subjects as a means of expanding or maintaining existing territory. This involves the political economy of subject formation. In the educational systems of Western industrial countries, a close connection exists between subject status and financial/resource allocation. High status subjects have better staffing ratios, higher salaries, higher capital allowances, more graded posts, better career prospects (Goodson, 1988). It is in the material interest of teachers and for the resource benefit of students that status enhancement and territory expansion are continuously being pursued for existing school subjects. There are many approaches to achieve these goals. 61 One which is central to our discussion is to stretch the boundary by incorporating promising initiatives (e.g., new bodies of knowledge). Initially, the inclusion of an initiative may not be relevant to territory expansion. Initiatives may simply originate with educators trying out new ideas or practices, or they may sometimes result from the demands of pupils or their resistance to existing forms of teaching (Westbury, 1984). Initiatives normally exist in several subjects over a long period of time, but according to Ben-David and Collins (1966), only a few have potential for further growth. This "further growth" is the turning point for the establishment of a host-guest relationship. At this stage, a few subject groups begin to take a political look at the initiative. They become interested in the new idea not only as intellectual content but also as potential means of improvement in occupational role and subject status (Goodson, 1988). This limited number of subject groups then become nurturing hosts and they begin to promote the initiative. Meanwhile the subject groups are also competing with one another to be selected as the official host of this particular invention. As such, the winning official host, which previously acted as one of the nurturing hosts, plays a significant role in shaping the new curriculum. The new curriculum (guest) shares the characteristics of its host in many ways. Therefore, a study of the guest-host relationship of a new curriculum helps us understand the development of a new curriculum and how it will grow in the future. Although Goodson does not look at curriculum formation from a subject inhabitancy point of view, his analysis of the politics of subject groups is very helpful in conceptualizing the guest-host relationship. In Goodson's view (1988), low-status subjects with poor career patterns and even with actual survival problems may readily embrace and promote new educational initiatives because they foresee the possibility for basic improvement in the 62 occupational role. He cited the example of rural studies which tried to promote new initiatives, such as environmental studies, in order to upgrade its subject status. In the 1960s, rural studies in Britain was faced with extinction in the emerging comprehensive schools and it lacked university base. Rural studies advocates wanted to redefine their subject by integrating environmental studies which was close to science. According to Goodson, high-status subjects may ignore major opportunities as they already possess satisfactory resources and secure position. As will be argued in a later chapter, even high-status subjects such as English, will not forgo opportunities to integrate media education and to extend their territory for status maintenance and power expansion. In my view, both low-status and high-status subjects are interested in becoming host(s) of new curricula for political and economic reasons. Garvin's (1992) study on consumer education confirms that the creation of a new compulsory course provokes a great deal of territorial conflict among subject groups that want the territorial advantage the new course would offer to their respective areas. The guest and the host are in a symbiotic relationship. Subject inhabitancy is also considered by the educational bureaucracy as a feasible way to accommodate the new social curricula. As mentioned earlier, the British Department of Education and Science invented the term "cross-curricular themes" for these new educational initiatives and "proposed that such subjects or themes should be taught through the foundation subjects, so that they can be accommodated within the curriculum but without crowding out the essential subjects" (quoted in Dufour, 1990c, p. vii). Since there are quite a number of new initiatives, the competition among them can be intense. Therefore, the effectiveness of their positioning strategy becomes crucial in the competition for the status of official knowledge. 63 Curriculum-building: Offering Unofficial Support to Curriculum Design and Implementation New social curricula are unfamiliar areas of study for the educational bureaucracy and for many classroom teachers. If members of pressure groups associated with the social movement offer their expertise to the development of the proposed curriculum, it can enhance the chances of legitimation of the new subject. Before government officials mandate a new school subject, they usually have to consider the availability of the relevant curriculum resource materials, textbooks and teaching aids. They also have to think about teacher training and curriculum implementation. If they know they can get assistance with curriculum design and implementation from the advocates, their confidence in mandating the new invention is greater. Numerous examples exist where new social curricula have had to rely on outside support for curriculum development. For example, in Britain, the Centre for Global Education, organized by committed teachers and advisers, provided curriculum materials for global education (Pike, 1990). For human rights education, two non-government organizations, the British section of Amnesty International and the Minority Rights Group, published teaching units for teachers (Selby, 1990). For development education, an organization called Voluntary Committee on Overseas Aid and Development (VCOAD) was set up to produce fact sheets and other materials for schools (Fyson, 1982). In the process of securing outside curricular support, school teachers play a significant role in bridging the gap between the social movement and the development of the new social curriculum. Many teachers are key members of pressure groups supporting social movements, promoting environmentalism, peace and feminism. Their double role, as advocate and classroom teacher, enables them to apply their expertise on subject matters such 64 as the environment, third world development and gender equality to curriculum design. This crystallizes Giroux's (1988) theoretical conceptualization of teachers as "transformative intellectuals." Giroux argued that teachers' work should be a form of intellectual labour and should not be defined in plain instrumental or technical terms. Teachers could contribute not only to the processes of curriculum implementation and execution but also to the planning and design of curricula. Thus, through their participation in social movements and involvement in curriculum-making, teachers of new social curricula can legitimate the social, political and cultural interests they endorse. The above framework summarizes the essential elements in the process of creating a new social curriculum. As many new social curricula originate from pressure group activities which are associated with major social movements and social forces in modern society, this framework tries to explain the strategy employed by less powerful groups in legitimating a body of "low-status" knowledge. The most significant theoretical aspect in the legitimation process is the positioning of these new social curricula and the subject permeation tactics they use. What form of "subject inhabitancy" do they choose? Is it attachment to one subject, permeation of several subjects, cross-curricula for all subjects or integration with other themes as a new, integrated subject? Sometimes the choice very much depends on the opportunities available. Furthermore, the four elements discussed are interlocking and interacting. For instance, the choice of the form of "subject inhabitancy" will affect the work of curriculum-building, and the availability of curricular support and persuasiveness of the language of justification will influence effective lobbying. The four elements of legitimation are interactive and interrelated. 65 2.5 Defining a Social Movement In this thesis it is necessary to determine whether the media literacy movement under investigation is in fact a social movement so that discussion can follow on how this movement leads to the legitimation of media education. Before proceeding to examine the case, what constitutes a social movement needs to be clarified. In social movement literature there exists little agreement among social theorists on a definition of a social movement. Different perspectives result in different definitions. For Touraine, who is interested in the relationship between the new social conflicts and social movements in postindustrial society, an alleged social movement is "the organized collective behaviour of a class actor struggling against his class adversary for the social control of historicity in a concrete community" (Touraine, 1981, p. 77). Emphasizing the role of persuasion in a social movement, Stewart, Smith, and Denton (1984, p. 14) claimed a social movement should be "an organized, uninstitutionalized, and significantly large collectivity that is created to bring about or to resist a program for change in societal norms and values, operates primarily through persuasive strategies, and is countered by an established order." Unsatisfied with the ambiguity of the concept of social movement, Diani tried to explicate the essence of a social movement and put forward a synthetic definition. His overarching definition of a social movement synthesized the collective behavioral perspective (Turner & Killian, 1987), resource mobilization theory (Zald & McCarthy, 1987), political process (Tilly, 1978, 1984) and the new social movements' approach (Melucci, 1985, 1989; Touraine, 1977, 1981, 1985). He defined a social movement as "a network of informal interactions between a plurality of individuals, groups and/or 66 organizations, engaged in a political or cultural conflict, on the basis of a shared collective identity" (Diani, 1992, p. 13). Based on the discussions on the working concepts of social movement by the above authors and other writers, seven criteria are being proposed to define a social movement. The ideal type proposed demonstrates the criteria for a social movement but not every social movement is required to have all the characteristics listed. Weber suggested the use of ideal type to formulate general and abstract concepts. To generate an ideal type, the first step is to select characteristics of behaviour or institutions which are observable in the real world, and then to summarize them to form a coherent, intellectual construction (Abercrombie, Hill, & Turner, 1984). The ideal types are therefore "hypothetical constructions, formed from real phenomena, which have an explanatory value" (Abercrombie, Hill, & Turner, 1984, p. 117). However, all the features of an ideal type will not always be presented in the real world, but "any particular situation may be understood by comparing it with the ideal type" (p. 117). According to Weber, it is natural for discrepancies to exist between reality and an ideal type. If the discrepancies are great, then reconstruction of the ideal type will result. Here are some of the criteria for an ideal type of social movement. First, a social movement should be an organized collectivity. According to Stewart, Smith and Denton (1984), a social movement has at least minimal organization. A social movement has leaders or spokespeople, membership or followers, and one or more groupings. Otherwise, the phenomenon under study may be only a trend or a symptom of social unrest. Social movement scholars agree on this point, claiming some form of organization is the major characteristic of a social movement (Blumer, 1969; Diani, 1992; 67 McLaughlin, 1969; Wilkinson, 1971). Blumer (1969, p. 8) defined social movements as "collective enterprises to establish a new order of life." McLaughlin (1969) remarked that this classic definition articulates group behaviour as the core concept of social movement. Other scholars, such as Diani (1992) and Melucci (1985), tended to use the terms "network of informal interaction" or "movement network" to describe the collectivity. But the basic message is that a social movement must involve individuals, groups and organizations interacting with each other. Movement network or movement coalition, however, can be very loose or very tightly clustered. Its function is to mobilize resources for collective action. Resource mobilization theorists particularly emphasize the significance of the role of organization in a social movement. Second, members of a social movement should have shared beliefs and solidarity. Diani (1992, p. 8) insisted that the movement's collectivity must have a "shared set of beliefs and a sense of belongingness." For Killian (1964) and McLaughlin (1969), a shared value system is one of the salient characteristics of a social movement. This set of beliefs, norms and group consciousness motivate members to develop commitment and take action. All social movement scholars referred to shared beliefs among the social movement participants. For example, Melucci (1985) used the term "solidarity," Touraine (1988) "identity," Turner (1981) preferred the terms "group identity" and "ideologies," McCarthy and Zald (1987) simply referred to "a set of opinions and beliefs." For these scholars, the value system or the collective identity shared by the activists of a social movement network define a movement's boundary. But the boundary is not fixed and the value system is also subject to change. According to Diani (1992, p. 9), the construction and preservation of a movement's identity "implies a continuous process of realignment and negotiation between 68 movement actors." The ideas and values of a social movement network are not necessarily homogeneous, although the actors involved share a common goal. Third, the major goal of a social movement should be to promote or oppose social change. It seeks to influence the social order. Respective authors highlight the close relationship between social movement and social change (Blumer, 1969; Stewart et al., 1984; Touraine, 1985; Wilkinson, 1971). For Lauer (1976, p. xiii), "the very definition of the social movement involves change." A social movement is "both a response to change and a factor influencing the direction of change" (p. 3). Fourth, a social movement always involves social conflict and it is countered by the established order. Since social movements advocate social change, the threat to the existing social order is inevitable, which in turn provokes resistance (Stewart et al., 1984). No matter whether the movement promotes change or opposes change, it will be involved in a conflicting relationship with other social actors (Diani, 1992). Stewart et al. (1984) discussed at length the confrontation between the social movement and the establishment. Touraine (1985) was concerned about the conflict of historicity. Melucci (1985) paid special attention to the struggle against the social mechanism of systemic domination. Fifth, a social movement should be an uninstitutionalized collectivity. It should not be part of the established order and it must not have the political and legislative power to enact any social change (Stewart et al., 1984). Once a social movement is co-opted by the establishment, it ceases to be a movement. Sixth, a social movement should be significantly visible. According to Stewart et al. (1984), a social movement must be "significantly large in scope" in terms of numbers of followers, size of geographical area, length of duration and frequency of events. Social 69 movement scholars debated how "large" the scope should be before it becomes significant. Some scholars insisted that a social movement is not a movement unless there is a fairly large number of people getting together to take action. On the contrary, other scholars argued that a social movement should not be evaluated by the number of its followers. However, scholars generally agreed that a social movement should persist for a long period of time and its activities should extend beyond a local community or a single event (McLaughlin, 1969). Seventh, a social movement should be differentiated from related phenomena. Social movements are always confused with social movement organizations. Many scholars stressed that a social movement consists of interacting groups of people and that a single organization does not constitute a social movement (Ash, 1972; Diani, 1992; Stewart et al., 1984; Turner, 1981). A social movement should also be distinguished from interest group or pressure group activities. Actors in a social movement usually come from different backgrounds with different orientations, but they share a system of beliefs and a sense of community which "exceeds by far the boundaries of any single group or organization" (Diani, 1992, p. 14). Moreover, a social movement is free to use noninstitutionalized actions, while pressure groups often employ the traditional channels of influence of a political system (Useem & Zald, 1987). Furthermore, a distinction should be made between a social movement and a social or political campaign. The former is usually initiated from the bottom-up, while the latter is organized from the top-down. The leader of a social movement is elected but the leader of a campaign is assigned as campaign manager. A campaign also has a specific goal, appointed staff and a set deadline. 70 2.6 Summary By reviewing the literature on new social movements and new social curricula, this chapter aims at mapping the relationship between postindustrial society, new social movements and new social curricula. The first part of the chapter attempts to establish the link between the societal shift to postindustrial society and the emergence of new social movements in Western societies. Since the 1960s, Western countries have moved from industrial to postindustrial societies. Many social theorists proposed that in postindustrial society people engage in a different kind of social conflict which deals less with the struggle for the control of means of production but more for the control of the production of symbolic goods. These new conflicts lead to new social movements. Unlike many old social movements which were essentially class-based, new social movements are characterized instead by, for example, demanding for change in values and life-styles, shifting social concern from party politics and class struggle to cultural issues, sharing a belief in liberation and personal autonomy, and recruiting new middle class as participants. Meanwhile, during the 1970s and 1980s, a large group of new social curricula emerged as a result of social movements at that time. There seems to be a close link between new social movements and new social curricula. The second part of the chapter puts forward a model of legitimation to illustrate the process by which new social movements lead to the codification of new social curricula. Theoretically, the model is built on the literature of sociology of knowledge, particularly the social conflict theory of curriculum-making. According to the social conflict theory, social movements can penetrate the educational arena and generate educational change. The 71 framework includes four elements of legitimation: justification, lobbying, positioning and curriculum-building. This framework suggests that many new social curricula have adopted a "problem-solving approach" to justify the need of their existence and claim that they are able to solve a particular social problem or resolve some social conflict. The use of public pressure is an effective tool in the lobbying process. Proper positioning and the strategy of subject inhabitancy are useful in finding a curricular niche for a new social curriculum. Moreover, unofficial support from the movement advocates for curriculum development is functional in smoothing the legitimation process. In this chapter, the characteristic features of new social movements and new social curricula are laid out in order to support the argument that the latter in many ways represent the concerns of the former. Since both (new social movements and new social curricula) are products of postindustrial society, they are embedded in postmaterialistic values. 72 Chapter Three Methodology This study examines the legitimation of media education as a new social curriculum in a postindustrial information society. The historical sociology research approach is adopted because the approach is particularly suitable for research concerned with societal shift. Apart from an explanation of the application of historical sociology, this chapter introduces the case study design of the research and provides details about document analysis and in-depth interviews as methods of data collection. 3.1 Historical Sociology Historical sociology is a research approach that integrates sociological and historical concepts and methods. Historical sociology originated from classical sociology and the social problem approach to social scientific problems that developed during the inter-war period in the United States. It is different from ordinary sociological and historical research: Some sociologists are "non-historical": empirically, they neglect the past; conceptually, they consider neither the time dimension of social life, nor the historicity of social structure. Similarly, some historians are "non-sociological": empirically, they neglect the way processes and structures vary between societies: conceptually, they consider neither the general properties of processes and structures, nor their relationships to acts and events. By contrast, historical sociology is carried out by historians and sociologists who investigate the mutual interpretation of past and present, events and processes, acting and structuration (Smith, 1991, p. 3). 73 An investigation using the socio-historical method can deepen our understanding of a particular social inquiry. As to the origin of historical sociology, many quite properly cite Marx, Durkheim and Weber as pioneers. According to Smith (1991), modern historical sociology emerged only after the 1950s. The new paradigm of historical sociology incorporates old concerns with a wide range of modern theoretical orientations. (Bendix, 1964; Eisenstadt, 1963; Moore, 1966; Skocpol, 1979, 1984c; Thompson, 1963; Wallerstein, 1974). These studies show that the distinctiveness of historical sociology is its epochal vision and its critical and unorthodox research mentality. Historical sociology is preoccupied with epochal interpretation. For Abrams (1982), historical sociology has a specific concern with epochal analysis, especially the transition to industrialism and, more recently, what has been labelled postindustrialism. Furthermore, since historical sociology is about large-scale social transformation and long-term cultural change, both Becker (1940) and Barnes (1948) considered historical sociology the study of social origins and development. In the past, the main task of modern studies of historical sociology was to trace the social origins and development of the industrial world. The common subjects of inquiry were the social origins of revolution, state-making, democracy and capitalism (Skocpol, 1984b). However, socio-historical investigation has recently expanded to include a large variety of topics including social origin of family structure, economic transformation, political process, ideological orientation. In addition to its epochal vision, historical sociology is unique in its research mentality. Mentality refers to its intellectual outlook and style of doing things. Firstly, historical sociology studies ask big questions which lead to meta-historical or macro-historical studies. Very often the analytical unit is a country or even a civilization. Historical 74 sociologists also ask meaningful but "smaller" questions by conducting historical studies of the experiences of individuals and well-defined groups within the limits established by social structures and processes. Secondly, Historical sociology studies are unorthodox and critical. According to Skocpol (1984b), many historical sociologists oppose the orthodox academic ways and tend to devise an unorthodox approach to research. They look for new clues to understand the past and reveal the significance of events. The inquiries are critical. For Smith (1991), in its first developmental phase, historical sociology wrestled with totalitarianism; after the 1960s it rediscovered domination, inequality and resistance movements and the Neo-Marxian approach became quite prevalent. Historical sociology is not only critical on the ideological level but also on the practical level. Scholars formulate a critical approach to research problems by rejecting the assumptions of previous studies. Thirdly, studies informed by historical sociology are sensitive to social disorder and inequality. Socio-historical studies examining social transformation, social disorganization which accompanies social change become the analytical focus of researchers. Modern socio-historical studies, particularly after the late 1960s, respond to the decline of the capitalist system and the emergence of varied social contradictions. Major new social movements, such as the student movement, the women's movement and the civil rights movement set the anti-domination and anti-inequality tone of socio-historical studies. Fourthly, historical sociology studies are humanistic. As Mills (1959) pointed out, at a time of rapid social change, people often feel they cannot cope with the larger world with which they are so suddenly confronted. Many socio-historical inquiries seek to understand more about the change and confusion with an ultimate hope that something can be done to 75 reduce suffering. Historical sociology research is social problem-orientated and focuses on social change and social programs. Historical sociology has developed its own distinct methodological logic. Skocpol (1984a) identified three major strategies for bringing together history and sociological theoretical ideas together: applying a general model to history; using concepts to interpret history; and analyzing causal regularities in history. Skocpol recommended the third strategy and coined the term "analytical historical sociology." The focus of this strategy is on developing an adequate explanation for a well-defined outcome or pattern in history. No effort is made to analyze historical facts according to a preconceived general model. The researcher's commitment then is not to any existing theory, but to the discovery of concrete "causal configurations" adequate to account for important historical patterns. The "deep analogy" approach proposed by Stinchcombe (1978) is also a way to conduct analytical historical sociology. He advocated grounding theories of social change in genuine historical analyses. Another group of scholars, however, employs an alternative strategy to achieve effective historical explanation. The emphasis shifts to the interaction among agency, structure and history. Abrams (1982) is the best representative of this group. He put forward his idea as the "problematic of structuring," taking it as an effective way of formulating fundamental issues of social and historical analysis. The concept of structuring refers to the attempt to understand the relationship between personal activities and experience on the one hand and social organization on the other, as something that is continuously constructed in time. The continuous process of construction is the focal concern of socio-historical analysis. This analysis is based on the assumption of the "two-sidedness" of the 76 social world, perceiving it as a world of which we are both the creators and the creatures, both makers and prisoners. It is a world which our action constructed and a world which imposes powerful constraints on us. Abrams' program is inspired by C. Wright Mills' idea of the "sociological imagination." Mills (1959) hoped that sociological imagination can help us grasp history and biography and the relations between the two within society. Giddens's structuration theory certainly also has great influence on Abrams (Calhoun, 1987). Giddens applied his own theory to conduct a number of historical sociology research projects. His theory of structuration offers a solution to divisions which have plagued sociological thought, especially the schism between action and structure (Craib, 1992). Giddens (1984, p. 2) argued: The basic domain of study of the social sciences, according to the theory of structuration, is neither the experience of the individual actor, nor the existence of any form of societal totality, but social practices ordered across space and time. According to Giddens, the old dualisms—action/structure, individual/society, determinism/voluntarism-should be reconceived as dualities, as parts of each other. In other words, instead of dichotomy, opposites or mutually exclusive thinking are dual in nature— simply two sides to the same coin. For Lloyd (1989), the comprehensive framework for approaching an explanation of the person/action/society/time complex of interrelationships, which was established by Anthony Giddens, Maurice Mandelbaum, Alain Touraine and others, contains a set of concepts about the methodology and theory of sociological structurism. Based on Mandelbaum's "methodological institutionalism," Lloyd put forward his theory of "methodological structurism" which emphasizes the "explicit recognition of the symbiotic relationship between the structuring power of people and the constraining power of 77 social structures" (Lloyd, 1989, p. 324). What Lloyd called "methodological structurism" is not substantially different from Giddens' "structuration" and Abrams' "problematic of structuring." A distinct feature of this model is his argument that scientific empirical enquiry into the nature of social structure as real structure is possible. His work is grounded on structuralist realism. He stressed that a socio-historical explanation can be a scientific explanation if it is concerned with the causal explanation of the history of relational structures (the two-sidedness) of social life. As this study of media education is situated in the context of societal shift from industrial society to postindustrial society, historical sociology becomes very helpful in assisting the formulation of the research problem as well as providing direction for this research. Unlike previous studies of historical sociology which focused on the "old" epochal issue of industrialism, this study turns to the "new" epochal issue of postindustrialism. According to Best and Kellner (1991), a series of socioeconomic and cultural transformations in the 1970s and 1980s suggesting a break with the previous society has taken place. An explosion of electronic media, computers and new technologies, a restructuring of capitalism, political shifts and upheavals, novel cultural forms, and new experiences of space and time have led to dramatic developments and changes in contemporary society and culture. Rapid social transformation is accompanied by new social problems, which could be the targets of investigation for new studies of historical sociology. This particular study addresses the issue of the emergence of media education in this period of transition to the postindustrial information age and traces the social origins of media education as a school subject. Historical sociology which specializes in studying social origin is, therefore, the appropriate research approach to be adopted. 78 This study also shares the research mentality of historical sociology. It is set against the background of large scale interaction between various social forces. The research adopts a macro approach, sensitive to both structural constraints and temporal processes. The study attempts to be critical and unorthodox. While not completely abandoning the old research agenda of school subject formation, it does employ a new perspective to investigate how pressure group activities and democratic forces associated with major social movements play a role in subject formation. As we enter the information age, media education reacts to the impact on society, especially the negative impact, of the mass media. It aims at helping young people to resist media manipulation and maintain critical autonomy in a democratic society. This study on media education shares a concern about social anomie and social equality with many other socio-historical studies. It also builds on the humanistic concern about how to help individuals better handle their relationship with the changing communication technologies. Furthermore, the study follows the emphasis of historical sociology on the analysis of structure and agency. Previous studies investigated school subjects by employing either structural analysis or agency analysis. Few studies attempt to synthesize the two approaches. For structuralists, school subjects are not rationally agreed bodies of established, neutral facts and ideas, but instead reflect the values and culture of the people who create and perpetuate them. Popkewitz and others (1987) employed a structural approach in their interpretation of the social history of the American school curriculum. They were concerned with the social dynamics that gave shape to various school subjects. The formation of school subjects, they claimed, involves the struggle of various social and professional interests who seek to use the school to express particular purposes and values. To them, the key to study subject 79 formation is to understand the structural continuity and social transformation of a particular society at a particular time. Tomkins's (1986) analysis of stability and change in the Canadian curriculum adopted a structural approach as well. His work emphasized how the social and cultural forces transformed Canadian curricula. Structural analysis is based on theories of social structure and social order. Knowledge patterns are viewed as reflecting the status hierarchies of societies through the activities of the dominant groups within them. The strength of structural analysis is to put subject formation into a macro-social context for scrutiny. On the one hand, it examines how changes in economic, political and social conditions create demand for new school subjects. On the other hand, it investigates how the power structure of society imposes an influence on subject formation. The limitation of this approach, of course, is its neglect of the role of human agency in the subject formation process. Goodson's early work represents another approach to school subject analysis. This approach puts great emphasis on the activities of human agency. Goodson (1985) held the view that any process of interaction is never fully determined by social, economic or political forces, while social structures and culture emerge out of and are changed by social interaction. He suggested that in order to understand how school knowledge is constructed, we should examine the actions of what he called "subject communities." Goodson is insightful to focus on the relations between subject groups in the formation of subject discipline. However, Goodson (1984) admitted that his concern for the activities of those subject communities might lead him to neglect the "structural origins" of the climate of opinion that allows subject communities to get started in the first place. Kelly (1988) criticized Goodson's interpretation of "vested interests" as material interests of faction 80 members, without accounting for socio-cultural interests along ideological lines. Through an evaluation of Goodson's work, I will argue that the agency analysis has a bias in over-emphasizing the actual activities that play a part in initiating change. It neglects the "condition of change" (Ball, 1985). The structural dimensions of society and schooling create an appropriate climate of opinion that allows certain things to happen and gives form and substance to these relations. Since both the structural and agency analyses have their own limitations and are complementary to each other, this study on media education aims at synthesizing these two types of analysis. After reviewing the methodological approach of previous studies on historical sociology, I would like to put forward a synthesis model which I call "dialectic structuring model." The aim of the model is to provide guiding principles for doing this socio-historical research on media education. This methodological framework is a synthesis of Giddens' (Craib, 1992; Giddens, 1984), Abrams's (1982) and Lloyd's (1986, 1991) structuration theory, Skocpol's (1984c) analytical historical sociology and Tilly's (1990) appeal for contemporary sensibility. The framework is based upon three assumptions. The first is synchronic (horizontal) interaction between structure and agency. This takes the assumption of the two-sidedness of our social world that social reality is at one and the same time a product of both the chosen action of individuals and the forceful constraint of social structure. Both agency and structure have power. They dialectically interact with each other and create changes. The second part is diachronic (vertical) structuring overtime. The relationship between agency and structure is not static but carries on through the dimension of time. The structuring process is indeed a dynamic historical process. The dialectic structuring of agency and structure over time creates a series of historical realities. Going 81 back to the past just to do a cross-sectional analysis is not a socio-historical study. The third part is retrospective link. Certain features of our contemporary world are considered problematic before moving back to trace the origins and transformations of those features. Tilly (1990) and Skocpol (1984a) once remarked that any study of the past should be constructed in terms of its significance for the present and Tilly hoped sociology could realize its potential as "history of the present." Kendrick, Straw and McCrone (1990) concluded that we are not interested in the past for its own sake but rather because it is a vital component in making sense of the present. Theoretically, this model is not substantially different from the sociological structurism on which Lloyd, Giddens and Abrams grounded their works. However, practically, this model aims at providing clearer guidelines for conducting research. First, instead of a general discussion of the symbiotic relationship between social structure and human agency, this model divides the concept of structuration into two parts, namely the synchronic interaction and diachronic structuring over time. This distinction focuses on the analysis of the structuration of media education at different points in time and notes the differences in the structuration pattern during various historical periods. Second, this synthesis model highlights the significance of contemporary sensibility. Abrams, Giddens and Lloyd did not put too much emphasis on this aspect. Media education will be an important component of education in the 21st century. One of the central concerns of researching media education of the past decades is to inform the future development of this subject. Therefore, it is necessary to articulate the importance of using the study of the past to make sense of the present. Third, this model regards historical sociology as an interdisciplinary adventure. This study on media education is, thereby, interdisciplinary in 82 nature. It tries to forge a genuine union of sociological conceptualization and historical narrative. This interdisciplinary approach differs considerably from Abrams, who regards historical sociology as a fundamental sociological method. In summary, according to this model, socio-historical research should investigate the dialectic relationship of agency and structure over time, and what is investigated must have significance for the present. While adopting this framework to conduct research, it is preferable to follow Skocpol's (1984a) and Stinchcombe's (1978) steps: using historical evidence to develop an adequate explanation for a well-defined outcome. Following the direction of this model, this study on media education, on the one hand, explores the structural social forces which gave rise to media education; on the other hand, it examines agency activities which brought media education into schools. The social forces under investigation include the Canadian technological environment, the American cultural penetration dilemma and the relationship between the media system and other social systems (e.g., family, church, school) in Canadian society. The agency activities refer to pressure group advocacy and lobbying activities identified with the media literacy movement. The dialectic interaction between social forces and agency activities is not examined at one point in time but over a period of 30 years. The research period extends from 1960 up to 1990. Since 1960, TV has played a central role in Canadian lives and public interest in screen study began in the 1960s. The media literacy movement was mobilized in the 1980s and by 1990 the media education curriculum had already been well integrated into the English curriculum in Ontario as official knowledge. The analysis of the past provides a link to the interpretation of the present. The investigation of screen education in the 1960s makes 83 sense of the legitimation of media education in the 1980s and informs the development of media education in the 1990s. Historical sociology is concerned with continuity and change in our contemporary society, particularly the issue of the up-coming epoch. It aims at explaining why and how certain things happened at a given time. This study is set against the background of the epochal shift to postindustrial society. The objective is to understand why and how media education became a school subject in Ontario in the 1980s. I seek a scientific causal explanation. Adopting the research tradition of historical sociology, this study employs the methodology of dialectic structuring. It also follows a research mentality that is critical, unorthodox, humanistic and sensitive to the issue of cultural democracy. 3.2 Case Study Design The nature of my research problem dictates that this has to be a qualitative study. Adopting the research approach of historical sociology, the study aims at describing, understanding and explaining the process through which media education became a mandatory part of the school curriculum. The decision is to focus on one instance and conduct an in-depth investigation. This decision led me to employ a case study design for my research. Case study is considered to be a superior method of description which is made possible "by giving special attention to totalizing in the observation, reconstruction and analysis of the objects under study" (Zonabend, 1992, p. 52). As other case studies, this study does not aim at generalization of results, but "the extension of the understandings." It 84 is believed that detailed descriptions of the events and people studied can "enable others to understand similar situations and extend these understandings in subsequent research" (McMillan & Schumacher, 1989, p. 194). According to Hamel, Dufour, and Fortin (1993), case study must "locate the global in the local." This means that the most critical decision in the research process is a careful selection of the case. For this study, the legitimation of media education in the province of Ontario in Canada was selected. This choice is based on the following reasons: First, the Ontario media education curriculum has an international reputation. This curriculum is regarded as one of the advanced programs in the field of media education worldwide (Butts, 1992). In the Canadian Journal of Communication, the Ontario media education program is described as a national leader and a recognized leader internationally in the area of media education (Kennedy, 1993). Two North American Media Education Conferences were held at the University of Guelph in Guelph, Ontario by local media educators in 1990 and 1992 respectively. The conferences were well attended by media educators from North America and other countries. The successful conferences caused the Ontario program to become well-known internationally. Second, the Ontario media education curriculum is the most established, mandated media education program by a Ministry of Education in Canada. Before 1995, it was the only mandated program in Canada. Ontario media educators took the lead in 1992 by establishing the Canadian Association of Media Education Organizations (CAMEO) to promote media literacy across Canada. They are also helping media educators in other provinces, such as Manitoba and Nova Scotia, to form associations for media literacy and 85 develop media education curricula (Pungente, 1993a). Ontario has made a substantial contribution to the development of media education in Canada. Third, the Ontario media education curriculum is well established. A curriculum resource guide, Media Literacy Resource Guide, was especially developed for the curriculum. A number of local media education textbooks were published. A teacher-training program was developed. A professional subject group on media education, Association for Media Literacy, was further expanded. The Media Literacy Resource Guide was so well developed that it is used in some English speaking countries. In 1992 it was translated into Japanese (Pungente, 1993a). The above are the general criteria of choosing Ontario media education curriculum as a case for study. A frequent criticism of case study design is the lack of representativeness. To select a representative case to grasp,the object of study is therefore crucial. This study is representative because it is a theoretical case of the new social curricula and also a typical case of media education. As shown by the literature, media education is a new social curriculum (Clark, 1990; Dufour, 1990). Preliminary field work in Ontario indicated that media education shares many characteristics of other new social curricula and it can be regarded as a representative case of new social curricula. First, media education is new and emerged only after the 1960s. It is social and cultural in nature. It is about media consumption and is highly relevant to students' everyday cultural life. Like all new social curricula, it possesses a critical objective, urging students to develop a more critical awareness of their social and media environment. Media education in Ontario shares many liberal values such as personal autonomy, self-management and anti-authoritarianism with other new social curricula. Its 86 theory and practice are grounded in the philosophy of social equality and justice. It also has the characteristic of subject transgression which means it transgresses subject boundaries as other new social curricula do. Most importantly, the Ontario media education curriculum grew out of the media literacy movement in the 1980s. It parallels the emergence of other new social curricula which also grew out of social movements or pressure group activities in recent decades. Thus, media education is a typical case of the new social curriculum and fits nicely with my research purpose of exploring the theoretical link between social movements and the formation of new social curricula. Furthermore, the emergence and growth of media education in Ontario in many ways parallels the world trend in media education development. According to the UNESCO reports on the development of media education, in the past 30 years, media education advocates in countries such as Australia, Britain, Denmark, France and the Netherlands have been trying very hard to legitimize media education (Bazalgette, Bevort, & Savino, 1992d; IFTC, 1977b; Morsy, 1984; UNESCO, 1964). Media education in these countries began with film studies and was initiated by teachers, parents and community interest groups. Britain is the most outstanding example of the "bottom-up" model of media education (Fuller, 1987). When we look at the Ontario case, we see that including media education in the formal curriculum was the primary goal of media education advocacy groups in Ontario. Media education in Ontario also began as screen education and was initiated by concerned community groups. Media education does not stand as an independent core subject, but as a component of English. Lobbying for media education in Ontario was not only influenced by the world-wide media education movement, but also mobilized by its provincial media literacy movement. Media education in Ontario is considered as a "bottom-up" initiative, 87 similar to initiatives in other countries. Since the Ontario case has most of the attributes of cases in other parts of the world, it is representative. The unit of analysis in the Ontario case study is the media literacy curriculum. The analysis is not limited to the curriculum per se. Although the focus of research in a case study is on one unit of analysis, there may be numerous events, participants or phases of a process subsumed under the unit (Merriam, 1988). For this project, the focus is upon the activities of the Ontario media literacy movement. Case study design can be used to test theory but it can also build theory. In education, the case study design is seldom used to test theory (Hammersley, Scarth, & Webb, 1985). Merriam (1988) explained that this may be related to the shortage of well established theories in the field. She pointed out that qualitative case study has been widely used in education in the service of constructing theory. The study has no intention of adopting an overarching theory or model to explain the birth of the media literacy curriculum in Ontario. Instead, I would like to use this case study to construct a theoretical explanation of the legitimation and classification of a body of new educational knowledge. A case study is an intensive investigation. This study uses document analysis and in-depth interviews as the major methods for data collection. All the data are collected with the goal of reconstructing and analyzing the case from a socio-historical perspective. Since generalization in a statistical sense is not a goal of this qualitative research, probabilistic sampling is not necessary in data collection. Moreover, this research adopts an emergent design. The first piece of data led to the next document to be read and the next person to be interviewed. Therefore, this research incorporates an on-going sample selection process which may be called "sequential sampling." 88 The period under study is from 1960 to 1990. The media literacy curriculum was first taught in Ontario schools in 1987. However, tracing its social history necessitates returning to the 1960s to examine the establishment of the National Film Board's Summer Institute on Screen Study in 1966 and the spread of screen education in Ontario schools. Although this study focuses on the "legitimation" of the media literacy curriculum, implementation of the curriculum in the years between 1987 and 1990 is also relevant. Therefore, the research ends in 1990 instead of 1987. 3.3 Document Analysis (I): Primary and Secondary Sources A significant amount of written material and videos related to media education were collected during the period of 1994-96. Most of the material was collected in Ontario, with some from the cities of Vancouver and Montreal. The data came from a wide range of sources, including archives, libraries, school boards, organizations and interviewees' personal libraries. The major locations for data collection were as follows: - The Alliance For Children and Television - The Archive of the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education - Archives of Ontario Ministry of Culture, Tourism and Recreation - Association for Media Literacy - Canadians Concerned About Violence in Entertainment (C-CAVE) - Department of Education and Information, United Church - Federation of Women Teachers' Associations of Ontario - Friends of Canadian Broadcasting - Information Division of the Canadian Education Association - The Library of the Jesuit Communication Project - The Library of the Toronto Board of Education - MediaWatch 89 - The Library of the Metro Action Committee on Public Violence against Women and Children (METRAC) - The Library of TVOntario - The Library of University of Toronto - Ministry of Education and Training, Ontario - National Film Board of Canada - The Ontario Teachers' Federation - Scarborough Board of Education - Theatre Books - Vision TV The data collected came from both primary sources and secondary sources. The major categories of the primary sources are as follows: 1. Official documents, reports, letters, memoranda and publications of the Ontario Ministry of Education. For example: - Circular 14 - Reports of Minister of Education, Ontario - English: The Five-Year Programme, All Branches, Senior Division, 1964 - English: The Four and Five-Year Programmes, All Branches, Grade 9, 1967 - Four-Year English Guidelines for Pilot Schools 1967 - English Intermediate Division 1969 - Screen Education in Ontario - English: Intermediate Division 1977 - English: Senior Division 1977 - English Intermediate Division: Evaluation and the English Program - English: A Resource Guide for the Senior Division - The Renewal of Secondary Education in Ontario: Response to the Report of the Secondary Education Review Project - Basically Right: English Intermediate and Senior Divisions 1984 - Provincial Review Report: Senior Division English 1984-85 - English Curriculum Guide 1987: Intermediate and Senior Divisions (Grades 7-12) - The Common Curriculum: Politics and Outcomes, Grades 1-9 - The Common Curriculum: Provincial Standards Language, Grades 1-9 2. Royal Commission reports: - Living and Learning: Report of the Provincial Committee on Aims and Objectives of Education in the Schools of Ontario (Hall & Dennis, 1968) - The Report of the Secondary Education Review Project (Green, 1981b) - Report of the Royal Commission on Violence in the Communications Industry (Royal Commission on Violence in the Communications Industry, 1977) - Pornography and Prostitution in Canada: Summary (Special Committee on 90 Pornography and Prostitution, 1985) 3. Minutes, letters, pamphlets, news clippings, reports and newsletters of the Association for Media Literacy. For example: - AML NewsletteriMediacy - The Trent Think Tank Report on Media Literacy Education (Andersen, 1990) 4. Minutes, memoranda and letters of the Ontario Teachers' Federation 5. Reports, minutes, pamphlets and newsletters from other relevant associations and organizations. For example: - Alliance Info -C-CAVENews - Clipboard: A Media Education Newsletter from Canada - Draft White Paper: Report of the Media Literacy Committee, OECA (Syrett, 1976) - FWTAO Newsletter - Getting Started on Media Education (Pungente, 1985) - Media literacy video series, NFB - Media & Mind Course (Language Study Centre, 1988) - Pornography: An Issue for Educators (OECTA, 1985) - Screen (NFB) - Screen Education in Canadian Schools (Stewart & Nuttall, 1969c) - TV Literacy: Teaching Kids to Watch TV Wisely (Goller, 1985) - TV Scope (Flemington, 1982) 6. Media literacy curriculum documents, resource guides, textbooks and teachers' guides. For example: - Television and Society (Ungerleider & Krieger, 1985) - Mass Media and Popular Culture (Duncan, 1988) - Mass Media and Popular Culture: Teacher's Guide (Duncan, 1989a) - Media Works (Andersen, 1989a) - Media Works: Teacher's Guide (Andersen, 1989b) - Media Images and Issues (Carpenter, 1989) - Media Literacy Resource Guide (Ministry of Education, Ontario, 1989) - AML Anthology 1990 (Smart, 1990) - Meet the Media (Livesley, McMahon, Pungente, & Quin, 1990) - Media Focus series Secondary sources are also vital to this study. The examination of the cultural debates on the role of mass media and mass schooling, the Canadian cultural policy, the changing concept of literacy and the worldwide media education movement depended largely 91 on secondary sources. Secondary sources include reports, books, periodicals, academic journals, newspaper clippings and other relevant materials. Examples are Indirections (Journal published by the Ontario Council of Teachers of English), Education Forum (magazine for the secondary school professionals), English Quarterly (official journal of the Canadian Council of Teachers of English and Language Arts), Canadian Forum, Queen's Quarterly, University of Toronto Quarterly, Canadian Journal of Communication. 3.4 Document Analysis (II): Content Analysis Projects In pursuing document analysis, two content analysis projects were conducted for special purposes. One is the media literacy textbook analysis, aiming to describe the Ontario media literacy curriculum. The second is the analysis of the Canadian Journal of Communication, aiming to explore the macro communication environment of media education in Canada. The textbook project examined seven documents in total. Three mandated media literacy textbooks listed in Circular 14 issued by the Ontario Ministry of Education and one curriculum anthology recommended by the AML were analyzed. They are Mass Media and Popular Culture (Duncan, 1988), Media Works (Andersen, 1989a), Media images & issues (Carpenter, 1989) and The AML Anthology 1990 (Smart, 1990). One point of concentration was upon Duncan's text because of its wide usage (Emme, 1991). Three related documents were also analyzed. The above four textbooks should be examined within the intertextuality of the documents and materials that accompany them. Therefore, three media literacy 92 curriculum "intertexts" were also examined: Media Literacy Resource Guide (Ministry of Education, Ontario, 1989), Mass Media and Popular Culture: Teacher's Guide (Duncan, 1989a) and Media Works: Teacher's Guide (Andersen, 1989b). Many textbook analyses do not include the intertext. But Derrida (1982) pointed out the great advantage of including the intertext in the study because through the "grafts" (points of contact between the text and its intertext), text will expose its "subtext." Subtext refers to "the clearly stated unsaid" (Dranch, 1983, p. 177). Harker (1992, p. 2) pointed out that "No text exists alone....Any text exists in a constant state of multiple references to other text." The textbook analysis employed structuralist analysis (Gilbert, 1989). Structuralist analysis is particularly useful for critical analysis of ideological content and suits the research purpose of examining the underlying ideology in the media literacy textbooks. Ideology is also defined as "a framework of assumptions, ideas and values incorporated into the perspective an individual or collective uses to guide analyses, interests and commitments into a system of meaning" (Clement, 1975, p. 270). For Gilbert (1984), the production of ideology is a cultural symbolic practice which can be deconstructed to reveal its elements and organization. An ideological discourse usually has a manifest context of denotative meanings, and a latent content representing an underlying structure of connotation. According to this conception of ideological discourse, "If one can identify the structure which give coherence to the message, if it is possible to discover the principle which presides over the organization of discourse and which unifies its elements, the analysis of ideology has largely been completed" (Larrain, 1979, p. 133). Following this logic, the structural analytical procedure is to first identify the small units of concepts or assumptions and then 93 try to derive the rules by which these basic units combine. In other words, structuralist analysis is the deconstruction of the components and structure of an ideological discourse. Following Gilbert's suggestion, the procedure of performing structural analysis of the media literacy textbooks is as follows: 1. Detect the assumptions about the mass media, the audience and the overall consumption pattern. 2. Find out how the impact of mass media and the use of media literacy are conceptualized. 3. Identify the major themes and concepts in the media literacy curriculum documents and look for the linkage between these themes and concepts. 4. Try to mark the broad concepts and propositions which provide the organizing structure of the ideological discourse. 5. Figure out the underlying problems which have generated this discourse and how the discourse articulated these problems. Ask whose perspective was articulated. 6. Illustrate the ideological discourse and map out its structure. Understand what relationship, causes and consequences are proposed and what theories provide the descriptions and explanations. 7. Contemplate what perspectives, questions and theories are not acknowledged. The strengths of structuralist analysis are twofold. First, instead of conducting fragmentary evaluation of separate issues of the curricular content (e.g., the range of materials or suitability of the vocabularies for a certain grade level), it provides a coherent and comprehensive analysis of the underlying ideology of the text. Second, it analyzes texts in ways that emphasize their structured and contextually grounded character, thus avoiding the shortcomings of traditional quantitative research. Quantitative analysis consists simply of frequency counts of the occurrence of pre-specified words, phrases or other semantic units. The suggestion that the units of analysis (e.g., a word or a phrase) can be isolated for 94 analysis oversimplifies the way textual meaning is produced by the reader. It also ignores the way a text is sequenced and organized. Structuralist analysis, on the contrary, sees the parts as a link to the whole. But structuralist analysis also has its limitations. First, it assumes that structure exists autonomously and is waiting to be discovered. To map the structure of the curricular content is to construct a representation from the researcher's perspective. This can be seen as the overlay of one discourse on another. Therefore, there should be no claim that this method is a value-free technique. Second, structuralist methods produce a static and deterministic model emphasizing product rather than process. This points to a danger in synchronic analysis, yet according to Gilbert (1984), this problem is not sufficient reason to discard the technique altogether. The second content analysis project aims to detect in what way media education was shaped by its communication milieu. The project explores the Canadian communication environment through content analysis of 207 articles in the Canadian Journal of Communication (CJC), which is the most prestigious journal in the field of communication in Canada. Its articles reflect the spectrum of views and issues on Canadian communication. Operating under a formal referee system, CJC is an affiliate of the Canadian Association of Communication (CAC) whose members are communication scholars