The turmoil about whether President Obama’s speech to school kids next Tuesday should be heard by them is growing, reports the Associated Press today. There is a long list of adults wrangling over the decision: White House spokespeople, Department of Education leaders, governors, mayors, school district heads, school principals, and parents — to name the main ones.
So far, I have read nothing that has mentioned the idea of a student herself or himself deciding whether to watch the speech. Yet any kid at school with a smartphone can browse to the White House website to watch and listen to what the President has to say — that is if students where he or she is are allowed to use their smartphones in school. Undoubtedly a video of the speech will be available essentially forever after it is given, so there is no chance of no option to watch. But should/must classes stop what they are doing and sit in rows watching Obama’s speech to them?
When I was in school in 1940s and 1950s, censorship of electronic media was not much of an issue. Our intercom system at Austin High School in El Paso, Texas was installed in about 1950. I recall April 11, 1951, the day that Douglas MacArthur’s famous parting speech to Congress was piped in and regular teaching and learning was put on hold to listen. I remember I was in the girls’ dressing room next to the gym, standing and listening as he said: “Old soldiers never die; they just fade away… ” You can hear what I heard on YouTube.
Whether you think it is a good idea for schools to pipe in President Obama — or it was a good idea for such an indelible impression to have been made on my young mind as a famous general told Congress what he thought — for us as mobilists this incident highlights a major bend in the road of education just ahead. It was a huge change when I was in school to be able to pipe a president, general, or politician into a classroom live. The fact that kids are rapidly getting individual access to the wide live world is an even bigger change.
The issue that is causing the turmoil about next week’s speech is whether it should be forced on students, and who makes that decision. The big issue just ahead is who has the power or right to tell kids what they must watch individually. I think there is a new civil liberty: the freedom to access the open internet. When a message is piped into a whole class or school, supervisors must decide whether to do it. But when each student can watch individually, can/should the school force them to watch something?
Of course, this issue is far larger than whether to force students to watch a particular politician. What about forcing kids to learn standard curricula using matching textbooks? If a student wants to learn more science, history, literature and the rest online, and get certified for achievement online, can/should schools force her to pass state approved tests? Individual mobiles are about to put learning choice into student hands.
