Building from A Starting Point: Grafting a Psycho-Social Approach onto Bubble-Bursting Political Information
One of the many problems we face as educators (and as a society) are “bubbles.” These bubbles are created through various means including our choices to surround ourselves with people holding similar viewpoints as well as algorithmic nudging toward our worldviews and perspectives.
Even if we are seeking to engage with other perspectives, we are faced with more problems: How media technology and the nature of corporate media can reshape our relations away from open and honest discussion in good faith. Social media platforms can divide us into in/out groups through how they are structured while systems set up for profit through quick engagement fosters “clickbait” more so that dialogue. As Marshall McLuhan has noted, the “medium is the message”, which is why media ecology is a needed avenue of exploration, as is discerning the people behind the technology.
And yet another issue arises. There are a ton of sources out there, and it takes skill to discern good sources from faulty ones (see, for example the SIFT moves). Even still, with such skills there is the lingering problem of motivated reasoning, worldview defenses, and other unconscious processes that block us from encountering different ideas, which is why it is key to understand the many possible layers of media education.
So, what might we do about this intricate problem? Let’s take a look in relation to encountering different political perspectives in U.S. social studies classrooms.
A Starting Point
In order to connect the electorate (particularly youth) with elected officials, Chris Evans, Mark Kassen, and Joe Kiani created A Starting Point (ASP), a video-based civic engagement platform with a website as well as social media accounts (Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook).
A stated goal is to create an informed electorate, but in my opinion the problem isn’t just on the part of the electorate as individuals, but rather the glut of information available coupled with corporate media’s fixation on conflict and the psychological tendency to defend our worldviews in socially harmful ways.
The current state of political polarization, coupled with some politicians holding hateful views, is an urgent problem. In an effort to decrease political polarization and provide reliable information about political stances, ASP is a valuable resource. Using ASP in a classroom, especially if coupled with a psycho-social approach to media education, could be particularly powerful. But what might this look like?
In the Classroom: The Starting Point
Let’s say a teacher is planning a lesson on climate change and wants students to deliberate on steps that governments can take (or not). They want students to learn about political positions on this topic, perhaps leading to a position paper, discussion, or a Karl Popper-style debate. This style of debate is to encourage multiple perspectives, but please keep in mind that hateful views are never valid and that in case of injustice it can be harmful for “both sides” to be discussed, for a decision making tree about choosing deliberation, civic litigation, or counternarration, see Krutka & Hlavacik, 2022.
A basic approach would be for students to learn about different positions on climate change policy and what it can do. A platform like ASP is helpful because the participating politicians have differing, but valid, views on the topic, such as responses to the questions: What is renewable energy? Can it become the primary energy source in the United States?
From this page, as a class or in groups, students can hear ideas from politicians from the different parties in very brief videos (usually about a minute). There are six videos total: three from Democrats and three from Republicans. Depending on the skill level and prior knowledge, the teacher may ask their students guiding questions; e.g., What is similar and different about how they define “renewable”? What is their preferred form of energy, and/or how they see these energy sources working?
Depending on time, the teacher may have them engage with more ASP videos related to climate change, such as What climate change issues do not get enough attention? or What can we do legislatively to combat climate change? For a more extensive activity or assignment, the teacher may assign additional in-depth research from these starting points.
In the Classroom: Building from A Starting Point
Rather than confine the lesson to this approach alone, it is helpful to graft on a psychosocial approach, there is work to be done before, during, and after the approach outlined in the above section.
In a prior lesson, the students would need to know how they might react to information that incites emotional and affective reactions, such as presenting a challenge to their worldview and/or preconceptions of people from different political parties (see, for example, the worldview threat thermometer).
Immediately before the lesson, the teacher needs to remind students about these reactions as well as psychologically prepare them for the emotionality of talking about climate change, a topic which can trigger existential anxiety. One way to help buffer anxiety is to bolster student self-esteem; e.g., asking students to write down a few examples of them being “good” people (this can be a private activity). The teacher can also prime helpful aspects of worldviews, such as kindness and listening to different viewpoints (assuming they aren’t hateful), and so on.
During the activity with ASP, the teacher needs to check in with students about how they are feeling, and why they might be feeling unhelpful emotions. This practice is to deepen self-awareness so that we can honor our emotions while not being passively controlled by them.
During a debate or discussion, the teacher should try not to enforce a consensus of opinion (e.g., “winning” the debate is for use of evidence and argumentation, not being the “right” answer).
Either during or after the activity, it might be helpful to ask students if they were surprised by the viewpoints expressed in the videos on ASP. One of the best things about these ASP videos is that they shatter a lot of the stereotypes we have formed from corporate media’s fixation on polarizing and extreme views of particular individuals.
Benefits of a Hybrid Approach
Engaging with ASP in a way that also engages with our emotional responses is a great way to combat political polarization and start from a common, established grounding. In the case of climate change, no time is wasted debating whether or not it is “real”. Instead, productive discussions across party lines focus on what the people can demand from their representatives.
Furthermore, by challenging our media environment (in this case, seeing what we might be losing) we are actually encouraging something very old: talking and listening to each other. Oral culture allows for more context, detail, and nuance. As Lakoff and Johnson have noted, we can approach "debate" as a dance, not a war. The hope is that these discussions will push us away from political partisanship and toward taking real action now to secure a less harmful future for us all.