Remix to Learn
Education could benefit from adopting the practices of Remix Culture
With Remix Culture on the rise, the debate is still open whether to embrace it or deem it an unlawful act against the rules of copyright. While some feel that it is breaking the law to use someone’s work to remix and reinterpret the meaning behind it, others believe we should welcome it, especially with our youth. Children today are born into a technologically driven world so they learn and interact with technology in a very different way than the rest of us. Remix Culture is one of those ways in which children are learning by doing, and in doing so they are also learning more about culture.
In Remix: Making Art and Commerce Thrive in the Hybrid Economy, Lessig talks about Interest Based Learning stating that:
When kids get to do work they feel passionate about, kids (and, for that matter, adults) learn more and learn more effectively. (80)
Lessig also views Remix Culture as the way in which our kids speak and think: “it is a literacy for this generation,” as he states in his TED Talk. It makes sense that if children are passionate about how they are learning, they will do better and learn more. If remix culture is how they learn and what they are passionate about then we should use it as a tool to educate them.
Author Henry Jenkins has a similar view on this culture and what he refers to as convergence culture, or participatory culture. Jenkins describes it as a culture where old and new media come together and the producer and consumer interact in a new way. In a 2013 interview about participatory culture (embedded below), Jenkins recalls when his grad students interviewed high school students from around the world and found that they had a “richer, intellectual, more creative life outside of school” — they were learning about the things they cared about through participatory culture. This supports Lessig’s advocacy of Remix Culture and its educational benefits, so it seems that school curricula would only benefit from its inclusion. Jenkins further explains participatory culture in this interview:
So why haven’t schools incorporated remix? One big reason, which is the bête noir of Remix Culture, is the fact that it is seen as breaking copyright laws. In the 2012 article, “How MIT is “Scratching” the Surface of Remix Culture,” Dr. Justin Marquis recalls teaching copyright to his media production students:
One of the favorite areas that I teach in media production courses is copyright. I am particularly interested in pointing out the evils of the institution and the ways in which the Internet is rewriting the rules and may eventually lead to changes in the laws governing the dissemination of ideas and innovation. One of the most powerful vehicles for sparking this change is the remixing of copyrighted materials to create new and interesting works.
He also uses a Remix video to explain the flaws of copyright and explain fair use at the same time:
As Lessig says, “Copyright law must be changed. Changed, not abolished” (253). While the copyright argument of Remix Culture has been taken to the extreme on both sides there is no denying the fact that this could be a beneficial tool for educating our youth, if we could just change our laws. Some have already ventured into testing the effects of Remix Culture in education, like MIT’s Scratch Program:
The Scratch program teaches students the benefits of fair use — that it is not a right or a law, but a “legally defensible position only.” Dr. Marquis argues that:
Fair use is a set of guidelines intended to help those remixing media to not be prosecuted for copyright violation. In the strictest interpretation, these students are being given tools and encouraged to break the law! This law is unjust and may even be considered immoral, and it is certainly a hindrance to the growth of culture, but what this experience can teach students is far more valuable than the technicality of the legality behind the activity.
This statement seems to touch on one of Lessig’s points about our kids living and growing up knowing that they are breaking the law, that they are not like us and technology is what makes them different. Lessig goes on to say:
We can’t kill the instinct that technology produces, we can only criminalize it, we can’t stop our kids from using it, we can only drive it underground, we can’t make our kids passive again, we can only make them pirates, and is that good?
The old way of educating is outdated. Current laws smother student engagement and creativity. Children have already embraced the tools of remix. The next logical step would be implementing it into education. Lessig and Marquis are undoubtedly on the right track. Copyright laws are outdated and need to be changed or adapted to fit the Remix Culture, especially if we are to tap into this culture and use it as a valuable resource to educate our children.
