If this clip doesn’t put a smile on your face, I’m not sure what will! I remember this adorable video circulating on Facebook awhile back, and I knew that this post would be a perfect excuse to watch it again, and to share it with all of you.

Postman wrote: “…We now know that “Sesame Street” encourages children to love school only if school is like “Sesame Street.” Which is to say, we now know that “Sesame Street” undermines what the traditional idea of schooling represents.” The full quote, from Good Reads, is written below. I found it helpful for my understanding to read the lines above in the context in which Postman wrote them. 

“Parents embraced “Sesame Street” for several reasons, among them that it assuaged their guilt over the fact that they could not or would not restrict their children’s access to television. “Sesame Street” appeared to justify allowing a four- or five-year-old to sit transfixed in front of a television screen for unnatural periods of time. Parents were eager to hope that television could teach their children something other than which breakfast cereal has the most crackle. At the same time, “Sesame Street” relieved them of the responsibility of teaching their pre-school children how to read—no small matter in a culture where children are apt to be considered a nuisance…. We now know that “Sesame Street” encourages children to love school only if school is like “Sesame Street.” Which is to say, we now know that “Sesame Street” undermines what the traditional idea of schooling represents.”

I grew up watching Sesame Street, so it was interesting to view one of my childhood staples in such a different context during last week’s EC & I 833 class with Katia Hildebrandt. I remember vividly many mornings as an eager preschooler sitting in front of the television watching episodes of Sesame Street and Mr. Dressup. Always excited to gain knowledge, I loved learning about letters, numbers, and relationships on both of these shows. I  can say with absolute certainty that in my 36 years, I had never once considered Sesame Street to be undermining traditional schooling. So to begin this post, I asked Google what it means to undermine. The response- undermine is to damage or weaken (someone or something), especially gradually or insidiously. Is it possible that Sesame Street had somehow undermined the value of traditional schooling? For me, the answer is no. If anything, Sesame Street caused me to love learning at an early age. I never once felt as though I didn’t love school because it was not like my beloved show. The show, and newer ones like Dora the Explorer and Magic School Bus, educate a different age group of kids, and often about things that aren’t even taught in school. Undermine, no. Augment, yes.

Even though I consider myself young(ish), I grew up without cable or satellite TV. We lived on a farm, and had 3 channels- CTV, CBC, and STV. Cartoons were on Saturday mornings and that was it. Movies? Sunday evening. No other time. I used to love going to my grandparents in town so I could watch cable. I remember clearly one of my high school teachers talking about TLC, and I asked him what those three letters stood for. He told me that it was The Learning Channel. He would often reference programs from TLC in his teachings of Science & Biology. Flash forward many years to when I had personal access to cable and satellite TV. I remember looking at TLC and wondering- how in the heck is this considered The Learning Channel?? In her article, What Happened to Educational Television: The Story of ‘The Learning Channel‘ Audrey Watters essentially asks the same thing. Watters introduces the topic by talking about some of the most controversial TLC “celebs”, like Josh Duggar and Honey Boo Boo. Now, don’t get me wrong, I am super guilty of watching both of these train wrecks unfold, but in what world could they be considered educational programming? Unfortunately, money (and ratings) talks, and these are the things that garner viewers. True educational programming cannot possibly gather ratings like these shows do.

What are the grander implications of the current array of AV technologies, such as apps and interactive educational shows, when we think about the format of schooling? I think the biggest implication is that there is an overwhelming attitude that school should be ‘fun’, entertaining, and game-like all the time. People (kids and adults alike) have shorter attention spans and desire instant gratification. The article I found on a parenting blog Why are our children so bored at school, cannot wait, get easily frustrated and have no real friends? is written by a parent who is also a teacher, and it touches on many of the implications we see in the classroom. Another huge implication of these AV technologies is that Apps and interactive educational shows are also only available to a certain (read: wealthy) demographic of our population. Our poorer, and most at-risk, aren’t afforded the same opportunities.

One of the educational goals of Sesame Street was based on the idea that “if you can hold the attention of children, you can educate them.” While the technology may change, I think the basic tenets of this quote remain true. Thoughts?