"Morally Panicked"

Teaching for Social Efficacy

What then is meant by teaching for social efficacy? Social efficacy in education moves beyond traditional practice, by suggesting the inclusion of student- and issues-centered approaches to teaching and learning. Advocates for social efficacy in education suggest that our schools are often demeaning and disempowering places where children are either bored into submission or where the transmission and socialization techniques destroy any hope for critical thinking and problem-solving development. The opportunity for teaching for social efficacy that promotes youth culture in schools is great, but we must discard the traditional transmission model of education and schooling in favor of a transformational model (Jennings, 1994).

Many see youth efficacy and empowerment as a major component of social education curriculum and instruction in our schools. The contention is that traditional social studies education may very well be the bad guy in this debate; for the history of social studies traditionally has been to perpetuate the status quo and often only allows one viewpoint regarding history. With the focus on "imposed" knowledge and skills and the growing accountability movement, social studies education remains reactionary so as to placate critics. Debate within social studies rarely centers around social efficacy or issues-oriented curriculum. The debate has been on what content should be taught and how that content should be "covered." A curriculum is needed that encourages participation, critical analysis, and action (Westheimer and Kahne, 1998).

The standardization and accountability movements are the real culprits. The concepts of critical thinking, problem solving, and issues-centered education are antithetical to this movement. If we encourage children to question and investigate themes and issues in depth, then the status quo and hegemonic powers might very well be threatened.

These methods now dominate the education process in this country. Ultimately, the goal seems to be to ensure that teaching and learning (at the very least) remain focused on transmission of essential knowledge, skills, and values. We seem to be attempting to "standardize" our children. Free-market capitalism replacing democracy as the governmental ideal is perpetuated by these endeavors. The place for social studies in a democratic society should be to provide fodder for dialogue and critical analysis of this "essential" knowledge, skills, and values curriculum and instruction. A social justice approach is critical of transmission, essential knowledge, and the "ideal" of free-market capitalism, thus is antithetical to these standardization and accountability movements.

Teaching for social efficacy is the answer to the threat enveloping our schools and society. We preach the joys of being a democratic society, yet democracy often cannot be found in our schools. We claim to be an open and just country, but school praxis has all but made our schools like prisons. Kids are prisoners subjected to the whims of the prison-like bureaucracy of the schools where teachers have become the guards. Kids are in schools to be molded into appropriately acting citizens. These citizens go along with the crowd, pleased to be living in the greatest country in the world.

Teaching for social efficacy suggests that personal stories and controversy be returned to social studies education. It suggests that life and learning is full of controversy and that we owe it to our kids to allow for investigating of social issues, past, present, and future. The premise is that a society not open and comfortable enough to allow for critique cannot progress and is a society in decline. Where is the democracy in this? Lies My Teacher Told Me (Loewen, 1995) is an excellent chronicle of these issues, particularly regarding history education and history textbooks. "Unfortunately, or fortunately, depending on one's point of view, the truly meaningful and lifelong connections in social efficacy have been provided outside of the classroom, especially outside of the social studies classroom… And this is the real issue. Can there and really should there be a school and education connection between social efficacy and youth culture?"

Many progressive educators bemoan youth culture in our society as demeaning, hegemonic, corporate dominated, and basically bad for our kids. Many state emphatically that youth culture runs counter to social efficacy in education. An entire movement called media literacy has arisen to counter this perception. Any incorporation of youth culture in teaching for social efficacy must obviously bring critical analysis in as a primary tool. The fact remains however, that youth culture is an ideal theme for teaching and learning, both as a possibility for liberation and to discuss its use as a tool for empowerment.

Youth Culture for Social Efficacy

What is the connection we all seem to have with youth culture? If we are truly interested in providing meaning to kids' lives as we engage in teaching and learning, why don't we do a better job of integrating youth culture into education? As stated earlier, youth culture is rife with controversy and currently receives strong criticism from all areas of the political spectrum. Much of the criticism is warranted, yet despite political leanings there seems to be some general agreement regarding the underlying problems with youth culture and its impact on society and especially our children. What are not needed are simplistic generalizations calling for censorship or attempts at ignoring the influence of youth culture.

Youth culture has never been so dominant in our lives, yet it is experiencing incredible criticism in our society today. Perhaps this is a primary reason for the criticism. Many are at a loss at how to deal with its influences. A strong argument can be made that youth culture has become the most influential education institution for our children in society, and many seem quite frustrated by this. Rather than fight to ensure one's own agenda in youth culture, it might be better to use it as an educational opportunity.

One must, in many instances, equate youth culture with childhood desire. Our children's natural desire to make sense of their world can be enhanced through the appreciation and application of youth culture as a pedagogical tool. Youth culture can provide the common connections and voice for our often-disconnected youth that many of us remember as wide-eyed joy and a sense of wonder of the world. Our children must be engaged in this endeavor, however; we cannot allow corporations to dictate this desire through Big Brother or Clockwork Orange- style media saturation and/or "brainwashing." Social education that integrates social efficacy is aware and unafraid of childhood desire, often connecting it to children's efforts to understand the world and themselves (Steinberg and Kincheloe, 1997).

Our society has made youth culture a cornerstone of cultural identity and we simply cannot ignore that fact. Television, movies, music, and other media provide fodder for connections among our disconnected citizenry. Why not use this rather than belittle it? We owe it to our kids to provide opportunities for critical analysis of youth culture. Rather than blindly accepting the "Disneyfication" or "Simpsonizing" of our kids and their lives, use these as teachable opportunities. Using Disney and its recent animated films such as "Aladdin" or "Pocahontas," for example, to analyze gender and cultural stereotypes may provide for eye-opening experiences for students. Using the Simpsons or even Sponge Bob Squarepants to look at social issues rather than as a pure entertainment can also turn kids on to the power and possibilities in youth culture and social justice. Film, television, music, and other forms of youth culture can provide rich opportunities for teaching and learning in the social studies.

Unfortunately, children experience few opportunities to engage youth culture except outside of school. Even in the workplace, conversation often revolves around youth culture events. Why then do we avoid youth culture in the classroom?
It seems that schools have evolved to places where it is encouraged not to take chances. A standardized curriculum, instruction, and procedures dictate little risk-taking. Teachers and administrators have become afraid to drift from the norm. Teachers often even state that they don't have time to integrate anything but the mandated curriculum. The accountability and achievement movement has severely limited what can occur in schools in the name or teaching and learning. A bland and boring social education has thus emerged.

Youth culture can counter this negative trend. If we are truly interested in motivating kids to learn and apply this learning to the broader spectrum of social literacy, then we must make stronger efforts at integrating meaningful curriculum and instruction that includes real-world connections. These connections allow kids to develop the scaffolding needed to construct knowledge. Youth culture can enhance a transformative rather than transmissive social education by providing these connections.

Music as a Tool for Social Efficacy in Schools

Music is the universal language, or so the saying goes. Most people love music and music is not only a reflection of culture and the times, but it is also often an active force in societal change. Music is a vital component of youth culture and the knowledge and understanding of youth music can be a powerful tool for developing social efficacy. Music really is our students' preferred media, even when compared to movies and television. It is essential for societal and cultural understanding. Yet, like other forms of youth culture, its role in schooling is minimal.

Music has tremendous global economic and cultural significance. It is situated both within international economics and industry and within personal social and even national identity (Shukar, 1998). There is an increasing discourse regarding the influence and impact of music within academic circles and also in mainstream media. Our students also deserve the opportunity to engage in this discourse and inquiry for music is one area where they seem eager to share their voice and express social efficacy.

Unfortunately, one seldom finds music used in the teaching and learning process outside of traditional arts instruction. Traditional schooling is so entrenched with covering essential knowledge to ensure high test scores, that excuses are often used for not applying youth culture such as music. Teachers do not have enough time, youth music is inappropriate, it is not relevant, or there is just a lack of knowledge; all are excuses for the lack of youth music in education. However, if we are interested in critical social efficacy for active participation and problem solving in society, then music offers many possibilities. And these excuses and issues must then be addressed.

Much can be said concerning the possibilities of youth music in promoting critical social efficacy. And despite the lack of its use in schools, music has had a profound effect in youth culture as a force for social change. Instead of dismissing its potential, schools would be wise to work diligently on integrating youth music into the teaching and learning process if for no other reason than that there is a desperate need to improve the perceived relevance of schooling (at least in our kids' eyes).

There are a few instances of effective integration of music in schools. Obviously music programs really help to meet the needs of students into developing into more well-rounded human beings. An appreciation of music and art is vital for critical social efficacy; yet one often finds that funding for the arts is the first item cut in times of financial crisis. And now, with the emphasis increasingly placed on achievement of "essential" knowledge, one often finds time for the arts being cut as well (Berliner and Biddle, 1995).

There are also instances of teachers (acting in isolation mostly) who integrate music into their teaching environment. Some teachers play classical or jazz as background music as students work on assignments. Others allow students to bring in examples of their own to play during these assignment times, or even as free time-sharing. Perhaps the most effective use is when a teacher actually integrates music into the teaching and learning process. Some social studies teachers, for example, have used music very effectively to demonstrate historical periods. Sample music integration examples include units on music and war, music and postwar America, the labor movement and music, social issues and music, and global cultures and music.
Many of these examples, while at least using music, are teacher directed with the teachers usually choosing and demonstrating the music examples. This is definitely a first step in meaningful integration – that of modeling, but critical social efficacy necessitates more student active involvement and choice (Brooks and Brooks, 1994).

Critical social efficacy requires that we engage in a more sincere effort at promoting the context and connections needed to ensure a more relevant learning experience. Allowing students to be involved in the social construction of meaning in their world is a vital step.

Keeping with social studies examples, using current events and social issues to provide context and connections for today and for the study of the past enhances the links necessary for student efficacy and empowerment. Youth music is a natural tool for achieving these goals. But it must be students' youth music. We can demonstrate ours as examples and modeling, but again, allowing students to include theirs in the teaching and learning process takes it that needed step. Only then can we hope to facilitate critical social efficacy.

Most youth music genres or individual artists contain examples of songs that contain social commentary or historical references. Many people are under the assumption that social commentary in music reached its peak in the late sixties and early seventies. Punk, Hip-Hop, and Grunge are genres from the 1980s through today that provide considerable social commentary and historical references. And rock still has much to say regarding social efficacy. And these are often the genres that most interest our students. While we may "just not understand" the music of today, we can not become our parents and blindly dismiss its potential for critical social efficacy. Remember the early folk and rock days.

Issues

Shuker (1994) suggests several issues regarding youth music as youth culture. These include the following:

• Economic, market, and consumer issues related to music
• Cultural preferences and social factors
• Ideology, dominance, and agendas related to music
• Youth culture and music and mass appeal
• Moral panic and youth culture and music

These issues suggest a critical approach in using and analyzing music, much like that suggested in the media efficacy movement. They should definitely be addressed, particularly as part of the promotion of critical social efficacy. A related issue is that these are often employed as reasons to belittle or demean youth music and youth culture as well – often leading to censorship and the like.

Economic, market, and consumer issues definitely affect the state of youth music. The issues of mass market and "what sells" often dictate kind and quality of music. Many even suggest that the idea of mass-produced music for profit limits creativity and choice regarding music for the public. A few corporations dominate the music industry perhaps suggesting that these have become culture industries, creating our culture for us, less for creativity and pleasure sake than for corporate profits. The globalization of "market ideals" has often also created a global music market, often at the expense of the music and art in particular cultures (Negus, 1992).

Related to the influence of corporation in music is the idea of cultural imperialism. Youth music as youth culture (at least in global sales) is dominated by the U. S. and the British. As a result, global cultural preferences in music are often dominated by the top seller from the United States. Societal factors also influence youth music, which is perhaps the reason for the success of rap and hip-hop. Despite the power of the global music industry, class and ethnicity can often provide incredible influence on trends and even sales in youth music (Wallis and Malm, 1992).

A particular critique of youth culture and music is the perceived ideology often inherent within in reinforcing dominant values and the agenda of those in power. Many suggest that that which is youth only becomes accepted so as to ensure the status quo. In other words, the hegemonic powers would not allow much youth music to question or challenge entrenched societal values. Despite the perceived success of this agenda, much youth music has successfully usurped the system and affected societal change.

Youth culture and music as one vital component is perhaps one of the few remaining avenues for possible common dialog and understanding. If nothing else, it often provides a context for connections to the world and sense-making in the world. Passion and intrinsic appeal are somehow inherent in youth music and youth culture. This dialog and common understanding in youth music can be used to enhance critical social efficacy (White, 1999).

Perhaps the more intriguing issue regarding youth culture and music is the idea of moral panic and the "threat" to society. As a result, new youth music is often subject to condemnation, censorship, and regulation. From the early experiences in rock such as Elvis to punk to heavy metal to hip-hop, music has been questioned regarding its legitimacy and impact on youth and society. Youth music is often viewed as promoting antisocial behavior and attitudes in youth; therefore many feel it must be controlled or at the very least ignored (Garofalo, 1992). Thus, application of youth music in schools is rare, as it is perceived to do little in meeting traditional goals. What one often finds in schools is a negative reaction to kid culture in whatever form (music, Pokemon, etc.) through stereotypes, banning, and demeaning acts and comments.

Hip-Hop and Social Efficacy

Many forms of youth culture emerge as commentary or resistance toward more mainstream culture and society. Perhaps no better example of this exists than in hip-hop or rap. From its earliest days, hip-hop has been viewed as cutting edge, crossing the boundaries, and has been considered by many as a threat to the values and morals of society. Jazz, blues, rhythm and blues, rock, disco, punk, rap, and hip-hop have all witnessed their detractors and have been viewed at one time or another as threats to the basic social fabric.

Through its history, hip-hop like all forms of youth culture has not only served as a reflection of the times, but it has also been a catalyst for critical social efficacy and societal change. Several themes can be used to integrate hip-hop into teaching and learning for social efficacy in schools. Hip-hop can be a very powerful theme as students investigate issues such as ethnicity and the struggle for equality, population growth, economics, technology, business and industry, efficacy, and empowerment within the context of social history (Szatmary, 2000). This focus in and of itself would provide the necessary relevance students need to facilitate a intrinsic love of learning leading to effective social efficacy.

Music in the United States, in the last part of the 20th century at least, is often reflected through the struggle for equality by various ethnic groups, particularly African Americans. One must first come to an understanding of the absolute importance of African American culture in the history of U. S. youth music. Rock would not exist as it is without blues, which originated from slave songs. Protest music of the sixties often had civil rights as the predominant theme. African American artists are often the trail blazers in social commentary and music innovation including blues, jazz, R and B, disco, rap, and hip-hop. Each of these genres emerged as a proactive youth culture force with youth music doing more than perhaps any other societal force in promoting integration and appreciation of cultures.

The Baby Boom of the post World War II years also contributed to the mass audience for youth culture and therefore music and popular music in all its "categories" reaped the benefits. One could provide an interesting social history of the latter half of the 20th century by exploring the evolution of youth music. One initially finds the light-hearted "bubble gum" music of the 1950s and early 1960s that could represent the glory that was post-war America. In the 1960s, music became harder edged and more serious with the exploration of social issues. The 1970s can be expressed in the more self-indulgent music such as disco. In the late 1970s and 1980s, punk, metal, and grunge explored more sobering issues once again. And in the 1990s, hip-hop and alternative music continued to push the boundaries and explore harder issues as well as entertain. Youth culture and music as a very vibrant example not only serves as a reflection of the times, but, as is evidenced from the social history of the late 20th century, can also be a very active social force in of itself.

Economics is also a huge issue that affects youth culture and music. The prosperity that emerged following the war enabled music to flourish as a dynamic force. Record, cassette, and now CD sales seemed to reach to new heights with every passing year. An essential component of youth culture is knowledge and awareness of music fads and trends. The economic climate of the times (whichever period one mentions) is again often reflected in the music (sound and lyrics) that is youth. Economic and social issues are particularly evident in the music of the late 1960s, early 1970s, early and late 1980s, and much of the 1990s. Economics within youth music can be investigated as an exciting social efficacy theme in the teaching and learning process.

Technology

has also provided impetus for the development of youth music as youth culture and societal force. Incredible developments in the latter half of the 20th century not only brought music to the masses, but it also enabled new and innovative sounds and techniques. The electric guitar, synthesizers, and computers have had substantial impact on the evolution of music. Television, MTV, CD's, and the Internet can all be investigated regarding their influence on youth music, youth culture, and society. Technology has become a vital theme in society. Using technology as an agent in youth culture can really facilitate the idea of social efficacy since technology and technology issues are so prevalent in today's society.

One of the most controversial issues related to the growth of music as youth culture is that of the influence of the music industry and the idea of corporate profits as the driving force for music. Central to the idea of youth culture is issue of business and youth music in the late twentieth century through today is nothing if not business driven. And this is the constant struggle. Artists often provide empowering social efficacy messages, but are also subject to personal sales. This often contradictory issue can provide much fodder for debate in the teaching and learning process. Issues related to capitalism, globalization, music choices, hegemony as the driving force, marketing, and how each relates to social efficacy could easily be integrated in schooling as we attempt to facilitate critical and active participation in society.

Perhaps the most relevant issue surrounding youth music (at least regarding schooling) is its role as societal force, as this relates most directly to the issue of social efficacy. Regardless of the genre, music remains a vibrant cultural phenomenon that reflects societal issues but can also have a proactive impact. Exploring the role of music in reflecting and impacting societal change can be a very motivating experience for kids in their endeavor to make sense of the world. The idea that music can not only be a device for entertainment, but one that provides social commentary and perhaps even a "call to arms" for change enables it to be a powerful tool for social efficacy.

Where to Now?

Youth culture and social efficacy themes can really make a difference for our children in their learning experience. The real question for us is how can we remain complacent if we really do care about our children and their future. What is needed is the understanding that any society can only progress if it moves beyond transmission ideals and the status quo. We must recognize that the growing restrictions and accountability movements in the United States only serve to undermine participatory democracy. Harping on non-issues, prison and punishment mentality, the mythology of America as world savior, corporate and military welfare, and unbridled market globalization are antithetical to social justice. Creating a world of caring and compassion through social justice requires the cultivation of the human spirit, the nourishment of the imagination, and the impulse for self-expression (Purpel and Shapiro, 1995).

We must not integrate youth culture for the sake of youth culture and to try to placate our troubled youth. We must provide opportunities for in-depth analysis of societal issues through youth culture, thus leading to social efficacy. We cannot ignore the issues regarding the economic and political factors possibly driving the choices we are given. The ideas of culture, culture icons, objectification, and social justice should be explored through in-depth inquiry, problem solving and critical thinking. Using a Disney movie, a Simpsons' episode, or a recent hip-hop hit just because our youth "like" them is not enough.

Teachers and others interested in social efficacy approaches in schools must realize that neutrality is an impossibility. What is important is creating a classroom atmosphere where students and teachers are empowered to question and critically analyze social studies issues and themes. It is perfectly fine to disagree, but what is important is creating opportunities for students to act on their ideas (participate as citizens in our democracy). Youth culture embodies a language of both critique and possibility, a language that allows students to locate themselves in history, find their own voices, and establish convictions and compassion necessary for democratic civic courage (Freire and Giroux, 1989). The concept of social efficacy is practically non-existent in our country today. This should be our goal - through the integration of youth culture in teaching for social efficacy and social justice within the education process.

It is time to allow the good times to roll in schools. Youth culture is a natural intrinsically motivating factor in our lives and should be integrated into the teaching and learning process in our schools. We are all very passionate about our likes and dislikes when it comes to youth culture. It can be a very powerful tool as we hope to develop social efficacy within our students as it allows for transformative investigation. Allowing for the investigation of issues regarding youth culture as Shukar suggests (1994) or using it as social and historical references as Szatmary (2000) suggests can only enhance powerful teaching and learning that actual involves students in discourse and dialog. What better way to engage in critical inquiry and problem solving for social efficacy than use youth culture within our schools?

References

Berliner, D. and Biddle, B. The Manufactured Crisis. New York: Addison-Wesley. 1995.
Brooks, J. and Brooks, M. The Case for Constructivist Classrooms. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. 1994.
Freire, P and H. Giroux. (1989). Pedagogy, youth culture, and public life. In Giroux, H. and R. Simon. Youth culture: Schooling and everyday life. Granby, MA: Bergin and Garvey Publishers.
Garofalo, R. (ed.) Rockin' the Boat: Mass Music and Mass Movements. Boston: South End Press. 1992.
Giroux, H. (1994). Disturbing pleasures. New York: Routledge.
Jennings, T. (1994). Social justice in the elementary classroom, Social Studies and the Young Learner 7( 1), 4 - 6.
Loewen, J. (1995). Lies my teacher told me. New York: Touchstone.
Negus, K. Producing Pop: Culture and Conflict in the Youth Music Industry. London: Edward Arnold. 1992.
Purpel, D. and S. Shapiro. (1995). Beyond liberation and excellence. Westport, CT: Bergin and Garvey.
Shuker, R. Understanding Youth Music. New York: Routledge. 1994.
Shukar, R. Key Concepts in Youth Music. New York: Routledge. 1998.
Steinberg, S. and J. Kincheloe. (1997). Kinderculture: The corporate construction of childhood. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Szatmary, D. Rockin' in Time: A Social History of Rock and Roll. Toronto: Prentice Hall. 2000.
Wallis, R. and Malm, K. Media Policy and Music Activity. New York: Routledge. 1992.
Westheimer, J. and J. Kahne. (1998). Education for action: Preparing youth for participatory democracy. in William Ayers, Jean Ann Hunt, and Therese Quinn.(eds.) Teaching for social justice. New York: The New Press, 1 - 20.
White, C. Transforming Social Studies: A Critical Perspective. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas Publisher. 1999.