Learning in Knowledge and Documentary Programmes

RESEARCH 24 18/2005 E

Maya Götz Learning in knowledge and documentary programmes

What are the benefits of contemporary programmes for primary school children?

Children learn about processes and “relatively durable acquisition of “retained” by the child as well as how singular facts in knowledge and knowledge, skills, abilities, attitudes much can be “regurgitated” (see Figs. documentary programmes. Such and patterns of behaviour or the 1 and 2). learning is less frequently about change thereof due to experience” The limitations of this model lie in general coherences and values. But (Brockhaus 1998, p. 310). If the aim the conception that there is a fixed they do learn something different of a knowledge programme is to trans- set consisting of chunks of content from every programme, as each mit prescribed contents, then the that are transmitted, just as a ball is creates its own specific learning success of such an effort can be “hit” to a player in a game. Accord- space. determined precisely through use of ingly, viewers are assumed to be “repre- and post-testing (cf. Truglio in ceivers” of previously determined this issue). Such an approach is based, content. implicitly, on a reception model of However, we know from reception television in which certain contents, Learning in television studies (for example, Stuart Hall chunks of content as it were, are 1980) how differently people see t is impossible not to learn. This transmitted by the programme and television contents from one another. fact also applies to television. received in kind by the child. Experi- They are attentive to certain things IBrockhaus, the German work of mental tests check whether, and if so, and not to others. They comprehend reference, tells us that learning is the which chunks of content have been what they perceive against the backdrop of their individual interests, experiences and patterns of interpretation (cf. Bachmair 1996, Mikos 2001). Accordingly, reception is not tantamount to imbibing chunks of information, but rather it consists of a process that involves the construction of meaning. As a result, we can claim that each child (and each adult) sees and interprets a different programme. If it is the case that everyone sees a different programme, then it must be concluded that learning by means of television should become more individual. And, models that interpret learning more or less as a one-directional instructional process are not adequate. Increasingly, educational science is coming to embrace the constructivist- Carolina Nesyt systemic perception of learning (cf. Fig. 1 Larochelle inter alia 1998, Phillips RESEARCH 18/2005 E 25

open writing situation in particular reveals the astonishing variety of learning that children themselves realise they have achieved by viewing television. 10-year-old Robin, for example, refers to the benefits of learning about a culturally embedded ritual: “In Dream Wedding you learn how to get married”; he also mentions communication strategies: “In Who wants to be a millionaire? you learn how to answer” (cf. Neuss in this issue). Given this theoretical background, it seems that the question regarding what children learn from knowledge programmes is far more complex than would appear at first glance. Meth- Carolina Nesyt odological forms of access need to be Fig. 2 applied that enable understanding how children develop and express 2000). According to this conception, child interprets the illuminated image allocations of meaning. The analysis learning is not solely a process of ac- as a train. Even if we are positive that of the children’s statements should be commodating and retaining contents, this is a cave due to our different per- aimed at reconstructing the points but one that mainly involves interpret- spective and knowledge, for the child children relate to during the pro- ing, acquiring and consequently this is the image of a train. A consid- gramme as well as to identify what developing individual constructions. erable number of the perceptions, was found to be attractive to and The acquisition of knowledge is un- learning, meanings, etc. constructed supportive of their learning. derstood to be an active, self-regulat- by the child will be retained over a The mission of the Internationales ed, constructive, contextual and so- longer period of time. Further, the Zentralinstitut für das Jugend- und cial process (Kösel, Scherer 2002). child links new phenomena to knowl- Bildungsfernsehen – the Internatio- Constructivist-systemic pedagogy edge already possessed, as seen in the nal Central Institute for Youth and (for example, Reich 2002, Voss 2002) interpretation of what appeared in the Educational Television (IZI) – is to can be linked to activity-oriented re- beam of the torch. Such islands of promote quality in children’s, young ception research, as both assume the knowledge are woven together into people’s and educational television. active involvement of learners and webs of understanding.1 Hence, its aim is to understand how viewers in learning and meaning The meaning of this argument in learning in television takes place and making. Here the following “child in terms of learning with television is to pinpoint the learning spaces of- a cave” metaphor can be applied to that children direct their attention to fered to children by individual pro- illustrate this conception (adapted specific aspects of the programmes, grammes. Particularly interesting are from Elschenbroich) (see Fig. 3). Me- namely those to which they can relate. the factors supportive of learning that taphorically speaking, the child can They then interpret these aspects are present in the programmes as well be said to be using a torch to illumi- through use of previous knowledge as those programmes in which learn- nate something on the wall that is and experience, integrating parts of ing processes develop in ways that are found to be interesting. That is, chil- the programme they have interpreted different to producers’ intentions. dren can be said to “illuminate” their into their evolving understanding of environment for themselves, directing the world. Consequently, quantitati- their attention to specific things and ve testing of their knowledge that may The research method leaving out others. In doing so, the be the main interest of researchers child subsequently interprets what is may reflect but a limited part of what During the data-gathering period of seen against the backdrop of the children have learnt from television. the research reported here (2002– knowledge already “possessed”. In this context the significance of 2004), 6 programmes that explicitly Thus, if a picture of an express train Norbert Neuss’s study becomes ap- target primary school children were is caught up in the light beam, the parent (cf. Neuss in this issue). The selected for the IZI study, entitled RESEARCH 26 18/2005 E

“Knowledge and Documentary Pro- Table 1: Number of participants in the sub- other things, coded in accordance grammes for Children”.2 Wissen samples with the following research No. of Average years macht Ah! (Knowledge makes you go Programme Children of age questions: Do the children perceive Ah!) (WDR*), Willi wills wissen (Wil- Was ist Was TV 46 9.4 any learning achievements? If so, li wants to know it all) (BR*/FWU), Wissen macht Ah! 45 8.9 what contents do they refer to as such Willi wills wissen 51 8.2 Null-Acht-13 (Zero-Eight-13) Felix und die wilden Tiere 61 8. an achievement? And, to which (WDR*/ SFB*/MDR*), Felix und die Anja und Anton 44 7.9 programme sequence? Does the wilden Tiere (Felix and the wild construct they have learnt from the animals)(BR), Anja und Anton (Anja remembered most about the pro- programme concur with a “generally and Anton) (ZDF*) and Was ist Was gramme. In individual interviews, valid” reality? On what level does this TV (What is what TV) (Super RTL).3 they were asked the same questions self-perceived learning lie? 300 children (153 girls and 147 boys) once again. The quantitative tendencies identified between 6 and 12 years of age partic- In order to determine the dimensions via MAXqda were subjected to fur- ipated in the study. The average age and contents of what was learnt, we ther differentiation in accordance of the sub-samples was adjusted to asked the children to define their with qualitative research criteria. The be as close as possible to the pro- learning achievement. Thus, during children’s statements were recon- grammes’ target audience (cf. Fig. 1). the interviews they were asked to re- structed to capture the meaning or gist Data gathering was conducted in a late to the scenes they found impor- and their connections were identified natural setting (Munich day-care tant (“What was the programme (i. e. the points they related to during centres), thus the children participat- about?”). This was followed by the the programme). ed in the study in a familiar environ- question “Was there anything you ment.4 Divided into groups compris- learnt?” Usually the children said ing 7 to 10 children, they watched one “yes” or “no”, often adding a brief The feeling of learning episode of one of the aforementioned explanation like: “How to make a programmes. Following the viewing, (news)paper”. The interviewers sub- Initially, the responses to the question the children painted a picture of what sequently referred to the contexts – “Was there anything for you to they liked most about the programme. mentioned in this case – “What about learn?” – were simply added up and During the interview that followed, the paper? What happened?” After- programmes ranked, accordingly. participants were asked about their wards the children were asked once This admittedly simple procedure re- painting and perceptions of the show. again what was new for them in the vealed a number of interesting tend- 4 weeks later, during a second round programme from their point of view. encies (cf. Table 2). In the case of of data gathering, the children were The transcribed interviews were then Wissen macht Ah!, virtually all the asked to paint a picture of what they entered into MAXqda and, among children perceived that learning was achieved. In Anja und Anton, on the other hand, only 50 % recognised such a benefit. It seems that several programmes such as Willi wills wissen and Wissen macht Ah! were identified more clearly by the children as knowledge programmes. Anja und Anton, a programme that integrates the learning contents into a fictional story in a relatively inconspicuous manner, is apparently less associated by the children with self-perceived learning. The subjective feeling of having learnt something remained at the same level in the second round of the research conducted 4 weeks later, except for the programme Was ist Was TV. In this case, the percentage of children who stated that they learnt Carolina Nesyt something from the programme Fig. 3 revealed a clear increase of 13 %. RESEARCH 18/2005 E 27

That is, those who had said “no” in (BR/FWU, Munich). In this pro- the edge of the individual scenes, the first interview later recognised gramme the reporter, Willi Weitzel, several of which are those where Willi that they had in fact learnt something. investigates a number of different himself expresses his astonishment. While this does not necessarily questions related to specific profes- N: “Yeah, how the papers are made and correspond to what we generally term sions and social issues. The episode that the people have to work very long learning of contents, as will be dem- shown to participants in the study hours and really hard.” onstrated below, there does seem to focusses on the question – “How does I: “Great. And what happened exactly exist something like a “feeling of a story get into the newspaper?” with the paper? Can you tell us a bit learning”. about it? Willi visits the Neue Presse newspaper in Passau, a town in southeast Bavaria. N: “First, some people from the press got After observing the journalists’ meeting together in the morning and decided What do children acquire during their daily morning conference, who will write about what; then they from the programmes? Willi joins Elke, a reporter, and a photo- went off and did the interview. And grapher as they interview the “turtle men”. then they sat down in front of the computer and wrote everything down. The results of the second round of These are two inhabitants of Passau who share a house and garden with almost 600 And then what they did was to take interviews are particularly interesting the photos. The report was passed on in terms of what children learnt and turtles. Back at the editorial office, Willi and Elke write the article and select an to a man who checked to see if there retained from knowledge and docu- expressive photo. At the printers, Willi were any mistakes in it. And then they mentary programmes a relatively long follows the production process: he learns printed it, which meant it was finished. period of time after viewing the pro- how their story, along with the other And then it was moved onto the gramme. In the following section, newspaper articles, is transcribed from the assembly lines on the shop floor, the each of the programmes is introduced computer onto huge newspaper presses, trucks then…” Nadia (10). and accounts presented of the chil- how the individual print editions of the dren’s learning. The supportive and newspaper are produced, gathered, tied All in all, thanks to the programme, problematic aspects as reported in the up into bundles and transported from the Nadja gained a few ideas about what individual children’s statements5, too, printer’s for delivery. During his visit the “editorial work of the press” looks are presented. The results provide a Willi gets up to quite a lot of mischief, like, as she calls it. She talked about flirting with Elke the journalist and synoptic description of what repre- the proceedings of the morning press learning journalistic skills such as the sents an initial characterisation of the “W” questions, which he remembers by conference, the interview and the learning environment offered by the singing the song from Sesamstrasse (the writing of the article on the computer, respective programmes. German Sesame Street). the addition of photos, the correction of the errors and finally the printing Structurally speaking, viewers of Wil- of the paper and its distribution. Her Learning by accompanying: li wills wissen learn first and foremost description was well structured and Willi wills wissen about the processes involved in pro- reduced to what were for her the (Willi wants to know it all) ducing a newspaper. Indeed, when essentials: the editorial work that she asked about what they learnt, many recalls and describes in concrete A typical exemplar of children’s self- of the children referred to the process terms beginning with the phrase – perceived learning of content after 4 of making a newspaper, in general; “and then they...” weeks is the scenes and images they that is, few made reference to stages Another aspect to which she attribut- can recall. This applies especially to and links within the process. In their ed particular significance was the the programme Willi wills wissen descriptions, they seem to grope at short scene in which the editor-in- chief corrects some errors in the article. In the off-screen voice accompanying the programme, Willi says: Table 2: Learning rankings – Answer: “Yes, there was something to learn” “The article is actually finished. But in every boss there’s a teacher, and 1st Round 2nd Round teachers usually find a mistake, as we 1. Wissen macht Ah! 91 % Wissen macht Ah! 92 % know.” This sequence, along with the 2. Willi wills wissen 78 % Was ist Was TV 86 % commentary, relates to an everyday situation with which Nadja is famil- 3. Was ist Was TV 73 % Willi wills wissen 79 % iar, namely that of the teacher making 4. Felix und die wilden Tiere 67 % Felix und die wilden Tiere 64 % corrections after she has completed 5. Anja und Anton 55 % Anja und Anton 54 % her work. An experience with which RESEARCH 28 18/2005 E

children cannot always reconstruct explained. 21 children remembered the details of these individual knowl- among other things the learning con- edge components. But they still know tents of the shark scene. In the episode the path – the process – leading to that takes place at the Düsseldorf the final result. The structure of learn- Aqua-Zoo sharks are observed while ing offered in Willi wills wissen re- being fed. The attempt to count the sembles a pattern of enjoyable “hop- teeth fails. That is why a cross-section ping” from one situation to the next. of a shark’s head is used to show its For the children this opens the chance many rows of teeth, with approxi- of a conception of a process or a job mately 336 teeth in total. Further, Fig. 4: Ralph and Shary explaining how sharks set in positive emotional overtones. presenters explain that if one tooth smell. falls out, another moves in to replace it. As Ole explained about what he many children can successfully relate. Learning facts learnt from the programme: As she recounts her notion of the through use of models in “There was that thing about the teeth, stages of producing a newspaper, explanations: […] they’ve got loads of teeth. I think Nadja relates to another point of Wissen macht Ah! they’ve got over 300 teeth, I think” Ole interest to her: people who work at (Knowledge makes you go (10) the press work hard and for long Ah!) hours. This example is indicative of Ole was able to extend his factual how children interpret Willi’s long Facts are another typical form of what knowledge thanks to this item. The yawn at the end of the episode when children perceive as a learning in con- size of the figure he acquired roughly he engages in a dialogue about the junction with a certain programme. corresponds to the one given in the time at that moment. Willi realises They remember Figures and words, programme. that it was midnight and that they or individual, usually scientific The shark is an impressive animal and were at the tortoise breeders long ago, events. A programme in which a par- the children’s considerable learning at 11 a. m. This means that it was a ticularly large number of facts can be retention is presumably due to their very long day; a point, too, to which learnt in comparison with other pro- being stimulated (perturbed) by the Nadja can relate. grammes is the science magazine high figures. The dramaturgical pre- We can note that lost in her recall of Wissen macht Ah! (WDR). sentation, too, was a success: the im- the process is the dimension of the In the episode viewed by participants ages of the sharks were first shown distribution of labour. Willi has had in the research, the two presenters, in order to attract their attention. This an extremely long working day, Shary Reeves and Ralph Caspers, was followed by the feeding session indeed. However, such was not the provide answers to 6 thematic ques- and the failure to count their teeth case for all of those taking part in the tions: what do earthworms eat and while they are eating. production of the newspaper. Willi’s ongoing presentation endows the how do they move? Why do frank- A particular learning gain was the programme with its own reality. In furter sausages burst in boiling water? special nature of the shark’s teeth. 10- turn, Nadja transforms the focus on How many teeth does a shark have year-old Bahar said, for example: and how do sharks smell blood in Willi into a part of her world image: “So the sharks lose their teeth almost work is hard and involves long hours. water? Why does a fish knife not have every day but they always grow again. This observation points to an aspect a sharp edge? When do we produce They don’t have just one row like we do, of the programme that could be saliva and how is salivation linked to they have two or three.” Bahar (10) improved. classical conditioning? Where is gold found and how is it mined? Additio- Sharks, as Bahar reports, do not have The space of learning nal information is provided by the two just one row “like us”, but several. Willi wills wissen presenters in between the items – He relates to his own teeth and thus (Willi wants to know it all) usually through explanations that use to the construction he has had used The space of learning offered by Willi models. to date on the subject of teeth. The wills wissen hinges mainly on Willi, After 4 weeks, 48% of the children reference point in the programme is the presenter. Viewers join him to referred to facts as their primary form the explanation provided by Ralph: watch the various processes. They are of learning from the programme. “This shark does not have just one introduced to the individual stages Exemplary of a particularly learning- row of teeth as we do, it has several.” and note the moments when Willi intensive sequence is the one in which This scene is highlighted by means experiences something special. The the special nature of shark’s teeth is of a model, the cross-section of a RESEARCH 18/2005 E 29 shark’s head. This manner of struc- sound arrives in one ear earlier than time of the second survey. Interest- turing of knowledge combined with in the other. But she cannot handle ingly, this is not a programme children the presenter’s offer to relate to a con- the transfer from one model to an- immediately identify as learning- cept already known to the children re- other. oriented. Rather, it is programme- presents a successful approach to the It has been proven that models and specific and is definitely intended as extension of knowledge. animations promote learning by such, since the learning material – The programme Wissen macht Ah! assisting in the development of men- from the fields of nature and social uses approaches that are deliberately tal models. This is particularly the affairs – is inconspicuously embed- and specifically didacticised. The case when they correspond to the ded in a fictive play story, featuring explicit formulation of questions, the exact simulation of a cognitive pro- the three main characters – Anja, search for and discovery of explana- cess. In doing so, they relieve the Anton and Klaus-Peter. tions and provision of an explanation working memory (Moreno/Mayer by means of a model are a constituent 2000). Learning paths are pre-struc- The learning theme of the episode The part of the programme. In the case of tured by means of classification and Frog King viewed by participants in the the question as to how sharks smell clarification on a higher level. This study is the lifespan of the frog. The learn- blood in the water, Shary and Ralph approach can be very successful, as ing content is embedded in the episode’s also provide an explanation. in the case of the cross-section of the storyline in which Anton, Anja and Klaus- shark’s teeth. However, explanations Peter rehearse the play The Frog King. Shary tells about the huge nose, Ralph Since Klaus-Peter who plays the role of explains that the shark uses this sensitive provided through use of models have the Frog King cannot croak properly, Anja sensory organ not only to smell the smal- to relate to what the children already and Anton set out on a search for frogs in lest drops of blood, but also to locate the possess in the way of constructions order to record genuine frog croaking on direction of the origins of a drop of blood. of the world. Models operating on the a tape recorder. In the process they rescue The model of noise is applied to visualise lines of a double transfer seem to be tadpoles spawn in an almost dried up this explanation. While Ralph covers his less appropriate for young children. creek bed and take them home. They ob- eyes with his hands, Shary creeps up be- serve the individual stages in the tadpoles’ hind him and claps her hands. Ralph then The space of learning development as they grow inside the has to guess whether Shary’s clapping Wissen macht Ah! aquarium at home. Preparations for the came from the left or the right hand side. (Knowledge makes you go Ah!) play progress in parallel to the stages in This scene, which is extremely inter- The space of learning offered to the frogs’ lifespan. Thus, by the day of esting and illuminating for the older young viewers by Wissen macht Ah! the performance, the tadpoles have finally grown into adult frogs in the aquarium. viewers, is rarely mentioned by the has been clearly didacticised. The Anja sums up the development stages children. Only one of the children programme purposively uses expla- once again on the board (Fig. 5) and in interviewed refers to this sequence as nations and models. They succeed by the performance Klaus-Peter is suddenly a self-perceived learning gain: relating to children’s existent con- able to croak. Subsequently they go to- cepts that relate to their prior knowl- “Yes, exactly! The sharks can hear very gether to the forest and set the frogs free. well on both sides, left and right.” edge and potential for development. Mareike (7) Half the children cited Anja und An- ton as a programme where there is Mareike learnt something about the Learning without actually something to learn. While the inci- shark’s hearing, namely that it can realising it: dence of the “feeling” of learning is hear well on both sides. In the pro- Anja und Anton not as high as in the other programme, however, not the shark’s (Anja and Anton) hearing but its sense of smell was explained. The explanation is linked to In addition to facts, concrete images the modelling of hearing. In the visu- and the general nature of processes, alisation, Shary claps behind Ralph’s children learn about general ears – first behind the left ear, then coherences from the programmes, behind the right ear (see Fig. 4). The albeit to a far lesser extent than other association for adults is unproblem- learning domains. Anja und Anton atic, but 7-year-old Mareike fails to (ZDF) is a programme that features make this link and remains at the level this aspect frequently. Most of the of what she has visualised concretely. children who participated in the study

Probably Mareike was able to under- retained the concept of coherences Fig. 5: Anja explains to Klaus-Peter the stand and grasp the message that acquired through viewing, even at the development stages of the frog. RESEARCH 30 18/2005 E grammes, many of the children (79 % cannot produce the right croaking information about what and how much in the first interview, 68% in the sec-sound. Nergiz interprets the fictive elephants eat, their weight at birth, rea- ond) are able to provide, at a mini- part to be real. Since the programme sons why the orphanage exists, the num- mum, an outline of the frogs’ lifespan. gives an impression of very real life ber of elephants that live there and why Both those who said they learnt some- and seems to show things “as they they were admitted. The fate of a few individual elephants is also covered, for ex- thing and those who did not make this are”, Nergiz assumes that it is “really” ample the story of little Sama, who lost a claim elaborated or presented evi- possible that someone cannot say leg after stepping on a land mine. dence that they discerned the concept “croak! ” This example underscores of the frogs’ life cycle, as in the case the caution required in the blending 38% of the children interviewed had of 7-year-old Josie: of fictional and non-fictional ele- acquired and retained a moral posi- ments in programmes for primary- tion even four weeks later. In the in- “(…) I didn’t know that frogs at first have no legs, like, that they have a tail, like. I school children. terview, 8-year-old Fridolin, for ex- didn’t know that.” Josie (7). ample, says he learnt the following The space of learning from the programme: 8-year-old Birgit described a se- Anja und Anton “Sometimes you have to help animals quence in the programme that con- (Anja and Anton) when they are injured. […] And especial- tributed to her learning. “Yeah, they The learning space offered by Anja ly when the mother isn’t there any more had a sort of poster showing the way und Anton is the opportunity to join nor is the father and nobody can look after frogs develop.” Here Birgit is refer- in the story and in the reflection the young ones, then (you) have to help.” ring to a specific scene in which process, to follow developments and Fridolin (8) Klaus-Peter expresses his desire to be thus memorise facts for a longer a tadpole so that he would not have period in a context. This is a learning The general rule Fridolin deduces to croak. Anja then explains to him activity that is not perceived as such; from the programme is that “people through use of live models and the the children fail to record this as a sometimes have to help animals”, corresponding display board (cf. learning achievement. In summary, especially when the mother and father Fig. 5) how a frog develops. She this is a pleasant, ‘modest’ aspect of are not able to do so. The mode of ended her explanation with the ques- the show that creates little fuss about expression in this case reveals a prox- tion “And then, what happens then, its existence and its potential. imity to human experience in the fam- Klaus-Peter?” And when the addres- ily. The desirability of humanisation see of the question repeats the ques- is certainly debatable, but it does re- tion “What happens then?” Anja Space for developing a veal how children arrive at fundamen- closes the scene with “Then it says moral orientation: tal moral stances through efforts that ‘croak’!” This is a dramaturgically Felix und die wilden Tiere compare the situation to their own successful scene due to its integration (Felix and the wild animals) (human) experiences. For 7-year-old into the overall context. Through the Sabrina, for example, the programme motivational application of a repeti- A fourth typical feature that children presents such a moral dimension. tion it contributes to the development perceive as a form of learning is in “Hmm, you can learn that you don’t of knowledge. This idea of focussing essence of a moral nature. While in always have to take care just of yourself, the information on just a few facts and most of the programmes viewed only that you can help others now and again.” integrating them into the story reveals 1 to 3 children appear to have attained Sabrina (7) an interesting pedagogical approach. such an orientation, in Felix und die Unintended interpretations, too, do wilden Tiere 15 children did so and Sabrina uses the concrete stories to make a seldom appearance. Nergiz, after 4 weeks 14 retained their learn- generalise about a usual taking-action (9 years old), for example, told us ing achievements. The programme rule that is not related to animals. She what she learnt from the programme: uses high-quality documentary ani- relates not only to taking action, but mal photography, which is re-edited also to a reflexive perspective, infer- “Yeah, that (...) some people can’t say for children, then presented and ac- ring that certain situations do not ‘croak!’” Nergiz (9) companied by the animal filmmaker involve only one’s self, but “now and Felix Heidinger. again” helping other people is also Nergiz elaborated upon her knowl- important. She thus forms a moral In the episode selected for viewing by edge by thinking that real people exist participants in the study, Felix talks about rule, extending her self-centred that cannot say the word “croak”! The an orphanage for elephants on the island perspective beyond herself. While, it point of reference in the programme of Sri Lanka. Besides describing the ele- is difficult to reconstruct in concrete is the fictive part when Klaus-Peter phant orphans’ daily lives, he presents terms when and where these realisa- RESEARCH 18/2005 E 31 tions are developed in the pro- via emotionally moving stories that on the part of the children and refer- gramme, we can surmise that it prob- also enable the children to develop ence to contents that do not appear in ably developed during broad treat- moral values, too, is an interesting ap- the programme are exceptionally high ment of the elephant orphanage. proach. (22 %). On the other hand, the re- What Noah (7 years) learns from the spondents’ perception that they have programme is a little easier to recon- learnt something very significant struct. The phenomenon from the programme remains strong Was ist Was TV four weeks later, as stated in this “Hmm. Yes, it’s not nice to be lonely (…)” Noah (7) (What is what TV) interview conducted with Abi (10) during the second round of the study: Noah probably concluded this from The learning profile from the I: “Right, Abi, did you learn anything the story about Sama. The episode programme Was ist was TV (Super from the programme?! shows the three-legged elephant RTL) warrants special attention as the A: “Me? Yes.” Sama, who has to stay behind when responses of participants in the re- I: “And what was it?” the whole herd is bathing in the river, search indicate that their learning in- A: “A lot, well, practically everything.” while clearly having a lot of fun. creased even after 4 weeks. The for- I: “Can you tell me?” Felix’s comment: “Only one stays mat of this programme includes va- A: “Well, about different planets and size, behind every day. That is Sama. But rious sequences, scenes and images that the Earth is really big, and I why does a small elephant have to from already-existing adult pro- thought that nobody had been on the remain chained up when its entire grammes that are re-edited, set to moon. But they were there. That was herd goes for a bathe in the river?” dramatised music and presented by really interesting. That’s it.” Abi (10) The camera zooms in on the elephant, two speakers. The presentation of in- focussing on the chains. This scene dividual facts are edited so closely to 10-year-old Abi feels she has learned is accompanied by melancholic, state- one another that, for example, during a great deal, indeed, “practically ly background music. During the the episode The Cosmos a total of 126 everything”. But when she is asked viewing of the programme, the chil- single facts were offered in the space to talk about it in detail, her remarks dren express their sympathy for of 25 minutes. on the contents are cursory. She now Sama’s situation with comments such As an introduction to the theme “The has knowledge about the existence of as: “Oh, the poor little thing!” – dur- Moon and the Cosmos”, short se- various planets and a feeling that the ing a moving scene that offers plenty quences were presented that illustrate Earth “is really big”. She alters her of opportunity for empathy and un- the influence of the moon on man and previous notions when learning that derstanding. Noah presumably put nature. The story linking the holistic man has already been on the moon. himself in Sama’s position and per- view is man’s first landing on the She also remembers that she was very sonally identified the situation as be- moon, narrated in three stages: the interested. What Abi learnt most is ing unpleasant. Here he is given Apollo 11 rocket, the first landing on that there are a lot of interesting as- enough space to arrive at a more fun- the moon and the return to Earth. pects to this programme, an appraisal damental discovery stretching beyond Interspersed in this presentation were that features in many of the children’s the concrete situation of the animal. computer animations presenting the statements. The programme itself It is not nice to be lonely. On the basis creation of the universe with its plan- conveys the impression that it is as of empathetic involvement in (pre- ets as well as the possible appearance an interesting place to learn. How- sumed) emotions, he makes a gener- of extra-terrestrials. In the next scene ever, what the children actually ac- ally valid discovery beyond the con- the focus is on Mars and its explora- quire is knowledge about the topic, fines of this particular story. tion. The elements linking and liven- rather than concrete well-founded ing up the whole presentation are content. The space of learning three 3-D animated figures – Theo Other typical characteristics of the Felix und die wilden Tiere (a question mark), Tess (an exclama- programme are confirmed in the (Felix and the wild animals) tion mark) and Quentin (a full stop) response given by Bernd, who 4 In Felix und die wilden Tiere, the ani- – who present and comment on the weeks later presented details about mals and their fate become a projec- scenes. the Apollo rocket as evidence of a tion scope for emotions. The children Subsequently interviewed on their learning achievement attained by studied extended their moral orienta- self-perceived learning, the children viewing the programme: tion through an understanding of the refer to facts gleaned from the pro- animal’s fate. From a pedagogical gramme. On the one hand, the inci- I: “And did you learn anything from the standpoint, creating a learning space dence of unintended interpretations programme?” RESEARCH 32 18/2005 E

A: Yes. Well, I didn’t, I didn’t know how Bernd is convinced that he learnt moon revolves around the sun. Yeah, the Poll-, how tall the Apollo 13, 11 something through the programme that’s what I learnt, and then, for ex- is, it’s 13 storeys tall. I didn’t know about a planned space station. But no- ample, if we learn that at school now, that. I didn’t know, either, that they thing of this nature was reported in you always know it. If you know it, want to build a space station, that they the programme. This is a phenome- you can say a lot about it in class.” have remote-controlled things up Lea (10) there.” non that recurred in the case of the Bernd (10) Was ist Was TV. Children report see- Lea answers the concrete question as ing something in the programme that to whether she learnt something from Bernd, 10 years old, feels he has was not in fact in it. In this particular the programme by saying, to begin learnt a lot from the programme, for case, the children mix up information with, that perhaps they will deal with example about the height of the Apol- they already have about the subject this subject later on at school. Then lo, which he says is 13 storeys tall. In with what they remember about the she lists her learning achievements: the programme the height of the Apol- programme. Given that a wealth of the creation of the sun or the moon, lo is reported to be “110 metres (…) information is transmitted in Was ist that there is a typical relationship as high as a 36-floor tower block.” Was TV, not all of which can possibly between the sun and the moon. That The subjective dimension of “quite be retained, the programme conveys her knowledge is very vague does not long” is correct, since 13 stories do the feeling of comprehensiveness, disturb Lea, for she knows what she indeed represent a very tall building that “everything” on the subject has can make do with her recently for Bernd. However, the concrete been shown. Further, the existence of acquired knowledge. If this subject is Figure he remembers does not corre- prior knowledge – whose origins are dealt with at school, then she will be spond to the one stated in the pro- from other sources – is only referred ahead of the others. She can make an gramme – a phenomenon that to by participants in the study on active contribution to the lesson reoccurs quite often (in relation to occasion. based on the security thus gained. In other programmes, as well). That is, Another typical phenomenon that terms of content, this learning children think they know Figures very surfaced only in Was ist Was TV is achievement will probably not lead exactly. This particular example re- the children’s presentation of them- to the success aspired to at school. veals very clearly, as well, that the selves as competent in terms of But for the child (and for the pro- way this scene itself is structured does knowledge. For example, 7-year-old gramme ratings) this is an achieve- not necessarily support the learning Sarah recalls that she tells her grand- ment, since Lea now knows how she process. The text accompanying the ma everything she has learnt: can do something for school – namely picture creates dissonance portrays a watch Was ist Was TV. “Well, I told my grandma, didn’t I, that man standing in front of a switch the sun is the centre, as far as the Earth panel, not by the missile while the goes, and that lots of planets go round it The space of learning voiceover states that “This tower just (…). And then I laughed myself silly Was ist Was TV under 111 metres high is as tall as a ’cause I wondered why I was telling her (What is what TV) 36-storey tower block.” (cf. Fig. 6) that; after all I’m still a young child.” The success of Was ist Was TV is Such image-sound divergences make Sara (7) based on the concept of offering a learning difficult. large amount of specialist knowledge But the figures in Bernd’s response Sarah is delighted as a “young child” from thematic areas that are highly are not the only surprising element: to be able to tell her grandma some- attractive to children. The items pre- thing about the solar system. The 7- sented are not usually didacticised. A year-old experiences the opportunity host of facts are shown, one after the to state her expert knowledge. other. The programme does not ad- Lea, 10 years old, also feels she has dress the kids as pupils and learners, gained competence from the pro- but rather as interested experts. Thus gramme: the children acquire individual special facts, similar to small islands of I: “Did you learn anything from the knowledge that often contain unin- programme?” tended interpretations or a few well- L: “Yes. Perhaps we’ll do that later at school, and then I’ll know what it all founded elements. Nevertheless, the means. And I’ve learnt how the sun, subjective utility value (Götz 2002) err.., how the moon was created and is high. Expert knowledge is useful Fig. 6: Text accompanying this shot: “This tower just under 111 metres high is as tall as that the moon always … above the sun. for self-promotion purposes and im- a 36-storey tower block.” I can’t remember exactly, I think the parts confidence of having gained a RESEARCH 18/2005 E 33 lot of experience in this field. What tion of facts and the acquisition of a REFERENCES has been learnt does not always match moral orientation are a rarer occur- that which was shown in the pro- rence than the remembering of facts Bachmair, Ben (1996). Fernsehkultur - Subjektivität gramme; nor is confidence in one’s or scenes. This form of construction in einer Welt bewegter Bilder. Opladen: Westdeut- scher Verlag, p. 357. own expert knowledge always well- lies on a higher level, where general- Donata Elschenbroich (2001). Weltwissen der Sie- founded. The scope of potential learn- isations are inferred via the compre- benjährigen. Wie Kinder die Welt entdecken können. ing provided by these programmes hension of concrete items. Narrative München: Kunstmann. p. 260. resembles a kaleidoscope of special integration approaches seem most Fisch, Shalom M. (2002). Vast wasteland or vast opportunity? Effects of educational television on chil- facts. There is always something new suitable for this type of learning dren’s academic knowledge, skills and attitudes. In and interesting to watch: as in the case construction. Children probably need Bryant, Jennings; Zillman, Dolf (Eds.). Media-effects. Advances in theory and research. 2nd ed. Mah- of a kaleidoscope there is less of a time to achieve these more complex wah, NJ: Erlbaum, pp. 397-426. memory of the individual patterns, forms of learning achievement: time Götz, Maya (2002). Der Gebrauchswert von Kinder- and more amazement at the variety for empathy and time to develop sendungen im Alltag. In: TelevIZIon, vol. 14, no. 2, as a whole. In summary, Was ist Was deeper understanding as well as to pp. 40-44. TV is a programme that conveys itself draw their own conclusions from Hall, Stuart (1972-1979). Encoding/Decoding. In Hall, Stuart et al. (Eds.). Culture, Media, Language: as an interesting place to learn. what they have seen. Working Papers in Cultural Studies. London: Rout- Translated by John Malcolm King ledge 1980. pp. 128-138. Revised by Peter Lemish Kösel, Edmund; Scherer, Helios (2002). Konstruk- Learning in knowledge and tionen über Wissenserwerb und Lernwege bei Ler- nenden. In Voss, Reinhard. Die Schule neu erfinden: documentary programmes Systemisch-konstruktivistische Annäherung an Schu- le und Pädagogik. Neuwied: Luchterhand. pp. 105- 128. The findings of this study reveal that NOTES Larochelle, Marie; Bednarz, Nadine; Garrison, Jim with each programme learning is dif- (Eds.) (1998). Constructivism and education. Cam- ferent. Not only do the contents differ, bridge, MA: Cambridge University Press. * Abbreviations of German Broadcasting Stations: Mikos, Lothar (2001). Fern-Sehen - Bausteine zu but so do the learning spaces. Chil- BR: Bayerischer Rundfunk (Bavarian Broadcasting einer Rezeptionsästhetik des Fernsehens. Berlin: dren learn by viewing processes that Corp.), Munich Vistas. p. 333. MDR: Mitteldeutscher Rundfunk (Central German are accompanied by a likeable tele- Broadcasting Corp.), Leipzig Moreno, Roxana; Mayer, Richard E. (2000). A co- vision personality with whom they SFB: Sender Freies Berlin (Radio Free Berlin), herence effect in multimedia learning: The case for minimizing irrelevant sounds in the design of multi- can relate. Above all, they learn Berlin WDR: Westdeutscher Rundfunk (West German media instructional messages. In Journal of Educa- through viewing concrete images and Broadcasting Corp.) Cologne tional Psychology, vol. 97, no. 1, pp. 117-125. scenes. They memorise facts more ZDF: Zweites Deutsches Fernsehen (Second Phillips, D. C. (Ed.)(2000). Constructivism in edu- German Television), Mainz cation: Opinions and second opinions on controver- easily when the contents have been sial issues. Ninety-ninth yearbook of the National prepared with didactic expertise. This 1 As is the case with all the models, this pictorial Society for the Study of Education. Chicago, IL: The example has its limitations. In particular, it de- University of Chicago Press. can be achieved through one of the scribes just a minor part of the complex process of afore-mentioned affable television learning. The learning process here seems to be Reich, Kersten (2002). Systemisch-konstruktivisti- purely cognitive, which it definitely is not. For ex- sche Pädagogik: Einführung in Grundlagen einer personalities, but also by means of a ample, the significance of the social context and interaktionistisch-konstruktivistischen Pädagogik. perspicuous explanation with the human relationships, vital in learning processes, Neuwied: Luchterhand. corresponding visualisation. If the have not been considered. Voss, Reinhard (2002). Die Schule neu erfinden: Sys- 2 Scientific supervision: the author with the co-ope- temisch-konstruktivistische Annäherung an Schule contents have been attractively pre- ration of Tanja Meyerhofer (M. A.), Monika Rei- und Pädagogik. Neuwied: Luchterhand. pared and if points are presented that chel (M. A.), Julia Knoller (M. A.), Dipl.-Oec. Ole Hofmann, Annette zur Mühlen (M. A.), Dipl.-Päd. relate to the children, the young view- Marieke van Oostrum, Dipl.-Päd. Miriam Brehm, ers will note several of the facts of- and Dipl.-Päd. Heidi Gleißner. fered in the programme. Similarly, it 3 The selection of the respective episode was left up to the editorial teams. To avoid going beyond the is possible to offer a feeling of learn- scope of this article and since the programme has ing achievement, for example by been discontinued in the meantime, the findings on Null-Acht-13 have been excluded. stringing together a wealth of special- 4 Only day-care centres equipped with a television ist knowledge and informative items set that is located in a separate room for purposes in subject areas that are highly attrac- of this study were selected. As a result, it was quite natural for participants in the study to watch TV in tive to children. What the children these surroundings. The catchment’s area of the THE AUTHOR garner from this type of programme day-care centres included both the education- oriented middle-class and the working-class area. is less the case of “correct” single Approximately 15 % of the children came from Maya Götz, Dr. phil., is Head of the facts and more the case of a feeling ethnic-minority families. The study was carried out Internationales Zentralinstitut für that they have learnt “really a lot”. during the months of June and July 2002. das Jugend- und Bildungsfernsehen 5 The children’s responses were edited to omit their (IZI), Munich, Germany. The relatively fundamental combina- “erms and ers” and repeated words.