This article addresses issues of quality in film-based educational research projects. It recommends criteria related to aesthetic form and substance as appropriate for judging the usefulness of educational films in achieving one possible goal for film-based educational research. That goal is to effectively challenge the prevailing educational imaginary. This imaginary is described as a set of images of schools and school people, rooted in the larger culture, that supports a debilitating master narrative about education. Issues of quality and utility are explored within the context of one teacher-made film exhibited at (among other places) a film festival at the author’s college of education.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Agger, B. (1990). The decline of discourse: Reading, writing, and resistance in post modern capitalism. New York: Falmer.
2.
Bakhtin, M. (1981). The dialogic imagination: Four essays. Austin: University of Texas Press.
3.
Barbash, I., & Taylor, L. (1997). Cross-cultural filmmaking. Berkeley: University of California Press.
4.
Barone, T. (2000). Aesthetics, politics, and educational inquiry: Essays and examples. New York: Peter Lang.
5.
Barone, T. (2001a). Science, art, and the predispositions of educational researchers. Educational Researcher, 30(7), 24-28.
6.
Barone, T. (2001b). Touching eternity: The enduring outcomes of teaching. New York: Teachers College Press.
7.
Becker, C. (Ed.). (1994). The subversive imagination: Artists, society, and social responsibility. New York: Routledge.
8.
Berliner, D., & Biddle, B. (1996). The manufactured crisis. New York: Macmillan.
9.
Bruner, J. (1986). Actual minds, possible worlds. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
10.
Bruner, J. (1994, April). Four ways to make meaning. Invited address at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
11.
Dalton, M. (1999). The Hollywood curriculum: Teachers and teaching in the movies. New York: Peter Lang.
12.
Dewey, J. (1934). A common faith. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
13.
Fay, B. (1975). Social theory and political practice. London: G. Allen.
14.
hooks, b. (1991). Narratives of struggle. In P. Mariani (Ed.), Critical fictions: The politics of imaginative writing (pp. 53-61). Seattle, WA: Bay.
15.
Horkheimer, M., & Adorno, T. (1972). Dialectic of enlightenment. New York: Herder & Herder.
16.
Lyotard, J-F. (1983). The postmodern condition (G. Bennington & B. Massumi, Trans.). Manchester, UK: Manchester University Press.
17.
Males, M. (1999). Framing youth. Monroe, ME: Common Courage Press.
18.
Narayan, U. (1997). Dislocating cultures: Identities, traditions, and Third World feminism. New York: Routledge.
19.
Rorty, R. (1982). The consequences of pragmatism. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
20.
Rorty, R. (1989). Contingency, irony, and solidarity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
21.
Sartre, J-P. (1988). What is literature? and other essays. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. (Original work published 1948)
22.
Stone, A. (1988). The reason for stories: Toward a moral fiction. Harper’s, 276(1657), 71-76.
23.
Tanner, D. (2000). Manufacturing problems and selling solutions: How to succeed in the education business without really educating. Phi Delta Kappan, 88(3), 188-202.
24.
Ungar, S. (1988). Introduction. In J-P. Sartre, What is literature? And other essays (pp. 3-20). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
25.
Zimmerman, P. (2000). States of emergency: Documentaries, wars, democracies. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
