Corporate Control of Creativity

The readings discussed the sense of ownership people have for their creative works. The readings discussed the history of this very American idea and belief as well as whether ownership of creative works is good. What effect does ownership versus a socially or community created view point have on the future of our culture and new creative ideas and works?

Ownership should be protected and people should have the right to earn a living from their creative works. Society needs to be careful that our regulations do not stifle creativity and free speech. If only a few people have control over the messages that can become public than our culture will become stagnant and our free speech right has been taken from us. Our culture should be able to develop freely. A few companies should not control the development of our societies culture. Homogeneity is not good. Americans have always taken pride in our perceived individuality. This is being threatened by the changes in technology, regulation and the market. We need to make sure that "fair use" is protected.

This has implications for my students. If this does not change and continues along the same trends they will enter a culture that is not interested in their new ideas and creative works. They may not even be able to find a venue in which to share their work if it does not fit into the controlling companies idea of what should be media. The fact that these companies will not allow controversial adds is concerning to me. Controversial issues has been the life blood of this country. This trend will lead to a less and less democratic nation. Democracy can not flourish in a culture that is controlled in this way.

There should definitely be restrictions on copying of creative works. But not to the extent at which it stifles creativity and puts the control of the "development" of culture in the hands of the few.

The statement by Diane Ravitch that "teachers don't need creativity. Teachers need to use methods that have proved successful." is ludicrous. Methods that have been "proved" successful are often not successful for all groups. The success of the methods are dependent on the teacher and the students they were used with. It is difficult and often impossible to generalize research in education on teaching methods. When you remove the teachers input and creativity you remove and important aspect of the classroom. You may hinder the connection between the teacher and the students. The teacher can not meet individual student needs and learning styles that will help them to be more successful. The model of using basal readers and scripts for teachers goes against the beliefs of most good teachers that know that students will not learn best in this way. If you remove the creativity from the teacher you may also remove the creative opportunities for the students. Social efficiency is not the greatest good. When schooling is view in an economic way you ignore many important facets, purposes and potential valuable uses of schooling.

Should impersonal capitalist corporations have control of our education system? An education system that also imparts social norms and culture to its students?

The idea of praxis is also important. It is one thing to have ideas, to see the problems in society. But it does not good to understand without acting. Praxis is the important joining of understanding or ideas and action. All critical theory should include praxis. Unfortunately, I have seen little praxis in much of the theory I have read.

I have students work in cooperative groups quite a bit. I never thought about the issues they might have based on their sense of ownership of their work. The idea / expression dichotomy is an interesting concept. I have had students make a point of telling me what was their idea in the project. This may come from a sense that their ideas are not as protected or owned as their words (expression) are. They are uncomfortable with the publicness of their ideas and are afraid they will be "stolen." It would be beneficial for my students to think about these issues critically. They should examine their beliefs about ownership of expression and ideas.

I remember struggling with this concept myself as a student when my mother would edit my papers and I would feel as though they were no longer "my words." I would loose my sense of ownership. I could not feel comfortable with a more communal sense of creative production. I am sure my students struggle with this issue as well.