Parasocial learning as an active learning process

By exploring learner experience of entertainment-education in the OLLE I have identified parasocial learning as the active, reflective process by which I suggest learning takes place. In doing so my work develops Sabido’s (in Nariman 1993) original theory of how individuals learn through entertainment- education for the new context of the OLLE and expands on assertions about audience members and TV/radio characters from other fields of practice. My interpretations of learner experience therefore advance understanding of how individuals learn through entertainment-education.

In his original theory Sabido (in Nariman 1993) describes the learner as a receiver for the educational message that is transmitted through the educational character, thus implying a passive role for the learner (see Figure 3).

150

Figure 3 Showing Sabido’s 1993 Communication circuit in entertainment-education

A passive role for the learner is also implied by Green and Brock (2000) who consider that learning occurs when an individual is transported into a story. However in exploring learner experience of entertainment-education I identified the parasocial learning process which includes learning by engaging in steps of involvement, internalization and identification in interaction with the entertainment-education characters, followed by reflection and discussion with peers and colleagues which suggests an active role for the learner (See Figure 7).

151

Figure 7 The 3 stage parasocial learning process (Brownlow 2014)

I will consider the role of reflection and discussion later in section 5.1.2 of this chapter. For now I wish to focus on the interaction between the learner and the entertainment-education character in order to demonstrate why parasocial learning reveals an active role for the learner and to provide rationale for my recommendation that Sabido’s (in Nariman 1993) original communication circuit should be amended.

I propose that character involvement is the first step in parasocial learning. In using the term involvement I am drawing on the ideas of Moyer-Gusé et al (2008) who describe involvement as demonstrating increased attention to a character. In doing so I am arguing that the very notion of paying attention to someone is an active response; by paying attention, I am suggesting the learner is noticing the character and noticing is an action that requires recognition seeking on behalf of the

152 learner. By comparison the learner could be presented with a character and not even notice them. Studies using masked visual identification tasks to measure subjective awareness such as Sandberg et al (2010) show it is possible to present learners with characters and scenarios yet they may claim not to have seen anything, thus implying a passive response to the stimulus presented. The

involvement step in parasocial learning therefore challenges the notion of the learner as a passive recipient of an entertainment-education message and demonstrates the active nature of their role. The second step in the parasocial learning process is internalization of the character, a key element of which is conversation rehearsal. This process requires the active use of imagination on behalf of the learner and has been observed in studies of parasocial interactions between TV characters and audience members (Hartmann and Goldhoorn 2011). The stimulation of learners’ imagination is reported to be a central feature of learning through stories (Wood 2014) and I assert that it is this active use of imagination of the learner that enables them to be transported into a story, the point at which Green and Brock (2000) suggest learning occurs. The identification of the parasocial learning process implies that internalization of the character requires active use of imagination and conversation rehearsal by the learner who is challenged to respond to the story as a consequence, again suggesting that the learner’s role in entertainment-education is an active one.

I believe parasocial learning is also associated with character identification which culminates in an interaction with a character. This results in an emotional challenge, leading to changes in outcome expectancy and a review of practice which I will discuss in more detail in section 5.1.2 below. Here I wish to propose that identification with a character is an active process. As discussed in the

literature review identification is a much debated concept within the field of entertainment-

education. It may be described as a learner perceiving themselves as similar to a character (Hoffner and Buchanan 2005) or wanting to be like a character (Eyal and Rubin 2003). Observing the

identification step within the parasocial learning process does not add further clarity to this debate but it does acknowledge that learners may perceive themselves to be like, or aspire to be like an entertainment-education character and in doing so it emphasises the active nature of this position.

153 Parasocial learning therefore emphasises the active role of the learner in constructing their own meaning in relation to the entertainment-education experience and illustrates how learners learn by developing their own conceptualizations. This position has implications for teaching design. As a recent meta-analysis of education literature has shown active methods produce better achievement when compared to traditional didactic methods across all academic levels (Hattie 2009), teaching methods that promote active learning are to be encouraged. The identification of parasocial learning as an active learning process implies therefore that entertainment-education can be selected as a pedagogical approach that promotes active involvement of learners with the intention of enhancing learner achievement.

In identifying the process of parasocial learning and discussing the initial steps on which a learner embarks, I have suggested that the learner’s role in entertainment-education is an active one. In doing so I am refining Sabido’s (in Nariman 1993) initial interpretation of the role of audience members in entertainment-education as passive recipients of educational messages. I recommend that his communication circuit is amended accordingly so that the description of the learner’s role is changed from “receiver” to “enactor” and that a communication arrow is added from the audience member to the entertainment-education character with the label “interaction” to reflect the interactive nature of the relationship based on the active imaginative processes enacted by the learner (See Figure 12).

154

Figure 12 Showing recommended adaptations to Sabido’s (1993) communication circuit to show the active role of the learner

As Sabido’s (in Nariman 1993) communication circuit was only originally intended to guide the design of entertainment-education and so reflects the teacher perspective, my recommendations advances work in this area by showing the nature of learning through entertainment-education from the learner perspective and enabling learner experience to be considered as part of entertainment- education design.

155