The Consumerist Pedagogy Method

 Originally Written: 08/04/2016

This idea is driven by a few influences. First, at the time of this writing, the United States is in all respects a consumerist economy driven by consumer spending. Second, labor and education seem to be at a disconnect. In a labor role, someone either works in an interdisciplinary team or works divided from a part of an overall process. How can education be tweaked to reflect the nature of this reality?

First, I propose that we understand that regardless of industry, the labor force can be generalized to extract archetypes of “labor roles” as I have termed them. The labor roles reflect important components necessary for the development of a consumer product and the economy around it. The proposed labor role archetypes are:

• ·      Theorists
• ·      Builders-applicators
• ·      Reviewers

Theorist are those typically responsible for developing the ideas or rationale for a new consumer products directly or indirectly. Workers in this type of role include; scientists, market researchers, analysts, architects, and designers. Builder-applicators are those responsible for turning theorized products into reality through building theorized products or field testing them. Workers in this role include; product engineers, machinists, manufacturers, and construction workers. Lastly, reviewers are those that are typically responsible for evaluating products and their utility. Workers in this category include; regulatory personnel, advertisers, quality controllers, professional reviewers, and the average consumer.

To adjust a lesson plan or mode of instruction using this idea, I would suggest taking a subject and relating it to a relevant consumer product. Then, divide the classroom into three groups; one for theorists, one for builder-applicators, and one for reviewers. In groups, the rest of the class time follows separate group work followed by a coming together of the class for group presentations. The theorists will present the theoretical foundation and origins of the product. The builders will present on the design, building, troubleshooting and development of the product. Third, the reviewers will pitch the product, conduct reviews, and evaluate the value of the product. Lastly, a classroom discussion over how the product can be improved can be done as a class.

As an example, we could try a lightbulb as a way of teaching electricity and optics. In this case, the theorists would give the class a background on the concepts, the formulas, and principles associated with electricity and optics. The builder-applicators would present the challenges of making a lightbulb by explaining metallic properties, conductivity, and circuits. Lastly, the reviewers would explain their opinion on the product so far using the principles they learned from the previous presentations as the reason for their dissatisfaction or satisfaction. Lastly, the class would come together to propose ways of improving the lightbulb. The result is that many of the concepts typically taught in a series of lectures taught by educators would still be covered with the added benefit of seeing the concept’s practical uses as the lessons progress. This is due to peer-to-peer instruction and application-focused teaching that is often criticized about traditional educational pedagogy. Although this example is a scientific one, this can apply to the social sciences as well. This method would likely not be useful for history, the arts, or literature.