Emily Steinmetz & Raven Bishop
Overview
Popular U.S. discourses about poverty, homelessness, and inequality often focus on the individual, blaming poor people for their circumstances rather than unjust systems and structures. Stereotypes about the poor – that they do not work hard, make poor financial and personal decisions, are uneducated, or come from a “culture of poverty” – are deeply entrenched in U.S. culture. These individualist explanations elide problems such as falling real wages; rising cost of living; unequal access to healthcare and education; pervasive discrimination along the lines of race, gender, disability, etc.; and public policies that, at best, fall short of helping people meet their basic needs and often exacerbate structural injustices.
One goal for my Introduction to Anthropology course is to challenge individualistic and cultural explanations for inequalities and make visible the structural factors that profoundly shape people’s lives. Another goal is to guide students to new ways of seeing the world: to open up to the varied and complex human stories that are erased when we rely on stereotypes, which flatten and dehumanize.
Instructional Technologist Raven Bishop worked with me to design a virtual reality viewing experience for introductory students that supported these course goals. In this activity, students engage with diverse experiences of homelessness told through 360º video using virtual reality headsets. Each video is narrated by an unhoused person, produced in partnership with Al Jazeera and students at USC’s Annenberg School of Communication and Journalism.
Virtual reality (VR) is an immersive technology that allows users to view, explore, and move through a simulated space. Videos filmed using a 360º camera, when viewed through a VR headset, allow the viewer to look in different directions and provide users with some autonomy in how they navigate the video. Educators are increasingly experimenting with VR as an instructional tool, leveraging its capacities for 3-D simulation, new forms of story-telling, interactivity, and potential for empathy building, among other things, to further their learning goals.
The Technology
We brought students to our college library’s new VARDIS (Virtual/Augmented Reality Digital Imaging Studio), a space designed for students to explore emerging XR technologies. There, we used Oculus Go headsets owned by our college to access the videos.
Alternatives: If your college does not have Oculus headsets, there are two inexpensive ways to replicate this activity.
- Students can use inexpensive (approximately $8) Google Cardboard VR viewer and a smart phone. For this option, students will need access to a smart phone with the youtube application installed (the videos cannot be viewed in VR in a web browser). They can open the video, click the cardboard icon which will switch the video into VR view (a split screen), place the smart phone into the viewer, and watch.
- Students can also view the 360º videos, without VR, on any device that can stream YouTube videos.
The three VR experiences that we selected immerse students in the daily lives of four unhoused people in Los Angeles. The viewer accompanies and witnesses life alongside the people telling the stories. When students meet Brian, Eric, Daisy, and Tim, they see much more than the simple stories of despair or stereotypes that they expect. Instead, they see the creative ways that unhoused people strive and survive in a city that makes it difficult, and in some cases illegal, for them to meet basic needs like accessing safe shelter, using a bathroom, or existing in public space.
Because the videos are made collaboratively, the unhoused participants curate and narrate their experiences for us. Brian gives us a tour of his tent home by a river bed. He says that living there “can be stressful, but it’s also relaxing being out here with the sound of the water at night.” Brian volunteers at a church, cooking food for others who are experiencing homelessness. We accompany Eric on his daily rounds, riding his bike across the city to different jobs and classes as he strives to secure a stable and stably-housed future. We bear witness to the challenges and beauties of Daisy and Tim’s relationship. They cannot find shelter that will accommodate both of them, which poses challenges for safety, privacy, and intimacy. We go with them on a walk in the park as they explain their goal of doing something fun every day, intentionally finding joy amidst their struggles. As Daisy says, “People just have this perception that there isn’t love, that there isn’t connection in the homeless population.” That perception, we learn, is untrue.
Through their storytelling, the narrators provide us with their own analysis of their experience. They “talk back” to dominant stereotypes about unhoused people, and deepen our understanding of both the structural injustices and the agency of those who live with housing precarity.
These immersive experiences offer students a sense of “being there.” In 360º video, for example, not only can we see Tim and Daisy sitting and talking, but we can also turn around and see the street behind us, or look up and see surveillance cameras. The larger 360º frame captures more context than a conventional video and offers a broader sense of the worlds that the narrators inhabit. Students have more autonomy in how they interface with the video, as well, and in this way it is a more individualized experience. For example, they can choose to watch Brian as he rides his bicycle across town to one of his jobs or to view the journey from Brian’s perspective. Relatedly, the experience inside the Oculus Go headsets is more intense and intimate than viewing video on a flat screen. We are invited into of personal spaces of the narrators’ lives – their homes and relationships – and it feels more like we are interlocutors than observers.
Connections with Course Content
This virtual reality activity is knitted into the broader trajectory of the course. One key concept, however, is the “single story” that students learn about from Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie’s TED Talk, “The Danger of a Single Story.” After students watch this video, we consider questions such as: What is the relationship between power and storytelling? Who has the power to tell stories? How do stories, especially “single stories,” shape our perspectives about people, places, and the world? Why does the framing of a story matter? What single stories do you have about people or places and/or what single stories have people had about you?
During the class period prior to the VR experiences, I talk with students about what to expect, describe the goals of the activity, and remind them of the key concepts we have covered that are relevant to this exercise. These two slides guide that conversation.
Introduction to the activity
First, Raven introduces students to VR and digital media. We discuss the behind-the-scenes editing and framing work that is often invisible to us when we encounter a finished text. Since students tend to view photography and video as more “truthful” than print media, we consider how all of the texts we encounter are mediated by authors, producers, editors, videographers, etc.
Raven asks students to envision in their minds’ eye the pyramids at Giza. Once they have a picture in mind, she shows a 360º image of pyramids from Google Arts and Culture on the screen.
Most students confirm that this is more or less what they had envisioned. Then she rotates the 360º image, showing a road with cars, vendor stands, people walking, and a city-scape in the distance. She scrolls around to show the view from the pyramid. These images differ from what students had imagined.
This leads to a short conversation about framing: different frames offer different versions of a story. Raven asks students to consider the impact of framing, to consider how the images of the Giza pyramids they had seen in the past had helped to create their own visual vocabulary of that place. We also ask deeper questions about why we have a particular visual vocabulary. Whose interests, stories, or versions are dominant? Is it jarring to see the pyramids in their modern context? What are the implications of framing in how we understand places and people?
When we encounter 360º video and photography, it is easy to forget that it still has a frame. The frame is different than the rectangular one we are accustomed to, but the spherical lenses of 360º cameras do have a defined depth of field. We remind students that even 360º video is edited and curated for the viewer.
Three Stations
After the introductory segment, students break into smaller groups and cycle through three different stations.
- Unpacking our assumptions: First, we ask students to consider the assumptions, stereotypes, ideas, and/or images about homelessness that they bring to this activity. This could be ideas about who they think homeless people are, what they believe are the causes of homelessness, or anything else that comes to mind. We ask them to consider their own personal assumptions as well as the ones that circulate in mass culture about unhoused people.
We also ask students to consider where their information about unhoused people comes from. Do they have personal experiences with homelessness through being housing insecure themselves, volunteering in their communities, encountering unhoused people on the streets, or something else? How do they see homelessness portrayed in movies and television? How much about homelessness have they learned directly from those experiencing it, versus others speaking about them?
- VR Immersion Experience: Raven guides students through this portion of the activity which takes place in VARDIS. The space is arranged with sturdy swivel chairs that will allow students to view the 360º content while remaining seated. Before putting on the Oculus Go headsets, she asks students to swivel in the chairs to make sure they are spaced far enough apart that students would not bump into each other. She then uses the DATA (Demonstrate, Ask, Talk Aloud) method to instruct and assist students in engaging in the VR experience and reminds them that if they feel uncomfortable they can remove the headsets at any time. Students watch three videos from the series that we had pre-selected: “Love on the Streets,” “Always on the Move,” and “Living on the River Bed.” Afterward, students disinfect their headsets under Raven’s guidance before the next group of students uses them.
- Free Write + Debrief: Immediately after the VR experience, students spend 5 minutes completing a free write activity. The worksheet , divided into four squares, provides space for them to reflect on the overall experience as well as each of the stories. We use their free write for the debrief that follows. We emphasize that their free write will also be useful for students as they write their reflection essays. Once they complete the free write, we move back into a circle to debrief and discuss. Since many students had not used virtual reality or Oculus headsets before, they have a lot to say about the experience as well as about the stories of homelessness that they engaged with. I take notes about what they say so we can revisit them in the following class meeting.
Wrap-Up and Reflection Essay
When we return to the classroom in the next class period, we further discuss the range of experiences of homelessness, often rendered invisible by the dominant single stories: women and non-binary people, children and families, the working poor, rural and suburban experiences, people who live intermittently with friends and family, teens who have been rejected by or run from their families, among many other circumstances. I introduce students to my collaborative work with incarcerated women and help them consider the links between incarceration, family violence, and housing insecurity. Finally, we look more closely at some of the structural factors that lead to homelessness and the range of public policy responses – from intensive policing to housing first.
Having the individuals’ stories to draw from was helpful for students as they learned more about the structural factors. As one student wrote in their reflection paper: “Usually things I’ve read in school about homelessness just spit facts about it. When you have the perspective of hearing and seeing real stories, it is easier for people to relate to in some way.” The lived experiences they encountered in the VR immersion helped them understand the relevance of the concepts, figures, and policies we examined afterward.
Students have one week to complete a 2-3 page reflection about the exercise. They are required to read Joi Lee’s short article, “What it Means to be Homeless in Los Angeles in 360º Video,” which provides more information about the project and a glimpse behind the scenes at how the videos were made. The article also has embedded videos of the three stories we watched in VARDIS in case students want to watch them again. I provide students with a prompt to guide their reflection.
Conclusion
Based on discussions and student reflection papers, it was clear that the VR immersion experience and the structured activities before and after shifted students’ perspectives.
First, it made visible to students the “single stories” that many of them had about homelessness, and it unsettled those single stories. As one student noted in their reflection: “I noticed immediately after completing it that the virtual reality exercise challenged many of my misconceptions and prior beliefs about homelessness that I didn’t even know that I had, let alone that they were inaccurate or incorrect.”
Prior to the VR immersion experience, many students’ ideas about homelessness conformed to societal stereotypes. These included misperceptions that most homeless people were dirty and disheveled men, and that most unhoused people did not work, had substance use disorders, and/or had mental illnesses. This activity unsettled the “single stories” that dominate popular understandings of homelessness. Student perspectives shifted from homeless people as “other” to seeing them as “regular people” who they related to. They had relationships, volunteered, looked for small joys in life, and had dreams and goals. The videos and reflections helped students move away from pity, fear, or disdain for unhoused people and toward compassion and understanding.
Second, the way the videos were produced – in collaboration with unhoused people and as invitations into their lives – helped students see the complex human dimensions of homelessness. As one student noted: “A traditional documentary would not have been able to capture the minute details that added to the ‘humanizing’ experience, like the glances I was able to steal at the titles of the books on the floor of Brian’s tent by the river. We were also able to feel the eeriness of sleeping in a construction site with Tim, and feel just as exposed as he and Daisy on a “date” in the park. This is how virtual reality was able to draw out such strong compassion: by making us feel as though we are there.”
Finally, students reflected on accessibility and power issues, in both producing and consuming VR. Several students wrote about the equipment and knowledge required to produce 360º video. They appreciated the way that this project opened up access to unhoused people to tell stories in their own way, while some students attended to the hidden “back-end” editing work that the journalism students completed, and the unequal access to online platforms that connect media with viewers. Some students also raised questions as well as the costs and access needed to view VR, such as smart phones, internet access, VR headsets, and knowledge.
Overall, students became more aware of the ways that we – interpersonally and institutionally – routinely dehumanize unhoused people. As students engage with the humanity of people who are often “Othered” or marginalized, they begin to ask deeper questions about how we organize society, whose lives matter, and what our responsibilities are to each other. Many students were suddenly concerned about unhoused people, regarded them with compassion, and interested in making change. Throughout the remainder of the course, students routinely referred to the VR activity, and at the conclusion of the semester many shared that this was the most profound learning experience they had in the course.
Though the focus of this article is the virtual reality activity, the authors would like to acknowledge the contributions of Nancy Cross, Director of Educational Technology at Washington College. Her instruction on video framing and editing complemented the activities described here and expanded students’ understanding of storytelling across media.
Links
- The article references the “DATA method,” and here is a link to a graphic that gives more information about it: https://vrschoolresearch.files.wordpress.com/2017/12/data-poster_final1.pdf
- If people want to experiment with the Google Arts and Culture material themselves (pyramid / sphinx), here is a link to that: https://artsandculture.google.com/streetview/giza-necropolis/hwEsw1mG-2_0_A?sv_lng=31.13920685575138&sv_lat=29.97512437058233&sv_h=265.0827511797919&sv_p=15.767175464317063&sv_pid=toLMbrJHwDPc7xm5mdIC7Q&sv_z=0.8596529287649037
Emily Steinmetz
Emily Steinmetz is Assistant Professor of Anthropology at Washington College. She has spent more than six years teaching and coordinating programs inside of prisons. Her research has explored small town prison economies, voter disenfranchisement, and life sentencing policies. She uses collaborative methods to work together with incarcerated people and returning citizens on research and activist projects.
Raven Bishop
Raven Bishop is an Instructional Technologist at Washington College and is also a National Board Certified Visual Arts Educator with over 15 years of experience in project-based curriculum and instructional design. She leads the new Virtual/Augmented Reality Digital Imaging Studio [VARDIS] in Washington College's Miller Library where her work explores augmented & virtual reality in instruction.