This is my new blog entry.
Notre-Dame de Paris (2019)
4 months ago
Wednesday, September 8, 2010
Monday, June 1, 2009
Australian Teachers of Media, Qld Youth Council on Mass Media
This past Friday and Saturday, I had the pleasure of working with a group of young people from around Queensland who have been chosen to form a Youth Council on Mass Media. They were chosen after entering a competition in which they had to submit a video recording of themselves answering three questions about young people and the media. The successful students were from Brisbane, the Gold Coast, Cairns and Mt Isa.
The students met for two days during the ATOM Qld State conference 'Connect09'. They discussed aspects of young people's relationship with media and planned and made two one minute videos picking up on the themes they discussed. They then presented these to the conference delegates in the final session on Saturday and took part in a Q&A session. The videos and students' responses to questions were very well received.
The students will now take part in discussions for the Global Youth Council being organised for the Summit on Media for Children and Youth to be held in Sweden in June 2010. The students will take part in discussions in a Facebook group and responses from this space will be taken to the Summit in Sweden.
The students met for two days during the ATOM Qld State conference 'Connect09'. They discussed aspects of young people's relationship with media and planned and made two one minute videos picking up on the themes they discussed. They then presented these to the conference delegates in the final session on Saturday and took part in a Q&A session. The videos and students' responses to questions were very well received.
The students will now take part in discussions for the Global Youth Council being organised for the Summit on Media for Children and Youth to be held in Sweden in June 2010. The students will take part in discussions in a Facebook group and responses from this space will be taken to the Summit in Sweden.
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
State library talk
Recently I was invited to present a talk about video games and education as part of the State Library of Queensland's "Open Source" series. The presentation will take place on the 30th July. Details are below:
Serious play – videogames and education
Once regarded as incompatible with the business of serious learning, video games are being increasingly harnessed in the classroom and other education contexts.
Many teachers are leading an educational revolution by tapping into young people’s passion for video games to help them become motivated to learn. In addition, many education experts argue that video games offer a whole new way to learn that should be emulated in schools and classrooms, and incorporated into the curriculum.
This talk will present a holistic view on using video games in the classroom, outlining both their numerous positive impacts as well as addressing a few cautions for teachers, students and parents.
QUT media literacy educator Michael Dezuanni will discuss the ways that games can enhance the learning process, how students can learn complex concepts while designing and producing their own games, and learn to critically reflect on their work. Michael will also provide examples of the brilliant new ways games are being incorporated into the classroom, as well as highlight what games cannot do with respect to learning.
When Thu 30 Jul, 6.30pm
Where slq Auditorium 2, level 2, State Library of Queensland
FREE no booking required
Serious play – videogames and education
Once regarded as incompatible with the business of serious learning, video games are being increasingly harnessed in the classroom and other education contexts.
Many teachers are leading an educational revolution by tapping into young people’s passion for video games to help them become motivated to learn. In addition, many education experts argue that video games offer a whole new way to learn that should be emulated in schools and classrooms, and incorporated into the curriculum.
This talk will present a holistic view on using video games in the classroom, outlining both their numerous positive impacts as well as addressing a few cautions for teachers, students and parents.
QUT media literacy educator Michael Dezuanni will discuss the ways that games can enhance the learning process, how students can learn complex concepts while designing and producing their own games, and learn to critically reflect on their work. Michael will also provide examples of the brilliant new ways games are being incorporated into the classroom, as well as highlight what games cannot do with respect to learning.
When Thu 30 Jul, 6.30pm
Where slq Auditorium 2, level 2, State Library of Queensland
FREE no booking required
Thursday, March 5, 2009
The politics of media literacy
In my film an media curriculum class today a question arose about the role of politics in the media literacy classroom. The focus of the class was on approaches to "controversial" or "disputable" media texts and alternatives to discussion and debate in the media classroom. This was in the context of how a teacher might engage middle years students to critically respond to texts that rely on sexist and racist stereotypes - where students resist "theory" based lessons. I introduced the practice of culture jamming and the students used editing software to remix / jam a controversial video game to change its meaning and draw attention to some of its problematic content. The students agreed that this was a productive and meaningful alternative to respond to such texts. However, the inevitable questions arose - who gets to decide what is controversial and to what extent should a teacher be directly "political" in the classroom?
Of course, media literacy education often deals overtly will political questions, both in the more traditional sense of party politics and in the broader sense of socially and culturally based politics. However, my students put forward a range of views about how overtly political they believed media classrooms should be. Some believed media education should aim to intervene in students' social and cultural roles. Others believed it was wrong for media teachers to overtly 'politicize' the classroom. Particularly interesting was that several of the students indicated that they knew little about politics because they had not learned about it in secondary school and they indicated that they felt the system had let them down.
Personally, I believe that media classrooms are a space in which political ideas should be raise. However, students are unlikely to respond to polarizing viewpoints or soap box positions. Furthermore, the outcome of classroom activities should never be to have students arrive at a predetermined disposition towards an issue. Media classrooms should be spaces in which a range of viewpoints is possible and in which differing positions are accepted. Of course, this is not to say a teacher should not put forward their own position - but it should be recognised as one of a number of positions to take into consideration.
Of course, media literacy education often deals overtly will political questions, both in the more traditional sense of party politics and in the broader sense of socially and culturally based politics. However, my students put forward a range of views about how overtly political they believed media classrooms should be. Some believed media education should aim to intervene in students' social and cultural roles. Others believed it was wrong for media teachers to overtly 'politicize' the classroom. Particularly interesting was that several of the students indicated that they knew little about politics because they had not learned about it in secondary school and they indicated that they felt the system had let them down.
Personally, I believe that media classrooms are a space in which political ideas should be raise. However, students are unlikely to respond to polarizing viewpoints or soap box positions. Furthermore, the outcome of classroom activities should never be to have students arrive at a predetermined disposition towards an issue. Media classrooms should be spaces in which a range of viewpoints is possible and in which differing positions are accepted. Of course, this is not to say a teacher should not put forward their own position - but it should be recognised as one of a number of positions to take into consideration.
Monday, February 23, 2009
Video Games in the English Language Arts classroom Pt 2
In my last post I suggested that there were three levels on which learning about video games in the English classroom might occur: using conventional textual analysis; through identifying gameplay and games design techniques; and through designing, making, remixing games.
My presentation about this at a workshop with teachers on Friday was well received and they seemed to see the value in the approach. It was interesting that the teachers believed one of the main motivations for introducing games into English was to engage male students who were reluctant readers: the teachers had degrees of success with engagement with games study where they had little success with literature. Our discussions around this focused on the importance of being authentic to gaming culture - with the teachers agreeing that the over-intellectualisation of games was counter-productive.
A concept I introduced - that teachers seemed highly interested in - was that of video games "para-texts". That is, texts that are produced as part of the discussion / critique / discourses around games - for example, forums on games websites; walkthroughs produced by gamers; games reviews and so on. One suggestion was to have students produced voice-over walkthroughs of their own recorded gameplay, with a focus on the ways in which the game engages the player.
I argued that this type of "critical" approach to games was likely to be far more authentic to gamers than exercises in which students are asked to deconstruct games using models borrowed from literary and even film and television analysis.
My presentation about this at a workshop with teachers on Friday was well received and they seemed to see the value in the approach. It was interesting that the teachers believed one of the main motivations for introducing games into English was to engage male students who were reluctant readers: the teachers had degrees of success with engagement with games study where they had little success with literature. Our discussions around this focused on the importance of being authentic to gaming culture - with the teachers agreeing that the over-intellectualisation of games was counter-productive.
A concept I introduced - that teachers seemed highly interested in - was that of video games "para-texts". That is, texts that are produced as part of the discussion / critique / discourses around games - for example, forums on games websites; walkthroughs produced by gamers; games reviews and so on. One suggestion was to have students produced voice-over walkthroughs of their own recorded gameplay, with a focus on the ways in which the game engages the player.
I argued that this type of "critical" approach to games was likely to be far more authentic to gamers than exercises in which students are asked to deconstruct games using models borrowed from literary and even film and television analysis.
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
Video Games in the English Language Arts classroom Pt1
This Friday I am conducting a workshop at the Education Queensland's Innovation Learning Centre with a focus on studying video games as texts in English classrooms. Studying games in English makes sense as a natural progression from teaching literature, popular fiction, film and television. Or does it? Games are not books, television or film. Yes, games are texts, but they are not just texts. Yes, games are multimodal texts, but are not just multimodal. Yes, games are visual, but they are not just visual. Yes, games are interactive, but they are not just interactive.
In many respects gameplay may have more in common with something like playing sport (which also relies on language, narrative, structure, representations) than using books and other types of texts. Therefore why study in the English classroom? I think it is important to study games, but I think the rationale for their inclusion needs to be different than for studying other types of texts, particularly literature. In turn, this will change the types of activities that make sense for use in the classroom.
Games can be simulated worlds; puzzles; challenges; social experiences; affinity spaces; competition spaces (likes sports); they can be extensions of a person’s lived realities; they are spaces for experimentations with identities; they are good fun; and they are spaces which often (purposely) exclude adults – likes some types of popular music. For these reasons, the relationship between students, teachers and games differs (usually) than for students, teachers and books.
So we need to be careful about the motivations / rationales for introducing games into the English classroom. However, there is a level on which games can be “tamed” for use in English classrooms – and if done well, students may even find it enjoyable, will develop their language skills, and be motivated. This includes: Genre analysis; Narrative analysis; and Discourse analysis (including analysis of representations etc). Some approaches from the use of literature, film and television are useful here.
A second level (which probes further) and will make more sense to gamers (but is still a form of intellectualisation that is somewhat at odds with the whole purpose of playing games) Might include: analysis of gameplay (descriptions of levels and challenges – providing “walkthroughs”); Identifying elements of game design (immersion, increasing challenge, avoiding “dead man walking” etc).
A third level is important: This combines analysis of gameplay with game designs, remixes, and fancuts; (but also reflections / explanations of what the student is aiming to achieve (for example, via reflective blogging). This level of consideration also includes the gameplay experience of other (for example, through audience research – why do students enjoy playing, why do others enjoy playing?). This third level draws in questions of identity / subjectivity that are important to consider when studying games in English. More thoughts after the workshop...
In many respects gameplay may have more in common with something like playing sport (which also relies on language, narrative, structure, representations) than using books and other types of texts. Therefore why study in the English classroom? I think it is important to study games, but I think the rationale for their inclusion needs to be different than for studying other types of texts, particularly literature. In turn, this will change the types of activities that make sense for use in the classroom.
Games can be simulated worlds; puzzles; challenges; social experiences; affinity spaces; competition spaces (likes sports); they can be extensions of a person’s lived realities; they are spaces for experimentations with identities; they are good fun; and they are spaces which often (purposely) exclude adults – likes some types of popular music. For these reasons, the relationship between students, teachers and games differs (usually) than for students, teachers and books.
So we need to be careful about the motivations / rationales for introducing games into the English classroom. However, there is a level on which games can be “tamed” for use in English classrooms – and if done well, students may even find it enjoyable, will develop their language skills, and be motivated. This includes: Genre analysis; Narrative analysis; and Discourse analysis (including analysis of representations etc). Some approaches from the use of literature, film and television are useful here.
A second level (which probes further) and will make more sense to gamers (but is still a form of intellectualisation that is somewhat at odds with the whole purpose of playing games) Might include: analysis of gameplay (descriptions of levels and challenges – providing “walkthroughs”); Identifying elements of game design (immersion, increasing challenge, avoiding “dead man walking” etc).
A third level is important: This combines analysis of gameplay with game designs, remixes, and fancuts; (but also reflections / explanations of what the student is aiming to achieve (for example, via reflective blogging). This level of consideration also includes the gameplay experience of other (for example, through audience research – why do students enjoy playing, why do others enjoy playing?). This third level draws in questions of identity / subjectivity that are important to consider when studying games in English. More thoughts after the workshop...
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
ACMA - Digital Media Literacy initiative
The Australian Communications and Media Authority recently established a Digital Media Literacy initiative. The initiative aims to raise awareness about the need for media literacy in the internet era and to conduct / collect research that relates to the effectiveness of various approaches to media literacy.
It will be interesting to see how media literacy comes to be defined within the project. For example, will digital media literacy simply equate to being able to access and use media technologies effectively, or will there be some focus on critically reflective engagement, and creative participation, with new media technologies?
A step in the right direction would be for ACMA to recognise the media education work already being done in school systems across the country and to help raise the curriculum profile of the area.
More thoughts on this as the project develops...
Thursday, January 29, 2009
Building an Australasian Commons
Last year I undertook a small research project with some colleagues from QUT's School of Cultural and Language Studies in Education in which we aimed to investigate the role of copyright education in media literacy classrooms. A significant part of the project focused on the Creative Commons copyright framework and how it might be used with students in school contexts as a resource during media production. In a nutshell, Creative Commons allows individual to indicate which copy rights they wish to reserve when publishing their work. Various licenses can be generated from the four basic options of: attribution, non commercial,no derivative works and share alike.
The 'Building an Australian Commons' publication provides an excellent range of case studies of people and groups using CC. It is highly recommended for anyone wanting to get a sense of the range of ways in which CC can be used.
Here's the description of the project from the Creative Commons website:
The 2008 publication Building an Australasian Commons: Creative Commons Case Studies Volume 1 aims to document and provide examples of how Creative Commons licences are being used in Australia and internationally. With more than 60 case studies across the government, arts and education sectors, it provides a snap shot of the current practices of open access creators. Building an Australasian Commons is part of the international CC Case Study Wiki initiative.
The book can be downloaded here.
Sunday, January 18, 2009
Review: Blogs, Wikipedia, Second Life and Beyond - From Production to Produsage
Blogs, Wikipedia, Second Life and Beyond: From Production to Produsage
By Axel Bruns
Peter Lang, 2008
Reviewed by Michael Dezuanni
At the 2006 ATOM National Media Education conference, Axel Bruns gave a very well received presentation called Teaching the Produsers: Preparing students for User-Led Content Production, which can still be accessed in digital form on his blog: http://snurb.info/node/604. It will come as no surprise to anyone who has seen the presentation that Bruns’ new book Blogs, Wikipedia, Second Life and Beyond: From Production to Produsage, provides an excellent theorisation of what is increasingly being referred to as participatory culture – the cultures and affordances of Web 2.0 that allow individuals to be producers as well as users of media content.
The central claim of Bruns’ book is that ‘produsage’ (a term he coined) is becoming increasingly prevalent in online, networked cultures and that produsage has the potential to radically alter the ways in which ordinary people interact with the media and a range of other social, cultural and organisational processes. Bruns traces practices of produsage through the open source software movement, citizen journalism and blogging, the writing and rewriting of the Wikipedia, the folksonomies associated with online tagging and filtering, the ‘life caching’ practices of photo-sharing sites like Flickr, the remix and mashup cultures of video sharing sites like YouTube and the user-led production of artefacts in video games and online environments like The Sims and Second Life. Along the way, Bruns discusses issues of access, copyright infringement and copyright alternatives like Creative Commons, the education of produsers and implications for politics and democracy. It is a far-reaching and comprehensive book.
Media teachers will be especially interested in the re-theorisation of the relationship between production and use of media, and the distinctions Bruns makes between the practices of the industrial age and those emerging in new media environments. At the heart of produsage, according to Bruns, are four key principles. Although these concepts seem a little theory-heavy when first encountered, they are extremely well explained and the examples provided make their implications very clear. The principles are: probalistic, not directed problem solving (problems are solved by many from the ground up); Equipotentiality, not hierarchy (authority exists, but through heterarchies and ad hoc meritocracies); Granular, not composite tasks (tasks are completed via small scale contributions); and Shared, not owned content (everyone benefits from access to the ‘product’).
The book does not focus a great deal on what media teachers might call ‘critical literacy’ questions about produsage culture or its social implications, and nor does it deal with broader questions related to some of the more controversial aspects of young people’s online experiences. For example, it does not discuss how produsage might relate to online safety, the ethics of self-representation, online bullying and so on. This is not a criticism – there is substantial critical thinking and analysis of processes, concepts and frameworks in the book. It is just that Bruns focuses on the more immediate issues of how produsage operates and its implications for the industrial models of media production, rather than on the social and cultural implications of produsage.
It would be fair to say the book is cautiously optimistic about produsage, but is aware of its limitations. Bruns sees great possibilities for ‘produsage’ practices to open up opportunities for a democratisation of media cultures so that individuals have more opportunities to be involved in the development of the cultures, knowledge and information they use. However, he cautions against being overly celebratory about this. He warns that for ‘produsage’ to be truly transformative, individuals need to be educated about how to participate and how to effectively ‘read’ the artefacts of produsage. For example, he argues that much of the controversy about the Wikipedia is a consequence of individuals trying to read it as a conventional encyclopaedia, therefore ignoring the entry histories available on the site, which provide a fuller sense of the definitions provided. What will be clear to educators who read this book is that media education needs to respond to participatory culture and the practices of produsage.
Media educators are in a unique position to respond to many of produsage’s possibilities and consequences. We have a head start in engaging students in digital media production and processes of critically reading media. However, produsage also raises a range of new challenges that will only become more pronounced as more young people engage in new media cultures. In particular, media educators need to grapple with the consequences and ethical dilemmas of young people having the almost unfettered ability to represent themselves and others in online spaces; to take the work of others and make it their own; and to distribute and filter their own and others’ work in online environments. In several ways, the priorities and objectives of media education courses will need to change in response to these developments.
I found Blogs, Wikipedia, Second Life… to be a highly rewarding read. I have not previously found an account that rivals this one’s explanations of those complex processes that we all suspect are ‘going on’ in online spaces, and yet struggle to understand. I have not previously read an account that has so effectively brought into relief the extent to which these new processes have the potential to change the media scape as we know it. I would recommend this book to all media teachers because it goes a long way to explaining the complex processes many young people are involved in and because it provides an indispensable introduction to participatory culture and specifically Bruns’ theory of produsage, which is likely to be influential within media education for years to come.
By Axel Bruns
Peter Lang, 2008
Reviewed by Michael Dezuanni
At the 2006 ATOM National Media Education conference, Axel Bruns gave a very well received presentation called Teaching the Produsers: Preparing students for User-Led Content Production, which can still be accessed in digital form on his blog: http://snurb.info/node/604. It will come as no surprise to anyone who has seen the presentation that Bruns’ new book Blogs, Wikipedia, Second Life and Beyond: From Production to Produsage, provides an excellent theorisation of what is increasingly being referred to as participatory culture – the cultures and affordances of Web 2.0 that allow individuals to be producers as well as users of media content.
The central claim of Bruns’ book is that ‘produsage’ (a term he coined) is becoming increasingly prevalent in online, networked cultures and that produsage has the potential to radically alter the ways in which ordinary people interact with the media and a range of other social, cultural and organisational processes. Bruns traces practices of produsage through the open source software movement, citizen journalism and blogging, the writing and rewriting of the Wikipedia, the folksonomies associated with online tagging and filtering, the ‘life caching’ practices of photo-sharing sites like Flickr, the remix and mashup cultures of video sharing sites like YouTube and the user-led production of artefacts in video games and online environments like The Sims and Second Life. Along the way, Bruns discusses issues of access, copyright infringement and copyright alternatives like Creative Commons, the education of produsers and implications for politics and democracy. It is a far-reaching and comprehensive book.
Media teachers will be especially interested in the re-theorisation of the relationship between production and use of media, and the distinctions Bruns makes between the practices of the industrial age and those emerging in new media environments. At the heart of produsage, according to Bruns, are four key principles. Although these concepts seem a little theory-heavy when first encountered, they are extremely well explained and the examples provided make their implications very clear. The principles are: probalistic, not directed problem solving (problems are solved by many from the ground up); Equipotentiality, not hierarchy (authority exists, but through heterarchies and ad hoc meritocracies); Granular, not composite tasks (tasks are completed via small scale contributions); and Shared, not owned content (everyone benefits from access to the ‘product’).
The book does not focus a great deal on what media teachers might call ‘critical literacy’ questions about produsage culture or its social implications, and nor does it deal with broader questions related to some of the more controversial aspects of young people’s online experiences. For example, it does not discuss how produsage might relate to online safety, the ethics of self-representation, online bullying and so on. This is not a criticism – there is substantial critical thinking and analysis of processes, concepts and frameworks in the book. It is just that Bruns focuses on the more immediate issues of how produsage operates and its implications for the industrial models of media production, rather than on the social and cultural implications of produsage.
It would be fair to say the book is cautiously optimistic about produsage, but is aware of its limitations. Bruns sees great possibilities for ‘produsage’ practices to open up opportunities for a democratisation of media cultures so that individuals have more opportunities to be involved in the development of the cultures, knowledge and information they use. However, he cautions against being overly celebratory about this. He warns that for ‘produsage’ to be truly transformative, individuals need to be educated about how to participate and how to effectively ‘read’ the artefacts of produsage. For example, he argues that much of the controversy about the Wikipedia is a consequence of individuals trying to read it as a conventional encyclopaedia, therefore ignoring the entry histories available on the site, which provide a fuller sense of the definitions provided. What will be clear to educators who read this book is that media education needs to respond to participatory culture and the practices of produsage.
Media educators are in a unique position to respond to many of produsage’s possibilities and consequences. We have a head start in engaging students in digital media production and processes of critically reading media. However, produsage also raises a range of new challenges that will only become more pronounced as more young people engage in new media cultures. In particular, media educators need to grapple with the consequences and ethical dilemmas of young people having the almost unfettered ability to represent themselves and others in online spaces; to take the work of others and make it their own; and to distribute and filter their own and others’ work in online environments. In several ways, the priorities and objectives of media education courses will need to change in response to these developments.
I found Blogs, Wikipedia, Second Life… to be a highly rewarding read. I have not previously found an account that rivals this one’s explanations of those complex processes that we all suspect are ‘going on’ in online spaces, and yet struggle to understand. I have not previously read an account that has so effectively brought into relief the extent to which these new processes have the potential to change the media scape as we know it. I would recommend this book to all media teachers because it goes a long way to explaining the complex processes many young people are involved in and because it provides an indispensable introduction to participatory culture and specifically Bruns’ theory of produsage, which is likely to be influential within media education for years to come.
Monday, January 5, 2009
Media Remix
Late last year a textbook I have been working on with my colleague, Anita Jetnikoff, was published. It is called Media Remix: Digital Projects for Students. It is aimed at middle years students (years 5-9) and is made up of 24 projects. We wrote to book for a couple of reasons. We wanted to provide our pre-service media education students with a resource that demonstrated how to plan practical media production activities for students. We also felt that there was a real lack of resources for media literacy activities for students in this age range. We also wanted to show how media education concepts could be explicitly taught through practical activities. We are very pleased with the final result and are happy that it seems to be making its way into schools.
A flyer can be downloaded here.
The Contents:
Chapter 1: Remixing Ads
Chapter 2: Remixing Me
Chapter 3: Remixing The School
Chapter 4: Remixing Shots, Composition And Framing
Chapter 5: Remixing The News
Chapter 6: Remixing Style And Story
Chapter 7: Remixing Memories
Chapter 8: Remixing Opinions
Chapter 9: Remixing Stories Through Digital Storytelling
Chapter 10: Remixing The Life Story Of A Community Or Family Member
Chapter 11: Remixing Fiction
Chapter 12: Remixing Gameplay
Chapter 13: Remixing With Stop Motion
Chapter 14: Remixing Celebrity
Chapter 15: Remixing Audiences
Chapter 16: Remixing Sound FX And Soundtracks
Chapter 17: Remixing Fandom
Chapter 18: Remixing Television Genres
Chapter 19: Remixing Issues With One Minute Wonders
Chapter 20: Remixing Debates Through Micro Documentary
Chapter 21: Remixing Video Games Design
Chapter 22: Remixing With Machinima
Chapter 23: Remixing Responses To Media
Chapter 24: Remixing Journalism With Wikis
Sunday, August 19, 2007
The representation of women in magazines
The Women's Forum Australia has recently conducted research into the portrayal of women and teenage girls in women's magazines, finding that females are disproportionately sexualised in magazines, compared to men. The findings can be read online, and the forum has produced a number of resources for those interested in studying this topic further, as part of the "Faking it" campaign - which would be extremely useful for media classrooms.
The forum has the following objectives:
The forum has the following objectives:
- To promote the advancement, well-being and freedom of all women;
- To conduct and sponsor research about social, cultural, health and economic issues relevant to women;
- To provide education to women and men about social, cultural, health and economic issues relevant to women;
- To promote the equal participation and contribution of women and men in the work place and public life;
- To promote a positive balance for women and men between family commitment and participation in the work force;
- To mentor women in their contribution to public life;
- To promote initiatives that work for improvements in the lives of all women, in particular women from disadvantaged and marginalised backgrounds including women with physical and intellectual disabilities, women with mental illness, refugee and migrant women and indigenous women; and
- To empower women in their contribution to media and public debate and the formation of social policy.
Monday, July 23, 2007
Representing media literacy online - wiki entries on media literacy
Media literacy now has entries in both Wikipedia and the Wikiveristy, and the definitions and descriptions are worthy of analysis as media texts in their own right. The Wikipedia entry has evolved over the past eighteen months or so from being very much defined by the American media literacy movement, with a focus on protectionism. Over time the entry has been renovated by individuals from several countries to include international and historical information to place the American experience in a broader context.
It would be fair to describe the Wikiversity entry as still being quite American-centric, with little attention given to cultural studies approaches to media education.
Thursday, July 19, 2007
MEAC - Media Education Across the Curriculum
MEAC is an initiative of a group of media educators from several European countries and based in Berlin. The website includes a range of resources that introduce uninitiated educators to media education. This includes introductory material such as ideas for using video cameras in the classroom, issues papers and information about professional development.
There is an associated blog that canvasses a range of issues and resources related to media education.
New Zealand Media Education
New Zealand has been an international leader in media education for at least two decades. Media Studies is widely taught there at both senior and junior secondary levels. A range of resources supporting New Zealand Media ed can be found on the Media Studies website, including an email discussion list.
The National Association of Media Educators of New Zealand also supports teachers through a range of resources, events and professional development opportunities. "Script" is a regular publication produced by NAME, outlining resources, news and opportunities for NZ media educators and past copies can be downloaded from the site.
Tuesday, July 10, 2007
Australian Media Education State by State
Media education is supported by a number of curriculum policy statements across Australia. There are no national statements supporting media education as a curriculum priority. Download documents at the following sites:
Queensland:
Media is one of the five strands of the Queensland Studies Authority Arts Years 1-10 syllabus. Education Queensland requires all students to meet media outcomes in this syllabus up to the end of year 7. In years 8-10 it is not mandatory, however many schools choose to implements media outcomes at these levels.
Senior Film, Television and New Media is a QSA elective subject offered in years 11 and 12 and taught in approximately 110 schools across the State.
Media and popular culture are also mandatory areas of study in both the QSA Years 1-10 English and Senior English syllabus documents.
Victoria:
Media is one of five strands of the Arts in the Victorian Essential Learnings for Years 1-10 (VELS).
VCE Media includes four Media units that can be studied by students at the senior level as electives.
South Australia:
In primary, middle years and senior, media is one of the five strands of the Arts in the SACSA Framework. Standards for media are outlined at each level.
New South Wales:
Media is the only one of the five Arts forms not represented by a stand alone syllabus in years 7-10, or at the Senior level in NSW.
However, Film and media are studied as part of the English syllabus in years 7-10, and as elective options within the HSC Senior English course.
Western Australia:
In years 1-10 Media is one of the five strands of the Arts.
At the Senior level, Media Studies can be selected as an elective within the Arts.
ACT:
At all levels of schooling - from early years to senior - Media outcomes exist as part of the Arts Key Learning Area.
Northern Territory:
The Northern Territory Curriculum Framework includes media as one of the five strands of the Arts Key Learning Area for years 1-10.
Senior secondary students in the Territory undertake subjects developed and accredited by the Senior Secondary Assessment Board of South Australia (SSABSA) - see South Australia.
Queensland:
Media is one of the five strands of the Queensland Studies Authority Arts Years 1-10 syllabus. Education Queensland requires all students to meet media outcomes in this syllabus up to the end of year 7. In years 8-10 it is not mandatory, however many schools choose to implements media outcomes at these levels.
Senior Film, Television and New Media is a QSA elective subject offered in years 11 and 12 and taught in approximately 110 schools across the State.
Media and popular culture are also mandatory areas of study in both the QSA Years 1-10 English and Senior English syllabus documents.
Victoria:
Media is one of five strands of the Arts in the Victorian Essential Learnings for Years 1-10 (VELS).
VCE Media includes four Media units that can be studied by students at the senior level as electives.
South Australia:
In primary, middle years and senior, media is one of the five strands of the Arts in the SACSA Framework. Standards for media are outlined at each level.
New South Wales:
Media is the only one of the five Arts forms not represented by a stand alone syllabus in years 7-10, or at the Senior level in NSW.
However, Film and media are studied as part of the English syllabus in years 7-10, and as elective options within the HSC Senior English course.
Western Australia:
In years 1-10 Media is one of the five strands of the Arts.
At the Senior level, Media Studies can be selected as an elective within the Arts.
ACT:
At all levels of schooling - from early years to senior - Media outcomes exist as part of the Arts Key Learning Area.
Northern Territory:
The Northern Territory Curriculum Framework includes media as one of the five strands of the Arts Key Learning Area for years 1-10.
Senior secondary students in the Territory undertake subjects developed and accredited by the Senior Secondary Assessment Board of South Australia (SSABSA) - see South Australia.
Friday, July 6, 2007
The Story of Movies
The Story of Movies is a teaching resource developed by the Film Foundation, which preserves films (over 450 so far). The foundation was set up by some of the United States' most successful film makers including Martin Scorsese, Steven Spielberg and Woody Allen.
The resource is aimed at middle years students and provides a range of activities, with a traditional film analysis approach. The focus is on analysis of narrative, film language and themes. There is little exploration of production process, distribution or reception. the area of representations is only marginally dealt with. In other words, this is a conventional film appreciation approach, rather than a media studies approach.
However, teachers with little experience in this field will find it a useful resource.
Sunday, July 1, 2007
Why theory matters to media education
Cultural theory matters to media education because it aims to describe the relationship between people and the world around them, and of course media and popular culture form a significant aspect of people's world experience.
Cultural theory aims to provide a model to explain how society works, and places emphasis on aspects relating to identity formation and the exercise of power. These are both crucial areas of interest for media educators who go beyond a focus on media skills and aesthetics to include a focus on the role of media in society - socially, economically and politically.
Since its inception in the 1930s, media education has been closely associated with cultural theory. In fact, many argue that F.R. Leavis' book "Culture and Environment", which employed a "cultural heritage" theory of culture, was the first media education text.
Theories of discrimination associated with Richard Hoggart, Raymond Williams and Stuart Hall were highly influential on media education in the 1950s and 60s. In the 1970s and 1980s Marxist and structuralist theories, especially those associated with Louis Althusser and Roland Barthes help to shape media education, particularly via the work of Len Masterman.
The most recent theories - post modernism and post-structuralism - should inform media education because they provide convincing explanations of contemporary society - more convincing than those used by media educators up to this day (particularly structuralist notions of the one - directional dominance of media over individuals).
What can post-structuralist theory offer media education?
An explanation as to why young people are both vulnerable and powerful in relation to media simultaneously.
Theories for understanding young people's complex identity construction and use of media as a symbolic resource for identity construction.
An explanation of the evolving relationship between new media technologies and young people.
And much more...
Why does any of this matter? Because education should seem authentic to students and if they can't recognise themselves in scenarios that model particular educational claims, they will tune out. Young people know they are not victims of media, but they don't know how to participate most effectively in media culture, or how to think about media in such complex times. Media education can scaffold this learning.
I'm not suggesting that young people start learning post-structuralist theory. I am suggesting that teachers and media education theorists should find ways to develop curriculum that takes account of post-structuralism.
Here are some initial suggestions:
Place students at the center of their own learning experiences so that they can build on their existing media skills and knowledges though practical participation.
Recognise the limitations of "teacher expertise". Draw on the knowledge and skills of all members of the class.
Provide a diversity of experiences. Media classrooms should be spaces in which to experience genuine difference, innovation, and creativity. Promote acceptance and diversity.
Avoid absolute answers. Always look for opportunities to explore concepts, debate, question, challenge, interrogate and present alternatives. Aim to keep conversations going rather than close them down. Respond to controversies and ideas creatively rather than seek to have a final position.
Cultural theory aims to provide a model to explain how society works, and places emphasis on aspects relating to identity formation and the exercise of power. These are both crucial areas of interest for media educators who go beyond a focus on media skills and aesthetics to include a focus on the role of media in society - socially, economically and politically.
Since its inception in the 1930s, media education has been closely associated with cultural theory. In fact, many argue that F.R. Leavis' book "Culture and Environment", which employed a "cultural heritage" theory of culture, was the first media education text.
Theories of discrimination associated with Richard Hoggart, Raymond Williams and Stuart Hall were highly influential on media education in the 1950s and 60s. In the 1970s and 1980s Marxist and structuralist theories, especially those associated with Louis Althusser and Roland Barthes help to shape media education, particularly via the work of Len Masterman.
The most recent theories - post modernism and post-structuralism - should inform media education because they provide convincing explanations of contemporary society - more convincing than those used by media educators up to this day (particularly structuralist notions of the one - directional dominance of media over individuals).
What can post-structuralist theory offer media education?
An explanation as to why young people are both vulnerable and powerful in relation to media simultaneously.
Theories for understanding young people's complex identity construction and use of media as a symbolic resource for identity construction.
An explanation of the evolving relationship between new media technologies and young people.
And much more...
Why does any of this matter? Because education should seem authentic to students and if they can't recognise themselves in scenarios that model particular educational claims, they will tune out. Young people know they are not victims of media, but they don't know how to participate most effectively in media culture, or how to think about media in such complex times. Media education can scaffold this learning.
I'm not suggesting that young people start learning post-structuralist theory. I am suggesting that teachers and media education theorists should find ways to develop curriculum that takes account of post-structuralism.
Here are some initial suggestions:
Place students at the center of their own learning experiences so that they can build on their existing media skills and knowledges though practical participation.
Recognise the limitations of "teacher expertise". Draw on the knowledge and skills of all members of the class.
Provide a diversity of experiences. Media classrooms should be spaces in which to experience genuine difference, innovation, and creativity. Promote acceptance and diversity.
Avoid absolute answers. Always look for opportunities to explore concepts, debate, question, challenge, interrogate and present alternatives. Aim to keep conversations going rather than close them down. Respond to controversies and ideas creatively rather than seek to have a final position.
Wednesday, June 27, 2007
Media students as media researchers
I believe one of the most under-utilized, and yet powerful, media literacy strategies to use in secondary media classrooms is media research. In particular, students can gain great insight into media audiences and institutions via well constructed research activities.
Students interviewing other students, their parents and grand parents, siblings and others about their media tastes and habits, motivations for using those media , how their media use has changed over the years and so on can provide powerful insights. Of course this might be part of a production project such as a documentary rather than a formal written paper.
Conducting primary research of historical media can also be extremely rewarding when combined with critical research questions. For example, students researching media in the 1960s might source local newspapers from that period to identify the number of movie theatres and drive-ins that existed, what the television programs of the day were and what advertisements reveal about entertainment and popular culture of the time.
Research also helps to broaden out the scope of media education which has traditionally focused on textual analysis, when concerned with theory. While student can gain a great deal from close analysis of a range of media, they can also learn a lot about processes of production and consumption by aiming to answer a range of critical questions through research.
Here are three ideas for classroom research projects:
1. Students videotape an interview with a classmate about their favourite film, television program or game, asking a range of questions that really get to the heart of their fandom.
2. Student use primary sources to research the media that was popular in the year they were born. They should look at newspapers, magazines, if available, television programs, popular music and so on.
3. Students undertake a case study of a media event - for example, the release of a new blockbuster film. As a class they use a range of sources to find out as much information as possible about the production process, target audience, use of special effects, financial matters, marketing, etc for the film. The aim is to place it in its broader social and economic context.
Students interviewing other students, their parents and grand parents, siblings and others about their media tastes and habits, motivations for using those media , how their media use has changed over the years and so on can provide powerful insights. Of course this might be part of a production project such as a documentary rather than a formal written paper.
Conducting primary research of historical media can also be extremely rewarding when combined with critical research questions. For example, students researching media in the 1960s might source local newspapers from that period to identify the number of movie theatres and drive-ins that existed, what the television programs of the day were and what advertisements reveal about entertainment and popular culture of the time.
Research also helps to broaden out the scope of media education which has traditionally focused on textual analysis, when concerned with theory. While student can gain a great deal from close analysis of a range of media, they can also learn a lot about processes of production and consumption by aiming to answer a range of critical questions through research.
Here are three ideas for classroom research projects:
1. Students videotape an interview with a classmate about their favourite film, television program or game, asking a range of questions that really get to the heart of their fandom.
2. Student use primary sources to research the media that was popular in the year they were born. They should look at newspapers, magazines, if available, television programs, popular music and so on.
3. Students undertake a case study of a media event - for example, the release of a new blockbuster film. As a class they use a range of sources to find out as much information as possible about the production process, target audience, use of special effects, financial matters, marketing, etc for the film. The aim is to place it in its broader social and economic context.
Tuesday, June 26, 2007
Media education and discourse
Previously I have mentioned that I believe media education needs to engage with post structuralist theory. The evidence is all around us that young people engage with media in post modern ways that are far better accounted for by post structuralist theory than older structuralist theories that seek to identify things like hidden ideology within texts. Young people are not the subjects of dominant ideologies that position them and offer limited life choices. They negotiate their way through multiple available subject positions that are as varied as and fluid the contexts they find themselves in. That's not to say they have complete autonomy in their choices, just that their relationship with media is complex and evolving.
Here are a couple of ideas I am negotiating myself at the moment:
Judith Baxter suggests that all individuals operate within networks of power relations and may be powerful, powerless, somewhere in between or a combination of these at any one time. Consider a typical classroom. In very simplistic terms one might ask - who has the power here? The teacher who sets the curriculum agenda? The students who can refuse to learn if they wish? The male students, supported via hegemonic masculinity, the female students supported via resistant femininity? The academic students who will be rewarded by broader social and cultural discourses or the rebels who have the power to disrupt learning? Obviously it is a combination of these. Depending on the task at hand and the interactions occurring there will be varying power relations at work. Young people's interactions with media are certainly no less complex than that.
Judith Butler argues that our identities are performative. We enact and define who we are at one and the same time and we draw on hegemonic and variational discourses to do this. We have no essential or core identity. This should be both troubling and liberating for media educators. Troubling because it suggests we have no essential sense of self except from within discourse and power relations. However, liberating because it means there is the ongoing potential (actually necessity) for there to be variation to hegemony. In other words, we all play a role in constructing what counts as hegemonic and this means we can potentially change it and continually do so.
Both these theorists demonstrate the necessity of thinking about media education as a process of local micro level interventions. That is, it is unlikely that a media education student will ever be truly "empowered" as a result of being in a media classroom, at least in a significantly life-changing way. However, students can be involved in media related activities that directly draw attention to social inequities and inaccuracies in their lives and those others. They can be encouraged to participate in discussions about issues related to themselves and their communities. They can experience classroom activities that require them to think differently about other people, ideas and places and the classroom can become a space which is open to, and supportive of, a diversity of ideas and positions about issues.
Here are a couple of ideas I am negotiating myself at the moment:
Judith Baxter suggests that all individuals operate within networks of power relations and may be powerful, powerless, somewhere in between or a combination of these at any one time. Consider a typical classroom. In very simplistic terms one might ask - who has the power here? The teacher who sets the curriculum agenda? The students who can refuse to learn if they wish? The male students, supported via hegemonic masculinity, the female students supported via resistant femininity? The academic students who will be rewarded by broader social and cultural discourses or the rebels who have the power to disrupt learning? Obviously it is a combination of these. Depending on the task at hand and the interactions occurring there will be varying power relations at work. Young people's interactions with media are certainly no less complex than that.
Judith Butler argues that our identities are performative. We enact and define who we are at one and the same time and we draw on hegemonic and variational discourses to do this. We have no essential or core identity. This should be both troubling and liberating for media educators. Troubling because it suggests we have no essential sense of self except from within discourse and power relations. However, liberating because it means there is the ongoing potential (actually necessity) for there to be variation to hegemony. In other words, we all play a role in constructing what counts as hegemonic and this means we can potentially change it and continually do so.
Both these theorists demonstrate the necessity of thinking about media education as a process of local micro level interventions. That is, it is unlikely that a media education student will ever be truly "empowered" as a result of being in a media classroom, at least in a significantly life-changing way. However, students can be involved in media related activities that directly draw attention to social inequities and inaccuracies in their lives and those others. They can be encouraged to participate in discussions about issues related to themselves and their communities. They can experience classroom activities that require them to think differently about other people, ideas and places and the classroom can become a space which is open to, and supportive of, a diversity of ideas and positions about issues.
Sunday, June 24, 2007
Social Media Literacy
Social media are changing the media landscape and therefore, media education will need to change alongside it. The likes of YouTube, MySpace, Facebook and Flickr offer individuals the opportunity to participate in media culture in unprecedented ways as producers of media, not just consumers.
While some media educators have resisted a new media in the past, on the basis that it was either the realm of technology educators or the province of geeks, there is no doubt that social media is a mainstream phenomenon and media teachers need to keep pace with developments.
Social media also brings attention to all the old issues and debates that media educators have been responding to for decades, first in relation to popular fiction, comic books and the cinema, then television, and later video games - that these media are corrupting, dangerous and anti intellectual. Of course, there is a need to be mindful of online crime, but media educators also need to fight for the right to educate about these media.
Currently, Education Queensland blocks student access to Myspace and YouTube in Queensland state schools. I believe this is a retrograde step that is akin to the proverbial ostrich sticking its head in the sand. If students aren't able to learn how to be ethical, safe and critical in relation to these spaces at school, where is this likely to occur?
In the meantime, teachers need to find alternatives to these online spaces so that students can learn about the unique nature of social media, and learn to ask critical questions about it.
While some media educators have resisted a new media in the past, on the basis that it was either the realm of technology educators or the province of geeks, there is no doubt that social media is a mainstream phenomenon and media teachers need to keep pace with developments.
Social media also brings attention to all the old issues and debates that media educators have been responding to for decades, first in relation to popular fiction, comic books and the cinema, then television, and later video games - that these media are corrupting, dangerous and anti intellectual. Of course, there is a need to be mindful of online crime, but media educators also need to fight for the right to educate about these media.
Currently, Education Queensland blocks student access to Myspace and YouTube in Queensland state schools. I believe this is a retrograde step that is akin to the proverbial ostrich sticking its head in the sand. If students aren't able to learn how to be ethical, safe and critical in relation to these spaces at school, where is this likely to occur?
In the meantime, teachers need to find alternatives to these online spaces so that students can learn about the unique nature of social media, and learn to ask critical questions about it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
