Media lit intro and conclusion


Published on

Slides presented at "Researching Media Literacy" day on December 1st 2012 by David Buckingham, Andrew Burn, Becky Parry and Mandy Powell

Published in: Education, Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Our first set of activities focused on media language and moving image. There was diversity across the age groups in terms of pedagogy and focus. I present here what I hope are some useful snapshots of data and our emerging analysis.
  • A focus on media language provides children with sets of questions about texts as described above. Having decided to focus on moving image we then also decided to have a particular focus on how fear is created in film. We hoped this would link well with ideas about audience and affect.
  • In relation to studying film – we wanted to move away from a study of genre, forms and conventions. So not horror (which we found wasn ’t universally liked by yp too). But addressing broader questions of film language – made specific by a focus on how are fear, suspense and tension created in film.
  • We feel that interpreting the signs which make up comic strips, TV shows or computer games should not be seen as an academic code-cracking exercise. Critical to connect with the social and cultural context. Critical to acknowledge the understandings children bring to new texts or to production tasks based on their exp as readers of film.
  • Our unit of work was informed by this Vygotskian model of learning – key aim to value children ’s existing understandings but also to extend and challenge these. We saw what we are beginning to describe as shuttling between these – rather than linear progression, highlighting the need for recursive learning opportunities.
  • We considered carefully how best to enable children to begin to share their existing understandings of media language. This was often a starting point, but was equally important to foreground throughout the process. Online message board was v good at ensuring students talked to each other (not just to the teacher).
  • Interestingly, this issue of the visibility of the monster was found in all the year groups ( prompts consideration of what the audience knows and what is withheld.)
  • So in year 2 we also have consideration of how much of the ‘monster’ should be displayed and how much held back from the audience. There was a split in this class from those who displayed the monster vividly and those who hid the monster behind a door or window or under the bed. Some of them were also able to verbally articulate their ideas about this issue. The issue of the visibility of the monster cropped up in production too.
  • Across the sites we took what could be described as an ‘orthodox’ approach to teaching media language. Vast range of texts included. I am going to focus on some storyboarding activities because they challenge previous data about storyboarding and proved to be a useful scaffold – encouraging attention to different aspects / modes of film.
  • Storyboarding tangibly improved the attention to detail the children paid to specific uses of media language. EG In the Batman activity the students didn ’t draw but wrote notes on a storyboard print out. In each the role of the teacher – asking why re creative choices? Was critical.
  • In drawings some children are better able to demonstrate what they are paying attention to and this is more than observation – here meaning is being constructed / understanding demonstrated.
  • The media language the children had been taught was fairly simple (MS,CU, LS) and not sufficient to describe the clip they were drawing. Indicates a need to introduce vocabulary ‘just in time’.
  • However, this focus on sound and camera movement enabled one Y4 boy to extend his understanding. He explores the position of the character in relation to the camera movement and audience expectations of scary films. The role of the teacher, is to enter into a dialogue which extends the discussion from an observation towards a connection with social and cultural meaning.
  • In this storyboard activity the children were storyboarding an imagined second sequence to the film Lucky Dip. They use the sign combinations they have observed in the film but combine them in new ways to new effects.
  • Far from being ‘ unproductive busy work’ or demonstrating children draw everything in mid shot and don’t pay attention to composition – this data demonstrates that taught in a connected way, very young children can display complex understandings not just of the individual signs and their arrangement but the meanings they express.
  • A vast array of additional issues were raised by the production work the children undertook which include some questions about the role of cc, play, celebration, process over product which we are still examining. Might have time to say more about in discussion.
  • In year 2 in site (B) the teacher enabled the students to step into the shoes of the director. This connected their directorial choices re shot composition, gesture, light to their imagined audience.
  • In site A the teacher wanted to move away from some of the more orthodox approaches such as using narrative structure theory. He also wanted the students to learn to theorise, rather than passively accept a taught theory.
  • The data demonstrates students using and testing out the theory and combining this with their opinions based on their experiences as readers of texts / players of games. The data also demonstrates students stretching the theory, asking for new adaptations of it.
  • making connections
  • The final unit focused on the concept of Audiences and I am planning to share work from the Y3 class from one site.
  • Elizabeth Bird describes the notion of Audience as problematic, ever changing and fluid.
  • Rather than try to resolve or simplify some of the complexity of the concept – it seemed to us to be important to directly address it – even with the youngest children.
  • Rather than undertaking exercises which ask students to target ‘ stereotyped ’ audiences – we aimed to enable children to engage with real audiences in a reflexive way – i.e. raising questions about research methods and the status of knowledge.
  • The Y2 teacher started this unit by summing up the ideas about audiences that the children had expressed in the earlier units. He puts it to them that ‘they’ said all people would be scared of their movies. By doing so he invites them to question if they still think this by the end of the unit.
  • This data is an example of this summing up. AS confronts them with their own statement that everyone would feel the same about their horror films – scared and shows them how their ideas about audience developed.
  • I believe that here he is asking them a very difficult question. He then shows clips from EE, Ben 10, Loose Women asking the children to consider who in the room would like / watch them (parents and children). This takes them into a discussion linking genre and audience.
  • He develops this link between genre and audience and here he models movement between the personal and then to wider generalisations .
  • Our first activity aimed to enable interrogation of assumptions.
  • We invited discussion of a set of statements. The statements were intended not to provoke debate about the actual issues (although that ’ s how they got used in some contexts) but more to focus on the epistemological/theoretical questions – i.e. how would we know? what evidence would we need to make a judgment about this? It was important for teachers to allow some airing of opinion and personal experience here, but also to question gently some assumptions. For example, often children are very censorious about media for children younger than themselves. AS approached this by having parents invited in to share the discussion. Interestingly, initially the parents took up the stance of the negative statements. However, Alex challenged their assumptions by asking them about the games they play. He was also very candid about his own media preferences and these were not at a great distance from the children ’ s or the parents (there was lots of common ground.) As a result the parents ’ responses began to shift. They began to share their media pleasures and this allowed the groups to question the assumptions. They also moved from talking about ‘ other ’ people to including their own experiences.
  • Throughout AS uses a range of strategies to challenge and interrogate – note the upwards inflection / not quite rhetorical. So when one group decides girls are growing up too fast because of media influences he asks the girls in the class to put their hand up if they are too young to be wearing lip gloss. This technique allows them to see that they are making assumptions about ‘others’ whilst seeing themselves as impervious to influence. Needless to say no hands went up. The constant ‘do they?’ pushes the children to find evidence for their claims - but also to consider how secure they are with the idea they have suggested.
  • The children and parents were asked to consider the adv and disadv of fairly traditional research methods and how these might be used to research the statements.
  • AS introduces each method by making connections with things the children have already encountered. For example he explains that he keeps a research diary but doesn ’t always remember to fill it in. He points out I’m researching by being in the room, observing. He points out that they all completed a questionnaire. In this example he makes a connection between a child ’s experience and content analysis.
  • Again AS connects the children ’s suggestions with methods that have been used in order to see possible difficulties.
  • The children then conduct real research. They are told that this will help them to plan a media product for an audience later on. Questions are provided as a scaffold but they are also able to devise their own. The desk researchers clearly dispute some of the assumptions raised in earlier discussions.
  • He uses the parents present to make audiences concrete. They are also discerning that aspects of audience are important. Throughout this process AS insists that the children don ’t tell him what they think, but that they explain what the data tells them.
  • They don ’t only capture data they analyse it. Although they have been given a set of questions they come up with their own. For example ‘do you have a dog? Fave colour / food – and this data does prove useful to them. Collectively they listed a set of things that adults might want from a programme and another set for children and also prioriitised or ranked these criteria.
  • The final tasks were to devise health promotion campaign and a replacement for The Simpsons – using the data they had about adult and child audiences. In the feedback everyone had to base their comments on their research data – not personal opinions. They had to refer back to the list and say how it would appeal to adults / children. Individuals in the room were asked to comment – again using the data. The children ’s ideas in The Simpsons activity had become firmly rooted in their own pleasures and so they found themselves defending their decisions against the criteria. In this example the children had devised a storyline based on a house where some children lived. The children were naughty and this meant they were in conflict with a set of adults. This prompted an interesting debate about the way children’s programmes include content for both children and parents.
  • Still looking at the data but the year three data emphasises the importance of appropriate pedagogy which connects with the children ’s experiences in order to grapple with complexity and challenging ideas. Not to be afraid of ambiguity and provisionality even with very young children. What implications does this have for work with older students?
  • Media lit intro and conclusion

    1. 1. Media Literacy: Towards a Model of Learning Progression Funded by the Economic and Social Research Council, 2009-2011 David Buckingham, Andrew Burn, Becky Parry, Mandy Powell Centre for the Study of Children, Youth and Media Institute of Education, University of London
    2. 2. The context <ul><li>The ‘ key concepts ’ model – 25 years on… </li></ul><ul><li>Examinations – institutionalisation </li></ul><ul><li>Media literacy as regulatory policy </li></ul><ul><li>Changing literacies? – primary education </li></ul><ul><li>Media education, media studies, media literacy, media arts, moving image education… </li></ul><ul><li>Technology, creativity, citizenship… </li></ul><ul><li>Media (education) 2.0 </li></ul><ul><li>Education policy: performativity, centralisation vs. marketisation </li></ul>
    3. 3. Why research? <ul><li>The policy debate – leave it to teacher? </li></ul><ul><li>Rhetoric versus reality </li></ul><ul><li>Looking at learning, not just teaching </li></ul><ul><li>Everyday practice, not avant-garde showcase projects </li></ul><ul><li>Not ‘ effectiveness ’ or ‘ good practice ’ , but what works and doesn ’ t work in specific settings </li></ul>
    4. 4. Big issues and old theories <ul><li>Progression: ages and stages (Piaget) or the ‘ spiral curriculum ’ ? (Bruner) </li></ul><ul><li>Understanding learning: language/s and conceptual understanding (Vygotsky) </li></ul><ul><li>Multiple literacies: media and modes (Kress), social practice (Street); intelligences (Gardner) </li></ul><ul><li>Culture: cultural capital, taste and critical discourse (Bourdieu) </li></ul><ul><li>Legitimation: what kinds of knowledge or discourse ‘ count ’ in the media classroom? (Bernstein) </li></ul>
    5. 5. Media education issues <ul><li>Understanding learning progression – development, experience, assessment, pedagogy? </li></ul><ul><li>The ‘ key concepts ’ approach – is it still relevant in light of changing media? </li></ul><ul><li>Creativity and critique (theory and practice) – making the dialogue happen </li></ul><ul><li>Culture/s – generation, class, fragmenting audiences… </li></ul>
    6. 6. Our research <ul><li>‘ Developing media literacy: towards a model of learning progression ’ , ESRC, Jan 09 – Dec 11 </li></ul><ul><li>What and how can students learn about media over time? </li></ul><ul><li>Years 2/3, 4/5, 8/9, 10/11 </li></ul><ul><li>Cross-sectional and longitudinal </li></ul><ul><li>Specialist Media Arts schools and partner primaries </li></ul><ul><li>Locations – broadly middle-class / working-class </li></ul>
    7. 7. Fieldwork <ul><li>Year 1 – ‘ audit ’ : survey, interviews </li></ul><ul><li>Years 2 and 3 - curriculum development: six ‘ units ’ of classroom work </li></ul><ul><li>‘ Baseline ’ activities – existing knowledge (time-capsule, advertising) </li></ul><ul><li>Key concepts – language (narrative) </li></ul><ul><li>representation (celebrity) </li></ul><ul><li>institution (news) </li></ul><ul><li>audience (health promotion) </li></ul><ul><li>And the ‘ follow-on ’ </li></ul>
    8. 8. Work (still) in progress! <ul><li>Logistics and messy realities </li></ul><ul><li>Collaboration with schools and teachers </li></ul><ul><li>Dealing with the data mountain </li></ul><ul><li>Comparison across sites and age groups, and over time – breadth but also depth </li></ul><ul><li>Not an experiment or a randomised trial </li></ul><ul><li>A few snapshots from different sites </li></ul>
    9. 9. teachers ’ cultures, students ’ cultures
    10. 10. Teachers ’ and students’ media cultures <ul><li>Do media educators incorporate young people ’ s media cultures in the work of the classroom? </li></ul><ul><li>How would they find out about these? </li></ul><ul><li>And what about their own media cultures? </li></ul><ul><li>What about different social contexts? </li></ul><ul><li>Cultural capital; cultural omnivores; third space </li></ul><ul><li>What might all this mean for the media classroom? </li></ul>
    11. 11. Survey of media uses and attitudes: 1745 young people; 259 teachers <ul><li>Student media cultures </li></ul><ul><li>General consumption: </li></ul><ul><li>Secondary: television, music, games, films (82-58%) </li></ul><ul><li>Primary: Television, games, music, films (84-63%) </li></ul><ul><li>- newspapers all (35-32%) </li></ul><ul><li>Teacher media cultures </li></ul><ul><li>General consumption: </li></ul><ul><li>-Television, music and radio (70%) </li></ul><ul><li>Film and newspapers (68%; media teachers, 86%) </li></ul><ul><li>Games (15%) </li></ul>
    12. 12. Teachers ’ gaming cultures <ul><li>Frequent gaming: 15% </li></ul><ul><li>However: </li></ul><ul><li>Recent game experience: 63% </li></ul><ul><li>Wide variety, from the MMORPG Everquest to Call of Duty and Medal of Honour, Wii sport, Wii Fit. </li></ul>
    13. 13. Online cultures <ul><li>STUDENTS </li></ul><ul><li>Secondary </li></ul><ul><li>59% use Facebook </li></ul><ul><li>40% use Bebo </li></ul><ul><li>5% use Twitter </li></ul><ul><li>Primary </li></ul><ul><li>CBBC, Youtube dominant for younger; giving way to Facebook and Club Penguin for older </li></ul>TEACHERS 90% - internet use for personal purposes. More ‘functional’ (shopping, banking, etc) than ‘social’. BUT: 43% used social media, with Facebook dominant.
    14. 14. Making their own media <ul><li>Students </li></ul><ul><li>- making (but not editing) short films (43% P, 87% S) </li></ul><ul><li>Photos (67% P, 88% S) </li></ul><ul><li>music mixes (32% P, 82% S) </li></ul><ul><li>websites (20% P; 79% S) </li></ul><ul><li>Made a computer game (27% P; 80% S) </li></ul><ul><li>Teachers </li></ul><ul><li>- 20% make music </li></ul><ul><li>- 10% make websites </li></ul><ul><li>9% make films </li></ul><ul><li>5% make radio </li></ul><ul><li>4% make television </li></ul><ul><li>4% make animation </li></ul>
    15. 15. What social gaps? <ul><li>Greater game console ownership in less affluent area – 61% vs 36% game console in bedroom </li></ul><ul><li>More computer ownership in affluent area: 44% to 39% in bedrooms </li></ul><ul><li>Greater newspaper reading in less affluent area (predominance of tabloid titles) </li></ul><ul><li>Students ’ own media (mobile phones, music players) more widely tolerated in school in less affluent area: 75% (45% and 27% in more affluent area) </li></ul><ul><li>Bigger gap between teachers ’ and students ’ media cultures – similar differences as overall but more pronounced (eg newspapers; game choices) </li></ul>
    16. 16. Tastes: the example of games <ul><li>Different tastes/preferences in some cases: eg more affluent site top primary games: Club Penguin (40); Lego (35); less affluent site: Grand Theft Auto (32); Call of Duty (25) – but equally many shared tastes: FIFA, Sonic, Mario, Ben 10 common across both sites and all 4 schools </li></ul><ul><li>BUT gender more significant: Boys top 5: FIFA, Lego, Call of Duty, Grand Theft Auto, Mario Kart; Girls: Club Penguin, The Sims, Dress-Up games, Mario Kart, CBBC </li></ul><ul><li>AND AGE: 6 year-olds: Ben 10, CBBC, Cbeebies, Mario Kart, Sonic; 11 year-olds: GTA, Mario Kart, FIFA, The Sims, Call of Duty </li></ul>
    17. 17. What social gaps? <ul><li>SO: </li></ul><ul><li>Gaming and newspaper choices examples of different media tastes – but perhaps less pronounced than differences across age and gender </li></ul><ul><li>More affluent area – teachers mostly lived in the same area, shared many media uses and tastes </li></ul><ul><li>Less affluent are – teachers mostly lived elsewhere, shared fewer uses/tastes – but may have more positive views of students ’ media uses and tastes </li></ul>
    18. 18. MEDIA TEACHER PERCEPTIONS OF STUDENT MEDIA CULTURE <ul><li>SOME FEEL REMOTE: </li></ul><ul><li>I found [teaching a course on computer games] quite challenging because it ’ s something I don ’ t do in my spare time. </li></ul><ul><li>SOME FEEL CLOSE: </li></ul><ul><li>I was showing some pictures I put on Facebook simply because it was an easy way to store them, to bring them up because you can put them on Flickr, but often they ’ ve been taken down or whatever. They went ‘ oh my god, the teacher ’ s got Facebook! ’ </li></ul><ul><li>SOME SEE A TECHNOLOGICAL GAP ...: </li></ul><ul><li>It's a tricky situation for me because although I use a lot of technology here, I ’ m actually previously quite a Luddite really, so with really quite old fashioned ideas about what things work, certainly in terms of new technologies </li></ul><ul><li>SOME ASSUME CYBER-SAVVINESS: </li></ul><ul><li>But then and the one big thing that you possibly also are going to have with media is how far ahead of the kids are the teachers. But then interestingly when I talk to my year 11 ’ s about Twitter they hadn ’ t heard of it, which I was really surprised about because I thought they would know more about it than I did </li></ul>
    19. 19. What gaps between teachers and students? <ul><li>There are gaps, but equally considerable overlap and common ground: no ‘ digital natives and digital immigrants ’ </li></ul><ul><li>Pronounced niche interests and tastes across both groups; but enough ‘ common culture ’ (especially in television viewing) to still matter </li></ul><ul><li>Teachers are generally enthusiastic about incorporating students ’ media interests in the curriculum </li></ul><ul><li>Still notable (though variable) prohibition of students ’ own media practices in school </li></ul><ul><li>Teachers (in general) are generally positive about students ’ cultural experiences, though with some vestiges of protectionism and with some erroneous assumptions </li></ul><ul><li>But what actually happens in teaching? </li></ul>
    20. 20. COMPLICATED CLASSROOMS ... <ul><li>RESIDENT EVIL: A SNAPSHOT FROM ONE OBSERVATION </li></ul><ul><li>LOOKING AT HORROR NARRATIVES IN FILM AND GAME (GCSE MEDIA STUDIES) </li></ul><ul><li>Teacher knows a lot about games (though disavowing knowledge of new technologies) </li></ul><ul><li>Connects with boys (but also some girls) who like games </li></ul><ul><li>Conflict with one girl who prefers films </li></ul><ul><li>Destabilising of conventional hierarchies of distinction </li></ul><ul><li>Opening up of questions beyond the safety of curriculum requirements, but promising conceptual complexity and cultural commitment </li></ul><ul><li>Exploring these issues through production </li></ul>
    21. 21. Media education – bridging the gap? <ul><li>Less obvious ‘ common culture ’ , even between young people – though still enough to matter </li></ul><ul><li>What gets legitimised as ‘ educational capital ’ - and by whom? </li></ul><ul><li>How do teachers explore students ’ (very varied) media cultures? </li></ul><ul><li>How do teachers use their own popular cultural allegiances in the classroom? </li></ul><ul><li>How can this become a ‘ third space ’ for negotiation? </li></ul><ul><li>Next, some more detailed examples… </li></ul>
    22. 22. Media Language
    23. 23. Exploring Media Language Buckingham, 2003 <ul><li>Meanings. How do media use different forms of language to convey ideas or meanings? </li></ul><ul><li>Conventions . How do these uses of language become familiar and generally accepted? </li></ul><ul><li>Codes . How are the grammatical ‘rules’ of media established? What happens when they are broken? </li></ul><ul><li>Genres . How do these conventions and codes operate in different types of media texts – such as news or horror? </li></ul><ul><li>Choices . What are the effects of choosing certain forms of language – such as a particular type of camera shot? </li></ul><ul><li>Combinations . How is meaning conveyed through the combination or sequencing of images, sounds or words? </li></ul><ul><li>Technologies . How do technologies affect the meanings that can be created? </li></ul>
    24. 24. Scary Films <ul><li>Meanings. How do media use different forms of language to convey fear, tension and suspense? </li></ul><ul><li>Codes . Are there grammatical ‘rules’ of scary films? What happens when they are broken? </li></ul><ul><li>Choices . What are the scary effects of choosing certain forms of language – such as a particular type of camera shot, mise en scene or gesture? </li></ul><ul><li>Combinations . How is fear conveyed through the combination or sequencing of images, sounds or words? </li></ul>
    25. 25. Two Key Issues <ul><li>Avoiding </li></ul><ul><li>Parsing Film Grammar </li></ul><ul><li>Focusing on media language is an attempt to see how meanings are made, what motivates them, and how different groups of people might interpret them. </li></ul><ul><li>It connects with our other key concepts: representation, media institutions and media audiences. </li></ul><ul><li>Acknowledging </li></ul><ul><li>Children as Readers of Film </li></ul><ul><li>Children draw on their existing understanding of media language, when they ‘read’ media texts. </li></ul><ul><li>How can these understandings be drawn on in the classroom? </li></ul>
    26. 26. Media Learning: 3 Stages Buckingham, 2003 p.142 <ul><li>Analysis </li></ul><ul><li>Production </li></ul><ul><li>Exhibition </li></ul><ul><li>Recursive </li></ul><ul><li>Iterative </li></ul>
    27. 27. Emerging Concepts <ul><li>Show and Tell </li></ul><ul><li>Online Message Boards </li></ul><ul><li>Drawings </li></ul><ul><li>Screenings </li></ul><ul><li>Mind maps </li></ul>
    28. 28. Year 9 Message Boards <ul><li>I don't watch that many horror movies but i have watched a few and i really like them! - particularly ones like cloverfield....but scarier. Also i think the best horror movies are the ones where you know the least and never see the &quot;monster&quot; or whatever is scary. Then, when the movie finished you can be really concious of &quot;being watched&quot; but not know what to look out for. When you see the monster in cloverfield its kinda disappointing and ruins it a bit. </li></ul>
    29. 29. Year 2 Drawings
    30. 30. Introducing new ‘tools.’ <ul><li>Listen to sound </li></ul><ul><li>Watch the clip </li></ul><ul><li>Look closely at freeze frames </li></ul><ul><li>Learn some vocabulary (e.g. shots)–make inferences </li></ul><ul><li>Storyboard key sequences </li></ul><ul><li>Repeat same exercise with other clips </li></ul>
    31. 31. <ul><li>Year two and four in site (A) were given many opportunities to read (enjoy, infer, analyse and respond) to a series of clips. </li></ul><ul><li>The storyboard activities were distinct in relation to modes. So each task involved a focus on sound or camera shots or asked for drawings or only required note form. </li></ul>
    32. 32. Forms of Expression <ul><li>Y4 storyboarding opening of ‘Nightmare Before Christmas’ with attention to the visual. </li></ul>
    33. 33. Describing Shots <ul><li>‘ Closing up and turning up camera ’ </li></ul><ul><li>‘ Camera man walks forward, gates open, see castle. ’ </li></ul>
    34. 34. Interrogating Observations <ul><li>You walk backwards because you want to keep what is in front of you, in your line of sight. </li></ul><ul><li>Y4 </li></ul>
    35. 35. Text as a scaffold
    36. 36. Conclusions <ul><li>We can teach primary aged children to pay closer attention to visual and aural composition. </li></ul><ul><li>In different modes some children demonstrate understandings beyond what they can verbally articulate. </li></ul><ul><li>Identifying or being able to draw a ‘close up’ is not an end point. </li></ul><ul><li>The role of the teacher is to connect this with meaning and affect. </li></ul>
    37. 37. Production <ul><li>Creative Constraints </li></ul><ul><li>Building Blocks </li></ul><ul><li>Process / Product </li></ul><ul><li>Pleasure, play, popular culture </li></ul><ul><li>Sharing / Celebration </li></ul><ul><li>Reflection </li></ul><ul><li>Further production opportunities </li></ul>
    38. 38. How do you want the audience to feel when they see that?: Modelling creative decision-making <ul><li>Maintaining a link between media language, audience and institution the teacher connected the children to lived experience and allowed them to continue to draw on their own repertoires of understanding of texts. </li></ul>
    39. 39. Introducing theory: Introducing theorising <ul><li>A framework was developed which allowed the students to explore texts, drawing on their own experiences, to decide the point of view each was foregrounding. </li></ul><ul><li>Simultaneously, the students were making decisions about to what extent this theory was useful and some went further to suggest amendments to the theory. </li></ul>
    40. 40. POV: Across Media <ul><li>Working across different media, the students tested out a theoretical framework (Perceptual, Neutral and Interest pov). </li></ul>
    41. 41. Year 8 analysis of POV <ul><li>[The game is] telling the audience what to do, sometimes in the form of instructions. it makes the reader feel a bit like a puppet. It ’ s also a bit like watching yourself doing the action. </li></ul><ul><li>Perceptual is the POV that is used the least because your not seeing it through the characters eyes you are looking down on them. </li></ul>
    42. 42. Implications for Older Students <ul><li>Challenge </li></ul><ul><li>Tight / Niche Focus </li></ul><ul><li>Texts? </li></ul><ul><li>Valuing existing experiences </li></ul>
    43. 43. Representation: the rhetoric of diversity and the politics of difference
    44. 44. Representation: its parts <ul><li>Realism </li></ul><ul><li>is this text intended to be realistic? why do some texts seem more realistic than others? </li></ul><ul><li>Truth </li></ul><ul><li>how do media claim to tell the truth about the world? how do they try to seem authentic? </li></ul><ul><li>Presence and absence </li></ul><ul><li>what is included and excluded from the media world? who speaks, and who is silenced? </li></ul><ul><li>Bias and objectivity </li></ul><ul><li>do media texts support particular views about the world? do they put across moral or political values? </li></ul><ul><li>Stereotyping </li></ul><ul><li>how do media represent particular social groups? are those representations accurate? </li></ul><ul><li>Interpretations </li></ul><ul><li>why do audiences accept some media representations as true, or reject others as false? </li></ul><ul><li>Influences </li></ul><ul><li>do media representations affect our views of particular social groups or issues? </li></ul>
    45. 45. ... its challenges <ul><li>too philosophical/political? </li></ul><ul><li>rendered concrete and visible through social contexts (gender, age, ethnicity, sexuality, disability) </li></ul><ul><li>class? </li></ul><ul><li>over-simplification: spot the stereotype, the search for ‘truth’ and ‘reality’, labelling representations as ‘positive’ or ‘negative’, ‘good’ or ‘bad’ </li></ul><ul><li>identity? </li></ul>
    46. 46. Representation and celebrity <ul><li>what is celebrity? fame/infamy/stardom/power? </li></ul><ul><li>who becomes one? who doesn ’ t? </li></ul><ul><li>how do people become celebrities? produced by whom and why? </li></ul><ul><li>how is celebrity constructed or signified? what are the ‘ signs ’ of celebrity? </li></ul><ul><li>why do people like and dislike celebrities? </li></ul><ul><li>is ‘ celebrity culture ’ new? what does the apparent ‘ rise ’ of celebrity culture tell us? </li></ul>
    47. 47. <ul><li>the meanings of celebrity [are located] in the intertextual relations between celebrity and audience … neither a property of a specific individual, nor is it a construction of the culture industries. It is a product of media representations and the way in which audiences appropriate these meanings into their own everyday lives and concerns </li></ul><ul><li>[Duits & van Romondt Vis, 2009, p42] </li></ul>
    48. 48. <ul><li>how representations are constructed through processes of selection </li></ul><ul><li>how production (medium, technology and form) affects representations </li></ul><ul><li>how representations relate to institutions and audiences </li></ul>
    49. 49. <ul><li>a celebrity collage </li></ul><ul><li>analysis of a range of different case studies eg historical, political, cultural </li></ul><ul><li>analysis of one particular celebrity </li></ul><ul><li>simulation: the manufacture of a new celebrity </li></ul>
    50. 50. These children don ’t know about celebrity <ul><li>R: who is famous these days? </li></ul><ul><li>C: Madonna </li></ul><ul><li>A: I don ’t know who Madonna is </li></ul><ul><li>B: she looks like Lady Ga Ga </li></ul><ul><li>A: who ’s Lady Ga Ga? </li></ul><ul><li>D: Michael Jackson is special </li></ul><ul><li>R: what do you like about him? </li></ul><ul><li>D: his songs, his music </li></ul><ul><li>R: what ’s your favourite song? </li></ul><ul><li>D: Billie-Jean ... Thriller ... </li></ul><ul><li>A: ... I don ’t know Thriller ... </li></ul><ul><li>R: do you know who he is? </li></ul><ul><li>A: ... people talk about him ... I just don ’t know his songs </li></ul><ul><li>R: is he famous because he ’s rich? </li></ul><ul><li>D: he performs ... does things everyone wants to know about ... has big audiences so everyone </li></ul><ul><li>will be talking about him ... I never used to know about Michael Jackson until he died and more </li></ul><ul><li>and more people talked about him, more of his albums have been published </li></ul><ul><li>R: so how do you know about that? </li></ul><ul><li>D: it ’s his family ... they need to make more money from his albums. His sister, she’s a famous </li></ul><ul><li>singer. The parents needed to make money from the children because they weren ’t as famous </li></ul>
    51. 51. Celebrity collage <ul><li>fame as deserved in terms of skills/talent/hard work: just and individually won </li></ul><ul><li>extraordinary/special </li></ul><ul><li>contribution to society </li></ul><ul><li>‘ known’ </li></ul><ul><li>objective ‘truth’ </li></ul>
    52. 53. Subjective realities ... <ul><li>I love Usher. I love him so much I want to kiss him (y2) </li></ul><ul><li>he ’s [Johnny Depp] sexy, seductive, attractive, good-looking, works hard, is good (y8) </li></ul><ul><li>they ’re the main attraction ... people want to see them more </li></ul><ul><li>in the public eye ... someone might want to read about/find out about </li></ul><ul><li>appeared from nowhere [Susan Boyle], unexpected recognition </li></ul>
    53. 54. Some more contradictions <ul><li>W: people like Paris Hilton ... her dad started her career so she ’s not known for herself </li></ul><ul><li>X: the new Dr Who assistant ... she only got the job because she ’s Catherine Tait’s niece </li></ul><ul><li>Y: usually famous for cosmetic reasons rather than doing anything useful or good </li></ul><ul><li>Z: attention seekers, do outrageous things ... take their clothes off </li></ul><ul><li>G: Osama Bin Laden ... off message? ... </li></ul><ul><li>how to make sense of these contradictions? </li></ul>
    54. 55. Case studies ... <ul><li>image analysis: why that image? </li></ul><ul><li>established and establishing patterns </li></ul><ul><li>technologies of representation </li></ul><ul><li>comparing versions </li></ul><ul><li>importance of context </li></ul><ul><li>using difference </li></ul>
    55. 56. So far ... <ul><li>representation as cultural construct: cultural hierarchies </li></ul><ul><li>representation as social context: social subjectivities eg gender, ethnicity, age and class </li></ul><ul><li>context and content of equal importance: audience, institution and language </li></ul><ul><li>patterns and contradictions: building theory by moving backwards and forwards between abstract and concrete, familiar and unfamiliar </li></ul><ul><li>towards complexity and away from over-simplification (stereotype, objectivity, truth, realism) </li></ul><ul><li>the relationship between theory and practice? </li></ul>
    56. 57. Beyond caricature: recuperating Institution as a productive concept
    57. 58. Institution: its concrete parts? <ul><li>Production processes </li></ul><ul><li>who makes media? who does what and how do they work together? what technologies do they use? </li></ul><ul><li>Economics </li></ul><ul><li>who owns the companies that buy and sell media? what do things cost? how do companies make a profit? </li></ul><ul><li>Connections between media </li></ul><ul><li>how do companies sell the same ‘ properties ’ or ‘ brand identities ’ across different media platforms? </li></ul><ul><li>Regulation </li></ul><ul><li>who controls the production and distribution of media? are there laws about this? how effective are they? </li></ul><ul><li>Targeting audiences </li></ul><ul><li>how do media reach their audiences? how much choice and control do audiences have? </li></ul><ul><li>Access and participation </li></ul><ul><li>whose voices are heard in the media? whose are excluded? why? </li></ul>
    58. 59. What are the issues? <ul><li>transmission pedagogy </li></ul><ul><li>tedious facts: so what? </li></ul><ul><li>deficit model of media learning </li></ul><ul><li>or absent </li></ul>
    59. 60. Challenging the orthodoxies of deficit and disinterest <ul><li>Harry Potter: institutions, organisations and individuals </li></ul><ul><li>BBC: institutional case study </li></ul><ul><li>News: what is it, who is it for, who makes it, who pays for it </li></ul><ul><li>Simulation: who has power and when, who does what, where are the opportunities and constraints, what are the implications for producers, content and audiences? </li></ul>
    60. 61. Reaping the benefits of a media curriculum in Year 2 <ul><li>drawing on previous learning experiences </li></ul><ul><li>using the concepts </li></ul><ul><li>moving across and between forms and platforms </li></ul><ul><li>back and forward on a continuum between abstract and concrete </li></ul><ul><li>productive pedagogy </li></ul><ul><li>who are ‘they’ and what do ‘they’ want? </li></ul>
    61. 62. The Harry Potter model: institutions, organisations and individuals <ul><li>who are ‘they’? </li></ul><ul><li>what do they want? </li></ul><ul><li>to have fun: institution as cultural </li></ul><ul><li>to make money: institution as economic </li></ul><ul><li>for us to be safe: institution as social </li></ul>
    62. 63. The BBC: teaching for complexity
    63. 64. What does the BBC have to sell to get its money back? <ul><li>a different media model </li></ul><ul><li>it ’s always been there: institution as historical </li></ul><ul><li>they ’ll be cut off: institution as political </li></ul><ul><li>other models: institution as competitive </li></ul>
    64. 65. Making judgments
    65. 66. Back to broadcast news: ITV10, BBC6, BBC3 & Newsround <ul><li>comparing content </li></ul><ul><li>reliability of sources </li></ul><ul><li>making judgments </li></ul><ul><li>what ’s the relationship between the images they see and the people and events in the story? </li></ul><ul><li>wholesale and retail news </li></ul><ul><li>form, content and audiences: news values </li></ul>
    66. 67. We found ... <ul><li>institution as concept: more than the sum of its parts (but strong focus on institution anchors all activities) </li></ul><ul><li>teaching for and learning about complexity: avoiding cynicism and caricature </li></ul><ul><li>all ages interested in news, news values and ethics, working with judgments </li></ul><ul><li>all ages interested in regulation and funding issues </li></ul><ul><li>valuable aspect of media literacy </li></ul>
    67. 68. Audiences
    68. 69. Everywhere and Nowhere <ul><li>We cannot really isolate the role of media in culture, because the media are firmly anchored into the web of culture, although articulated by different individuals in different ways. We cannot say the audience for ‘Superman’ will behave in a particular way because of the effect of a particular message; we cannot know who will use ‘Superman’ as some kind of personal reference point , or how that will take place. The “audience” is everywhere and nowhere? </li></ul><ul><li>(Bird, 2003) </li></ul>
    69. 70. (The concept formerly known as) Audience <ul><li>Audience as a concept is complex. </li></ul><ul><li>Studying Audience has shifted dramatically, with changing perceptions of the ‘active audience.’ </li></ul><ul><li>Shifts in media culture have also raised questions about participation, power and constraint. </li></ul>
    70. 71. A need to move beyond…… <ul><li>Targetting Audiences </li></ul><ul><li>Stereotypes and Assumptions </li></ul><ul><li>Neatening up / Closing Down </li></ul>
    71. 72. What have we said so far?
    72. 73. <ul><li>AS: Who thinks someone might not like it? </li></ul><ul><li>J: There ’ s different people / different countries/ they might not know about horror books… </li></ul><ul><li>AS: We knew that a shadow or creepy music might mean…. </li></ul><ul><li>  News – your opinions changed – you produced four different programmes for different audiences? What changed your mind? </li></ul><ul><li>  </li></ul><ul><li>C: Horror is different subject, genre from news – news is about what ’ s happening round the world and it ’ s true </li></ul><ul><li>  </li></ul><ul><li>AS: Same about horror, differently about news? </li></ul>
    73. 74. <ul><li>AS: You believed children would like one version of news and adults another? </li></ul><ul><li>AS: Why do you think everyone watching a horror would feel the same? </li></ul><ul><li>AS: Did I show you proper adult horror films? </li></ul><ul><li>Class: No. </li></ul><ul><li>  </li></ul><ul><li>AS: I ’ m glad that I ’ ve got you stumped. That ’ s the starting point for our lesson. I think by the end of tomorrow afternoon – you will have an opinion on this – whether you agree with me or not is beside the point…. </li></ul>
    74. 75. Moving between personal to general <ul><li>I watch an awful lot of soaps – I don ’ t watch many chat shows. </li></ul><ul><li>Some people might say ‘ I watch mainly the news…I don ’ t watch much reality television. ’ </li></ul>
    75. 76. Confronting Discourses <ul><li>Studying Audience should help pupils to interrogate assumptions about media effects that are commonly found in public discourse about the media. </li></ul><ul><li>(Bazalgette, 1992) </li></ul>
    76. 77. With parents (and cake) <ul><li>Playing video games like ‘ Grand Theft Auto ’ makes young people aggressive. </li></ul><ul><li>  </li></ul><ul><li>Children ’ s television programmes like ‘ Teletubbies ’ are good for children. </li></ul><ul><li>Social networking sites like ‘ Facebook ’ stops young people making friends, going out and socialising. </li></ul><ul><li>  </li></ul><ul><li>The media today make girls want to grow up too fast. </li></ul><ul><li>  </li></ul><ul><li>Make a list of points for and against the statement and be ready to share your ideas with the whole class. </li></ul><ul><li>  </li></ul>
    77. 78. Maintaining the ‘question’ <ul><li>Different kinds of people watch different kinds of stuff. </li></ul><ul><li>Do they? </li></ul><ul><li>Like with radio….people like listening to it for different reasons. </li></ul><ul><li>What different reasons do people have for listening to the radio? </li></ul>
    78. 79. Which Method? <ul><li>  </li></ul><ul><li>A questionnaire: a set of questions on paper or online that you ask your target audience to answer. </li></ul><ul><li>An interview: a set of questions you ask an individual from your target audience to answer verbally. </li></ul><ul><li>A research diary: you ask your target audience to keep a diary / record for a period of time – and give them prompts or questions to consider to relate to your research. </li></ul><ul><li>An observation: a period of time where you visit your target audience in their own home, work or school and watch and listen, make notes and perhaps record what they do and say. </li></ul><ul><li>A focus group: a set of questions you ask to a small group of people from your target audience. </li></ul><ul><li>An experiment: you ask one person from your target audience to do something e.g. watch TV and then you see what they do next. </li></ul><ul><li>Desk research: you look at the facts and figures that are collected about media for your target group. For example, BARB Broadcasters ’ Audience Research Board publish the viewing figures for television programmes. </li></ul><ul><li>Content Analysis: You select a media text and analyse it. You might count how many times a film has a violent scene in it. </li></ul><ul><li>  </li></ul>
    79. 80. <ul><li>J: Say if you bought a drink – you ’ d look at the back and see what ingredients there is. </li></ul><ul><li>AS : Ah so you are comparing media to a drink. A scientific way of doing it – so you ’ d see how much fat and sugar was in it to see it was bad for you. Films are more difficult to do that with cos they don ’ t come with a label saying what ’ s inside them and we don ’ t know exactly how much violence or swearing. </li></ul><ul><li>R: Or you could just have a little go with your mum… </li></ul><ul><li>  </li></ul><ul><li>AS: Ah so you could test it? </li></ul>
    80. 81. <ul><li>AS : Experiment – this is what Riley was talking about so – we might say this half of the class – you go and watch Cbeebies and this side you go and watch ‘ Texas Chainsaw Massacre ’ – one of the most outrageous horror films ever made and then I ’ m going to bring you back and see whether this half behaves better than this half! </li></ul><ul><li>All laugh. </li></ul><ul><li>AS : No believe it or not that is what people have done in the past! </li></ul><ul><li>Now it ’ s quite difficult to measure behaviour isn ’ t it? It ’ s not like you can get out a ruler and measure – I can ’ t measure your behaviour with a ruler… </li></ul>
    81. 82. ‘ Real’ Research <ul><li>The children all interview a parent. </li></ul><ul><li>Most of the class also undertake a questionnaire with younger children. </li></ul><ul><li>One group undertake desk analysis – including data from BARB etc </li></ul>
    82. 83. Not guessing….. <ul><li>AS : In this room we ’ ve got two different audiences – can we make something that different audiences both like? So we are not just guessing. We are not just saying ..oh I think children will like this because it ’ s bright and colourful, we are finding out do children actually like programmes that are bright and colourful? We ’ re not going to say ‘ oh that ’ s got lovely flowers in it, mums will that because maybe your mum ’ s won ’ t. Maybe they would rather watch horror films or football? </li></ul><ul><li>  </li></ul><ul><li>Do I need to know what celebrities they like or doesn ’ t that matter? Do I need to know what job they do or doesn ’ t it matter? </li></ul>
    83. 84. Analyse Findings <ul><li>Data handling / number crunching </li></ul><ul><li>Audience Profiling </li></ul><ul><li>Reporting back </li></ul><ul><li>Putting it all together </li></ul>
    84. 85. Apply Findings <ul><li>Health promotion. </li></ul><ul><li>Replacing ‘The Simpsons’. </li></ul><ul><li>Devising programme </li></ul><ul><li>Initial feedback </li></ul><ul><li>Pitches </li></ul><ul><li>Final feedback </li></ul>
    85. 86. Conclusions <ul><li>Maintaining complexity </li></ul><ul><li>Confronting stereotypes and assumptions </li></ul><ul><li>Research but also research analysis and application </li></ul>
    86. 87. Conceptual learning <ul><li>Different types of concepts – more or less factual, abstract, clearly defined </li></ul><ul><li>Concepts as tools not tablets of stone – as means not ends – contested, changing </li></ul><ul><li>Not learning theory, but learning to theorise </li></ul><ul><li>Testing and interrogating theory/generalisation </li></ul><ul><li>Concrete to abstract – but also abstract to concrete </li></ul><ul><li>Connecting concepts </li></ul>
    87. 88. Theory and practice <ul><li>Theory to practice – practice to theory (reading to writing, audience to producer) </li></ul><ul><li>Working across and between multiple media/modes </li></ul><ul><li>The role of meta-language (and ‘technical’ language) – just-in-time and useful </li></ul><ul><li>Simulation – making it matter, but also distancing </li></ul><ul><li>Balancing creativity and constraint – depending on aims, motivations and context </li></ul><ul><li>The need for recursive experiences – ‘developmental media-making’ – cycles of action and reflection </li></ul>
    88. 89. Progression <ul><li>Recognising students ’ ‘proto-concepts’ </li></ul><ul><li>But also interrogating and challenging – evidence, justification, testing generalisations, how do you know? </li></ul><ul><li>Are there ‘building blocks’ – for example in learning media language? </li></ul><ul><li>Are some concepts more ‘difficult’ than others? (For kids or for teachers?) </li></ul><ul><li>A spiral, iterative curriculum – in analysis, theory and production </li></ul><ul><li>A systematic, recursive approach leading to much more challenging possibilities at secondary level </li></ul>
    89. 90. Culture/s <ul><li>Accessing and validating students ’ existing preferences and expertise – beyond anxiety </li></ul><ul><li>Bringing in teachers ’ cultural preferences </li></ul><ul><li>‘ Third spaces’ and social differences </li></ul><ul><li>Expanding cultural repertoires, encountering the unfamiliar = ‘cultural progression’? </li></ul><ul><li>Taste, identity and power – personal and political, controversial concepts </li></ul><ul><li>Interrogating how and why things are differently valued </li></ul>
    90. 91. Policy going forwards (or backwards)… <ul><li>Revisiting and renewing ‘ key concepts ’ </li></ul><ul><li>Teacher training and subject knowledge </li></ul><ul><li>Assessment – but of what? Critical thinking? Critical practice? </li></ul><ul><li>Curriculum specifications – depressing learning? </li></ul><ul><li>Media literacy, technology, creativity… </li></ul><ul><li>English and literacy – but cross-curricular (arts, social sciences) </li></ul>