Advertisement

Wider Literacies with Digital Media

  • Michelle Cannon
Chapter

Abstract

This chapter revisits the social and political tensions running through the text, and makes recommendations to develop literacy as critical and collaborative media-making informed with artistry and purpose. This chapter, whilst acknowledging the extrinsic uses of film and media production in schools as tools to boost traditional academic achievement, trains its lens on the elusive intrinsic benefits that augment aesthetic sensibility, critical acumen and social participation. The book will be of interest to social groups motivated by broad and inclusive educational programmes that nurture creative expression, cultural capital and civic engagement through enlightened hands-on media production and ‘signature pedagogies’.

Bibliography

  1. Alexander, R. (Ed.). (2010). Children, their World, their Education: Final Report and Recommendations of the Cambridge Primary Review. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  2. Ball, S. J., Maguire, M., & Braun, A. (2012). How Schools Do Policy: Policy Enactments in Secondary Schools. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  3. Belshaw, D. (2012). What is Digital Literacy? A Pragmatic Investigation [online]. PhD Thesis, Durham University, Durham. Retrieved February 7, 2018, from http://neverendingthesis.com.
  4. Brazil. (1985). Film, Directed by T. Gilliam. USA: Universal Pictures.Google Scholar
  5. Brook, T. (2010). Digital glue: Creative media in the classroom. In C. Bazalgette (Ed.), Teaching Media in Primary Schools (pp. 116–130). London: SAGE Publications.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Burn, A., Potter, J., & Reid, M. (2014). Media arts, digital culture and education—Guest editorial [online]. Media Education Research Journal, 5(1), 5–14. Retrieved February 7, 2018, from http://merj.info/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/MERJ_5.1_Introduction.pdf.
  7. Burnett, C. (2011). The (im)materiality of educational space: Interactions between material, connected and textual dimensions of networked technology use in schools. E-Learning and Digital Media, 8(3), 214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Delors, J. (1996). Learning: The Treasure Within. The International Commission on Education for the 21st Century. Paris: UNESCO.Google Scholar
  9. Denzin, N. K. (2001). Interpretive Interactionism (2nd ed.). London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Eisner, E. (2005/1993). Forms of understanding and the future of educational research. In E. Eisner (Ed.), Reimagining Schools (pp. 150–162). Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  11. Giroux, H. A. (2011). On Critical Pedagogy. New York: Continuum.Google Scholar
  12. Goodman, S. (2003). Teaching Youth Media, A Critical Guide to Literacy, Video Production, and Social Change. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  13. Goodman, S. & Cocca, C. (2014). Spaces of action: Teaching critical literacy for community empowerment in the age of neoliberalism [online]. English Teaching: Practice and Critique, 13(3), 210–226. Retrieved May 22, 2018, from http://education.waikato.ac.nz/research/files/etpc/files/2014v13n3dial1.pdf.
  14. Hall, S. (1992). Cultural studies and its theoretical legacies [online]. In L. Grossberg, C. Nelson, & P. Treichler (Eds.), Cultural Studies (pp. 277–294). London and New York: Routledge. Retrieved February 7, 2018, from http://msuweb.montclair.edu/~furrg/pursuits/hallcultstuds.html.
  15. Huston, J., & Long, R. E. (2001/1973). John Huston: Interviews. Jackson, MS: University Press of Mississippi.Google Scholar
  16. Kendall, A., & McDougall, J. (2012). Critical media literacy after the media [online]. Revista Comunicar. Retrieved February 7, 2018, from http://www.revistacomunicar.com/pdf/preprint/38/En-02-PRE-13482.pdf.
  17. Koh, A. (2014). The Political Power of Play [online]. Hybrid Pedagogies. Retrieved February 7, 2018, from http://www.hybridpedagogy.com/journal/political-power-of-play/.
  18. Kvale, S. (1996). Interviews: An Introduction to Qualitative Research Interviewing. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  19. Lanham, R. A. (1994). The Electronic Word: Democracy, Technology, and the Arts. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  20. Loveless, A. (2008). Creative learning and new technology? A provocation paper [online]. In J. Sefton-Green (Ed.), Creative Learning (pp. 61–71). London: Creative Partnerships, The Arts Council. Retrieved February 7, 2018, from https://www.sussex.ac.uk/webteam/gateway/file.php?name=creative-learning-sept-2008&site=45.
  21. Lynch, T. L. (2015). The Hidden Role of Software in Educational Research: Policy to Practice. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  22. Martin, A. (2006). A European framework for digital literacy [online]. Nordic Journal of Digital Literacy, 1(2), 151–161. Retrieved February 7, 2018, from http://www.idunn.no/dk/2006/02/a_european_framework_for_digital_literacy.
  23. McDougall, J. (2016). “Mediapting” and curation: Research informed pedagogy for (digital) media education Praxis. In J. Frechette & R. Williams (Eds.), Media Education for a Digital Generation. New York: Routledge Section 20.Google Scholar
  24. Mihailidis, P. (2014). Media Literacy and the Emerging Citizen: Youth, Engagement and Participation in Digital Culture. New York: Peter Lang.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Pendleton-Jullian, A. (2009). Design Education and Innovation Ecotones [online]. Retrieved February 7, 2018, from https://fourplusone.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/apj_paper_14.pdf.
  26. Peppler, K. (2013). New Opportunities for Interest-Driven Arts Learning in a Digital Age. New York: The Wallace Foundation.Google Scholar
  27. Porter, N. (2015). Schools Should be Fined for Their Students’ GCSE Fails, Argues Think Tank [online]. Policy Exchange. Retrieved February 7, 2018, from https://policyexchange.org.uk/schools-should-be-fined-if-pupils-dont-make-the-grade/.
  28. Potter, J., & McDougall, J. (2017). Digital Media, Culture and Education: Theorising Third Space Literacies. London: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Reid, A. (2007). The Two Virtuals: New Media and Composition. West Lafayette, IN: Parlor Press.Google Scholar
  30. Roberts-Holmes, G. (2014). The ‘datafication’ of early years pedagogy ‘if the teaching is good, the data should be good and if there’s bad teaching, there is bad data’. Journal of Education Policy, 30(3), 302–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Rushdie, S. (1991). Imaginary Homelands. London: Granta.Google Scholar
  32. Sefton-Green, J. (2013). Mapping Digital Makers: A Review Exploring Everyday Creativity, Learning Lives and the Digital. State of the Art Reviews. London: Nominet Trust.Google Scholar
  33. Stommel, J. (2012). Hybridity, pt. 2: What is Hybrid Pedagogy? [online]. Hybrid Pedagogy [online]. Retrieved February 7, 2018, from http://www.hybridpedagogy.com/journal/hybridity-pt-2-what-is-hybrid-pedagogy/.
  34. Thomson, P., Hall, C., Jones, K., & Sefton-Green, J. (2012). The Signature Pedagogies Project: Final Report [online]. London and Newcastle-upon-Tyne: Creativity, Culture and Education. Retrieved February 7, 2018, from https://www.creativitycultureeducation.org/publication/the-signature-pedagogies-project/.
  35. Wexler, P., Crichlow, W., Kern, J., & Matusewicz, R. (1992). Becoming Somebody: Toward a Social Psychology of School. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  36. Williamson, B. (2017a). Big Data in Education The Digital Future of Learning, Policy and Practice. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  37. Williamson, B. (2017b). Learning in the “platform society”: Disassembling an educational data assemblage. Research in Education, 98(1), 59–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michelle Cannon
    • 1
  1. 1.UCL Knowledge Lab, Institute of EducationUniversity College LondonLondonUK

Personalised recommendations