05/21 Reflection

The article by Kellner and Share immediately begins by explaining that critical media literacy is extremely important but the USA hasn’t been able to achieve and therefore teach it. This literacy spans material outside of traditional literary works, and offers a mainstream analysis of media. The protectionist approach is pointed out, similar to Degand’s article about multiliteracies and culturally relevant pedagogy. This approach keeps people from the important information they deserve to know as many citizens blame media for the worlds problems (that are completely unrelated). They understand that media contributes to social problems in some ways, but when it is contextualized in the right way, it contributes to education and discussion very well. Another way media is taught is through thinking about the aesthetic properties, which is important but focuses on self-expression rather than socio-consciousness. A third approach is the “media literacy movement,” where this media and learning is politically neutral and explores communication. The central approach the authors want people to take is a combo of these 3 approaches. It teaches all types of literacy and social problems, including projects for democratic social change. This type of literacy increases civic participation since it is a collaborative type of teaching and learning. This radical democracy requires teachers to share power with students when conducting lessons so they get the most learning. This critical learning requires cultural studies and education through the media; independence and interdependence are both promoted through this approach. Media production must be encouraged through this approach and it must be increased in public school settings in the US. The article finishes by stating that literacy must be expanded to include common modes of communication. Teachers must be trained to stimulate creativity and this type of learning should become normal in the classroom settings in order to create progressive democratic students.

I have struggled to think of a classroom setting where this type of approach is used, but i sincerely think that this is becoming a central aim of the International Baccalaureate program. I participated in English classes through this and never have I been encouraged to used my phone in class more than here. This class heavily empahsized the influence social media has on society now, and it was tailored to fit what was most popular in the period we were learning. We studied how politicians are now using this almost “addiction” to media to their advantage, and how they are manipulating audiences into believing them through it. This occurs through ads and even standard apps like twitter. In addition to persuasion, it is important to well-known figures that they are seen active on media since it increases their popularity– they are more “modern.” I think studying this made me extremely aware of “hidden” biases within media, and has allowed me to grow as I seek out news sources and other media in general.

If you had an opportunity to learn like this within an english class, would you? If a controversy came up do you think you would be able to sit and discuss it in a class or do you think classes should be as neutral as possible?