Teaching media literacy

Below is an article review/synopsis written for my communication education course.

Teaching media literacy

For this post, I selected an article by Covington (2004) discussing approaches to teaching media literacy because my contribution to the group book proposal project requires me to contribute a section on this topic. The article notes the increasing importance of media literacy courses in today’s information age, due to “the need to determine the value of content” (Covington, 2004, p. 119) generated by the media.

Covington (2004) traces the origin of media literacy as a teaching discipline to Bianculli’s (1992) call for “teliliteracy” (p. 7). Expanding on this, media literacy may now be defined as “the ability to critically examine, understand, question, and evaluate how various media produce meaning, the structure of media organizations, how such organizations construct reality, and how consumer’s lives are impacted as a result (Abdullah, 2000)” (Covington, 2004, p. 121).

The author suggests that the ultimate goal of a media literacy course is to create change in the attitudes and behavior of students by providing them with “a framework for judgments to be made about the information one receives” (Covington, 2004, p.119). He describes two types of audience for the media literacy course, the captive audience (e.g. students who take the course because it is required), and the voluntary audience (such as those who take the course as an elective). These two categories can be viewed as two ends of a continuum, with most students falling somewhere in between.

According to the article, a media literacy course should include content on the possible alienating effects of media due to its competition with institutions such as the family and its potential to erode community. Instructors could also cover the influences on the media, including geographical location as well as cultural, political, and economic variables. Management of media organizations also play an important role in the direction of coverage.

In terms of teaching techniques, the article recommends that media literacy instructors provide students with the opportunity to both analyze and develop media products, thus equipping them to be critical and knowledgeable consumers and producers of media content. Canada provides a good example of how this task can be approached – the government requires media literacy to be taught in all schools and media producers visit Canadian educational institutions to explain the production process to students. This allows students to ask questions about how decisions are made, the creative process, and what influences media content.

Another important goal for media literacy instruction is to help students understand the ubiquity of media and the tendency to be oblivious of its pervasive presence. The imagery of a fish in water which nevertheless remains unaware of the environment in which it is immersed is a good way to make this point to students (Covington, 2004). Students should also be made aware of how one’s cultural assumptions impact the media production and consumption process.
The course can also include a discussion of propaganda and the fact that the most powerful influences of media tend to be the ones we are least aware of.

Finally, the author presents systems theory as a helpful framework for designing and delivering media literacy courses. Based on key tenets of systems theory, media literacy courses must be open to the constantly changing media environment and continually adapt course content and methodology to this rapidly evolving real-life media context.

References

Covington, W. G. (2004). Creativity in teaching media literacy. International Journal of Instructional Media, 31(2), 119-124.

Bianculli, D. (1992). Teleliteracy: Taking television seriously. New York, NY: Touchstone.