Autor: Tilmann P

Source: http://www.soton.ac.uk/~mec/MECWEB/TMEDIASUM.pdf [2003-06-11] Southampton 1999.

SUMMARY REPORT
Andrew Hart
Alun Hicks
Research and Graduate School of Education
The University of Southampton
Summary Report of the Research Project
Teaching Media in English
1999

Participants

Note

This research project was funded by the Media Education Centre and the Language Division of the Research and Graduate School of Education at the University of Southampton. The project Research Fellow was Alun Hicks.

Janine Carroll	Regent’s Park School, Southampton
Linda Edge	Robert May’s School, Odiham
Viv Mitchell	Hamble School
Hilary Over	The Dorchester (Thomas Hardye) School)
Mark Perrian	Ringwood School
Polly Redman	Queen Elizabeth School, Wimborne
Laila Sillarbi	Winton School
Sue Tilley	Bournemouth School for Girls
Olivia White	City of Portsmouth Girls’ School
Jim Wood	Bay House School, Gosport
Britta Yates	Perin’s Community School, Alresford

Table of Contents

Background – Research Aims 2

Research Questions 3

Key Areas of Research 3

Media Education in Context – The School Environment 4

Approaches to English in the Cox Report (1989) 4

The New Media Environment 7

Key Findings 10

Conclusions – Developments since 1992-93 12

Status, Coherence, and Progression 13

Teacher Consensus and Support 14

Technological Change 14

Contexts 15

Media Pedagogy 15

Implications 16

Research Design 17

References 19

Further Information 19

The Media Education Centre: Aims and Activities 20

Background – Research Aims

Following the success and international extension of the Models of Media Education project (Hart and Benson, 1993; Hart, 1998) this new study examined the range of approaches to Media teaching in secondary schools at Key Stage 4 (ages 14-16) in the context of the post-Dearing curriculum for English. The project aimed to investigate the forms and purposes of Media teaching in English in secondary schools in the South and South West of England. It attempted to update the findings of the Models of Media Education Project in the light of the new provisions for National Curriculum English and current GCSE Board syllabuses. It also aimed to provide an account of the forms and purposes of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) in English teaching through the lens of appropriate research perspectives.

Research Questions

What are teachers of English doing when they say they are doing Media at Key Stage 4 in UK secondary schools?

Key Areas of Research

Media Education in Context – The School Environment

The Cox Report (DES, 1989) provided a clear basis for Media teaching within several of the five approaches to the teaching of English which it identified.

Approaches to English in the Cox Report (1989)

A „personal growth“ view focuses on the child: it emphasises the relationship between language and learning in the individual child, and the role of literature in developing children’s imaginative and aesthetic lives.

A „cross-curricular“ view focuses on the school: it emphasises that all teachers (of English and of other subjects) have a responsibility to help children with the language demands of different subjects on the school curriculum: otherwise areas of the curriculum may be closed to them. In England, English is different from other school subjects, in that it is both a subject and a medium of instruction for other subjects.

An „adult needs“ view focuses on communication outside the school: it emphasises the responsibility of English teachers to prepare children for the language demands of adult life, including the workplace, in a fast-changing world. Children need to learn to deal with the day-to-day demands of spoken language and of print; they also need to be able to write clearly, appropriately and effectively.

A „cultural heritage“ view emphasises the responsibility of schools to lead children to an appreciation of those works of literature that have been widely regarded as amongst the finest in the language.

A „cultural analysis“ view emphasises the role of English in helping children towards a critical understanding of the world and cultural environment in which they live. Children should know about the processes by which meanings are conveyed, and about the ways in which print and other media carry values.

The original Southampton Models of Media Education project in 1992-93 explored major questions about aims and methods for Media teaching amongst teachers of English. (Hart and Benson, 1993) It uncovered several areas of uncertainty amongst teachers and identified a range of models which English teachers consciously draw on in the classroom at Key Stage 4 (KS4: age 14-16). The project produced detailed descriptions and analyses of a wide range of classroom strategies for teaching about the media. A range of teaching models was identified that showed how classroom strategies and practices were incorporating new technological developments and ideological debates. By providing two distinct but related sets of data on Media teachers’ rationales for their work (from in-depth interviews) and Media teachers’ classroom methods (from systematic observation), the study:

The project also showed how Media teachers have been supported in the development of their work in the classroom through curriculum guidance and training provided by university education departments and by national advisory bodies like the British Film Institute (BFI) and Film Education. Teachers also have had the benefit of support from professional bodies like the National Association for the Teaching of English, the (now defunct)

Society for Education in Film and Television and the Association for Media Education (AME). Also important was the role which central government played in the formulation of National Curriculum policies, especially for English (through the Department for Education and Employment, Her Majesty’s Inspectorate, the (then) Schools Curriculum Assessment Authority and previously the National Curriculum Council (responsible for the Cox Report).

At departmental level, there was often a clear expectation that Media work would occur, as mandated by the National Curriculum for English, and there was often discussion and collaboration in the design of units of work that incorporated Media for students at KS4. So, in spite of the fears and uncertainties of some teachers of English about how others (parents, head teachers, school governors) would see their Media work, it was incorporated into the routine work of English departments. It was rare, however, for Media to be written explicitly into school policies.

New National Curriculum Orders based on the Dearing Review were published in 1995 (DFE) that repositioned Media within English. The importance of Media was now much clearer, though the actual number of Media references were fewer. At Key Stages 3 and 4 the most significant reference to Media comes in the Reading Programme of Study and requires that “pupils should be introduced to a wide range of media, eg, magazines, newspapers, radio, television, film. They should be given opportunities to analyse and evaluate such material, which should be of high quality and represent a range of forms, purposes, and different structural and presentational devices.” (1. f.) Many other references within Reading would, to the committed Media teacher, encourage opportunities for Media work. For example, pupils should be taught to:

Post-Dearing National Curriculum English Order (1995)

In addition, there are, within the Speaking and Listening, and Writing Programmes of Study, ample opportunities for the inventive teacher of Media to bring in quite naturally the study of media texts. For example, the range of forms in which pupils are expected to write includes “playscripts and screenplays” (1.c.)

The force of the post-Dearing curriculum and the place of Media within it were enhanced by the School Curriculum Assessment Authority’s (SCAA, now Qualifications and Curriculum Authority) GCSE regulations and criteria which instructed Examination Boards that “The range of reading assessed must also include non-fiction, media and texts from other cultures and traditions” (p. 37). Thus, many teachers who had feared the demise of Media Education within English, found that it had, in fact, been given the status that, arguably, only comes from a secure position within the assessment system.

However, despite these developments and the strong growth of specialist GCSE, GNVQ and A-level courses, Media in English seems to have remained a minor concern for many teachers of English. Learning about the media was re-established by the post-Dearing curriculum, but not in a particularly strong form, that is, not requiring specific commitments to Media work from English teachers. Continuing battles over the purposes of English have created uncertainties and tensions that have sometimes side-lined Media teaching in English. Yet the environment in schools has now changed both in terms of curricular constraints and the spread of multimedia resources. There are signs, that, through the new GCSE syllabuses, significant movement is now occurring once again. Some recent studies also indicate a growing interest in IT as an object of study rather than simply as an instrument for teaching and learning. (Goodwyn and Findlay, 1997) So this new project addresses both the issues of curriculum context and the new media environment.

The New Media Environment

Outside schools, there have also been radical changes in the social and cultural practices that characterise young people’s media interactions.

We are at the beginning of a multimedia era, in the sense of a new, increasingly enveloping and involving media environment experienced as an interconnected whole. Media culture has massively expanded over the last decades. There is a range of new media: cable and satellite TV, home computers, video recorders and camcorders, new ‘on-line’ interactive services, video discs and other consumer-oriented interactive software. (Livingstone and Bovill, 1999: p. 6) There is also a growing inter-penetration of media, as genres, themes and contents flow from one to another with increasing ease as a result of the movement from analogue to digital coding and the consolidation of communications conglomerates.

Technological and statutory developments have led to significant changes in the ways in which young people interact with the media. Various forms of deregulation have led to the increasing availability of specialist and streamed services that no longer fit the traditional models of broadcasting. Technological developments have facilitated increasingly creative interactions with media artefacts. These practices include ‘scratch’ video, the use of ‘dub’ and mixing techniques in live and recorded music and the reworking of still images through digital manipulation. At the same time, computer technology has increased the opportunities for relatively sophisticated production in sound and still and moving images. Increasingly, these are distributed through the Internet, thereby changing the relationships between young people and commercial media industries. Indeed, the development of broad-band networks which abolish the ‘tyranny of distance’ and allow a continual, interactive flow of cultural productions, information, experience, and expertise of all kinds, is widely seen as the pivotal innovation in the emerging array of ‘new media’.

Many young people no longer experience media texts as complete entities. Rather, they seem capable of relating to and enjoying a series of fragments and of ‘parallel processing’ many media events simultaneously. Traditional ‘effects’ research has focused on audiences as passive objects, but more recent ethnographic approaches see audiences as informed subjects who respond actively to texts. Qualitative studies have shown how different media genres relate to diverse ‘taste publics’, how the social dynamics of domestic contexts relate to media usage and how new communication technologies are being integrated into domestic settings. Studies of young people’s usage of television and a range of other media have begun to outline a developmental model of new forms of literacy in terms of narrative, discursive and modal competencies. These competencies are more than skills. They are social practices that develop by means of ‘spontaneous’ acquisition and by ‘scientific’ or more systematic learning experiences. Optimists see schools’ ability to use these developments as a basic precondition for building a society able to take full advantage of the movement from an industrial to an information age. They point to the potential for creating a more open society, a more informed and participating citizenry, a more fluid and innovative culture, and a more flexible and appropriately skilled workforce. The UK Government has placed particular emphasis on the need for schools to promote ‘network literacy’ and has funded a number of pilot projects linking schools to broad-band networks.

As the experience of computing in schools has shown, however, simply introducing new technologies does not ensure that they will be used either fully or flexibly. A number of British commentators have pointed to economic and organisational realities: high running costs and lack of appropriate training for teachers. There is no positive correlation between the spread of information and communication technologies and the growth of understanding about them. Indeed, the correlation may be an inverse one. Even where there is a genuine determination to update school curricula, the pace of technological change continues to outstrip educational responses.

But there is also a cultural reality that is shaping the ways new technologies are used in schools and how pupils relate to them. The ‘new media’ are being introduced into a situation where there is a complex network of established connections and discontinuities between schooling and the mass media environment. These relations can create openings and opportunities for flexible innovation in teaching and learning around ‘new media’. But they can also erect symbolic barriers. The rhetorics and pleasures of pupils’ leisure-time involvement in media often sit somewhat uneasily alongside school-based initiatives.

Teachers of English are now facing a range of new pressures and dilemmas that are accentuated by changes in the cultural formations outside school. The media environment that surrounds schools and engages pupils’ attention has become more complex, more pervasive and more integrated. The new centrality of media culture to young people’s experience has been further strengthened by the erosion of the sites that previously sustained and handed on vernacular cultures through family and community networks.

Seen together, these developments make this an appropriate moment to take a systematic look at how schools and teachers are responding to curricular and technological changes. In addition, therefore, to the specific focus on the forms and purposes of Media teaching in the English classroom, there are some larger major questions about current tensions between culture, technology and schooling that the new project illuminates:

Key Findings

New syllabus demands have meant that teachers are gaining in confidence in their teaching of Media; those less confident acknowledge the need for more expertise. Teachers were optimistic about the future of Media Education.

Although examination syllabuses and departmental Media policies have been highly influential in determining the nature of Media Education within English, individual teacher choice within the syllabus or scheme of work was still critical in determining the approach to Media within the classroom.

As a consequence of syllabus choice, a narrow view of Media Education has emerged in some schools, although teachers did strive to move beyond the syllabus limitations. Also, the definition of Media Education has been muddied by some Boards through their failure to define clearly the position of media texts in relation to non-fiction texts.

IT did not feature in any of the eleven lessons seen. Teachers and their pupils are just beginning to use the new technologies, including the Internet, but there is, as yet, no evidence of any attempt to make technologies (new or old) the focus of Media study within English.

Texts were likely to be studied without significant attention to context. Even Media Studies specialists saw no place for Institutions within the crowded English curriculum. In several schools Key Concepts had become ‘hybridised’, a mixture of rhetorical principles borrowed from literature combined with the original BFI Signpost Questions.

Within this context, there was still, amongst some teachers, a sense of equipping pupils with the means to defend themselves against Media manipulation.

Experienced teachers were especially dependent on Media understandings gained some years ago.

Within this pack, most teachers were familiar with the materials related to the selling of Levi Jeans.

In the eleven schools visited, no teachers recalled any OFSTED inspector making a significant reference in the verbal feedback or in the written report to the teaching of Media within English. No school had developed a cross-curricular approach to the teaching of Media.

In the eleven schools visited, four Media specialists had a significant role in providing INSET for teachers of Media within English and this had a positive impact on colleagues’ confidence and competence in their work.

Conclusions – Developments since 1992-93

The most significant conclusion from this research is that little has apparently changed since 1992-93, despite new National Curriculum and Examination Board provisions. This is hardly surprising in one sense, since nearly half the sample of teachers we studied this time were the same as those in the earlier study and it is unlikely that their practice would change radically in the intervening five years. Four out of the five who were revisited used the same medium on each occasion (two print and two television) and the fifth ‘switched’ from television to print.

It is also unsurprising to find a predominant focus by these English teachers on Language and Representation more than on Institutions and Agencies. The study of text, rather than context could be said to be a defining characteristic of English teaching as it is currently understood. The 1993 report noted few opportunities in lessons for space to be given to pupils’ own media experiences, but in comparison with the 1998-99 study there was a strong element of popular culture in the lessons. In 1992-93, three dealt with the making or marketing of popular music and another with the analysis of comics, but in the 1999 report there are no obvious examples of popular culture being addressed, other than in the study of the Levi Jeans advertisements. Arguably, the curriculum freedom offered in 1992-93 allowed for a more open interpretation of media experiences, but this freedom had its disadvantages. Between the eleven teachers there was less of a common purpose, more of a sense of individual preoccupations being explored.

On the other hand, the new study shows that in spite of an apparent narrowing down of the Media curriculum, all teachers felt a clear sense of purpose. They all had a sense of the place of Media within the English curriculum, and each lesson was clearly designed to fulfil an identifiable Media requirement of the appropriate GCSE syllabus. It is possible to interpret the changes that took place between the two studies as a development of coherence and focus in Media, but, perhaps, at the expense of inclusiveness, and creativity.

Status, Coherence, and Progression

There are areas in which significant advances have been made. For example, the 1992-93 research noted the doubtful status of Media Education within the English department. In 1998-99 that status had been significantly enhanced, and there was a strong sense that most were gaining confidence in their Media expertise, or, at the very least, recognising the need to gain more expertise if they were to do justice to their pupils. The motivation for this, of course, has been the new GCSE requirement that Media (as a reading skill) is assessed in all syllabuses.

This may, however, not be all good news. Where the GCSE Board elected to test Media within a terminal examination, there was a strong emphasis upon analysing printed texts, considered without the benefit of their original context. Where the Board elected to test Media understanding within coursework, there was much more likelihood of study of context and of the moving image.

If the status of Media within English has been enhanced, then so has its coherence within the English curriculum. OFSTED inspections have ensured that every school now has clear curriculum statements outlining curriculum content and opportunities for progression and continuity. (Ironically, inspectors were extraordinarily consistent in their failure to make the teaching of Media in English a significant issue). There were clear examples in 1998-99 of such curriculum statements having a significant impact on the Media curriculum, and being strongly based on a conceptual model of Media teaching. It seems that there is now much less likelihood of pupils endlessly repeating advertising projects as they progress through the school with each teacher unaware of their pupils’ prior curriculum experience. Collaboratively produced units of work, supported by relevant and centrally held resources (particularly from the English and Media Centre) were the norm.

But a word of caution is needed here. In most cases, the final choice for curriculum content at lesson level still resides within the individual teacher. Teachers can use this freedom to ‘play safe’ to rely on tried and tested lessons taken from a collectively produced scheme of work. Or, they can use the freedom to assert their individuality within a coherent curriculum framework. Thus, continuity and progression for the learner can be guaranteed, but this may be within a narrow or limited Media diet. For teachers to make informed choices they need the benefit of research such as this. They need to see the advantages of common purpose, but, at the same time, to recognise the dangers of the curriculum straitjacket. A very careful balance between collectivity and individualism needs to be struck.

Teacher Consensus and Support

In 1992-93 the National Curriculum framework was still ‘bedding in’. By 1998-99, the National Curriculum had been largely accepted, or at least tolerated. Teachers themselves were likely in 1992-93 to have entered Media Education down a variety of avenues; in 1998-99, regardless of length of teaching, memories of first encounters with Media Education tended to be forgotten, with teachers now linked by the National Curriculum connection. With this new uniformity, there is arguably, a common base on which teachers can agree and move forward, though some may regret the loss of diversity.

Yet if teachers of Media can now look with more confidence to the English curriculum and to their English teaching colleagues for authority and support, they are likely to find the whole-school context more of an obstacle. In 1991 the BFI were, (misguidedly, as history has shown), advocating that the main Media thrust should be cross-curricular (Bowker, 1991: Buckingham, 1990a 1990b; Hart ,1992). Certainly, there has been no obvious development of cross-curricular Media initiatives since then, and OFSTED-driven whole-school imperatives have made it harder for the English teacher to justify leaving classes to attend Media-related courses. Media INSET in 1992-93 was noted as being sporadic and inconsistent. In 1998-99, with the collapse of much local authority-based INSET, Media training seemed even rarer.

Technological Change

Five years of technological development have meant that teachers are beyond the stage of struggling to get on computer training courses, or talking about the importance of ‘keyboard skills’. In 1998-99 there were references to use of scanners, digital cameras and, of course, the Internet. But in practice, the pattern of lessons in both research projects seems very similar. I T was not used in any lessons seen, though folders of work and lesson plans suggested that the use of word-processing was common enough outside these lessons. In 1998-99, the Internet was beginning to be used as an information source to support study of film and literature.

But still, such technologies were tools of occasional use rather than the focus of study. Perhaps another five years will see more attention paid to the significance of accessing entertainment and information via the Internet and the possible impact on how we collectively and individually perceive the world.

A significant and surprising feature in relation to choice of Media technology remains the absence of television broadcasts as focal ‘texts’. If television broadcasts have yet to gain a major foothold in the English curriculum then what chance has the Internet as an object of study?

Contexts

Whatever texts were studied, a common thread in the 22 lessons featured in both projects was the significant absence of context. Printed texts were commonly seen as isolated fragments, and though broad institutional contexts were raised, the emphasis was nearly always upon engaging with the text itself. Five years have made little difference to teachers’ attitudes towards teaching about Agencies, Institutions or Ideology. The 1998-99 teachers were never opposed to the notion that the context of production was important, but considered the issue too slippery for pupils to grasp, or too low a priority in a crowded curriculum that offered no encouragement to go beyond the text itself. Indeed, the Media Studies specialists, those most likely to know about Institutions and Ideology, were no more likely than any other teacher to bring these issues into the English classroom: they were strong in their assertion that such matters were best tackled in a discrete Media Studies context.

Media Pedagogy

Despite the curricular and technological changes of the past five years, teachers’ aims and approaches seem to have changed little. They still seek to empower their pupils with the ability to ‘analyse’, ‘understand’ and ‘deconstruct’, with a hint of inoculation in the empowerment. Their approaches within the classroom also remain broadly similar. Analysis is still likely to involve teacher-led discussion, with learning handed back to pupils once the parameters of textual understanding have been defined. This seems especially strong where television technology is used, with teachers finding it difficult to separate control of technology from control of learning. And the outcome of textual analysis in a production sense is still more likely to be the essay than the video. Indeed, given that all Media work in the 1998 GCSE syllabuses has an assessment outcome, one cannot blame teachers if they ‘play safe’ in this respect. The gap between teachers’ description of most successful or favourite Media lessons and the lessons observed in the research reveals a tension between what teachers actually do teach and what they might wish to teach. They often cite in the interviews successful lessons that were group-based or technology-dependent, lessons that some find difficult to accommodate in the current English curriculum.

Implications

The National Curriculum for English was being re-drafted as this paper was being written. It proposes more emphasis on “moving image texts” and a clearer distinction between non-fiction texts and media texts, but no strong encouragement to engage with the social and economic contexts in which texts are produced. The way in which Examination Boards ‘translate’ the new curriculum into assessment criteria and practices will be central to the development of Media teaching over the next decade. Another factor will be the possible ‚trickle down’ effect from the new syllabus specifications which the Examination Boards are producing for Advanced and General examinations in Media Studies for students at 16+ and 18+ years of age.

Optimistically, another five years could see a significant opening up of the Media in English curriculum. But one of the 1998-99 teachers feared that if the English curriculum does not take account of the pace of technological change, then a ‘credibility gap’ could open up between pupils’ personal media experiences and schools’ engagement with them. It is arguable that the gap already exists. Nearly 30 years ago, Murdock and Phelps (1973, p.143) suggested that pupils’ media assignments, “should be produced with a real audience or public in mind…the school, or even better, the local neighbourhood.” That recommendation is unlikely to be fulfilled in the current English curriculum, which generally encourages conservatism rather than innovation.

This research shows unequivocally that the National Curriculum requirements and the way they have been interpreted by the Examination Boards define, but do not ultimately determine, what Media is taught in English-teaching classrooms. In practice, local factors such as school policies, Head of Department preferences, access to resources, professional training and individual commitment, work in tension with external factors. Teachers still have relative autonomy in curriculum planning and lesson delivery. However, If teachers like the eleven in this project are to close the increasing gap between the new media environment outside school and educational responses within school, they will need the curricular, technological and institutional contexts in which they can effectively operate and in which innovation is encouraged.

Research Design

Purposive sampling in Hampshire, Dorset and Somerset LEAs focused on schools where Media teaching was thought to be prominent within the English curriculum. Where possible, in order to make direct comparisons possible, the same teachers as were featured in the 1992-93 study were approached. Arrangements for visits were made through personal contact with Heads of English Departments.

As in the original 1992-93 study, the new project uses semi-structured interviews with selected practitioners and audiotaped classroom observations. Schedules of interview questions and key classroom issues were devised for interviews with teachers and for classroom observations. The interview questions differentiate classroom approaches to Media in terms of aims, content and methods and explore teachers’ previous experience, professional development and perceptions of Media as a discipline. The same basic questions and the same observation categories as were used in 1992-93 formed the basis of the instruments, but there were additional interview questions and observation categories on uses of ICT which were not relevant in the 1992-93 study. Lesson observations, based on the same observation categories as in 1992-93, took place as soon as possible after interview. The categories include time-allocations for different parts of the lesson; the nature and style of questions; the degree and nature of pupil participation; the resources used (including ICT), tasks and activities set; concepts available to pupils and language used by teacher and pupils. An account of each lesson was sent to the teacher concerned for comment.

References

Bowker, J. (Ed.) (1991) Secondary Media Education: A Curriculum Statement London: BFI

Buckingham, D. (1990a) ‚English and Media Studies: Making the Difference’ English Magazine, 23, pp. 8-12

Buckingham, D. (1990b) ‚English and Media Studies: Getting Together’ English Magazine, 24, pp. 20-23

Department of Education and Science (1989) English for Ages 5-16 London: HMSO (The Cox Report)

Department for Education (1995) English in the National Curriculum London: HMSO

Goodwyn, A. and Findlay, A. (1997) Media Education and Mother Tongue Teaching: Conflict or Convergence? Paper delivered at Southern Media Education Research Group Symposium within the European Conference on Educational Research, Frankfurt

Hart, A. (1992) Mis-reading English: Media, English and the Secondary Curriculum The English and Media Magazine, 26, pp. 43-6

Hart, A. (Ed.) (1998) Teaching the Media: International Perspectives New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates

Hart, A. and Benson, T. (1993) Media in the Classroom: English Teachers Teaching Media Southampton: Southampton Media Education Group

Livingstone, S. and Bovill, M. (1999) Young People, New Media (Summary Report of the Research Project: Children, Young People and the Changing Media Environment) London: London School of Economics

Murdock, G. and Phelps, G. (1973) Mass Media and the Secondary School Basingstoke: Macmillan

Further Information

Dr Andrew Hart is Senior Lecturer in Education at the Research and Graduate School of Education, University of Southampton, where he teaches Media Studies on the MA(Ed) course and supervises MPhil/PhD research. He has also taught on the postgraduate Initial Training course in English, Drama and Media Studies for many years. He has published widely on Media Education and has worked closely with teachers as Director of the Southampton Media Education Group (winner of the British Film Institute’s Paddy Whannel Award for innovation in Media Education), as Director of the Southern Media Education Research Network and of the recently established Media Education Centre. He currently represents the UK on the World Council for Media Education. Recent publications include Teaching Television, Making ‘The Real World’ (CUP 1988), Understanding the Media (BBC/Routledge 1990/91), Developing Media in English (Hodder 1995) and Teaching the Media: International Perspectives (Lawrence Erlbaum, 1998).

The Media Education Centre: Aims and Activities

Launched in 1996 and based in the Research and Graduate School of Education, the Media Education Centre has grown out of regional, national and international activities in the study of the media over the last decade. It will consolidate and extend the work of the Southampton Media Education Group and the Southern Media Education Research Network with Media researchers and practitioners both regionally and nationally. Internationally, Centre staff have established links with other European and world-wide work on Media through research and conference activities and through an extensive list of publications. The Media Education Centre is a cross-faculty initiative linking Education, Arts and Social Science postgraduate work. Through its programme of seminars, conferences and publications, the Centre will act as a catalyst for new developments, as a forum for debate and as a mechanism for research collaboration. Postgraduate taught and research courses (including Distance Learning options) are also offered through the Research and Graduate School of Education.

Key features

This work, and any part of it, is copyright. Putting any part of this work to any unauthorised use is a punishable offence and liable to prosecution. This applies in particular to reproduction, translation, copying, micro-filming, electronic storage or any other electronic re-working.