美国的媒介素养教育（下）

关键词： 媒介 媒介素养 文化研究方法 预防方式 媒介教育的 媒介教育理论 数字化 在线教育

[摘要]：
本文意在考察研究媒介教育的本质及其在美国的施行状况。全文分为五个部分：第一部分论述了美国在媒介教育方面远远落后于其他国家的原因。第二部分从三个阶段（预防阶段、面对阶段、转变阶段）对美国媒介教育的历史进行了简单的回顾。第三和第四部分从概念与应用的层面对媒介教育加以分析。最后的第五部分探讨了美国的媒介教育未来将要面对的挑战，所涉及的包括媒介教育的集中与扩展、从运动变为教育干预及新技术带来的影响等。本文的结论是，美国的媒介教育需要不断地进步革新从而达到一个更加令人满意的水平。

Abstract: This paper attempts to examine what media education is and how it functions in the United States from five perspectives: introduction, a brief history, conceptual issues, application issues, and future challenges. The introduction lays down the reasons why the United States is far behind other English speaking nations in media education. The second section examines the history of media education in the United States from three stages: inoculation phase, facing-it phase, and transitional phase. The third and fourth sections analyze the media education from conceptual and application levels. Finally in the fifth section, future challenges facing the centralization and expansion of media education, from movement to educational intervention, and the impact of new technology are discussed. It concludes that a continuous reform is needed for the media education in the United States to reach a more satisfactory level. [China Media Research. 2007; 3(3): 87-103]
 
Keywords: media education, media literacy, cultural studies approach, inoculation approach, history of media education, media education theories, digitalization, online education

未来的挑战
       美国媒介教育在未来将要遇到的挑战可分为三个方面：媒介教育的集中与扩展、从运动变为教育干预、新技术带来的影响。
 
集中与扩展
       从上文有关概念问题与应用问题的描述中我们可以看出，媒介教育的多种定义——无视其名目如何——都在向着同一个方向靠拢，即接受“媒介教育是以培养媒介素养为目的的一个过程”。它意在通过获得接触、分析和评价媒介作品的能力，并且同时获得离开学校后的就业能力，从而培养起批判性思维。然而，由于媒介教育的执行与评价受中央的或国家性政策指导，因此这对于美国来说仍是一个巨大的挑战。
       在澳大利亚、加拿大、英国和几乎所有的欧洲国家，媒介教育都在国家层面拥有坚实的支撑力量。然而与这些国家不同，对于美国来说，制定全国性的媒介教育课程和政策似乎有些不太现实。由于美国的教育体系分由五十个独立的州来进行操作和管理，并且明显受到家长和社会团体的影响，因此要想建立起一个统一了各种利益与各州目标的中心式计划几乎是不可能的。所以，美国是否应该寻求某种替代性的方式——比如由Thoman（1990）提出的以家长或家庭为中心的方法——来解决这种地方分权的问题？这要留待媒介教育者们来回答了。
       对媒介教育的内在成分和外部联系加以扩展是美国的媒介教育者们需要面对的另一个问题。一直以来，媒介教育关注于的书面文本；而在信息爆炸的今天，我们还需要通过广告、电影、电脑、报纸、电视等对其他一些信息形式（比如语言形式、听觉形式、视觉形式）加以关注——不仅包括书面文字，还包括药物滥用、暴力、色情、消费主义、社会不公等主题。此外，这种扩展还涉及社会研究、、行为等学科（Allen, 1992）。换句话说，对媒介教育的内在成分加以扩展、对跨学科的媒介教育加以设计，这是另一个需要媒介教育者们集中智慧加以解决的问题。
       媒介教育的外部联系是指学校内的媒介教育体系与外界团体（包括家长、社会团体、非营利性组织、商业公司等）之间的关系（Christ和Hynes，2006；Masterman，1997）。如果学校里的媒介教育要与外界团体进行协作，课堂自主性、教学法、教育目标和行政管理政策将会如何受到外部团体的影响（比如说由于不同的地区信仰、家长的过度参与、来自于商业机构的捐款及人力物力支持[Brown，1998；Hobbs，1998b；Kellner和Share，2005]），这是美国的媒介教育将在未来遇到的另一个挑战。
 
从社会运动到教育干预
       作为一种社会运动，要求建立媒介教育计划的活动已经结束了强烈要求社会承认的第一阶段，而开始在地区/国家的层面上接受官方的正式批准（Bazalgette，1997）。媒介素养的进步成为大家所向往的教育目标，这实在鼓舞人心。但是这一社会运动是否已转变成一场有效的教育干预，仍然是一个问题。Tyner（2000）指出，社会运动中常见的喊口号式的做法仍然存在于媒介教育的发展过程中，具有不确定、紧迫和夸张等特点；这种表达方式让教育者们很难在媒介教育中制定明确而连贯的理论原则。换句话说，参与教育工作的人们很难对这种语言加以理解和接受，这就影响到了他们为媒介教育的学校改革做出贡献。因此就Tyner看来，“如何阐明媒介教育的目标（这与学校文化是协调一致的）”是一个教育者们需要继续努力的问题。
       Bazalgette（1997）指明，为了制定出一套合理有效的媒介教育计划，我们需要突破媒介教育运动发展第一阶段中的五条局限：（1）媒介教育是激进人士的天下；（2）学习进步收效甚微；（3）媒介素养有多种概念；（4）媒介教师与媒介从业人员之间存在很大的差别；（5）缺乏研究和充分掌握信息情况下的辩论。如今，虽然情况已经大大改善，但是这些局限还是或多或少地存在。Aufderheide（2004）也有过类似的担心。他指出，当前的美国媒介教育需要解决四个明确而急迫的需要：（1）数据问题——研究者们需要获得更多的基础信息来支持媒介教育的发展；（2）公共性问题——需要制定连贯一致的概念和定义，从而可以建立起面向多种媒介教育计划的公共平台；（3）基础建设问题——需要建立起一个全国性的机构来制定媒介教育发展的计划与步骤，从而将各方面的努力统一协调起来；（4）有效益的、良性的关系问题——需要在政策制定者、社会团体和外界组织之间建立起互动的桥梁。对以上这些局限与急迫的需要加以了解，可以帮助教育者们更好地面对媒介教育在未来将要遇到的挑战。
 
新技术的影响
       新技术不仅改变了我们的生活方式，还给二十一世纪的媒介教育带来巨大的挑战（CML Reflection Resource，2002-2003；Kubey，1997）。新技术的影响主要来源于媒介的数字化（Abernathy和Allen，2003；Buckingham和Sefton-Green，1997；Fischetti，2000；Mammett和Barrell，2002；Olson和Pollard，2004；Tyner，1998；Warnick，2001）。据Olson和Pollard（2004），数字化的巨大力量、尤其是将传统媒介（如报纸）和数字媒介（如机）加以混合与会聚的能力还没有被美国媒介教育所重视。媒介的数字化趋势要求我们以新的方式从三个方面看待媒介教育：新数字美学、认知效应、社会效应。
       数字化趋势是指以二进制码对印刷与媒介加以整合，将传统媒介转变为数字媒介，并由此产生一整套完全不同的生产与分配模式。我们应在媒介教育的范畴内对数字化趋势在美学和在观众认知方面产生的效应加以研究，不仅仅关注于“数字环境中的计算机和媒介，而且要关注数字化媒介如何影响了传统媒介环境”（Olson和Pollard，2004，p. 249）。对媒介教育产生影响的数字美学特征可能包括交互性、操纵性，对所有媒介的内容进行目标的预设与再设，有意识的虚拟经验的创造，并尝试以之为产生新内容的一种方式等。
       数字化趋势在认知方面产生的效应源于它的非线性特征和对数字媒体内容要求方面的期望的创建，这直接影响着学生们使用媒介的方式。最后，数字化媒介所产生的最重要的社会效应是“去大众化”（Olason和Pollard，2004）。以前那种数量很大且成分均一的观众群体将逐渐消失；数字化媒介通过让观众们根据自己的意愿选择媒介信息，从而形成具有针对性的诉求，而不是大众化的诉求。对于这种从大众化向个人化的转变，媒介教育应该思考一下它对于美国文化和美国民主生活方式的意义。
 
结论
       本文从四个方面对美国媒介教育的发展状况进行了回顾：一、论述了美国媒介教育落后于大多数英语国家的原因。二、分三个阶段对美国的媒介教育发展历史进行了简单的描述：预防阶段、面对阶段和转变阶段。三、对有关美国媒介教育的定义与性质等概念问题进行了分析。四、对“如何设计与发布媒介教育课程”及“如何评价媒介教育计划”等应用问题进行了讨论。最后，笔者指出未来美国媒介教育将会遇到的三种挑战：“媒介教育的集中与扩展”，“从运动变为教育干预”及“新技术带来的影响”。
       总之，本文力图反映描绘的是美国媒介教育的过去、现在与将来。尽管笔者不曾冀望能详尽展现其全貌，但在该领域继续进行改革的必要性已经昭显：我们需要不断地进步，从而在概念上改善模糊、极端和分裂的状况，在操作上改善课程设计和评价的矛盾与不一致现象，同时正视由新的媒介技术所带来的未来挑战。如此，美国才能建立起合理完善的媒介教育体系、与其他国家分享经验、并最终为世界的媒介教育做出自己的贡献。

Notes.
1. A sample list of active non-profit media education associations in the United States:
Action Coalition for Media Education (http://www.acmecoalition.org/)
Alliance for a Media Literate America (http://www.amlainfo.org/)
Assessment in Media Education (http://www.readingonline.org/newliteracies/worsnop/)
Association for Media Literacy (http://www.aml.ca/home/)
Center for Media Literacy (http://www.medialit.org/)
Center of Media Studies (http://www.mediastudies.rutgers.edu/cmsyme.html)
Citizens for Media Literacy (http://www.main.nc.us/cml/)
Commercial Alert (http://www.commercialalert.org/)
Media Education Foundation (http://www.mediaed.org/)
Media Matters: A National Media Education Campaign (http://www.aap.org/advocacy/mediamatters.htm)
Media Watch (http://www.mediawatch.com/)
National Telemedia Council (http://www.nationaltelemediacouncil.org/)
Pauline Center for Media Studies (http://www.daughtersofstpaul.com/mediastudies/)
2. For example, a special issue of Journal of Communication (1998, Vol. 48, No. 1) was devoted to a symposium on media literacy. The issue covers nine articles from communication scholars exploring different aspects of media literacy. In addition, American Behavioral Scientist as well contributed two special issues (2004, Vol. 48. No. 1-2) on media education (Theme: “High Time for ‘Dis-Illusioning’ Ourselves and Our Media: Media Literacy in the 21st Century”). Media specialists, including practitioners, scholars, and educations in diverse fields, were invited to express their views on two parts of the theme: (1) Strategies for Schools (K-12 and Higher Education), and (2) Strategies for General Public.
 
 
References
Abernaty, K., & Allen, T. (2003). Exploring the digital domain: An introduction to digital information fluency. New York: PWS.
Accrediting Council for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication (2004). Accrediting standards. Retrieved March 10, 2006 from http://www.ukans.edu/ ~acejmc/BREAKING/ New_standards_9-03.pdf
Allen, D. (1992). Media, arts, and curriculum. In M. Alvarado & O. Boyd-Barrett (Eds.), Media education: An introduction (pp. 426-430). London: BFI.
Aufderheide, P. (2004). Media literacy: From a report of the National Leadership Conference on Media Literacy. In R. Kubey (Ed.), Media literacy in the information age: Current perspectives (pp. 79-86). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
Anderson, J.A. (1983). Television literacy and the critical viewer. In J. Bryant & D. R. Anderson (Eds.), Children's understanding of television: Research on children's attention and comprehension (pp. 297-330). New York: Academic Press.
Bazalgette, C. (1997). An agenda for the second phase of media literacy development. In R. Kubey (Ed.), Media literacy in the information age: Current perspectives (pp. 69-78). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
Bowen, W. (1996). Citizens for media literacy. Retrieved from March 4, 2006, from http://www.media-awareness.ca/english/teachers/media_literacy/ what_is_media_literacy.cfm
Bowen, W. (2006). Defining media literacy: Summary of Harvard Institute on media education. Retrieved from March 4, 2006, from http://interact.uoregon.edu/ mediaLit/ mlr/readings/articles/ defharvard.html)
Brown, J. A. (1991). Television “critical viewing skills” education. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Brown, J. A. (1998). Media literacy perspectives. Journal of Communication, 48(1), 44-57.
Buckingham, D. (1990). Children talking television: The making of television literacy. London: Falmer.
Buckingham, D. (1996). Critical pedagogy and media education: A theory in search of a practice. Journal of curriculum Studies, 28(6), 627-650.
Buckingham, D. (1998). Media education in the UK: Moving beyond protectionism. Journal of Communication, 48(1), 35-43.
Buckingham, D. (2003). Media Education: Literacy, learning and contemporary culture. Cambridge, UK: Polity.
Buckingham, D., & Sefton-Green, J. (1997). Multimedia education: Media literacy in the age of digital culture. In R. Kubey (Ed.), Media literacy in the information age: Current perspectives (pp. 285-305). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
Center for Media Studies (2000). Media education now in all 50 states. Retrieved March 3, 2006, from http://medialit.med.sc.edu/statelit.htm.
Center for Media Studies (2002-2003). Media literacy: Education for a technological age. Retrieved March 6, 2006, from http://www.medialit.org/reading_room/ article337.html
Center for Media Studies (2002-2005). History of Media Literacy in the USA – Decade by Decade. Retrieved March 2, 2006, from http://www.medialit.org/ reading_room/rr2.php
Center for Media Studies (2005). Medialit Kit. Retrieved March 6, 2006, from http://www.medialit.org/pdf/mlk/14A_CCKQposter.pdf
Chou, D. F. (2005). The current development of media education in the world. In D. F. Chou & G. M. Chen (Eds.), An introduction to media literacy (pp. 23-54). Taipei, Taiwan: WuNan.
Christ, W. G. (Ed.) (1994). Assessing communication education: A handbook for media, speech & theatre educators. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Christ, W. G. (Ed.) (1997). Media education assessment handbook. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Christ, W. G. (1998). Multimedia: Replacing the broadcast curriculum. Feedback, 39(1), 1-6.
Christ, W. G. (2002). Media literacy: Moving from the margins? Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 46, 321-327.
Christ, W. G. (2004). Assessment, media literacy, standards, and higher education. American Behavioral Scientist, 48(1), 92-96.
Christ, W. G. (Ed.) (2006a). Assessing media education: A resource handbook for educators and administrators. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Christ, W. G. (2006b). Introduction: Why assessment matters. In W. G. Christ (Ed.), Assessing media education: A resource handbook for educators and administrators (pp. 3-16). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Christ, W. G., & Hynes, T. (1997). Missions and purposes of journalism and mass communication education: An ACEJMC-ASJMC joint committee report. Journalism and Mass Communication Educator, 52(2), 73-100.
Christ, W. G., & Hynes, T. (2006). Mission statements. In W. G. Christ (Ed.), Assessing media education: A resource handbook for educators and administrators (pp. 31-50). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Christ, W. G., & Potter, W. J. (1998). Media literacy, media education, and the academy. Journal of Communication, 48(1), 5-15.
CML Reflection Resource (2002-2003). Literacy for the 21st century. Retrieved March 10, 2006, from http://www.medialit.org/reading_room/ article336.html
Collins, R. (1992). Media studies: Alternative or oppositional practice? In M. Alvarado & O. Boyd-Barrett (Eds.), Media education: An introduction (pp. 57-62). London: British Film Institute.
Considine, D. M. (1990, December). Media literacy: Can we get there from here? Educational Technology, 19, 7-19.
Cope, B., & Lalantzis, M. (Eds.) (2000). Multiliteracies: Literacy learning and the design of social futures. London: Routledge.
Donald, R. (2006). Direct measures: Portfolios. In W. G. Christ (Ed.), Assessing media education: A resource handbook for educators and administrators (pp. 421-438). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Ferrington, G. (2006). What is media literacy? Retrieved March 3, 2006, from http://interact.uoregon.edu/mediaLit/mlr/readings/articles/whatisml.html
Fischetti, N. (2000). The future of digital entertainment. Scientific American, 283(5), 47-49.
Galician, M-L. (2004). Introduction: High time for “dis-illusioning” ourselves and our media. American Behavioral Scientist, 48(1), 7-17.
Gardiner, W. L. (1997). Can computers turn teaching inside-out, transform education, and redefine literacy? In R. Kubey (Ed.), Media literacy in the information age (pp. 359-376). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
Gregorian, N. (2006). Media literacy & core curriculum: Initial results from the evaluation of a new media-literacy program funded by the U.S. Department of Education. Threshold: Exploring the Future of Education, winter, 5-7.
Grady, D. A. (2006). Indirect measures: Interships, careers, and competitions. In W. G. Christ (Ed.), Assessing media education: A resource handbook for educators and administrators (pp. 349-371). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Hall, S., & Whannel, P. (1964). The popular arts. Longdon: Hutchinson.
Halloran, J., & Jones, M. (1968). Learning about the media: communication and society. Paris: UNESCO.
Halloran, J., & Jones, M. (1992). The inoculation approach. In M. Alvarado & O. Boyd-Barrett (Eds.), Media education: An introduction (pp. 10-13). London: BFI.
Hart, A. (1997). Textual pleasures and moral dilemmas: Teaching media literacy in England. In R. Kubey (Ed.), Media literacy in the information age (pp. 199-211). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
Hobbs, R. (1994). Pedagogical issues in U.S. media education. Communication Yearbook, 17, 453-366.
Hobbs, R. (1996). Media literacy, media activism. Telemedium, The Journal of Media Literacy, 42(3).
Hobbs, R (1998a). The seven great debates in the media literacy movement. Journal of Communication, 48(1), 16-32.
Hobbs, R. (1998b). Literacy for the information age. In J. Floor, D. Lapp, & S. B. Heath (Eds.), Handbook of research on teaching literacy through the communicative and visual arts (pp. 7-14). New York: Macmillan.
Hobbs, R. (2001, Spring). The great debates circa 2001: The promise and the potential of media literacy. Community Media Review, 25–27.
Hobbs, R. (2004). A review of school-based initiatives in media literacy education. American Behavioral Scientist, 48(1), 42-59.
Hobbs, R., & Frost, R. (2003). Measuring the acquisition of media literacy skills. Reading Research Quarterly, 38(3), 330-355.
Huesmann, L. R., Eron, L. D., Klein, R., Brice, P., & Fischer, P. (1983). Mitigating the imitation of aggressive behavior by changing children's attitudes about media violence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 899–910.
Irwin, S. O. (2006). Direct measures: Embedded “authentic” assessment. In W. G. Christ (Ed.), Assessing media education: A resource handbook for educators and administrators (pp. 397-420). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Kellner, D., & Share, J. (2005). Toward critical media literacy: Core concepts, debates, organizations, and policy. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 26(3), 369-386.
Kubey, R. (Ed.) (1997). Media literacy in the information age. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
Kubey, R. (1998). Obstacles to the development of media education in the U.S.. Journal of Communication, 48(1), 58-69.
Kubey, R. (2003). Why U.S. media education lags behind the rest of the English-speaking world. Television & New Media, 4(4), 351-370.
Kubey, R. (2004). Media literacy and the teaching of civics and social studies at the dawn of the 21st century. American Behavioral Scientist, 48(1), 69-77.
Kubey, R., & Baker, F. (1999, October 27). Has media literacy found a curricular foothold? Retrieved March 3, 2006, from http://www.medialit.med.sc.edu/ edweek.htm
Leavis, F., & Thompson (1933). Culture and environment: The training of critical awareness. London: Chatto & Windus.
Mammett, R., & Barrell, B. (2002). Digital expressions: Media literacy and English language arts. Calgary, Canada: Detselig.
Masterman, L. (1980). Teaching about television. London: Macmillan.
Masterman, L. (1985). Teaching the media. London: Comedia.
Masterman, L. (1997). A rationale for media education. In R. Kubey (Ed.), Media literacy in the information age: Current perspectives (pp. 15-68). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
Media Awareness Network. (2006a). Media education in Canada: An overview. Retrieved February 20, 2006, from http://www.media-awareness.ca/english/
teachers/media_education/media_education_overview. cfm
Media Awareness Network. (2006b). Chronology of media education in Canada. Retrieved February 20, 2006, from http://www.media-awareness.ca/english/ teachers/ media_education/ media_education_chronology.cfm
Metallinos, N. (Ed.) (1994). Verbo-visual literacy: Understanding and applying new educational communication media technologies. Montreal, Canada: 3Dmt Research & Information Center.
Meyrowitz, J. (1998). Multiple media literacy. Journal of communication, 48(1), 96-108.
Moore, R. C. (2006). Direct measures: The capstone course. In W. G. Christ (Ed.), Assessing media education: A resource handbook for educators and administrators (pp. 439-459). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
National Communication Association (1998). The speaking, ing, and media literacy standards and competency statements for k-12 education. Annandale, VA: NCA. Retrieved March 7, 2006, from http://www.natcom.org/nca/files/ ccLibraryFiles/FILENAME/000000000119/K12%20Standards.pdf
Olson, S. R., & Pollard, T. (2004). The muse pixelipe: Digitalization and media literacy education. American Behavioral Scientist, 48(2), 248-255.
Ontario Ministry of Education (1989). Media literacy resource guide. Retrieved March 10, 2006, from http://www.medialit.org/reading_room/article338.html
Parsons, P. (2006). Indirect measures: Institutional data, surveys, interviews, and advisory boards. In W. G. Christ (Ed.), Assessing media education: A resource handbook for educators and administrators (pp. 329-347). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Partnership for 21st Century Skills (2003). Learning for the 21st century: A report and mile guide for 21st century skills. Washington D. C.: Author.
Piette, J., & Giroux, L. (1997). The theoretical foundations of media education programs. In R. Kubey (Ed.), Media literacy in the information age: Current perspectives (Vol. 6, pp. 89-134). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
Pungente, J. (1997). Live long and proper: Media literacy in the USA, Clipboard, 8(2), Summer. Retrieved March 3, 2006, from http://interact.uoregon.edu/mediaLit/mlr /readings/articles/medialit.html
Rosenbaum, J. (1994). Assessment: An overview. In W. G. Christ (Ed.), Assessing communication education: A handbook for media, speech & theatre educators (pp. 3-29). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Quin, R., & McMahon, B. (1997). Living with the tiger: Media curriculum issues for the future. In R. Kubey (Ed.), Media literacy in the information age (pp. 307-321). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
Rubin, A. (1998). Media literacy: Editor’s note. Journal of Communication, 48(1), 3-4.
Scharrer, E. (2002/2003, December/January). Making a case for media literacy in the curriculum: Outcomes and assessment. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 46(4). Retrieved March 8, 2006, from http://www.readingonline.org/ newliteracies/lit_index.asp?HREF=/newliteracies/jaal/12-02_column/index. html
Scheibe, C., & Rogow , F. (2004). 12 basic principles for incorporating media literacy and critical thinking into any curriculum. Ithaca, NY: Ithaca College.
Sholle, D., & Denski, S. (1994). Media education and the (re)production of culture. Westport, CT: Bergin & Garvey.
Silverblatt, A. (1995). Media literacy: Keys to interpreting media messages. Westport, CT: Praeger.
Sinartra, R. (1986). Visual literacy connections to thinking, reading and writing. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.
Singer, D. G., & Singer, J. L. (1998). Developing critical viewing skills and media literacy in children. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 557, 164–180.
Thoman, E. (1990, July). New directions in media education. Paper presented at the international Conference of the University of Toulouse, France. Retrieved February 26, 2006, from http://www.medialit.org /reading_room/article126.html.
Thoman, E. (1993). Skills and strategies for media education. Retrieved March 10, 2006, from http://www.medialit.org/reading_room/article1.html
Thoman, E. (1995). The three stages of media literacy. Retrieved March 12, 2006, from
http://www.media-awareness.ca/english/teachers/media_literacy/ what_is_media_literacy.cfm
Thoman, E., & Jolls, T. (2004). Media literacy – A national priority for a changing world. American Behavioral Scientist, 48(1), 18-29.
Tucker, D. E. (2006). Direct measures: Examinations. In W. G. Christ (Ed.), Assessing media education: A resource handbook for educators and administrators (pp. 373-395). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Tyner, K. (1991). The media education elephant. Retrieved March 6, 2006, from http://www.medialit.org/reading_room/ article429.html
Tyner, K. (1998). Literacy in a digital world: Teaching and learning in the age of information. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Tyner, K. (2000, May). Media education in the year 2000: Directions and challenges. Paper presented at the international conference on “Children, Youth and the Media”. Toronto, Ontario: Canada.
Walsh, B. (2006a). A brief history of media education. Retrieved February 26, 2006, from http://interact.uoregon.edu/mediaLit/mlr/readings/articles/briefhistml.html
Walsh, B. (2006b). Expanding the definition of media literacy. Retrieved March 3, 2006, from http://interact.uoregon.edu/mediaLit/mlr/readings/articles/ Expanding_Media_lit.html
Warnick, B. (2001). Critical Literacy in a Digital Era: Technology, Rhetoric, and the Public Interest. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Williams, R. (1961). The long revolution. London: Chatto & Windus.
Zettl, H. (1990). Sight sound motion: applied media aesthetics. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
 
 
Appendix A. Major Events in the History of Media Literacy in the United States.
 
I. Pre-1960: Early visionaries prepare the way
 
1. Marshall Mcluhan’s revolutional work on media.
2. John Culkin first invented the term “media literacy.”
 
II. 1960-1970: First experiments with media in schools
 
1. Early experiments in school television production started in the early 1960s.
2. The first TV studio in Murray Avenue Elementary in Larchmont, New York was established in 1965.
3. Iowa educators pioneered “Media Now Curriculum” in mid-1960s. Its Southwest Iowa Learning Resources Center (LRC) became a precursor of today’s area education agencies and served as a community locus for an innovative film study program.
4. Ford Foundation funds experimental high school TV program started in the late 1960s.
5. A report announced that the “Screen Education” movement failed to survive the war in the late 1960s.
 
III. 1970 - 1980: Early programs paved the way
 
1. Church groups introduced “Television Awareness Training” (TAT) for parents and adults in 1977. The Viewer’s Guide for Family and Community was developed.
2. Media & Values magazine began to chronicle growing influence of media culture and publish early activities for media literacy classroom in 1977.
3. The School of Public communication at Boston University, under a contract with the Department of Health, Education and Welfare, and US Office of Education, developed the “Television Literacy: Critical Television Viewing Skills” curriculum in 1979.

IV. 1980-1990: Connection with outside media literacy movement
 
1. The “Grunwald Document” was unanimously declared by the representatives of 19 nations at UNESCO's 1982 International Symposium on Media Education at Grunwald, Federal Republic of Germany.
2. Ministry of Education of Ontario, Canada published the “Media Literacy Resource Guide” in 1987.
3. The 1988 Annual Report of the L.J. Skaggs and Mary C. Skaggs Foundation on what are other countries doing in media education.
4. Len Masterman published “Media education: 18 basic principles” in 1989.
5. An international conference at the University of Toulouse, France in 1990, sponsored by UNESCO, proposed the new directions in media education, including the establishment of the “four criteria for success” in implementing media education in any county.
 
IV. 1990-present: Collective efforts, pioneering projects, curriculum connections, and the rapid growth of media education
1. The Media Development published Thoman’s “An overview of the challenges to implementing media literacy in the USA” in 1990.
2. The Media Commission of the National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE) met at the NCTE conference in Seattle in 1991 to explore and evaluate a number of issues central to the future of media education in the United States.
3. Aspen Institute hosted historic gathering in 1992 to set agenda of media education for the decade.
4. The Harvard University hosted the first US media literacy teaching institute in 1992.
5. The “Catholic Media Literacy Curriculum” was released in 1993.
6. The Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD) published the “Skills and Strategies for Media Education” in 1993.
7. The “Safeguarding our Youth Conference,” sponsored by the Department of Justice, the Department of Education, and the Department of Health and Human Services, was held in 1993.
8. U.S. Senate invited testimony for media literacy as strategy for violence prevention in 1995.
9. The first national media literacy conference on “Sows the Seeds” for future growth was held in Boone, North Carolina in 1995 (The second conference was held in Los Angeles in 1996).
10. Carnegie Foundation endorsed media literacy for young adolescents in 1996 (through the report of “In Great Transitions: Preparing Adolescents for a New Century”).
11. The whole issue of Journal of Communication was devoted to a symposium on media literacy (1998, Volume 48, No. 1).
12. Partnership for Media Education was formed in 1997, and had first national media education conference in Colorado Springs in 1998, St. Paul, Minnesota in 1999, and Toronto, Canada in 2000.
13. Alliance for a Media Literate America (AMLA) was founded in 2000.
14. Mid-continent Research for Education and Learning (McREL) expanded its language arts matrix to define standards for both “viewing” and “media” in 2001.
15, “CMLls MediaLit Kittm,” a framework for leaning and living in media age was published in 2002.
16. The “Learning for the 21st Century” report situated media literacy as 21st century skill in 2003.
17. The American Behavioral Scientist devoted two special issues (2004, Volume 48, No. 1 & 2) to the theme of “High Time for ‘Dis-illusion’ Ourselves and Our Media: Media literacy in the 21st Century”.
 
Source: Center for Media Studies (2002-2005). History of Media Literacy in the USA – Decade by Decade. Retrieved March 2, 2006, from http://www.medialit.org/ reading_room/rr2.php
 
 
Appendix B. A Summary of the 10 Classroom Approaches to Media Literacy
 
1. The Inquiry Model - A structured framework that will help students recognize basic issues and provide strategies for developing subject content. This model helps to stimulate open questioning and encourages students to be intellectually curious about the world; it also demands that they have the proper tools for meaningful research and discussion.
2. Critical-thinking Strategies– It refers to a body of intellectual skills and abilities that enable one to decide rationally what to believe or do. It also includes a set of values: the pursuit of truth, fairness or open-mindedness, empathy, autonomy, and self-criticism.
3. Values Education – Assumes that the mass media are an ideal resource for the discussion of moral dilemmas, the development of moral reasoning, and the use of techniques such as values clarification.
4. Media from the Perspective of Subject Disciplines - In relation to media-literacy analysis in a subject context, it is important to stress that teachers will need to move beyond conceiving of media simply as audio-visual aids. Ideas that teachers can use to incorporate media literacy into their classes include English, social sciences, family studies, science and technology, visual arts, music, physical and health education, mathematics, and resource center teachers.
5. Cross-media Studies and Interdisciplinary Strategies- The issues, trends, and special events of our time are simultaneously reflected in all or several of the mass media. Hence, whether the topic is the arms race, the promotion of a rock star, an advertising campaign, or sexuality and violence in the media, a cross-media analysis is required. The effective application of the key concepts of media depends on the integration of several media.
6. Creative Experiences – Assumes that we should integrate formal media analysis with media production. Those creative activities can range from something as short and simple as sequencing a series of photographs to a project as complex as the production of a rock video.
7. Semiotics - It is the science of signs and is concerned primarily with how meaning is generated in film, television, and other works of art. It is concerned with what signs are and the ways that information is encoded in them.
8. Reading the Media Environment – Assumes that each medium of communication has its own biases and ideology. When we interact with a medium of communication, we are influenced as much by the form of the medium as by its message. Thus, we should ask the following question about each communication medium: What would life be like without this medium?
9. Alternative Points of View -As a counter to the mass media, which are generally, conservative and constitute a major industry in which the profit motive is paramount, teachers, depending on the level of the class, can show films and videos that present an alternative vision or a different kind of perception and experience to that of the mainstream media. However, these should be a supplement to, and not take the place of, the study of popular models.
10. Full-credit Courses in Media Literacy - These courses, offered at the secondary school level, will probably be presented as one of the optional courses in English or the visual arts and will reflect a great diversity of approaches. Examples of areas covered by such courses including pop culture, the world of images, the information society, the study of specific media or genre within a medium, and television production,
 
Source: Ontario Ministry of Education (1989). Media literacy resource guide. Retrieved March 10, 2006, from http://www.medialit.org/reading_room/article338.html
 
 
Appendix C. A Summary of the 12 Basic Principles for Incorporating Media Literacy and Critical Thinking into Any Curriculum
1.        Use media to practice general observation, critical thinking, analysis, perspective-taking, and production skills by encouraging students to think critically about information presented in any media message.
2.        Use media to stimulate interest in a new topic by showing an exciting or familiar video clip or reading a short book or story.
3.        Identify ways in which students may be already familiar with a topic through media by giving examples from popular media content to illustrate what students might already know about a topic.
4.        Use media as a standard pedagogical tool by providing information about the topic through a variety of different media sources.
5.        Identify erroneous beliefs about a topic fostered by media content by analyzing media content that misrepresents a topic or presents false or misleading information about a topic.
6.        Develop an awareness of issues of credibility and bias in the media by teaching how to recognize the source (speaker) of a media message and the purpose of producing the message, and how that might influence the objective nature of information.
7.        Compare the ways different media present information about a topic by contrasting ways in which information about a topic might be presented in a documentary, a TV news report, a newspaper article, an advertisement, or an educational children's program about a specific topic.
8.        Analyze the effect that specific media have had on a particular issue or topic historically and/or across different cultures by discussing the role that the media have played (if any) in the history of this topic.
9.        Use media to build and practice specific curricular skills by using print media (books, newspapers, magazines) to practice reading and comprehension skills.
10.     Use media to express students' opinions and illustrate their understanding of the world by encouraging students to analyze media messages for distortions and bias issues of particular interest to them.
11.     Use media as an assessment tool by having students summarize their knowledge about a topic in a final report that employs other forms of media beyond the standard written report.
12.     Use media to connect students to the community and work toward positive change by finding collaborative possibilities for projects with community institutions.
Source: Scheibe, C., & Rogow , F. (2004). 12 basic principles for incorporating media literacy and critical thinking into any curriculum. Ithaca, NY: Ithaca College.
Appendix D. NCA Media Literacy Standards and Competencies.
I. Media literate communicators demonstrate knowledge and understanding of the ways people use media in their personal and public lives.

Knowledge	Behaviors	Attitudes
1. Recognize the centrality of communication in human endeavors. 2. Recognize the importance of communication for educational practices. 3. Recognize the roles of culture and language in media practices. 4. Identity personal and public media practices. 5. Identify personal and public media content, forms, and products. 6. Analyze the historical and current ways in which media affect people’s personal and public lives. 7. Analyze media ethical issues.	8. Access information in a variety of media forms. 9. Illustrate how people use media in their personal and public lives.	10. Are motivated to evaluate media and communication practices in terms of basic social values such as freedom, responsibility, privacy and public standards of decency.

II. Media literate communicators demonstrate knowledge and understanding of the complex relationships among audiences and media content.

Knowledge	Behaviors	Attitudes
1. Identify media forms, content, and products. 2. Recognize that media are open to multiple interpretations. 3. Explain how audience members interpret meanings. 4. Describe how media practitioners determine the nature of audiences. 5. Explain how media socialize people. 6. Evaluate ideas and images in media with possible individual, social and cultural consequences.	7. Create standards to evaluate media content, forms, and products. 8. Illustrate how media content, forms, and audience interpretations are linked to viewing practices.	1. Are motivated to recognize the complex relationships among media content, forms, and audience practices

III. Media literate communicators demonstrate knowledge and understanding that media content is produced within social and cultural contexts.

Knowledge	Behaviors	Attitudes
1. Identify the production contexts of media content and products. 2. Identify the social and cultural constraints on the production of media. 3. Identify the social and cultural agencies that regulate media content and products. 4. Evaluate the ideas and aesthetics in media content and products.	5. Demonstrate how media content and products are produced within social and cultural contexts. 6. Demonstrate how social and cultural regulations affect media content and products.	7. Are motivated to examine the relationships among media content and products and the larger social and cultural contexts of their production.

IV. Media literate communicators demonstrate knowledge and understanding of the commercial nature of media.

Knowledge	Behaviors	Attitudes
1. Explain how media organizations operate. 2. Identify the social and cultural agencies that regulate media organizations. 3. Compare media organizations to other social and cultural organizations	4. Demonstrate the relationships between media organizations and media distribution practices.	5. Are motivated to analyze the historical and current ways in which media organizations operate in relationship to democratic processes.

V. Media literate communicators demonstrate ability to use media to communicate to specific audiences.

Knowledge	Behaviors	Attitudes
1. Identify suitable media to communicate for specific purposes and outcomes. 2. Identify the roles and responsibilities of media production teams. 3. Analyze their media work for technical and aesthetic strengths and weaknesses. 4. Recognize that their media work has individual, social, and ethical consequences. 5. Reflect upon how their media literacy work relates to events outside of school learning.	6. Practice multiple approaches to developing and presenting ideas. 7. Structure media messages to be presented in various media forms. 8. Assume accountability for the individual, social, and ethical outcomes of their work.	9. Are motivated to appreciate how their media literacy work enhances self-expression, education, and career opportunities

Source: National Communication Association (1998). The speaking, ing, and media literacy standards and competency statements for k-12 education. Annandale, VA: NCA.

[注释]

[1]译者注：加州的媒介素养中心是非营利的团体，也是美国媒介素养教育的先驱者，提供媒介教育领导管理，公共教育，专业人才和全国性的教育资源；致力于提升和支持媒介教育在近用（accessing）、分析（analyzing）、评鉴（evaluating）与创造媒介内容（creating media content）的四个架构下，帮助年轻一代公民，发展21世纪民主社会和媒介文化生活所需的技能——批判思考和媒介制作，最终目标希望能使公众对于媒介讯息做出明智的抉择。贯彻透过教育赋予权力的理念（empowerment through education），其任务在转化媒介素养理论研究为实用的信息、训练和教育的工具给教师、青年领导人、家长和儿童照顾者使用。见http://mediaportal.moe.gov.tw/front/bin/partprint.phtml?Part=web_03&Category=0&Style=1

[2]译者注：指《文化和环境：培养批判意识》一书

[3]译者注：美国宪法的第一修正案：“联邦议会不得立法建立宗教，不得立法禁止宗教活动自由；不得立法剥夺言论自由和出版自由；不得剥夺人民以和平方式集会或者向政府请愿要求申冤的权利。”这是美国新闻自由的根源。