SHORT ANALYSIS of Len Masterman’s Article:
Teaching the Media: Chapter 2
Kieran Coffey
#200132904
CMNS 428: Stuart Poyntz
Word Count: 502
Chapter 2 of Len Masterman’s Teaching the Media takes a look at the necessity of multiple literacies and suggests some ways in which traditional educational practices need to be reformed. With youth increasingly using multimedia as well as those media taking on many roles and functions, the traditional deconstruction approach is not sufficient to tackle the challenge of educating youth effectively. In this article Masterman suggests a set of core ideas and principles as well as a framework in which new ways of teaching the media can be realized. In addition, he stresses that new ways of teaching about reality and being critical are crucial points in the projects’ success.
Masterman begins by articulating the necessary framework for the new media project. He states that the media need to be presented as a process representing different frames of reality as opposed to being presented as a single package. Through four strategies including criticizing sources and frames of represented reality, media texts can be properly analyzed. He also suggests that although these methods are effective, since audiences are now increasingly considered commodities, focusing on media texts is not a complete system.
Masterman states that it is important to have key concepts in mind when teaching media. He lists ideology, realism, audience positioning, and rhetoric among his examples. Essential parts of understanding these concepts are both actively producing and being critically autonomous. Masterman strongly encourages that students learn by doing and that in doing so they can develop a mature level of critical awareness that can be exercisedoutside of an educational environment.
This point is perhaps one of the most important goals of Masterman’s multiple literacies projects. He suggests that these goals are only attainable through the reformation of the traditional pedagogical systems. This means encouraging non-hierarchical teaching, dialogue, and reflection in the classroom. It is through these methods that students can exercise what Friere called a Dialogue-Reflection-Action model, which supports both active production and critical awareness in students.
Masterman concludes by writing about progressivism, suggesting that there are debates between the right and the left wings over pseudo-issues regarding new education when there is an incredible need for classroom reform regardless. He suggests that patterns of subordination and domination that run deeply in the educational systems can be challenged by moving towards new ways of teaching in the classroom.
Masterman’s article represents a strong framework and base of understanding for new pedagogical practices. Perhaps where is falls short is that it does not address new media specifically, such as the internet and online learning possibilities. However, due to the paper’s date of publication (1987) and the fact that it is a chapter in a larger volume, this goal is not an integral part of the article. The ideas of critical autonomy and participation in students are the key concepts, with suggestions on methods to reform education and important core concepts as the strong support. This article is very informative and enlightening, and is a must-read for anyone in the educational field.