This article was downloaded by: [McMaster University]On: 24 October 2014, At: 09:07Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Action in Teacher EducationPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/uate20

Media Literacy and InformationLiteracy: A Need for Collaboration andCommunicationAngel Kymes aa Northeastern State UniversityPublished online: 12 May 2011.

To cite this article: Angel Kymes (2011) Media Literacy and Information Literacy: A Needfor Collaboration and Communication, Action in Teacher Education, 33:2, 184-193, DOI:10.1080/01626620.2011.569445

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01626620.2011.569445

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever orhowsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arisingout of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Action in Teacher Education, 33:184–193, 2011Copyright © Association of Teacher EducatorsISSN: 0162-6620 print/2158-6098 onlineDOI: 10.1080/01626620.2011.569445

Media Literacy and Information Literacy: A Needfor Collaboration and Communication

Angel KymesNortheastern State University

Both media literacy and information literacy struggle for legitimacy in school curricula, and seek tobe recognized as relevant to student learning initiatives. While each has a distinct historical context,a dedicated group of followers, and base of research and intervention, neither has alone achieved thescale needed to make systemic change in public education in the United States. The author proposesrecognition of the strengths of each, a combined effort of supporters, and a dedication to the newapproaches and initiatives working to make changes in education that could have a lasting effect onthe ways students use, learn, and understand media in their educational and personal lives.

INTRODUCTION

For a former school library media specialist, information literacy skills and technology integra-tion were central to teaching and learning in the school library. When I was introduced to theconcepts of media literacy, it seemed logical to include these new ideas into the existing frame-work of information literacy and the standards at the national and state levels that directed studentlearning. Several years ago, I wrote a short chapter that suggested that the library media centerwas a logical place to incorporate media literacy components and projects into school activitiesand student research (Kymes, 2005). Through state and national presentations, I have discoveredthat many other school librarians are interested in media literacy and excited about incorporatingthe skills and components into their libraries and student learning projects. Many see media liter-acy as a natural extension of what they do every day in schools. Dedication to technology and newmedia applications place librarians as front-line witnesses to the power of these tools in the livesof modern students. Incorporating information literacy skill into the school curriculum requireseducators to look at multiple texts—print, digital, media—and use all effectively for gatheringinformation and producing useful knowledge. However, in the K–12 literature, there is very lit-tle incorporation of specific media literacy skills within library curricula and research. In manyways, this may be a result of the assumption that within the field of information literacy, mediatexts are included as relevant texts, not unlike print texts, as legitimate sources of informationand study. Media literacy is seen as included within information literacy, as is technology,digital,and visual literacy. In fact, within the newest standards developed by the American Associationof School Librarians (2007), Standards for the 21st Century Learner, media literacy is mentioned

Correspondence should be addressed to Angel Kymes, Curriculum and Instruction, Northeastern State University,3100 E. New Orleans, Broken Arrow, OK 74014. E-mail: kymesa@nsuok.edu

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

McM

aste

r U

nive

rsity

] at

09:

07 2

4 O

ctob

er 2

014

MEDIA LITERACY AND INFORMATION LITERACY 185

specifically (though partially) in Standard 2.1.6, “use media literacy to create products to cre-ate products that express new understandings” and imbedded in many others. Researchers andgroups dedicated to each of these specific disciplines may choose to overlook the other and seehow each is different. Classroom teachers and researchers in media literacy have often over-looked the school library, believing that the library is a place of book learning and research only.Librarians have focused less on entertainment media and popular culture in favor of database skilland information evaluation. Media literacy and information literacy are unique in ways; however,together they require an integrated approach to learning, and incorporation into existing standardsand subjects of study.

HISTORICAL BACKGROUNDS

During the 1940s, the American Library Association (ALA, 1945) recognized the need for agroup of professionals dedicated to schools and school libraries to exist. Since the late 1960s,the school librarian in the United States has often been referred to as a “library media specialist”and the school library as the “library media center” in efforts to “emphasize the broad focus ofthe school library media program” and to recognize the influence of viewing and listening skillsassociated with multiple media formats included with print book collections in the public schools(American Association of School Librarians & Association for Educational Communications andTechnology, 1998, p. vi). In 1988, the American Association of School Librarians (AASL) andthe Association for Educational Communications and Technology (AECT) created the first edi-tion of Information Power, which outlined the purposes of the library within the schools, and theunique role of the school librarian. The first iteration of Information Power established guidelinesfor the school library program, defined roles and responsibilities of the library media specialist,and discussed baselines for personnel, resources, and facilities (AASL & AECT, 1988). WhenInformation Power was revised a decade later to include specific student learning standards andindicators of success, the associations adopted the definition of information literacy, drafted bythe American Library Association in 1989, as the ability to “access, evaluate, and use” informa-tion in its various forms (AASL & AECT, 1998). This definition remains intact and continues todrive the research and profession.

The AASL and AECT 1998 standards allowed specifically for student appreciation, use, andcreation of information products in a variety of media formats and outlets. Therefore, media inall forms have coexisted alongside traditional print resources as valid sources of information andcredible content for learning. As with all facets of education since the late 1990s, technologycontinues to revolutionize the school library and the ways in which students access and use infor-mation for their personal and educational purposes. Today, students in school libraries also useWebsites, blogs, wikis, and a host of web 2.0 tools to create and share knowledge.

Information literacy has, however, suffered from a perennial publicity problem. In 2003,School Library Journal, the educational journal published for school librarians, conducted anation-wide survey about the integration of information literacy skills. According to results fromthat survey, 68% of school librarians reported difficulty in implementing the national, state, anddistrict standards, and respondents claimed less than one third of teachers could explain thenecessity of information literacy skills for their students (Whelan, 2003). Whelan (2003) sug-gested many educators hear the term and conclude that it is “library jargon” or synonymous with

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

McM

aste

r U

nive

rsity

] at

09:

07 2

4 O

ctob

er 2

014

186 ANGEL KYMES

simple access (p. 51). Information literacy has been defined within the profession as skill, con-cept, habit, and a tendency to lifelong learning. Likewise, during the midwinter American LibraryAssociation (ALA) meeting in January 2010, the AASL Board of Directors (Pentlin, 2010) votedto officially change the name of its professionals to “school librarians,” citing confusion overtitles and noting differences in the United States and other countries as to titles and assumedresponsibilities. The loss of the term media could revert thinking back to book or print-basedlearning only; the loss of the term specialist could devalue the masters-level educational dedica-tion required to obtain certification in most states. Inconsistencies in who we are and what we docontinue to plague the profession and reduce the effectiveness of the message.

Media literacy, which in the United States began attracting the attention of educators in the late1960s and early 1970s, initially focused on the effect of television on children and using televisionfor learning opportunities. Tyner (1998) credited reports by the Surgeon General and the NationalInstitute of Mental Health for creating interest in media literacy education and the developmentof the critical viewing skills curricula (p. 138). Unfortunately, a “back-to-basics” approach toeducation emerged in the early 1980s, and the media literacy movement was largely abandoned.

During this period of disfavor in the public schools, a number of organizations and associationsin the private and nonprofit sectors worked to keep media literacy efforts alive. Thoman and Jolls(2005) blamed a lack of leadership and direction from professional teaching organizations anddeficits in academic research for the floundering and continued lack of emphasis in schools thatcharacterized this period. Factions emerged, with opposing groups appropriating media for theirspecific purposes and creating responses to media which fit those purposes. Groups such as theNew Mexico Media Literacy Project (http://medialiteracyproject.org) use the media for instruc-tion about the power of media, and for campaigns centered on health, tobacco use, and the roleof advertising in media. The critical media literacy movement is rooted in critical literacy theoryand critical pedagogy for democratic participation (Buckingham 2007; Gainer, 2010; Rodesiler,2010). By stressing resistance to hegemonic themes, Gainer (2010) suggested using media withstudents to “analyze and critique dominant narratives” and thereby “transform society” as stu-dents create “alternative representations” and possibilities (p. 372). Many other educators fallbetween these camps, in a “site between fandom and censor” (Kellner & Share, 2005; p. 373),taking instead an approach that emphasizes critical thinking and personal responsibility withregard to the media.

Although other countries work with national standards and guidelines on teaching media lit-eracy, the movement the United States has simply never become widespread. During the lastdecade, media literacy education in the United States has failed to gain sufficient momentum towarrant significant curricular changes. Schwarz (2005) wrote that media literacy “may have adifficult time finding a place” within the public school curricula in the United States because ofeducators’ “cynicism and fatigue” in the face of continual public criticism and perpetual cyclesof school “reform” (p. 233).

INITIAL DISTINCTIONS

Information literacy and media literacy have struggled since the 1970s to gain purpose and sup-port within the public school curricula. Both movements have suffered from publicity problems,lack of teacher awareness, and have been sidelined in cycles of “back-to-basics” movements

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

McM

aste

r U

nive

rsity

] at

09:

07 2

4 O

ctob

er 2

014

MEDIA LITERACY AND INFORMATION LITERACY 187

in the educational and political landscape. They are not, however, interchangeable or identical.Information literacy has been the mantra and sole focus of the library community alone. Medialiteracy has been appropriated by a number of school and cultural groups and used in class-rooms and grass-roots community efforts for conflicting purposes. Librarians have typically usedmedia and technology in a simplistic or functional manner, regarding them as neutral in terms ofinformation delivery. Access to media is centered on location and retrieval, and its use is basedin school activities. This is contrasted with Buckingham’s (2007) assertion that media educa-tion cannot rest solely in teaching through media, as librarians have traditionally been willingand comfortable doing, but that media education must be about the media. Educators who haveembraced the tenets of media literacy tend to recognize that media use is dominated by pop-ular culture, that the site of consumption is more often outside of the school walls, and thataccess to media must include an “access to cultural forms of expression and communication”(Buckingham, 2007, p. 115).

SHARED CONCEPTS

Therefore, though not necessarily identical in application or purpose, the similarities betweenmedia literacy and information literacy are striking.Information literacy and media literacy

• view media and multimodal texts as valid sources of study and information gathering• seek to teach students to question the information and messages received from others• encourage students to be responsible, ethical users of technology• value consumption and production as responses to media and information.

Tyner (1998) asserted that the “similarities between the stated competencies of informationliteracy, visual literacy, and media literacy are so close that separating them seems unnecessarilyartificial” (p. 104). Although information literacy is defined by AASL as the “ability toaccess, evaluate and use information in a variety of forms” (AASL & AECT, 1998), medialiteracy is currently defined by the National Association for a Media Literacy Education(http://namle.net/publications/media-literacy-definitions/) as the “ability to access, analyze,evaluate, and communicate information in a variety of forms, including print and non-printmessages.”

These similarities in purpose and near consistency in definition cannot be overlooked. Infact, in many instances in education and popular publications, the terms are viewed synony-mously. UNESCO combined media and information literacy together as “the skills and abilitiesfor critical reception, assessment and use of information and media in their professional andpersonal lives” (Moore, 2008, p. 4). The organization concludes that the underlying compo-nents of each concept are “inextricably intertwined,” and that “library and mass media traditionsare converging as their digital context increasingly overlap” (Moore, 2008, p. 5). The documentTeacher Training Curricula For Media and Information Literacy (Moore, 2008) further assertsthat “media and information literacy may be summed up as being centered on five core com-petencies, referred to as the ‘5Cs’: Comprehension, Critical thinking, Creativity, Cross-culturalawareness and Citizenship” (p. 6).

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

McM

aste

r U

nive

rsity

] at

09:

07 2

4 O

ctob

er 2

014

188 ANGEL KYMES

These shared strands of information literacy, media literacy, and information and communi-cation technology (ICT) literacy are commonly interwoven and frequently substituted for oneanother in discussions of future skills or digital citizenship. Entrenched in the new language ofschool reform and helping to define the changing landscape of the future of public education isthe national organization The Partnership for 21st Century Skills (P21; 2004). Although much ofthe organization’s focus is on what it terms “the three R’s and the four C’s,” basic skills coupledwith critical thinking, communication, collaboration, and creativity, there is also a focus on build-ing shared learning environments and interdisciplinary learning experiences. The P21 frameworkindicates that these environments and experiences are dependent on the skills of information lit-eracy, media literacy, and ICT literacies. Although Kellner and Share (2005) are critical of theP21 framework, reviling the merger of corporate America with public education and condemningits language of instrumental progressivism, they reluctantly acknowledge that it does offer “thepossibility of wide exposure for media literacy” (p. 381).

Discovery Education’s definition of media literacy skills (http://web2010.discoveryeducation.com/media-literacy.cfm) sounds much like the discussions of basic 21st-century skills in the P21framework (as indeed it is a corporate member of the Partnership for 21st Century Skills), andcommonly understood by librarians as components of information literacy. These skills includeresearch skills for locating information, the ability to create and share new media and information,critical thinking skills, adaptive learning behaviors, and the ethical use of information.

Teaching Media Literacy and Information Literacy

McPherson (2008) encouraged educators to move beyond “a narrow set of analytical and ratio-nal thinking processes and values” to instead focus on broader constructs of literacy that allowstudents to “represent what they wish to say,” “understand a broader set of communications fromother people,” and “contribute positively to society” (p. 37). In the K–12 environment, there area number of factors that will increase the success of media and information literacy efforts, andpedagogical philosophies to consider. These include a culture of collaboration, a dedication toinquiry-based learning in authentic learning contexts, and a commitment to the use of popularculture texts.

Collaboration

Neither media literacy nor information literacy are sets of skills, competencies or habits of mindthat can be taught and learned in isolation. Both require larger frameworks of discipline andcontext for learning to be most successful. Literature courses, social studies and history classes,and current events courses are all obvious ties to media literacy instruction, and concepts can beeasily embedded within broad themes of research and study of these disciplines. Because inte-gration requires high levels of collaboration between the school librarian and classroom teachers,the school librarian may be uniquely positioned to weave together the strands of media and infor-mation literacy into meaningful units of study and application. For most teachers, the mention ofmedia or information literacy brings assumptions of technologies, and some are not comfortableallowing students to explore technologies with which they are not familiar and unable to assess.Again, the librarian, situated in a profession dominated by technology and web-based literacies,can serve as a technology resource for teachers and students wishing to explore and exploit themfor media and information learning. By designing collaborative units of study with classroom

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

McM

aste

r U

nive

rsity

] at

09:

07 2

4 O

ctob

er 2

014

MEDIA LITERACY AND INFORMATION LITERACY 189

teachers, the librarian can help students integrate the concepts of media and information liter-acy with classroom content to develop rich learning experiences. Considine (2009) noted thatmedia literacy can be “an ally for engaging students with the curriculum in creative and chal-lenging ways” (p. 66). This engagement occurs not only when collaboration is fostered betweenthe teaching faculty within a school, but also between the students within the classrooms. Kist(2004) observed that new literacy classrooms are sites where student collaboration, motivation,and engagement are high in response to the emphasis on digital and media texts and multipleoutlets for literate practices.

Inquiry-Based Learning in Authentic Contexts

Using questions to drive student research and to encourage critical and independent thinking isthe hallmark of inquiry-based learning. AASL’s Standards for the 21st Century Learner (2007)advocates this approach, and questioning is the heart of the Center for Media Literacy’s (2005)Media Lit Kit & other curricular materials. Brown (2009) encouraged educators to look for“essential questions” that help students develop inquiry and critical thinking skills, by connectingwith students’ out-of-school experiences, allowing for divergent and multiple perspectives, andaddressing ideas and concepts that are relevant to students’ lives. Additionally, Brown (2009)suggested that the “intentional use of questions . . . prompts students’ personal involvement inknowledge building . . . [and] is well aligned with the communal nature of the new media whichfoster self-expression [and] experimentation” (p. 26). Adams and Burke (2009) noted the differ-ences between media and information literacy but claimed that essentially both literacies requirethe learner to “deeply question” what she or he is seeing and learning (p. 192). Carnesi andDiGiorgio (2009) celebrated inquiry-based learning as a new “interactive cycle of research”:

The inquiry process engages students in a way that promotes critical thinking, higher-level process-ing, and the use of more varied and appropriate resources. And if that’s not enough reason to teachthe inquiry process, consider the fact that students are learning a process of gathering evidence tosolve problems or answer questions that they can use throughout life, as opposed to finding andregurgitating a set of facts they will never need again. (p. 32)

Ryan (2008) defined authentic learning as that which is “community-based, cross-curricular,and connected to students’ complex textual lives” (p. 191). When students’ literacies in and outof school are valued and incorporated into learning experiences, connections to “real life” can bemade, and can help to prevent the response of “so what?” (Brown, 2009) that frustrates so manyteachers. In a high school setting (Levin, 2010) the librarian and classroom teachers work togetherto help students create video projects, incorporating the skills of media production, AASL infor-mation literacy standards, and disciplinary goals and objectives. Through the use of open sourcesand free software on the web, commercial sites like YouTube and Hulu, students observe and thenpractice the skills of story and production to their videos, marketing pieces, and documentaries(Levin, 2010).

Popular Culture

Duncan-Andrade (2004) defined popular culture as “the various cultural activities in whichyoung people invest their time, including but not limited to music, television, movies, video

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

McM

aste

r U

nive

rsity

] at

09:

07 2

4 O

ctob

er 2

014

190 ANGEL KYMES

games, sport, Internet, text messaging, style and language practices” (p. 313). All of these tech-nologies and skills continue to shape and alter the in and out of school practices of students.Research by the Kaiser Family Foundation (2010) indicates that the average student spendsmore than 7 hours each day engaged with media, typically in multiple formats simultaneously(i.e., watching television, surfing the web, and texting friends, and doing homework, all at thesame time).

In light of students’ media use and connectedness to technology applications and skill,Duncan-Andrade (2004) believed that “traditional school curriculum, coupled with traditionalpedagogies, stand little chance of capturing the hearts and minds of young people” (p. 317).Allowing popular culture texts into the classroom has been a struggle for many educators duringthe past few decades. Schools traditionally devalue students’ awareness and connectedness topopular culture, rejecting it as “academically irrelevant and socially reprehensible” (Duncan-Andrade, 2004, p. 316) and responsible for a “miasma of denigrating and sub-intellectualideologies” (Savage, 2008).

However, Marsh and Millard (2000) suggested that the use of popular culture texts in the class-room provides students with the message that they “do not have to cast off the identity of homeand community as they enter the classroom” (p. 183). Levin (2010) noted that her students’ mediaawareness allows them to become “sophisticated media creators and consumers” (p. 53). Popularculture texts can be motivating for students, and be used to provide a bridge to “the recognizedcanon of texts” (Marsh & Millard, p. 186). Likewise, Duncan-Andrade’s (2004) research withstudents indicates their desire to use popular culture texts to make connections to their daily livesand the books and curricular texts used in schools (p. 334). Students in Savage’s (2008) researchindicated they would value the input of caring, interested educators who could assist them in read-ing and interpreting the media messages aimed at them as youth consumers (p. 54). Educatorswho value the use of popular culture texts and discourses within the classroom can make theseconnections to students’ lived experiences and engage them in critical thinking through mediaand information literacy activities (Morrell, 2004). Social networking (Dowdall, 2009), YouTube(Kellner & Kim, 2010), and hip-hop (Duncan-Andrade & Morrell, 2008; Morrell & Duncan-Andrade, 2002; Weinstein, 2006) can all serve as spaces in which educators can bridge the gapbetween school and cultural literacies.

DIRECTION AND RESPONSIBILITIES

The language of high-stakes testing and rhetoric of accountability have dominated the educa-tional landscape of the past few years. In most schools today, classroom teachers do not feel asif they are required, equipped, or even allowed to teach skills outside of those that are tested indistrict benchmark tests and state measures of accountability. This mentality continues to driveout forms of curriculum and subjects that are outside of “basic” education and the account-ability movement’s emphasis on reading and math skills. Due to this increasing pressure onclassroom teachers and the high-stakes testing environment prevalent in so many schools, theschool library remains the place where students and teachers together have the opportunity toinvestigate popular culture texts and situate themselves as critical and informed consumers ofmedia messages. To make the concepts of media and information literacy relevant to classroomteachers, administrators and curriculum specialists in K–12 settings, a number of different groups

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

McM

aste

r U

nive

rsity

] at

09:

07 2

4 O

ctob

er 2

014

MEDIA LITERACY AND INFORMATION LITERACY 191

and the proponents of media literacy and information literacy must come together to speak witha common voice. Unfortunately, this shared message is more of a vision and less of a reality.Badke (2009) warned that there is a “danger of living in silos” of separation and distinction, asinformation literacy, media literacy, or ICT literacy “are seen as remedial adjuncts in academia,”and are considered extraneous to education “in part because they have not established a commonfront” (p. 48).

Tyner (1998) asserted that the “need to set one literacy apart from another” can beexplained only through a need to “strengthen the professional status of its constituencies, orto take issue with the approaches used by proponents” but noted that there is much room for“cross-collaborative comparisons” (p. 104).

Therefore it is a spirit of collaboration, shared vision, and acceptance of an overriding need forchange within public schooling that must drive a connected, concerted effort of all constituenciesto make changes that will bring about the inclusion of media and information literacy studies asnecessary curriculum.

Proponents of media literacy are searching for ways to make inroads with media literacyinstruction in schools. The efforts of organizations such as the Center for Media Literacy, ProjectLook Sharp, Just Think and their extensive curricular materials available to schools demon-strate a dedication to facilitating the process for interested teachers. Professional organizationssuch as NAMLE and Action Coalition for Media Education (ACME) offer resources and con-ference learning experiences necessary for in-service teachers to gain advice, assistance, andencouragement from others in the field.

School librarians should continue their dedication to information literacy while incorporat-ing, but not subjugating, media literacy. Literature and research in the library community mustcontinue to focus on including the language, concepts, and skills of media literacy as they areinterwoven into the existing framework and standards of information literacy. In the schools,librarians must work to foster higher levels of collaboration with classroom teachers to incor-porate media and information literacy skills into curricular areas. School librarians must makea greater commitment to the critical and democratic principles advocated by media literacyproponents to assist in the development of informed and autonomous citizens.

Colleges of education have a dedication to producing teachers for future generations ofstudents. As technologies continue to revolutionize society and the teaching/learning process,universities have a responsibility to incorporate new technologies into preservice teachers’ class-room and field-based learning experiences. By strengthening commitments to the Partnershipfor 21st Century Skills (already endorsed by the American Association of Colleges of TeacherEducation) and adopting principles suggested in UNESCO’s Teacher Training Curricula ForMedia and Information Literacy (Moore, 2008), universities demonstrate their dedication tothe skills of media and information literacy and recognize the necessity of teaching suchskills to teacher candidates and students alike. In the paper, 21st Century Knowledge andSkills in Educator Preparation (American Association of Colleges of Teacher Education & ThePartnership for 21st Century Skills, 2010), the organizations encourage colleges of teacher edu-cation to recognize the need to combine the traditional academic learning with the new formsof knowledge and skill “so that our children meet the demands of a global economy, as well asengage in good citizenship and participate fully in a vibrant and civil society” (p. 3).

Although these changes must begin as colleges of education prepare preservice teachers, prac-ticing teachers must also engage in professional development opportunities, graduate courses and

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

McM

aste

r U

nive

rsity

] at

09:

07 2

4 O

ctob

er 2

014

192 ANGEL KYMES

workshops that allow them to learn new skills and technologies. As we educate future schoollibrarians in their graduate programs, faculty must recognize the importance of integrating medialiteracy into curricula. Teachers and librarians alike must be willing to reach out to the otherand design cooperative, collaborative lessons incorporating media and information literaciesthat motivate and empower student learners. Because media information literacy skills are notbound by traditional school disciplines, teachers in all subjects—literature, history, science, orsociology—can partner with one another and with the school librarian to create curricular unitsof inquiry.

McPherson (2008) envisioned a future where students, connected through networks of literacyand technology, are able to embrace pluralism and democracy. It will be through the efforts ofeducators dedicated to the skills of media and information literacy that will allow these studentsto emerge and thrive.

REFERENCES

Adams, S., & Burke, M. (2009). New literacies: What can popular culture teach us about information and media literacy?In M. Leaning (Ed.), Issues in information and media literacy: Education, practice, and pedagogy (pp. 191–207).Santa Rosa, CA: Informing Science Press.

American Association of Colleges of Teacher Education (AACTE) & The Partnership for 21st Century Skills. (2010).21st century knowledge and skills in educator preparation. Retrieved from http://aacte.org/index.php?/Research-Policy/Recent-Reports-on-Educator-Preparation/aacte-and-p21-release-paper-on-21st-century-knowledge-and-skills-in-educator-preparation.html.

American Association of School Librarians. (2007). Standards for the 21st century learner. Chicago, IL: AmericanLibrary Association.

American Association of School Librarians & Association for Educational Communications and Technology. (1988).Information power: Guidelines for school library media programs. Chicago, IL: American Library Association.

American Association of School Librarians & Association for Educational Communications and Technology. (1998).Information power: Building partnerships for learning. Chicago, IL: American Library Association.

Badke, W. (2009). Media, ICT, and information literacy. Online, 33(5), 47–49.Brown, K. (2009). Questions for the 21st century learner. Knowledge Quest, 38(1), 24–29.Buckingham, D. (2007). Media education goes digital: an introduction. Learning, Media & Technology, 32(2), 111–119.Carnesi, S., & DiGiorgio, K. (2009). Teaching the inquiry process to 21st century learners. Library Media Connection,

27(5), 32–36.Center for Media Literacy. (2005). Media lit kit. Retrieved from http://www.medialit.org/cml-medialit-kit.Considine, D. (2009). From Gutenberg to Gates: Media matters. The Social Studies, 100(2), 63–73.Dowdall, C. (2009). Impressions, improvisations and compositions: reframing children’s text production in social network

sites. Literacy, 43(2), 91–99.Duncan-Andrade, J. (2004). Your best friend or your worst enemy: Youth popular culture, pedagogy, and curriculum in

urban classrooms. Review of Education, Pedagogy & Cultural Studies, 26(4), 313–337.Duncan-Andrade, J. R., & Morrell, E. (2008). The art of critical pedagogy: Possibilities for moving from theory to practice

in urban schools. New York, NY: Peter Lang.Gainer, J. S. (2010). Critical media literacy in middle school: Exploring the politics of representation. Journal of

Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 53(5), 364–373.Kaiser Family Foundation. (2010). Generation M2: Media in the lives of 8–18 year olds. Retrieved from

http://www.kff.org/entmedia/upload/8010.pdf.Kellner, D., & Kim, G. (2010). YouTube, critical pedagogy, and media activism. Review of Education, Pedagogy &

Cultural Studies, 32(1), 3–36.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.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

McM

aste

r U

nive

rsity

] at

09:

07 2

4 O

ctob

er 2

014

MEDIA LITERACY AND INFORMATION LITERACY 193

Kist, W. (2004). New literacies in action: Teaching and learning in multiple media. New York, NY: Teachers CollegePress.

Kymes, A. (2005). The library media center: At the center of media literacy education. In G. Schwarz & P. U. Brown(Eds.), Media literacy: Transforming curriculum and teaching. The 104th yearbook of the National Society for theStudy of Education (Part I, pp. 275–278). Malden, MA: Blackwell.

Levin, S. (2010). Student created videos: Teaching copyright and media literacy through student produced documentaries.Knowledge Quest, 38(4), 53–55.

Marsh, J., & Millard, E. (2000). Literacy and popular culture: Using children’s culture in the classroom. London, UK:Sage.

McPherson, K. (2008). Shaping global criticality with school libraries. School Libraries Worldwide, 14(2), 35–44.Moore, P. (2008, June 16–18). Teacher training curricula for media and information literacy: Report of the International

Expert Group meeting, UNESCO House, Paris. Retrieved from http://portal.unesco.org/ci/en/ev.phpURL_ID=27057&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html.

Morrell, E. (2004). Linking literacy and popular culture: Finding connections for lifelong learning. Norwood, MA:Christopher Gordon.

Morrell, E., & Duncan-Andrade, J. R. (2002). Promoting academic literacy with urban youth through engaging hip-hopculture. English Journal, 91(6), 88–92.

Partnership for 21st Century Skills. (2004). Framework for 21st century learning. Retrieved from http://www.p21.org/.Rodesiler, L. (2010). Empowering students through critical media literacy: This means war. Clearing House, 83(5),

164–167.Ryan, M. (2008). Engaging middle years students: Literacy projects that matter. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy,

52(3), 190–201.Savage, G. (2008). Silencing the everyday experiences of youth? Deconstructing issues of subjectivity and

popular/corporate culture in the English classroom. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 29(1),51–68.

Schwarz, G. (2005). Obstacles, challenges, and potential: Envisioning the future. In G. Schwarz & P. U. Brown (Eds.),Media literacy: Transforming curriculum and teaching. The 104th yearbook of the National Society for the Study ofEducation (Part I, pp. 229–250). Malden, MA: Blackwell.

Thoman, E., & Jolls, T. (2005). Media literacy education: Lessons from the Center for Media Literacy. In G. Schwarz &P. U. Brown (Eds.), Media literacy: Transforming curriculum and teaching. The 104th yearbook of the NationalSociety for the Study of Education (Part I, pp. 180–205). Malden, MA: Blackwell.

Tyner, K. (1998). Literacy in a digital world: Teaching and learning in the age of information. Mahwah, NJ: LawrenceErlbaum.

Weinstein, S. (2006). A love for the thing: The pleasures of rap as a literate practice. Journal of Adolescent & AdultLiteracy, 50(4), 270–281.

Whelan, D. L. (2003). Why isn’t information literacy catching on? School Library Journal, 49(9), 50–53.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

McM

aste

r U

nive

rsity

] at

09:

07 2

4 O

ctob

er 2

014