Page 167 |
Save page Remove page | Previous | 167 of 215 | Next |
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large (1000x1000 max)
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
All (PDF)
|
This page
All
|
162
putting food on the table was a real and everyday concern, both Marta and Diana
valued education and worked hard to provide their children with whatever resources
(including technological resources) they could to help them succeed in school. The
complex economic negotiations that went on in these families are important to note
in trying to understand the realities of the Digital Divide. While Digital Divide
discourses have positioned economics as a major factor in determining use and non-use
of technology, they rarely have connected the Digital Divide to the realities of
inequality and poverty in this country, and in particular to the everyday lived
experiences of those identified only as “non-users” in digital divide studies.
In the Ramos family, purchasing media appeared to be less of an issue. As I
mentioned at the beginning of this chapter, the family owned multiple televisions,
had cable, and collected DVDs and magazines. When it came to buying a computer
and getting internet service, Alicia and Martin foregrounded their concerns about
online safety and control over how the technology was used. Later in our discussion,
the cost of the technology also came up as a reason for not owning a computer or
having online service. Their concern appeared to be not in the purchasing of
hardware, but the costs of internet service. As Alicia explained:
…families who do have computers, they spend a – I guess the more services
you have, the more money you spend. It’s just like cable television. The
more services and channels you want, the more you pay, and so it kinda – it’s
an extra bill on top of that for us. And we’re kinda like – we have a method
that we always save for a rainy day, because you never know what tomorrow
– what it may bring, and so forth like that, and so we look at it like an extra
bill, like a utility bill, I mean, the Internet service, and we’re kinda like
debating whether or not – can we afford [it].
Object Description
| Title | Kids as cultural producers: consumption, literacy, and participation |
| Author | Stephenson, Rebecca Herr |
| Author email | rherr@usc.edu; bhs@hri.uci.edu |
| Degree | Doctor of Philosophy |
| Document type | Dissertation |
| Degree program | Communication |
| School | Annenberg School for Communication |
| Date defended/completed | 2008-08-25 |
| Date submitted | 2008 |
| Restricted until | Unrestricted |
| Date published | 2008-10-17 |
| Advisor (committee chair) | Banet-Weiser, Sarah |
| Advisor (committee member) |
Gross, Larry Seiter, Ellen |
| Abstract | This dissertation looks closely at the practice of digital media production within a group of special education students and their teachers. Using ethnographic methods of extended participant observation and semi-structured interviews with students, teachers, and parents, along with textual analysis of students' media projects, this work examines the types of learning that emerge from making media at school and the ways in which that learning relates to media and technology use in everyday life. Over the course of one school year (2005-2006), the students who are the focus of this dissertation undertook eight different multimedia production projects, ranging from designing PowerPoint presentations to digital video production and stop-motion animation. Through media production, the students found opportunities to practice traditional and digital literacy skills as well as to explore issues of identity and self-expression.; This dissertation provides empirical support for recommendations made by several media literacy scholars to include media production as part of critical media literacy curricula and contributes a unique case study -- one situated in special education -- to a growing body of work on digital literacy. Three interdisciplinary themes--consumption, literacy, and participation -- are used to organize the description and analysis of the students' media production activities. These themes connect the specific production that took place in the classroom to larger discourses about youth, media, technology, education, and access, working to complicate existing constructions of young people as either helpless victims of manipulative media or naturally savvy media and technology users. Instead, this research emphasizes that the relationships kids have with media and technology are complex, dynamic, intrinsically linked to their identities as consumers and participants in society. Media literacy is thus theorized as a tool for understanding and controlling consumption, participation, and the construction of young people as both current and future citizens. |
| Keyword | media literacy; media production; special education; middle school; digital media |
| Geographic subject (city or populated place) | Los Angeles |
| Coverage date | 2005/2006 |
| Language | English |
| Part of collection | University of Southern California dissertations and theses |
| Publisher (of the original version) | University of Southern California |
| Place of publication (of the original version) | Los Angeles, California |
| Publisher (of the digital version) | University of Southern California. Libraries |
| Provenance | Electronically uploaded by the author |
| Type | texts |
| Legacy record ID | usctheses-m1674 |
| Contributing entity | University of Southern California |
| Rights | Stephenson, Rebecca Herr |
| Repository name | Libraries, University of Southern California |
| Repository address | Los Angeles, California |
| Repository email | cisadmin@lib.usc.edu |
| Filename | etd-Stephenson-2393 |
| Archival file | uscthesesreloadpub_Volume29/etd-Stephenson-2393.pdf |
Description
| Title | Page 167 |
| Contributing entity | University of Southern California |
| Repository email | cisadmin@lib.usc.edu |
| Full text | 162 putting food on the table was a real and everyday concern, both Marta and Diana valued education and worked hard to provide their children with whatever resources (including technological resources) they could to help them succeed in school. The complex economic negotiations that went on in these families are important to note in trying to understand the realities of the Digital Divide. While Digital Divide discourses have positioned economics as a major factor in determining use and non-use of technology, they rarely have connected the Digital Divide to the realities of inequality and poverty in this country, and in particular to the everyday lived experiences of those identified only as “non-users” in digital divide studies. In the Ramos family, purchasing media appeared to be less of an issue. As I mentioned at the beginning of this chapter, the family owned multiple televisions, had cable, and collected DVDs and magazines. When it came to buying a computer and getting internet service, Alicia and Martin foregrounded their concerns about online safety and control over how the technology was used. Later in our discussion, the cost of the technology also came up as a reason for not owning a computer or having online service. Their concern appeared to be not in the purchasing of hardware, but the costs of internet service. As Alicia explained: …families who do have computers, they spend a – I guess the more services you have, the more money you spend. It’s just like cable television. The more services and channels you want, the more you pay, and so it kinda – it’s an extra bill on top of that for us. And we’re kinda like – we have a method that we always save for a rainy day, because you never know what tomorrow – what it may bring, and so forth like that, and so we look at it like an extra bill, like a utility bill, I mean, the Internet service, and we’re kinda like debating whether or not – can we afford [it]. |
