Leadership Report For Global MIL
Consortium for Media Literacy Volume No. 117March, 2021Leadership Report for Global MILConfronting the Challenges of a Participatory Culture(Fifteen Plus Years Later)02Report03CML is pleased and proud to present this Special Report, Confronting the Challenges ofa Participatory Culture (Fifteen Plus Years Later), with Henry Jenkins as Editor. Henryis the Provost Professor of Communication, Journalism, Cinematic Arts and Educationat the University of Southern California – but we know him best as a strong and faithfulchampion for media literacy world-wide The white paper, Confronting the Challenges of a Participatory Culture, was publishedby the MacArthur Foundation sixteen years ago. This original document, prepared byHenry Jenkins and a team of researchers at MIT, offered an important reframing of medialiteracy which reflected the shifting realities of the digital era – new affordances, newpractices, and new opportunities were leading to new forms of informal learning that wereplaying an important role in the lives of many American youth. Educators were often slowto recognize the value of these new spaces as a site for developing new skills or the waysliteracy changed in a world where young people were creating and sharing media witheach other in record numbers.38CML NewsResourcesJenkins and Jolls have authored other papers together.39MediaLit! Moments40Today, it is possible to critically analyze cultural narratives by applying theCML framework:JOIN OUR MAILING LISTCONNECT!ONS / Med!aLit Moments March, 2021 1
IntroductionConfronting the Challenges of a Participatory Culture(Fifteen Plus Years Later)CML is pleased and proud to present this Special Report, Confronting the Challenges ofa Participatory Culture (Fifteen Plus Years Later), with Henry Jenkins as Editor. Henryis the Provost Professor of Communication, Journalism, Cinematic Arts and Educationat the University of Southern California – but we know him best as a strong and faithfulchampion for media literacy world-wide.We remember well the global excitement and the accolades for Henry and his teamthat accompanied the publication of the original report. A new era, a new digital revolutionwas still dawning, and people in the media literacy field were wondering how thesenew developments would impact the theory and practice of media literacy. One thingwas clear: just deconstructing television ads or asking students to construct PSA’swere rapidly becoming practices that showed their age; the digital world was far morecompelling for critical analysis and more importantly, for interaction and yes, participation.Confronting the Challenges of a Participatory Culture both embraced media literacyand helped pave a path to the future – it was both reassuring and insightful, with newframeworks and points of departure that built on the foundations already laid.With this report being such an important marker between the old and the new, it isimportant to look back and see how the field has since developed. The genesis of thisretrospective report was a 2018 dinner between Henry Jenkins and Tessa Jolls in LosAngeles, where a discussion led to the idea of doing a 15-year retrospective during2019 on the Participatory Culture report through a series of interviews of those involved.Life intervened, and neither Henry or Tessa could tackle the project until 2020, with firstpublication in Henry’s blog in February, 2021.And here it is! This special issue of Connections will provide the entire RetrospectiveReport on Confronting the Challenges of Participatory Culture (Fifteen Plus YearsLater), which Henry broke into four sections in his blog. Henry and Tessa conceptualizedthe report content and participants; Tessa conducted recorded interviews; and Henryorganized and edited the multitude of documents which comprise this Retrospective. Wehope it stimulates reflection and discussion, just as the original report did, since there areseldom opportunities to look back and see what really happened.CONNECT!ONS / Med!aLit Moments March, 2021 2
ReportHENRY JENKINS, EDITORConfronting the Challenges of a Participatory Culture(Fifteen Plus Years Later)PART ONEThe white paper, Confronting the Challengesof a Participatory Culture, was publishedby the MacArthur Foundation sixteen yearsago. This original document, prepared byHenry Jenkins and a team of researchers atMIT, offered an important reframing of medialiteracy which reflected the shifting realitiesof the digital era -- new affordances, newpractices, and new opportunities were leadingto new forms of informal learning that wereplaying an important role in the lives of manyAmerican youth. Educators were often slowto recognize the value of these new spacesas a site for developing new skills or the waysliteracy changed in a world where youngpeople were creating and sharing media witheach other in record numbers.Across this series, we are going to providean oral history of how that report came to bewritten and what its impact was at the timeof publication. In this opening segment, wespeak to Connie Yowell, who headed the Digital Media and Learning Initiative for theMacArthur Foundation; Mimi Ito, who was a second pillar of the initial research for theDigital Media and Learning Initiative; and Henry Jenkins, who was the primary authorof the Participatory Culture White Paper. Long time media literacy advocate Tessa Jollsconducted the interviews.CONNECT!ONS / Med!aLit Moments March, 2021 3
Connie Yowell: In 2004, we were coming out of a 30 million initiative and districtreform that was focused on teacher professional development and evidence-basedapproaches to teacher professional development. It was state of the art. It was areally thoughtful, forward looking set of commitments we had made revolving aroundthe notion that the teacher was going to be the core unit of change in transformingschools and that we needed to focus on professional development. We were inthree districts doing district wide reform, and within three years, we cycled through11 superintendents and made almost no progress.The MacArthur Board was paying attention. They said, there’s got to be somethingdifferent we can do. We had John Seely Brown on our board, the former head ofXerox. John said we should be looking over the horizon and thinking about the impactof digital media, and these new tools that are coming out, and what they mean forlearning. I was like, well, I don’t do that. I’m a hardcore educator. I don’t believe intechnology making a difference. I’m out of here.What we decided in the meantime was to split the difference, because MacArthurdidn’t want me to leave, which I appreciated, and to do three exploratory pieces ofwork. Henry’s piece was one of the three. Another one was Mimi Ito’s research. Weasked her, with her group of 25 researchers, to do an ethnographic study of howyoung people were using digital media outside of school. We had Nicole Pinker inChicago, who’s a computer scientist, and we just said, “you’re in our backyard”. Itallowed us, the staff, to be able to come and spend some time with teachers and kidsto see how they were doing intervention with technology.Great. But neither of those was the conceptual piece. Neither of those pieces werereally grounded. In reading Henry’s stuff, I was really coming to understand thetransformation in the culture. We needed somebody who understood the relationshipbetween culture and media and what it means for thinking and production andcreativity and all the things that Henry focuses on. Then, the third piece was for Henryto really dive deep conceptually to help us and to help the field understand what washappening both from a theoretical and a more practical perspective. He was able tounderstand the media in a much different way and explain a new set of literacies. Wewere looking for Henry and his team to conceptually, intellectually drive that work.CONNECT!ONS / Med!aLit Moments March, 2021 4
I mean, he’s got all those literacies. His team has all those literacies. He’s deep in it,but to have him start writing about it and really make explicit what the combination ofthese new digital tools plus culture was going to create.That was the genesis of the work. We had brought Henry with Mimi and Nicole to beour consultants to help make us be smarter. It really became clear that we neededhim to be our intellectual center, and his team to push that thinking to the worldof education, because this new thinking wasn’t going to come out of the world ofeducation.Tessa Jolls: I think that’s a really important point – how we can shift educationeasily. I mean, it’s a real challenge, but I always felt that this work was reallyimportant in terms of holding up this mirror for where we were and trying to helpeducators see that we needed to move in a different direction.Connie Yowell: Yes. In order to do that, educators, we all do, need a conceptualframe. We need to know the categories and the buckets that matter in this newworld and why they matter. A big piece of the work that Henry was doing and histeam was doing, from my perspective, was coming up with those key conceptualcategories that are grounded in pop culture. In our vision of innovation, we neededto go deep on the adjacencies to education. We weren’t funding directly within theeducation space; instead, we were funding all of the adjacent places where newideas were coming to life then figuring out what they would mean for education andfor learning. Henry’s work is clearly a core adjacency that needed to become infusedinside education. Connie Yowell is currently serving as Senior Vice Chancellor ofEducation Innovation at Northeastern University and was founder of LRNG.Henry Jenkins: This was my very first opportunity to work with the MacArthurFoundation. We've been working with them continuously for the last 15 years sincethe report was written. I was midway through my time co-directing the ComparativeMedia Studies Program at MIT. We had launched the program with the goal ofproviding a new kind of master's program in media studies, one that was committedto preparing people to go out in the world and make a difference in industry,journalism, public policy and academia. It was a program that would have a verystrong applied logic to it. We wanted students to take what they were studyingin their classes and to apply that in an immediate way to pressing problems inconversation with real world stakeholders. Project New Media Literacies was oneof our major research initiatives but one among others. We were also researchinggames-based education, games and innovation, global media policy, civic media,and the creative industries. Each of those projects allowed a mix of studentsto engage in an active research process based on their own career goals andcommitments.CONNECT!ONS / Med!aLit Moments March, 2021 5
As we were reaching out to identify what those research opportunities were,I was in a dialogue with danah boyd, who took some classes under me when shewas a master's student at the MIT Media Lab. She was advising Connie Yowellat MacArthur, about the launch of some new initiatives around digital mediaand learning. Through her intervention, I was invited out to San Francisco for aconference at the old Exploratorium, where we were to present some insights intothe current media environment, with the idea of impressing the MacArthur leadership,and hopefully getting some grant funds out of it. As I was doing that first presentation,something went wrong with the PowerPoint. It was basically shuffling the slidesrandomly throughout the entire presentation. So I had a rich deck of stuff preparedto share, but on the fly, I was having to adjust my talk to reflect the images on thescreen, with no sense of what might pop up next. No one ever dared to say to me,was that a random presentation or did you plan it that way? But it must have beenstrong enough because that launched one of the most important relationships of myacademic career.Connie had situated me next to the President of the MacArthur Foundation on the bustrip back to the hotel, and asked me to explain to him why media literacy should bepart of their initiative. I did so. I don't remember anything I said in that conversation.By the time we got off the bus, he was sold on the idea that media literacy shouldbe part of MacArthur’s agenda. Everyone, all the staff at MacArthur seemed reallythrilled that I somehow convinced him of this. I was asked to bothwrite a white paper and to do some proof of concept demos.I was already dabbling in media literacy. I'd written the column for Technology Reviewthat a number of people had seen and responded to. I was starting to get invitationsto speak at media literacy conferences in the New England area. We had begun to doa series of conferences called We’ve Wired the Classroom – Now What? They weredesigned for local educators to think about the next steps towards online education –what kinds of curricular materials and professional development were required, whatnew projects were emerging.Right now, we’re suddenly relying on online education nationwide, but a lot of thework we were advocating then never took place. Many of the challenges we nowconfront were being discussed at these conferences decades ago.Many of us saw a need for advocacy for the digital realm, something like NationalPublic Radio or National Public Television that was going to generate content,develop curricular materials, take advantage of the experiments that were going on,and bring the teachers along. As the conference title suggests, it's not enough to wirethe classroom and just assume that everything else falls into place because it doesn't.The wires are the least of it. The Clinton administration at that time was pushing themto wire all the classrooms in America, saying this would close the digital divide, andwe knew it wouldn't.CONNECT!ONS / Med!aLit Moments March, 2021 6
The main thinkers of that period were passing through MIT– like Howard Rheingoldwho was doing groundbreaking thinking about the virtual community, and regularlyspeaking at MIT. Sherry Turkle was a colleague at MIT who was raising importantquestions about online conversations, identity in a networked world, and the blurringof reality and the imaginary online. We had great students like danah boyd passingthrough MIT. She was shaking up our thinking because she was so grounded in theyouth culture and what they were doing online.Part of our mandate from MacArthur had been to look across the research thathad been done on learning and fandom and gaming spaces. This helped us gaininsight into learning in other online communities and bringing that back to schools.Throughout that report are signs of the conversations we were engaged with MITon games-based learning. Alongside the work we were doing for MacArthur, wewere doing Microsoft-funded research making the educational case for how gamesmight serve educational purposes. We called that initiative Games to Teach andas we expanded our funding, it became The Education Arcade. Kurt Squire, theoriginal Research Director for Games to Teach, left MIT and ended up at Universityof Wisconsin-Madison with James Paul Gee. It’s no accident that two of JamesPaul Gee's students are on the team that wrote the Macarthur white paper with me.So, there was a cross-pollination with one of the major centers for thinking aboutgames-based education. I am still seeing the importance of that pioneering workeven as I fear that this language of gamification has rigidified a lot of the creativeexperiments that were going on into the narrowest possible version of what gamesbased education could look like. I am very pleased to see this new book LocallyPlayed by Benjamin Stokes who was, at the time, one of my foundation officers atMacArthur and later became my PhD student at USC. Ben’s new book stresses howgames played in real world spaces can enhance community building.I don't think that report could have come out of any place other than MIT. Being atMIT left us ahead of the curve in the midst of ongoing conversations about the socialand cultural impact of emerging platforms and practices. I was housemaster in anMIT dormitory, and I could walk up and down the halls, and just see what studentswere doing online. That was part of my night job, so it wasn't even necessarilyformalized research. But there were lots of insights that made their way into thatreport that grew out of just living in an MIT environment with those students.Tessa Jolls: Yes, and I think it's fascinating how all of that came together at thisspecial time. How then was that connection made in terms of, hey, we need a report,we need this theoretical framework outlined?Henry Jenkins: As Connie Yowell describes in her interview, she was working withNicole Pinker. She was working with Mimi Ito. She was working with me. There wereconversations amongst us about how we were progressing. I certainly was followingMimi Ito’s research. She invited me to participate in discussions with her researchgroups at multiple points along the way, and vice versa. I think it was very clear thatwe needed a shared vocabulary to talk about learning in this environment.CONNECT!ONS / Med!aLit Moments March, 2021 7
I also felt that we needed to make the case to educators for why the kinds of informallearning that were taking place in young people's lives outside of school were in factpertinent to what teachers did in their classrooms.Mimi's work was documenting youth digital practices out in the world. She ended upusing youth vernacular to frame her theories. She talks about “hanging out, messingaround, geeking out”. Those are terms that emerged organically from the young peopleshe interviewed. My task was the opposite: to take what we knew from research oninformal learning, fan communities, gaming communities, and write it up in a waythat would speak to teachers, to principals, the school board members, the statepolicymakers, grant funders. So I was giving academic terms to practices that probablywould have been described rather differently by the young people themselves.As we got into it, it was also clear that young people were being taught to devaluetheir own experiences, to devalue the ways they were learning and what they werelearning in these informal spaces. I've come to recognize the importance of helpingyoung people think about why it's important to take seriously those opportunities, asalongside helping teachers think about how to incorporate those skills and practicesinto the schools.Tessa Jolls: Yes, absolutely. You really were at this confluence of all of these ideasswirling around. Fortunately, it seems, like, I know and talking with Connie and withMimi, they saw a need to really articulate more of the theoretical foundations andthen they turned to you. It was just incredible timing, well, not really coincidence, butdefinitely you were the man of the time and that really made all the difference. HenryJenkins is currently Provost's Professor of Communication, Journalism, Cinematic Arts,and Education at the University of Southern California and is the Principal Investigatorfor the Civic Imagination Project (funded by MacArthur).Mimi Ito: Henry was focused on writing a more conceptual summative piece and thenaround the same time, we had started fieldwork on what young people were doingin the digital landscape. We were looking at kids who were on Myspace and instantmessenger primarily and had not really made the leap to text messaging, which ishard to believe. The US was very late to text messaging compared to the rest of thepost-industrial world. The US was an outlier, so kids were still using a lot of instantmessengers around then. This is pre-iPhone. Sometimes I get my chronology wrong. yes, it was definitely pre-iPhone. MacArthur deciding to look at the online world asan arena for understanding learning was ahead of the time. John Seely Bro
Leadership Report for Global MIL Consortium for Media Literacy March, 2021Volume No. 117 Confronting the Challenges of a Participatory Culture (Fifteen Plus Years Later) CML is pleased and proud to present this Special Report, Confronting the Challenges of a Participatory Culture (Fifteen Plus Y
mil-dtl-22992 mil-dtl-24308 mil-dtl-25516 mil-dtl-25955 mil-dtl-26482 mil-dtl-26500 mil-dtl-26518 mil-dtl-27599 mil-dtl-28731 mil-dtl-28748 mil-dtl-28840 mil-dtl-32139 mil-dtl-38999 mil-dtl-39024 mil-dtl-3933 mil-dtl-5015 mil-dtl-5015 h mil-dtl-55116 mil-dtl-55181 mil-dtl-55302 mil-dtl-83413 mil-dtl-83503 mil-dtl-83513 mil-dtl
mil-dtl-22992 mil-dtl-26482, i mil-dtl-26482, ii mil-dtl-26500 mil-dtl-27599 mil-dtl-28748 mil-dtl-28804 mil-dtl-28840 mil-dtl-38999, i mil-dtl-38999, ii mil-dtl-38999, iii mil-dtl-38999, iv mil-dtl-55302 mil-dtl-83503 mil-dtl-83505 mil-dtl-83513 mil-dtl-83522 mil-dtl-83527 mil-dtl-83723, i mil-dtl-83723, iii mil-dtl-83733
mil-prf-123 mil-prf-11015 mil-prf-39014 mil-prf-55681 mil-prf-11272 mil-prf-23269 mil-prf-49467 mil-prf-49470 mil-prf-32535 mil-prf-39006 mil-prf-55365 mil-prf-55342 mil-prf-914 mil-prf-32159 escc qpl 3009 esc
MIL-C-6529 TYPE 3 Royco 483 MIL-DTL-23549 Royco 49 MIL-DTL-25681 Royco 81MS MIL-G-21164 Royco 64 MIL-G-7711A (obsolete) Royco 11MS MIL-G-81827 Royco 22MS MIL-H-5606A Royco 756A MIL-PRF-23699 CI Royco 899 MIL-PRF-23699 HTS Royco 560 MIL-PRF-23699 STD Royco 500 MIL-PRF-23827 TYPE 1 Ro
Bruksanvisning för bilstereo . Bruksanvisning for bilstereo . Instrukcja obsługi samochodowego odtwarzacza stereo . Operating Instructions for Car Stereo . 610-104 . SV . Bruksanvisning i original
STANDARDS Military MIL-STD-481 MIL-STD-490 MIL-STD-681 MIL-STD-961 MIL-STD-1 174 MIL-STD-1267 MIL-STD-1 306 MIL-STD-1 464 DOD-STD-1 476 DOD-STD-1686 DOD-STD-2 167 MIL-STD-21 75 HANDBOOKS DOD-HDBK-263 Configuration Control - Engineering Changes, Deviations and Waivers (Short Form) Specificati
MIL-C-16173 MIL-L-19140 STANDARDS MILITARY MIL-STD-22 MIL-STD-248 MIL-STD-271 MIL-STD-278 MIL-STD-”731 MIL-STD-792 MIL-STD-1684 - Paper, Kraft, Treated (Fire Resistant).-Corrosion Preventive Compound, Solvent Cutback, Cold-Application. - Lumber and Plywood, F’ire-retardentTreated.
10 tips och tricks för att lyckas med ert sap-projekt 20 SAPSANYTT 2/2015 De flesta projektledare känner säkert till Cobb’s paradox. Martin Cobb verkade som CIO för sekretariatet för Treasury Board of Canada 1995 då han ställde frågan
