:
 








References 10

Примерно вдвое меньше (30,77%) адептов только интегрированного подхода и совсем немного (7,69%) - у подхода сугубо автономного.

Медиаобразование сегодня: страны-лидеры

В завершении опроса предлагалось назвать страны, где, по мнению экспертов, на сегодняшний день медиаобразование находится на наиболее высоком уровне развития. Полученные результаты сведены нами в таб.6.

Таб.6. Список стран, где, по мнению экспертов, медиаобразование находится на наиболее высоком уровне развития

N Название страны: Число экспертов, по мнению которых, развитие медиаобразования в данной стране находится сегодня на наиболее высоком уровне:
Канада 17 (65,39%)
Великобритания 16 (61,54%)
Австралия 11 (42,31%)
Франция 7 (26,92%)
США 6 (23,07%)
Россия 5 (19,23%)

Как видно из таблицы опрос по данному разделу не принес неожиданных результатов лидерами в области медиаобразования большинством голосов экспертов были признаны Канада, Великобритания, Австралия, Франция, США и Россия. Остальные голоса более-менее равномерно распределились между рядом западноевропейских стран (Германия, Дания, Норвегия, Финляндия, Швеция, Швейцария) и Японией (они получили по 11,54% экспертных голосов), Мексикой, Тайванем и ЮАР (по 7,69% экспертных голосов), Австрией, Аргентиной, Бразилией, Венгрией, Венесуэлой, Исландией, Испанией, Италией, Кубой, Новой Зеландией, Чили и Бельгией (по 3,85% голосов).

Что ж, в самом деле, достижения Канады и Австралии, во всех школах которых медиаобразованию придан обязательный статус, широко известны медиапедагогам всего мира. Популярность теоретических идей и практических подходов ведущих британских, французских и американских медиапедагогов также весьма велика. Традиционно сильны позиции медиаобразования в Скандинавии. Что же касается стран Восточной Европы, то здесь, действительно, в большей степени известен медиаобразовательный опыт России и Венгрии, в то время, как о процессе медиаобразования в Польше, Чехии или Румынии медиапедагоги других стран имеют, как правило, слабое представление (не в последнюю очередь из-за языкового барьера и меньшей международной активности медиапедагогов данных государств).

В течение длительного времени российские медиапедагоги были изолированы от мирового процесса медиаобразования. Позитивные изменения в этом направлении произошли только за последние 10-15 лет. Вот почему хочется надеяться, что результаты нашего небольшого исследования в какой-то степени помогут российским медиапедагогам и исследователям задуматься над проблемами сравнительного анализа медиаобразовательных подходов в различных странах мира.

Примечания

Gutierrez Martin, A. (1996) Educacion Multimedia y Nuevas Tecnologias. Madrid. Ediciones de la Torre, p.12.

Медиаобразование//Российская педагогическая энциклопедия. Т.1/Гл. ред. В.В.Давыдов. М.: Большая российская энциклопедия, 1993. С. 555.

Федоров А.В. Медиаобразование: история, теория и методика. Ростов: ЦВВР, 2001. 708 с.

Шариков А.В. Медиаобразование: мировой и отечественный опыт. М.: Изд-во Академии педагогических наук, 1990. С.50-51.

Media Education/Literacy: The Analyze of Experts Opinions

This article was supported by Russian Foundation for Humanities (RGNF), grant N 01-06-00027а. Published in: Fedorov, A. (2003) Media Education and Media literacy: Experts Opinions. In: MENTOR. A Media Education Curriculum for Teachers in the Mediterranean. Paris: UNESCO.

Actuality, Aims and Methodology of the Survey

The Russian Pedagogical Encyclopedia defines media education as the direction in pedagogic, promoting the study of regularities of mass communications (press, television, radio, cinema, video, etc.). The main goals of media education are: to prepare the new generation for the living in the modern information world, for the perception of different information, to teach a person to understand it, realize the effects of its influence on the psychology, to master means of communication based on the non-verbal forms, with the help of technical means [3]. Media education today is seen as the process of the personalitys development with the help of and on the material of the means of mass communications (media). It is aimed at the development of the culture of the intercourse with media, creative, communicative abilities, critical thinking, perception, interpretation, analysis and evaluation of media texts, teaching different forms of self expression with media technology. Media literacy, acquired in the result of this process, helps a person to actively use the resources of the information field of TV, radio, video, cinema, press, Internet [1, 8].

The important event in the history of the media education movement in Russia is the registration (by the Educational Methodical Unification of the Ministry of Education of the Russia Federation) of a new university specialization Media Education (03.13.30) in June 2002. The initiative came from our research group, supported by the grant of Russian Humanities Scientific Fund (grant N 01-06-00027a). In practice it means that for the first time in its history, media education in Russia gained an official status.

Still, in Russia as well as in foreign countries we can witness sort of the confusion of the terms of media education and media literacy. There are quite a few differences in theoretical approaches to media education, to distinguishing of the most important aims, objectives, means of introduction into the teaching process, etc. These are the reasons why we addressed to the leading Russian and foreign media educators asking them to answer the special survey aimed at the clearing up of the following questions:

-which of the well known definitions of media education and media literacy are supported the most among the experts;

-what media education aims and theories seem as the most important;

-how these theories and purposes correspond to the modern socio-cultural context of different countries;

-what way of the integration of the media education into schools and universities, supplementary educational and recreational institutions is seen as the most preferable;

-in what countries at the present time the level of the development of media education is the highest?

We are very grateful to all the Russian and foreign experts in the field of media education/literacy, who sent their answers. In the result weve collected data from 26 media educators from 10 countries:

Baranov, Oleg, Ph.D., assoc.professor, Tver State Pedagogical Institute, member of Russian Association for Film & Media Education (Russia);

Chelysheva, Irina. Ph.D., Taganrog State Pedagogical Institute, member of Russian Association for Film & Media Education (Russia);

Clarembeaux, Michel, Director of Liege Audiovisual Center (Belgium);

Cornell, Richard, Ed.D., Professor and Coordinator, College of Education, University of Central Florida), former president of International Council for Educational Media (USA);

Gomes, Jose Ignacio, Ph.D., professor, director of Grupo Comunicar, Universida de Huelva (Spain);

Goodman, Steven, Executive Director of Educational Video Center, New York City (USA);

Gura, Valery, Ph.D., professor, Taganrog State Pedagogical), member of Russian Association for Film & Media Education (Russia);

Gutierrez Martin, Alfonso, PhD., University of Valladolid (Spain);

Korochensky, Alexander, Ph.D., professor of Rostov State University), member of Russian Association for Film & Media Education (Russia);

Krucsay, Susanne, Head of department Media Pedagogy/Educational Media/Media Service in the Austrian Federal Ministry of Education, Science and Culture (Austria);

Lemish, Dafna, Ph.D., professor, Chair, Department of Communication, Tel Aviv University (Israel);

McMahon, Barrie, Curriculum Manager Post-compulsory Education, Department of Education and Training, Western Australia;

Monastyrsky, Valery, Ph.D., professor, vice-director of Institute of Social Science, Tambov State Pedagogical University), member of Russian Association for Film & Media Education (Russia);

Novikova, Anastassia, Ph.D., member of Russian Association for Film & Media Education (Russia);

Penzin, Stal, Ph.D., assoc.professor, Voronezh State University, member of Russian Association for Film & Media Education (Russia);

Pungente, John, president of CAMEO (Canadian Association of Media Education Organisations), director of Jesuit Communication Project, Toronto (Canada);

Rother, Irving/Lee, Ph.D, president of Association for Media Education in Quebec (AMEQ); Board member Canadian Association for Media Education Organisations (Canada);

Ryhzich, Natalia, media educator, Taganrog State Pedagogical Institute, member of Russian Association for Film & Media Education (Russia);

Shak, Tatiana, Ph.D., assoc. professor, Krasnodar State University of Culture & Arts, Head of the Center of Musical & Information Technologies, member of Russian Association for Film & Media Education (Russia);

Suess, Daniel, Ph.D., professor, University of Zurich and Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Zurich (Switzerland);

Torres, Miguel Reyes, Ph.D., professor, director of CIME - Media Education Investigation Center, coordinator Master Degree in media education, University Playa Ancha (Chili);

Tyner, Kathleen, Lead Researcher, Hi-Beam Consulting (San Francisco), Program Director of the Youth Media Initiative of the National Alliance of Media Arts and Culture (USA);

Usenko, Leonid, Ph.D, professor of Rostov State Pedagogical University, member of Russian Association for Film & Media Education (Russia).

Wei, Bu, Ph.D., professor of Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (China);

Worsnop, Chistopher, one of the North American leader in media education (Canada);

Yakushina, Ekaterina, Ph.D., Russian Academy of Education, member of Russian Association for Film & Media Education (Russia).

The questionnaire combined the questions of the open and closed types. The results show that experts answered the open type questions less willingly than those that required choice among variants, that just corresponds to the general tendency of sociological surveys. Respondents tend to economize their time and as a rule seldom give long answers.


:

  1. I. 14
  2. List of References
  3. Reference 1
  4. Reference 10
  5. Reference 2
  6. Reference 3
  7. Reference 4
  8. Reference 5
  9. Reference 6
  10. Reference 7
  11. Reference 8
  12. Reference 9




: 204

<== | ==>
References 9 | Media education, media literacy, media studies

? google:

 

© studopedia.com.ua '.


: 0.004 .