Non-formal Education for Critical Media Literacy: the case of Youth in Action Programme in Lithuania

Vilnius University Faculty of Philosophy Department of Education Science

Nerijus Kriauciunas

The Programme of Studies in Education Science Master thesis (edited1)

Non-formal Education for Critical Media Literacy: the case of Youth in Action Programme in Lithuania

Scientific Adviser: Assoc. Prof. Dr. Lilija Duobliene

Vilnius-Zurich, 2009 1

In the edited version the English language was reviewed, the list of references was corrected and the analytical categories and theme discourses from the in-dept interviews with youth workers (Annex 5) and youth leaders (Annex 6) were removed. Do not hesitate to contact the author by email nercas@email.lt for the full length of the theses

1

The final paper ………………………………………………………………………………………... accepted by order of the Dean of Faculty of Philosophy no. ……., I prepared independently, to the end edited and submitted to the scientific adviser. ……………………

…………………………………………..

(Date)

(Signature of graduate)

The final paper matches (does not match) established requirements for the MA thesis and I allow to defend it. ……………………

…………………………………………..

(Date)

(Signature of scientific adviser)

The department received the final paper with the mediation of the scientific adviser ……………………

…………………………………………..

(Date)

(Signature of department manager)

2

INDEX OF CONTENTS

SUMMARY......................................................................................................................................... 4 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................... 6 1. MEDIA EDUCATION FOR CRITICAL MEDIA LITERACY..................................................... 9 1.1. Media concepts and its significance for the contemporary education .......................................... 9 1.2. Media education in the world and in Lithuania .......................................................................... 11 1.2.1. Different approaches to media education ...................................................................... 11 1.2.2. Media education in different countries .......................................................................... 13 1.2.3. Media education in Lithuania ........................................................................................ 17 1.3. Media literacy and critical consciousness................................................................................... 20 2. CRITICAL PEDAGOGY IN MEDIA EDUCATION .................................................................. 23 2.1. The concept and the main ideas of critical pedagogy................................................................. 23 2.1.1. Freire’s concept and ideas of critical pedagogy: then and now.................................... 24 2.1.2. Critical pedagogy in relation to the Frankfurt school of critical theory ....................... 28 2.2. From the critical language literacy towards the critical media literacy in education ................. 30 3. YOUTH NON-FORMAL EDUCATION AND CRITICAL MEDIA LITERACY ..................... 34 3.1. Non-formal education in the light of critical pedagogy.............................................................. 34 3.2. Critical potential of youth non-formal education in Lithuania ................................................... 37 3.3. Non-formal education for critical media literacy: empirical research........................................ 39 3.3.1. Research methodology and methods .............................................................................. 40 3.3.2. The context of non-formal media education................................................................... 43 3.3.3. Non-formal media education practices in Youth in Action projects .............................. 49 DISCUSSION OF THE RESULTS................................................................................................... 63 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................ 65 LIST OF REFERENCES................................................................................................................... 69 ANNEXES......................................................................................................................................... 74

3

Non-formal Education for Critical Media Literacy: the Youth in Action Programme in Lithuania SUMMARY The main purpose of this paper is to discuss theoretically the problem of critical media literacy and to provide the empirical research inquiry on the youth non-formal media education practice in Lithuania. This work consist of four main parts: 1) the theoretical overview of media education for critical media literacy; 2) the theoretical overview of critical pedagogy from the aspect of media education; 3) the empirical research on youth non-formal media education in Lithuania; and 4) discussion of the results, conclusions and recommendations.

In the first part of this paper the different media concepts are theoretically discussed highlighting the importance of critical attitude towards media. Further main approaches to media education are presented together with discussion on the media education situation in Lithuania and different countries emphasising the importance of critical media literacy for the development of critical consciousness. In the second part the attention is given for the critical pedagogy and its importance in media education. In this part the concept of critical pedagogy is discussed, its theoretical sources and its urgency in contemporary education. Further the discussion of critical pedagogy scholars is provided on the features of critical literacy and critical media literacy. In the third part non-formal education practice is discussed from the perspective of critical pedagogy. In this part the most attention is given to present the empirical research highlighting its methodological nature analysing and discussion the empirical data collected during the in-depth interviews with youth workers and young leaders in Lithuania.

At the end of this paper, in the conclusions the importance of critical media literacy is stressed and the empirical data is discussed that reveal the specificity of media literacy in non-formal education and confirm the manifestation of the development of critical consciousness in the non-formal education projects in Youth in Action programme. The recommendations mostly is focused on the development of education policy in Lithuania suggesting to give more attention for critical media literacy, improve the training of teachers and other educators, recognise and further support the existing successful media education practices both in formal and non-formal education.

4

Neformalus kritinio medija ra!tingumo ugdymas: programa „Veiklus jaunimas“ Lietuvoje SANTRAUKA Pagrindinis !io darbo u"davinys yra teori!kai aptarti kritinio medija2 ra!tingumo problem# bei empiriniu tyrimu pateikti neformalaus ugdymo praktikos analiz$ Lietuvoje. %& darb# sudaro keturios pagrindin's dalys: 1) medija ugdymo, kurio tikslas yra kritinis medija ra!tingumas, teorin' ap"valga; 2) kritin's pedagogikos teorijos medija ugdymo aspektu ap"valga; 3) neformalaus medija ugdymo Lietuvoje empirinis tyrimas; ir 4) rezultat( aptarimas, i!vados ir rekomendacijos.

Pirmoje darbo dalyje yra teori!kai aptariamos skirtingos medija koncepcijos, i!ry!kinant kritinio po"i)rio svarb# medija at"vilgiu. Toliau yra pristatomi pagrindiniai po"i)riai & medija ugdym# bei dabartin' medija ugdymo situacija Lietuvoje bei kitose !alyse, akcentuojant kritinio medija ra!tingumo svarb# ugdant kritin& s#moningum#. Antroje dalyje d'mesys yra skiriamas kritinei pedagogikai ir jos svarbai medija ugdyme. %ioje dalyje yra aptariama kritin's pedagogikos koncepcija, jos teorin's i!takos ir aktualumas !iuolaikiniame ugdyme. Toliau pateikiama kritin's pedagogikos teoretik( diskusija, atskleid"ianti kritinio ra!tingumo ir kritinio medija ra!tingumo specifik#. Tre*ioje dalyje i! kritin's pedagogikos perspektyvos aptariama neformalaus ugdymo praktika. %ioje dalyje did"iausias d'mesys yra skiriamas empirinio tyrimo pristatymui, i!ry!kinant jo metodologijos ypatumus bei analizuojant ir aptariant tyrimo duomenis, surinktus gilumini( intervi( su jaunimo darbuotojais ir jaunimo lyderiais metu Lietuvoje.

Darbo pabaigoje, i!vadose pabr'"iama kritinio medija ra!tingumo svarba ir apibendrinami empiriniai duomenys, kurie atskleid"ia medija ra!tingumo neformaliajame ugdyme specifik# ir patvirtina kritinio s#moningumo ugdymo aprai!kas neformalaus ugdymo projektuose programoje „Veiklus jaunimas“. Rekomendacijos labiausiai fokusuojamos & !vietimo politikos tobulinim# Lietuvoje, pateikiant si)lymus skirti daugiau d'mesio kritiniam medija ra!tingumui, gerinti mokytoj( ir kit( ugdytoj( medija mokym#, pripa"inti ir toliau palaikyti esamas s'kmingas medija ugdymo praktikas ir formaliame, ir neformaliame ugdyme.

2

+ia ir toliau angli!kas terminas media never*iamas & lietuvi( kalb# vartojant termin# medija taip siekant nesusiaurinti "od"io reik!m's esant tiksliam vertimui. Daugiau apie termino media vartojimo ypatumus lietuvi( kalbos aspektu galima rasti Medij! kult"ros balsai: teorijos ir praktikos ("r. literat)ros s#ra!e)

5

INTRODUCTION There is little doubt that media heavily influences contemporary life but there is more debates on what role media plays and what its impact on people. The arguments in the debate depend on the theoretical stance regarding the concept of “media” (Michelkevicius, 2008). Winkler (2004) provides a cumulative account of media definitions deriving from the different theoretical perspectives in which the critical perspective defines media as a social agent that plays the significant role in shaping ordinary people’s life in favour of the dominant ideologies and elites that hold power in the society. Such understanding of media’s place and role in societies is critically analysed in the works of the associates of the Frankfurt School of critical thought together with the contemporary critical media theorists (Wood, 2000; Miller, 2002; Taylor and Harris, 2008). The early associates of the Frankfurt School offered an extensive theoretical analysis on how the dominant and often oppressive ideologies and hegemonic powers in the societies are reproduced through cultural institutions, such as schools, families, mass media and the church (Adorno and Horkheimer, 1972). Other critical scholars continued in the same direction drawing the conclusions that contemporary education must include media education for critical media literacy as one of its essential components (McLaren and Hammer, 1995; Giroux, 1997; Macedo and Steinberg, 2007; Kellner and Share, 2007; Kincheloe, 2007).

The importance of critical media literacy is becoming more articulated also by international institutions in recently issued reports and conducted studies (UNESCO, 2001; Council of Europe, 2002; European Commission, 2007; European Parliament, 2008; Alliance of Civilisations, 2009, for instance). The reports and studies are conducted in close cooperation with the academia and they provide the overview of media education developments over the past decades in different countries of the world and urge decision makers to adopt and initiate coherent policies on critical media literacy. Scholars draw attention to the fact that there are different approaches to media education, however, they claim that it is through critical inquiry that critical media literacy on media liberates people from the imposed ideologies and empower them for social transformations in overcoming oppressive life conditions (Kellner and Share, 2007). The situation with media education, especially critical media literacy, in Lithuania is rather fragmented and is still implemented in a rather nonsystematic way. In general, media education is rather limited to the teaching of computer literacy and often on the level of technical skills, although there are plausible initiatives, which implement critical media literacy programmes both in formal and non-formal education settings (Sakadolskis in Smalinskaite, 2006, Sakadolskis, 2008).

6

The lack of critical media literacy may be explained by the lack of the critical component in education in general. This is recognised and argued by many of the education theorists who argue in favour of critical pedagogy theory and practice in education (Freire, 1967, 1992, 1998; Giroux, 1997, McLaren, 2000; Kincheloe, 2007). The concept and ideas of critical pedagogy together with the critical media theories form the theoretical ground for the critical media literacy. The main concern of critical pedagogy is to show that it is through education that people can be liberated from oppression (Freire, 1967, 1992; Giroux, 1997). The theoretical works of Freire and his followers in the critical pedagogy field provide the valuable insights on what should constitute the education that aims to develop the critical consciousness of people. The concept and founding ideas of critical pedagogy come from the educational practice of teaching people literacy. With the rapid development of media technologies, critical pedagogy theorists quickly recognised the potential of critical pedagogy to contribute to education for critical media literacy. Although most of the works on critical pedagogy are focusing on formal education, there is no doubt that critical pedagogy may be practiced in any of the many educational settings (Freire, 1992; Kincheloe, 2007).

There is relevant international research done on media education at higher education levels (French and Richards, 1994), in schools (Hart, 1998; Hart and S端ss, 2001, Taylor, 2002) but still there is, definitely, a lack of basic scientific research on media education (Hart, 1998). Especially it is felt in the field of non-formal education where generally not many studies are done due to mainly institutional reasons such as high level of decentralisation and diversity of programmes (Domaille and Buckingham, 2001) or low level of recognition and benefits in the academia world (Chisholm, 2008). In Lithuania, the Ministry of Education and Science conducts yearly research on general computer literacy (Kalvaitis and Tamosiunas, 2008), but they lack the understanding and focus on critical media literacy. Cymermoniene (2008) is relevant to mention who conducted research during the pilot project on critical media literacy in fifteen Lithuanian schools that confirms the importance of such programmes. The overview of the research in the field of non-formal education does not provide any data on media education in the field.

Considering the above, this work will focus on the problem of media education perspective in Lithuania, trying to recognise its features and potential in general and in correspondence with critical pedagogy, particularly in the practices of the youth non-formal education projects, those contribution for media literacy is not yet valued enough.

The object of this work is the development of media education in the direction of critical media literacy through non-formal education.

7

The main aim of this work is to investigate theoretically and empirically media education in the perspective of critical pedagogy by exploring youth non-formal education practice and its potential for the development of critical media literacy.

The specific objectives are: •

To provide an overview of the situation of media education in Lithuania and different countries;

•

To establish the theoretical framework of critical media literacy grounded in the perspective of critical pedagogy and critical media theories;

•

To examine theoretically the critical potential of youth non-formal education in the perspective of critical pedagogy;

•

To investigate empirically the existing media education practices in the European Youth in Action projects in Lithuania focusing on the critical component in them;

•

To draw theoretically and empirically- based conclusions and recommendations for critical media literacy trends and perspectives in the field of youth non-formal education.

Methodology and methods: the research methodology is informed by the critical pedagogy and critical theory traditions. The in-depth interviews were conducted with youth workers and youth leaders who represent different educational roles in youth non-formal education. There were prepared and used two research instruments: an interview plan with guiding questions for the youth workers and the other one for the youth leaders. The research results were analysed comparing the responses from the two groups and in this way constructing the empirical research knowledge on the non-formal media education practice and experience. When drawing conclusions the research knowledge was compared in the light of the theory of critical media literacy.

The structure of research work: 1. During the planning and preparation stage the contacts with the Agency of International Youth Cooperation were established and main agreement received to support this research.

The interview plans for youth workers and youth leaders were developed (February-March, 2009).

1. Pre-selection of the research sample and establishment of the necessary contacts with the interview participants. Confirmation of the research times and places. (March, 2009) 2. Collecting the research data by implementing the interviews with youth workers and youth leaders (26 March-1 April, 2009).

3. Data input, coding and analysis of the interview content (April-May, 2009).

8

1. MEDIA EDUCATION FOR CRITICAL MEDIA LITERACY 1.1. Media concepts and its significance for the contemporary education The understandings and explanations of media vary across different media theories. Media theorist Winkler (2004) provides a cumulative account of media definitions deriving from different theoretical perspectives. The author constructs the basic definition of media based on the six main theses: 1. “Communication”. Media is the machinery of the social networking.

2. Symbolic nature. From other mechanisms of the social networking - such as the exchange of goods, labour, politics, sex or violence - media differs in terms of its symbolic character.

3. Technology. Media is always technical media.

4. “Form” and “content”. Media imposes the shape on the communicated message.

5. Media overcomes space and time. The overcoming of geographical distances (telecommunications) is for media as typical as the overcoming of the time or the storage and tradition formation as aspect of creation.

6. Media is invisible. The more media is used, the more it goes without saying and the more it has a tendency to disappear. Media usage is largely unconscious. (Winkler, 2004) Further, Winkler elaborates his theses in a more extended way providing fruitful insights of the complexity of the attempts to conceptualise media. Michelkevicius (2008) in a recently published compilation of texts on “media cultures” in Lithuania and abroad also stresses the complexity when defining media. In addition, he discusses the difficulties when translating and/or using the English term “media” in the Lithuanian language and context. By referring to Tholen the author stresses that “the way we ask and reflect on the question about the media place, it changes the relation between the concepts and media metaphors” (Tholen, in Michelkevicius, 2008, p. 30). In the scope of this work “media” will be considered as a social agent which plays a significant role in shaping people’s lives, too often if not always without their conscious awareness of its ideological impact. Such an understanding and explanation of media place in the nowadays lives of people derives mostly from the critical media theories.

Contemporary critical media theories are rooted in the works of the scholars associated with the Frankfurt School of critical thought (Wood, 2000; Miller, 2002; Taylor and Harris, 2008) but not exclusively. Wood (2000) and Miller (2002) attribute the “critical” component to those media 9

theories and research practices that attempt not only to simply represent the social world as it is but starting from that to provide the critical insights that attempt to bring the reforms and radical change in human lives. Taylor and Harris (2008) bring the most integrated account of the theoretical works of the past and present critical thinkers arguing that often the ideological component of the contemporary mass media is hidden under the entertainment elements and imposed through media generated symbols. They conclude that mass media is deleting the line between the real and virtual worlds leaving powerless people under the hypnotic amnesia but at the same time shaping their real life condition in favour of the people who are in power. Clearly, Winkler’s terms “symbolic nature” of media is serving as a mechanism for shaping the “social networking” in real life.

Michelkevicius (2008) recognises the need for studying media arguing that media is more and more becoming people’s daily routine – “people work, entertain, communicate through media” – media environment becomes natural and often perceived unconsciously. The author talks about the need to understand the impact of media on people and opportunities to develop a “peaceful/ecological” relationship with media. Again, this corresponds to the understanding of Winkler that the more people use media the more it becomes invisible and at the same time unconscious. Both authors talk about the need to develop the critical consciousness towards the media impact but only partly recognise that media is “charged” with ideology.

On the other hand, Kincheloe, in discussing the progressive education, brings the notion of “cultural pedagogy” explaining that “the new “educators” in the electronically wired contemporary era are those who posses the financial resources to use mass media” (2007, p. 24). He urges educators to understand not only the education that takes place in the educational setting but also the education that takes place through popular culture. For him, television, movies, video games, computers, Internet, instant messaging, iPods, music, dance, and other productions play a significant pedagogical role in producing cultural forms, the meanings, the rituals, and the representations that are imposed by the hegemonic ideology and oppressive powers. Similarly, Hammer (1995) sees the goal of educators to understand the particular media context of learners as their shared experience and to develop their consciousness towards the understanding on how ideological component of media is shaping their real life conditions. Fairclouh (1999) talks about textually-mediated life lived by contemporary people recognising that without the education of critical awareness people’s lives will continue to be directed by someone else but them. If contemporary education sets in the goals to educate critically conscious individuals to be capable of taking responsibility for their lives and be active citizens in the democratic society, then in such a case, media education must be part of the educational practice.

10

1.2. Media education in the world and in Lithuania When evaluating the situation and practice of media education it is important to be aware that the outcome will depend a lot on the theoretical standpoint on what is understood as the constitution of “media education�. Keeping the focus on the critical component in this work, the different media education practices call to be evaluated from the critical point of view before assessing the current situation of media education in the world and in Lithuania.

1.2.1. Different approaches to media education Following the tradition of critical media theory, Kellner and Share (2007) identifies at least four approaches to media education: 1) protectionist approach; 2) media arts education; 3) media literacy movement; and 4) critical media literacy. Although in all of the approaches the need for better media literacy is stressed, in the educational approach there are significant differences. Below is the summary on the main educational elements with highlighted limits of different approaches in media education: Table 1. Main approaches to media education.

Approaches Protectionist approach

Media arts education Media literacy movement Critical media literacy

Educational objectives To educate people about the risks and dangers of media

Educational elements

To teach the value of aesthetic qualities of media and the arts To educate people media knowledge and skills To educate for the critical thinking and consciousness to overcome oppression

Provides theoretical media education; involves producing media arts Theoretical and practical education of using media tools Includes educational elements of approaches above and in addition focuses on ideology critique and analysis of power issues

Explores the manipulative and addictive nature of media; raises the awareness on the risks and dangers within media

Limitations from the critical point of view Treats media audiences as passive objects; misuse of media education by some of the political groups imposing own ideology; valuing traditional print culture over media culture Favours the individuality over the society, lacks counter production in offering an alternative media Often is limited to teaching technical skills, does not question ideological and power issues within media Does not provide a single body of methodology

Source: adapted from Kellner and Share, 2007, pp. 6-9 Giroux (2001) brings to the attention the role of the different ideologies that influence political decisions and practices in education for literacy, including the education for media literacy. The author identifies three main competing ideologies, which if, applied enable to identify the nature of 11

media education: 1) the instrumental ideology; 2) the interaction ideology; and 3) the critical ideology. Below is the summary that briefly describes the main differences between the ideologies and their critique: Table 2. Main ideologies applied in media education Ideologies

Main assumptions

Educational objectives

Instrumental ideology

The human world can be explained using the same scientific methods applied in studying physical world; social relationships follow the natural laws and therefore are the subject of quantification; knowledge is objective because it consists of “facts” derived from empirical research The human world differs from the physical (natural) world; knowledge is seen as social construction that derives from a person's encounter with the objective world; this implies subjectivity and puts at the central place the construction of meanings and the need to explore the human dimension of knowledge Social systems are reproducing themselves through the ideological state apparatus, there exists hidden structures/curricular in education and culture; knowledge is relative to subjectivity and often derives from social and/or cultural hegemony

To achieve the “mastery of fundamental skills” and answer the demand for such skills necessary from the growing sector of “mass production of information, communication, and finance” To enable people to acquire literacy skills necessary for “higher level of reasoning”; to serve the personal growth

Interaction ideology

Critical ideology

Limits from the critical point of view Reduces the education to operational level and is mechanical; treats people as commodities; detaching education from the social and historical context; ignores the dominance of certain ideology and power behind the literacy Addresses power only on the cognitive or psychological level, detaches theory from practice and does not recognise the political and cultural significance of (media) language; is not able to capture the broader media context

To achieve the “quality of human consciousness” as well as the mastery of necessary media skills

Source: adapted from Giroux, 2001, p. 206-208 Kellner (1995) distinguishes the concept of critical media literacy from the functional literacy and cultural literacy, where functional literacy “refers to the acquisition of the rudimentary skills of reading and writing”, while the cultural literacy “refers to acquisition of basic knowledge concerning one's culture, society, and polity”. In contrast, critical media literacy “refers to the gaining of skills necessary to analyse and critically dissect all the forms of culture with individuals interact, ranging from books to the artefacts of film, television, radio, and the other products of the cultural industries” (Kellner, 1995, p. xiv-xv).

For the scope of this work it is important to stress that media education is possible and takes place not only in the formal education setting but also outside the formal education curricula. Although 12

many of the critical literacy scholars keep focus primarily on the school as the main sight for the media education practice, Kincheloe (2007) calls to recognise and consider any opportunity for critical literacy within formal education programmes but also considers equally important nonformal education programmes. This work will attempt to contribute to the knowledge on the education for the critical media literacy in the field of non-formal education.

In concluding, media education that follows the concept of critical media literacy recognises the need and includes in the education the technical skills of using different media. But through this process, it keeps the main attention for the education of critical consciousness towards the media’s political and cultural role to shape people’s identities, meanings and oppressive conditions in life. In addition, many authors in the critical theory tradition stress the importance to include in media education practice the production of alternative media that would counter fight the dominant oppressive practices shaped by media.

1.2.2. Media education in different countries Several comparative reports, studies and research (see the Table 3 in the annexes) provide the relevant overview of the changing media education landscape during the two past decades worldwide. They differ one from the other in (a) period of time they take; (b) countries they cover; (c) educational level and setting they focus; (d) research object they keep; and (e) research methods they use. The findings allow us to draw some conclusions on the media education situation in general, and in the field of non-formal education in particular.

French and Richards (1994) compared the case studies on university media and communication education practices in eight European countries arguing in the conclusions that with the existing differences in the understanding, approach and practice of media education across countries, there are no doubts that media studies are moving towards the discipline in the higher educational level in Europe. Fedorov (2008) provides a historical overview of media education evolution in different countries across the world and notes similarly that there exists the rich diversity within media educational practices but at the same time refers to the countries, for example France, Great Britain, Germany, USA, Canada and others, where media studies gained a separate discipline status during the years from 1990 to 2000. Other research (Hart, 1998; Hart and SĂźss, 2001) and studies (Domaille and Buckingham, 2001; Taylor, 2002; European Commission, 2007; Fedorov, 2008) portray more the situation with media education at the school level and to a certain extent include the data from the field of non-formal education (Taylor, 2002; European Commission, 2007; 13

Fedorov, 2008; Alliance of Civilization, 2009).

Hart and Süss (1998, 2001) argued for the need of basic research in the media education field and conducted two international research projects in order empirically examine systematic strategies for the teaching of media in different countries. Research findings in the English-speaking countries showed “a rich variety of forms and practices within familiar basic paradigms [of teaching media]” but also identified “the lack of attention to: classroom interaction and dialogue about media; space for young people’s own media experience and knowledge; opportunities for active involvement in the social production of texts; teaching in context through engagement with media process and technologies; engagement with political issues; and learning about media institutions” (Hart, 1998).

The same research conducted later in 1999-2001 and including more European countries came to the similar findings but in addition showed the controversies: while the optimism among the media educators seems growing towards the opportunities for critical media literacy, at the same time they noted the decreasing importance of media literacy in general due to the introduction of computer literacy in schooling in some of the countries (Hart and Süss, 2001).

Above discussed tendencies seem to continue in nowadays media education as some of the critical media scholars confirm similar views. On the one hand, the adoption of computer literacy in the formal education practice offered the “back doors entrance” for critical media literacy (Luke in Kellner and Share, 2005) but on the other hand, there is a great lack of critical media literacy approach in the current media education practice in different countries of the world (Giroux, 2001; Kellner and Share, 2007; McLaren and Kincheloe, 2007). Similarly, a recent study confirms that the access and use of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) in schools of 27 European Union member states is increasing (Korte and Hüsing, 2007). But at the same time the latest report from the Committee of Culture and Education of European Parliament (2008) emphasizes the importance to educate the critical consciousness towards media in many of the educational settings in Europe.

The institutional understanding of critical media literacy is present not only in the European Union but also in the Council of Europe and UNESCO. In all three cases, the institutional understanding was shaped by the earlier conducted international studies on the situation of media education in different countries of the world. In 1997-1999, the Council of Europe implemented an educational project on the critical approach to media in civic education programmes where it conducted a survey in five European countries on the situation with media education. The report published after the end of the project stresses the importance of critical media literacy in civic education 14

programmes (Taylor, Council of Europe, 2002). In 2001, UNESCO published a report from the youth media education survey from thirty-one countries around the world. The conclusions were made in the sense that it was observed a shift in the definition of media education towards a more critical media literacy stressing the importance of critical awareness and democratic participation (Domaille and Buckingham, UNESCO, 2001). The authors of the study conclude that media education at the date of the study was struggling for the recognition as an individual subject in the school curriculum educators were lacking training, teaching resources and research, media education was happening mainly because of the individual enthusiasm of the educators and with limited local support. Educators welcomed the entrance of ICT into the school education hoping for the opening possibilities to including critical questioning of media but at the same time stressing the fear of teaching computer literacy only on the technical level. Although the study was primarily targeted at schools, it was recognised “that in several countries (such as the USA or parts of Latin America) the most interesting and productive work is done outside the formal education system, in the context of local youth and community-based projects� (Domaille and Buckingham, UNESCO, 2001, p. 8). The study included the question about such practices but the results have showen the lack of awareness among the respondents of the existence of media education practices in the nonformal education field. Domaille and Buckingham conclude that this does not prove that such practices do not exist but rather that media education in non-formal education fields is not well researched at the date of the study due to its highly decentralised and diverse nature.

In the second half of 2007, The European Commission in cooperation with the Universidad Autonoma de Barcelona conducted a study on the situation and the trends of media literacy in Europe. Based on the theoretical inquiry from the existing literature on media education and literacy, the research team came to four evolutionary stages of understanding media literacy that is linked with the developments of media technologies: Chart 1. Evolutionary stages of understanding media literacy in the theoretical literature Classic literacy

Audiovisual literacy

Digital literacy

Media literacy

Source: adapted from the Universidad Autonoma de Barcelona, 2007 The study of the situation in Europe reveals that there exists the diversity of initiatives and strategies, which vary in media education according to the countries and actors. Despite the diversity, some common trends were identified and are relevant to the scope of this work: 15

1. Traditional media is converging with the digital media creating new multimedia environments and experiences for young people and calls for new research in Europe; 2. Media education policies in Europe are shifting towards the objectives of empowerment, autonomy and participation of citizens; 3. There is growing sensitivity of citizens towards commercial communication observed and therefore media literacy in its critical appearance is more than welcomed; 4. Teaching ICT skills is established in almost all European schools but media literacy in a more broader sense is still trying to find the respective recognition; 5. Increasing access and use of ICT in school education increase the educational media production and help young people to develop communication skills; 6. Media industry is becoming more attentive to media literacy and gets involved in media education practices; 7. There has been new active participation and involvement of different stakeholders in promoting media literacy; 8. There is an increase in interest among regulatory authorities in participating and promoting media literacy.

In the conclusion the research team recommends to develop common “media literacy policy” in Europe linking it with the “technological and economical innovation”, stimulate creativity as an “essential part of the media literacy”, promote it as the “instrument for the active citizenship in the European public sphere” and “reinforce the research and education in media literacy” (Universidad Autonoma de Barcelona, 2007). The study also highlights the existing tensions between the formal and non-formal media education practices, also between civil actors and state educational authorities in media education.

The recent report of the Alliance of Civilisations (2009) continues stressing the importance of the critical media literacy in the media education practice and calls for the political recognition of such practice. Produced in collaboration with academics, the report provides interpretative analysis of different cases and examples of media education practices in different countries showing that until the date of the report there were media education practices that followed the critical media literacy approach but these practices need to be recognised and further expanded. Frau-Meigs and Torrent (2009) in the introduction part stress the importance that media education practices outside the formal education sector gain respectability worldwide.

16

In conclusion, it can be said that across countries in the world educators, academic scholars and in some cases decision makers recognise the importance of media education and especially the critical media literacy. The empirical evidence confirms that access, use and teaching of ICT are already a part of educational practice in most countries, especially in the technologically advanced regions of the world. However, more indebt research concludes that a critical media literacy approach is missing and needs to be included in the media education practice. Lastly, there exists the recognition that media education practice is not only limited to the formal education sector but it takes place also in the diverse educational venues outside schools. Unfortunately, such non-formal education practices are not well researched and are represented only in limited cases. The last point is especially important for the scope of this work because it provides the rationale for the research in the field of non-formal education.

1.2.3. Media education in Lithuania Lithuania was not included as a case in any of the studies or research that were referred to above with the exception of the study about the access and use of ICT in school education, which only to some extent could be applied in evaluating the situation with media education in the country. Since, 2003 each year Ministry of Education and Science has been conducting the research on computer literacy among the population in Lithuania. The last research that was conducted in 2008 attempted to shift from the focus on the computer literacy in the pure sense of the technological use towards the digital literacy arguing that the trends of using ICT are changing (Kalvaitis and Tamosiunas, 2008). The research outcomes provide only limited knowledge on functional and organisational aspects of education related to digital literacy. By referring to the document of the European Commission, researchers draw attention to the fact that computer literacy has evolved into digital literacy. In addition, in a rather misleading way, they distinguish the digital literacy from the informational literacy arguing that in future research it is important to focus on the digital literacy (the same). Such recommendation contradicts not only the trends concluded by other research and studies conducted in other countries but also is against the initiatives of Ministry of Education and Science to bring more critical media literacy to Lithuanian schools as discussed in the interview with Sakadolskis (Smalinskaite, 2006).

In 2006 Ministry of Education and Science decided to implement a pilot project on information literacy in 15 secondary schools in Lithuania. The project included impact research which concluded the following: 1) teachers who were the part of the programme positively evaluated it emphasising especially well prepared lessons; 2) they expressed preference for teaching media 17

literacy as an independent subject; and 3) identified the problems related to the lack of knowledge and resources on the subject alongside with insufficient financial support (Cymermoniene, 2008).

Pupils who took part in the programme and learnt critical media literacy comparing to their peers who were not part of such programme were more able to analyse the information delivered by media, interpret and critically assess it (the same). The research concludes that media literacy should be integrated in many life spheres of children and adults emphasising the importance of education for critical thinking.

The research was conducted on the information literacy in a higher education level in Lithuania but because they kept focus on the operational level of informational literacy and not on the critical component, they give little value for the scope of the work. With the lack of the relevant research on the subject there, it is possible only to provide a descriptive overview of the fragmented situation of media education in Lithuania referring to the existing programmes and projects that include media education practices.

At the end of 2008, a conference on the theme of informational literacy took place in Lithuania.

Although the majority of the presentations from the invited speakers were covering the informational literacy on the level of operational competence (Master students of Management of Library and Information Centres, 2008; Kiauleikis, 2008; Tautkeviciene, 2008) but attention was also given to the importance of the information literacy in the sense of critical media literacy.

Sakadolskis (2009) discusses the meaning of information literacy in the 21st century arguing the need for such educational programme in Lithuanian schools referring to the experience of the pilot programme. The pilot programme on critical media literacy that continues to be implemented in the school year of 2008-2009 includes 4 lessons on media, 9 lessons on the Internet, 4 lessons on cinema and 5 lessons on the television and is a plausible example of good practice in Lithuania (Orintiene, 2007; Sakadolskis 2008). In addition to the pilot programmes, in a number of schools there are pupils’ journalists clubs, or video, photography and music groups but it is difficult to examine to what extent they contribute to the education of critical media literacy because there is no relevant research done by present date.

Besides the initiative in the formal education there are a number of initiatives that offer extracurricular or non-formal education opportunities to develop media literacy in Lithuania. The media education centre Meno Avilys continuously offers media education programmes for educators and young people that include education for critical media literacy in the area of movies, cinema, photography and video production (Meno Avilys, 2009). The Centre for Civic Initiatives is offering 18

educational seminars for teachers, social workers, police officers, cultural workers where people who work with young people are get acquainted with the youth culture, including studying youth media culture (Centre for Civic Initiatives, 2009). The Lithuanian Centre for Children and Youth is offering to join a journalist club and learn about media industry work while developing critical consciousness towards media (Lithuanian Children and Youth Centre, 2009). Similar centres in other districts of Lithuania offer similar educational programmes but no data has been collected yet.

Growing youth work sector in Lithuania to some extent also offers media education through the implemented youth projects and initiatives. Until 2008, the Department for Youth Affairs under the Ministry of Social Security and Labour was providing grants for (youth) non-governmental organisations for the projects that encourage active youth participation in creating a knowledge society in Lithuania (Department for Youth Affairs, 2007). Similar financial support continues to be available at the level of the municipality which provides support in different districts of Lithuania but unfortunately again there is a lack of data on the matter. European Union non-formal education programmes Youth (2000-2006) and Youth in Action (2007-2013) offer grants for the youth projects where in a number of projects media education or media as a method is implemented having the central place in the educational process (Lithuanian Agency of International Youth Cooperation, 2007, 2008). Apart from the general study done on the impact of Youth programme (Lithuanian Agency of International Youth Co-operation, 2007) and general research on youth situation in Lithuania (Department for Youth Affairs, 2008, 2007, 2006) there is no specific research done on the media education in youth non-formal education. This also applies to the other practices and programmes of non-formal education in Lithuania. A rather recent research (Kviestkiene, 2006) on the expenses and access of the children’s non-formal education in Lithuania provides an overview of the relevant research in the field but does not include any data that would be in particular focusing on media education in non-formal education setting.

Drawing conclusions on the media education situation in Lithuania it can be said that there are plausible fragmented practices of media education for critical media literacy both in the formal education and non-formal education fields. In the formal education field there is some research done relevant to the topic but their objective is to understand media education at a rather operational level. The exception is the impact research in the pilot project on informational literacy in Lithuanian schools. The diverse non-formal education field provides media education programmes that in their description aim at critical media literacy but the extent of practice and contribution is rather unknown because it lacks sufficient research in the field. On the institutional level there is a certain understanding that ranges from the more operational level of digital literacy to the 19

informational or media literacy, the support for such initiatives in education is rather fragmented and not systematic on the side of the state institutions. However supporters of the critical media literacy is actively involved in promoting the critical media literacy in educational practice both in school and out-of-school programmes.

1.3. Media literacy and critical consciousness The close look at how the present media is working and influencing people’s critical consciousness will build an argument that supports the importance of critical media literacy. Taylor and Harris (2008) argue that contemporary media itself is not self-reflective and self-conscious of its limits and has negative implications on people’s life. There are at least two reasons for such lack in media as identified by the critical media theorists: 1) media is permeated by the ideological components that are not overlooked but actually there are inner forces that drive media; and 2) many theoretical analyses of media even if they recognise the ideological aspect instead of being critical they celebrate this as the proof of media’s effectiveness in society (Taylor and Harris, 2008). Associates of the Frankfurt school have developed a critical theory of political economy of communication to examine how the logic of capital “shapes the structure and content of the culture industries” (Bettig, 2002, p. 84). Adorno and Horkheimer (1972) provide the valuable analysis on the reproduction of the powers of the ruling elite via cultural institutions such as schools, family, mass media and churches that have replaced the previously used physical forces such as the army or the police.

Recognising the new role for culture Adorno and Horkheimer developed the culture industry approach, which analysed the media system and ways of convincing consumers that they are receiving what they really want (Bettig, 2002). Bettig (2002) argues that culture industry prevents social changes not because of “false ideology” but rather because it becomes a part of an economic system driven by a profit motive and governing in the market logic the production of culture and information.

In a similar way, Taylor and Harris (2008) explore how, in mass media, the cult of celebrity serves to distract people from the real life issues turning the educative potential of the media into the “Banality TV”. Media basically serves to legitimate and reproduce the one dominant life style and ultimately is supporting the maintenance of the status quo of power relationships in the societies.

The authors apply Benjamin’s notion of the “distraction” to the contemporary mass media and argue that “while the essential elements of the commodity system remain undisturbed, celebrity faces effectively distract us from much less glamorous and more mundane structural economic causes that continue to dominate social relations within the heavily mediated West and the wider 20

global political order” (Taylor and Harris, 2008, p. 134). The significant role of the celebrities was noted by Adorno and Horkheimer (1972) explaining how cultural industry in an “assembly-like character” and through “the synthetic, planned method of turning out its products (factory like not only in the studio but, more or less, in the compilation of cheap biographies, pseudo documentary novels, and hit songs)” produce “stars” that are very “suitable for the advertising” (the same, p.

163). As Bettig notes, the ultimate goal of the media industry is to serve the “goal of oligopolistic producers … to minimise risks by standardizing products and to maximise profits by creating demand through marketing and advertising” (2002, p. 86). Media industry provides what people expect and in turn they come back ready to consume culture produced by the media in this way closing the circle of reproduction. Questioning media texts, media produced life styles or media industry itself ultimately means to question the dominant social, political and economical system itself. This is a challenging task for educators because media culture is often a part of learner’s identity and the most powerful experience (Kellner and Share, 2007). And the one who does that becomes the “outsider” of the system and risks to become voiceless because most of the cultural public spheres are already dominated by the profit-making logic (Giroux, 2001; Bettig, 2002).

Media industry has not only the implications on the consumer behaviour of people but also very important political implications. Nowadays the blending of three powers – business, politics and media can be observed. It becomes difficult to make a distinction between certain figures, be it a politician, business or media person, is representing and acting upon. Media theorist McLuhan (1964) turns over the original idea of Panopticon and applies it to the new electronic media arguing that new media technology enables the “mass” to observe and follow the “few” replacing the original idea designed by the philosopher and social theorist Bentham in 1785. Now few, mostly from the ruling elite are appearing on the screens of TV, covers of the magazines or at radio talkshows and spreading their understanding of the world which repeated and repeated many times becomes implicit in the understanding of common people. Taylor and Harris (2008) provide the critical analysis of the examples how media is converting the real life events into spectacles reaching everyone and vice-versa how the political spectacle becomes the reality for many people where their role as citizens is limited to participation in repeatedly conducted elections with a limited choice in the political menu constituted mostly from the ruling elite. McLaren and Hammer (2007) critically analyse how media for the first time turned the war during the Golf War in 19901991 into the aesthetic spectacle where everyone experienced it but at a safe distance. The analysis of how television as technology affects people reveals that due to the mosaic nature the view that is transmitted gets connected into totality only in the unconsciousness (McLuhan, 1964; McLaren and Hammer, 2007). New media technologies were used to manipulate people’s minds by arguing the 21

benefits of the war but at the same time re-establishing certain hegemonic powers over people. In the critical media theories there is more evidence of the media’s impact on people showing how media is reproducing the dominant ideologies and powers.

Hammer (1995) argues that often is the case that young people are more familiar with new media practices and equipped with technical skills of using media in their lives. Similarly Kellner and Share acknowledge that, “[s]tudents and youth are often more media savvy, knowledgeable, and immersed in media culture than their teachers, and can contribute to the educational process through sharing their ideas, perceptions, and insights” (2007, p. 17). But at the same time, the authors admit that “[t]oo often students believe the role of media is simply to entertain or inform, with little knowledge of the economic structure that supports it” (Kelner and Share, 2007, p. 15). They see “[t]he basis of media literacy is that all messages are constructed, and when education begins with this understanding of the social construction of knowledge, the literacy process can expand critical inquiry into multiple forms of information and communication, including television and other modes of media culture, the Internet, advertising, artificial intelligence, biotechnology, and of course, books” (the same, p. 19). This is where the critical educator may enter with educational content awakening the conscious awareness on the media industry and its “hidden messages”.

Many scholars and educators see the new opportunities that are opening the computer literacy and the Internet, but Bettig does not leave much hope for the Internet saying that “the same profit motive is driving the structure and content of the Internet” (2002, p. 88). The Internet is to a large extent used rather for the entertainment and consuming and not for critical discussions and social change geared towards better social, political and economical system. Bettig borrows Ewen's (1976) term “captains of consciousness” when arguing that with the Internet rapidly becoming a mass medium, it just strengthens the positions of the wealthiest of the planet and continues to impose more strict barriers for critical alternative. The analysis reveals, “of the 1991 Forbes list of richest 400 individuals and families in the United States found that they either made their fortune from or held significant stakes in culture and information industries” (Bettig, 2002, p. 88). The author continues noting that already now the businesses have an advantage in the struggle of what policies and programmes are in the “public interest” referring to the historical study of the copyright law as one of the cases. Rather pessimistic stand does not diminish the hope that through proper education it is possible to achieve the development of the critical consciousness towards media in particular but also to life in general. This hope comes from the theorist who tries to establish the ground for hope. Enzensberger (1974) proposes to replace the “culture industry” by the concept of “consciousness industry” arguing that media industry driven by the profit motives cannot become 22

“captains of consciousness” because “consciousness <...> cannot be industrially produced, it is a “social product” made up by people: its origin is the dialogue” (p. 5). Giroux (1997) in the critical analysis of ideologies and education argues that ideologies are not operating only in the realms of consciousness or unconsciousness but they are located in the universe of unconsciousness, common sense and critical consciousness. For the author the essential question is how to make education “meaningful in order to make it critical, and how … [to] make it critical in order to make it emancipatory” (Giroux, 1997, p. 71). The questions raised at the end of this part will be the main subject of the next part while exploring the concept and ideas of critical pedagogy, which has much to offer to the media education that aims at critical media literacy.

2. CRITICAL PEDAGOGY IN MEDIA EDUCATION New tendencies in media education in the world and to some extent in Lithuania identify the importance of critical media literacy calling to change the paradigm in education by strengthening the critical component. Education for critical consciousness is the essential object in the theoretical works and practice of critical pedagogy. The origins of critical pedagogy are mostly associated with the theoretical works and educational practices of Paulo Freire and associates of the Frankfurt School of critical thought (Giroux, 1997; Carnoy, 1998; McLaren, 2000; Rossatto, 2005; Kincheloe, 2007). The following sections will look at the concept and the main ideas of critical pedagogy alongside with the theoretical inputs of the critical thoughts of the Frankfurt School. Theoretical grounds for the passage from the critical literacy to the critical media literacy will be established by exploring the educational process and practice for critical media literacy in the contemporary world.

2.1. The concept and the main ideas of critical pedagogy The concept of critical pedagogy is evolving considering new themes, focuses and practices. Often referring to the original ideas of Freire, the critical scholars in the field reconsider new areas of concerns for critical pedagogy to approach new forms of emerging oppressive practices. This is the case with the ever-growing role of media in lives of people with its powers to establish the oppressive ideologies and powers across the globe. By merging with the critical theory of Frankfurt School associates, especially their critical contribution in the culture studies, critical pedagogy offers educational concept and practice for the critical media literacy.

23

2.1.1. Freire’s concept and ideas of critical pedagogy: then and now Critical pedagogy was born from Freire’s educational practice and research in the context of Brazil, „[o]ne of the great new industrial economies, enormously wealthy and enormously poor, it has the most unequal income distribution of any of the world’s major countries“; with the „political system, multiparty and highly democratic at one level, is still run on the bases of clientelismo, in which politicians maintain power by using public resources for very specific private interests“; where „only about one third of fifteen-to-nineteen-year-olds attend secondary school…and the conditions in basic education are desperately poor“ (Carnoy, 1998). At the same time, Freire, as called by Carnoy, is „an anomaly“ among educators because of being „truly international“ (the same, p. 8).

Two main causes contributed to his international character and enriched the world experience.

Firstly, due to the military coup in Brazil in 1964 Freire was imprisoned as a traitor for 70 days and after forced to leave his homeland. After briefly landing in Bolivia, he moved to live in Chile for five years working for the Christian Democratic Agrarian Reform Movement and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. The second cause is more pleasant and is related to the international recognition that was brought by the book Pedagogy of Oppressed that was first published in 1967. The book was well received not only among the circles of intellectuals but even more importantly by the education practitioners working at a grass-root level, especially after it was published in both Spanish and English. Freire was offered a visiting professorship at Harvard University in 1969 later moving to Geneva, Switzerland to work as a special education adviser to the World Council of Churches on the education reform in former Portuguese colonies in Africa, particularly Guinea Bissau and Mozambique. International experience in different parts of the world has brought Freire to the conclusion that critical pedagogy is relevant not only to the countries that struggle for the development but equally is important for the well developed countries (Freire, 1992).

This is obvious especially from the solid body of literature on critical pedagogy developed during the past two decades mostly by the scholars from the developed countries. Thus in the critical spirit at times they admit the lack of the contribution from the colleagues from other backgrounds and regions of the world (Rossatto, Allen and Pruyn, 2006). As could be seen from the below listed3, in past decades critical pedagogy is challenged by, and in return attempts to critically challenge the ideologies and practices that employ the “oppressive powers” to reach the “dominance over the minds, hearts and bodies of people”: sectarian religious ideologies (Rossatto, 2006; Giroux, 2007), 3

Further references may be found in Rethinking media literacy: a critical pedagogy of representation and Critical pedagogy: where are we now (see in the list of references)

24

changing map of political ideologies (Leistyna, 1996, 2007; Giroux, 1997, 2007; Weiner, 2007; Martin, 2007), re-emergence of the extreme ideologies (Bonilla-Silva & Embrick 2006; Kincheloe, 2007; Giroux, 2007), changing policies and politics of the states and governments (Lewis & Solórzano, 2006; Bejarano, 2006; Rossatto, 2006; McLaren, 2006; 2007; Kincheloe, 2007; Denzin, 2007), increasing global governance and global processes (McLaren, 2006, 2007; Kincheloe, 2007; Fischman & Gandin, 2007; Bartalomé, 2007; Grande, 2007; Lissovoy, 2007), expanding corporate “thinking” and dominance (Kincheloe, 2007; Berry, 2007; Suoranta & Vadén, 2007). By exploring different challenges contemporary scholars almost unanimously call for the need of the more liberating pedagogy in education.

Critical pedagogy, from Freire’s point of view, first of all is the “pedagogy of the oppressed” - “the pedagogy of people engaged in the fight for their own liberation … those who recognise, or begin to recognize, themselves as oppressed…” (1967, p. 53). The liberating power of critical pedagogy constitutes in two stages: in the first, “the oppressed unveil the world of oppression and through the praxis commit themselves to its transformation”; and in the second stage, “in which the reality of oppression has already been transformed, the pedagogy ceases to belong to the oppressed and becomes a pedagogy of all people in the process of permanent liberation” (Freire, 1967, p. 54-55).

While during the first stage the “oppressed” develops the critical consciousness on the oppressive condition in own life ant take the active stance; the second stage involves the struggle to create the society without any kind of the “oppressive” powers. For many critics the definition of the “oppressed” seemed too vague and they called to put more emphasis on the social class struggle. In later works Freire elegantly dismissed this criticism by admitting the role of social classes in history, but also drawing attention to the other forms and situation of oppression that involves for example gender, race, sexual or ethnicity related cases (Freire, 1992).

Contemporary scholars of critical pedagogy continuously acknowledge the complexity of the postmodern world and call the critical theorists-researchers-educators-practitioners to approach newly emerging issues of injustice, power abuse, oppressive practices imposed by the manipulative ideologies. Similarly like contemporary scholars, Freire (1992) criticised the sectarian, neoconservative and neoliberal ideologies drawing attention to the dangerous implications they have on education. According to Freire, neoliberal thinking “reinforces a pseudoneutrality of the educational practice, reducing it to the transfer of the informational content to the learners” and in this way “taking away the learners’ epistemological curiosity” to search for knowledge and discover the world. To continue with the author, this is in particular dangerous because such kind of education leads learners to lose the “immune to the bureaucratization of their minds” and ability to 25

participate in the “dialogic relationship” with others and in society. The relationship that is based on the dialogue in its essence and nature is opposite to the one that the authoritarian regimes are practicing (Freire, 1998). The danger with the conservative thinking is that to a large extent it avoids the deep transformations in and through education seeking to maintain the dominant ideology or retrieve the past. To be fair, Freire also provides the criticism for the “leftists”, who employed the rather “dogmatic thinking” into their practice trying to “fill the empty awareness” of people on their conditions, for being too “sectarian among” the different branches of the movement when thinking that “only their ideas are progressive” or because of adopting the “neoliberal pragmatic discourse” agreeing that fairness and equality is an utopia (Freire, 1992; 1998).

Giroux (1997) provides one of the most extensive analysis of the role and power that ideologies play in life generally and in education particularly. This author sees ideology as a “crucial construct for understanding how meaning is produced, transformed, and consumed by individuals and groups” (p. 91). In the tradition of critical theory, scholars of critical pedagogy dismiss the dominant belief that education is neutral of ideologies. Giroux goes further arguing that critical pedagogy should see humans as active agents and through critical inquiry in education to empower people to identify and deconstruct the dominant ideologies and produce their own subjective alternatives of meaning, identities and life practices. He argues that ideology is located both in the individuals and the social and institutional practices. Therefore critical reflection in education process is needed on both levels: 1) on individual level it is important to interrogate critically the inner histories and experience of participating in ideologies; and 2) on social and institutional level to reflect critically how certain ideologies are reproduced through day-to-day practice in, for example education, culture or work institutions (Giroux, 1997). This is only possible if reproductive practice in education would be transformed with the educational practice that is based on dialectics.

Freire (1967, 1992) equally argued for the need of dialectical pedagogy in education where the educational practice is historically contextualised and participatory. Both authors recognise the importance to consider people’s experience, meanings and understandings they bring to the education setting as a source for critical reflection. “Be they children coming to school for the first time, or young people and adults at centres of popular education”, they bring it “in the way of understanding of the world, in the most varied dimensions of their own practice in the social practice of which they are a part” (Freire, 1992, p. 72). Similarly, “[learners] own experiences and needs that have to be made problematic to provide the basis for exploring the interface between their own lives and the constraints and possibilities of the wider society” (Giroux, 1997, p. 81). The knowledge, the content and practice in education should be always contextualised addressing the 26

issues of injustice, inequality, abuse of power and oppression in the historical deriving from the learner’s living experience of presence and empowering them for the transformative actions in future. The task of the “progressive educator, through a serious, correct political analysis, is to unveil opportunities for hope, no matter what the obstacles may be” (Freire, 1992, p. 3).

In favour of participatory education, Freire stressed that it “is absolutely essential that the oppressed participate in the revolutionary process of the transformation with an increasingly critical awareness of their role as Subjects of the transformation” (1967, p. 127). From the beginning he draws attention to the negative practices of not involving people in the process by arguing that nonparticipative or “pseudo- participative” education treats people as “objects” and leads “into the populist pitfall and transform them into masses which can be manipulated”. In the educational process, educator and learner are seen both as Subjects and share the task of “unveiling the reality” through critical reflection and re-creation of knowledge (Freire, 1967). Critical pedagogy stresses the importance of critical reflection on the reality but also that educational relationship should be based on the equality between the educator and learner as human beings. However this does not dismiss the importance of the presence and role of educator. According to Freire, “educators have the right, and even the duty to teach what seems to them fundamental to the space-time in which they find themselves” (1992, p.113). Here the author acknowledges the “directive” nature of education by explicitly pointing out that education “always pursues objectives and goals, dreams and projects” recognising that education is not neutral. In respect to this one of the important issues for critical pedagogy is to “democratise the content” in education. This does not mean only to provide learners with a choice from the set of the subjects to study or topics to learn but to empower them to propose and explore education contents coming from „their world“ – the questions and issues that are at their concern and from their struggles in life. Here Freire brings the fundamental problem in education: „who chooses the content, and on behalf of which persons and things the „chooser‘s“ teaching will be performed – in favour of whom, against whom, in favour of what, against what“. These are the essential questions to ask in order to uncover the „hidden curricula“ in education addressed by many of the contemporary scholars of critical pedagogy. Recognising that schools and other educational settings are also operating as the sights for social and cultural reproduction of the dominant ideologies is the first and important step towards the critical pedagogy in education (Giroux, 1997).

Kincheloe (2007) considers the changing realities of the 21st century and discusses the central features of newly evolving critical pedagogy where critical understanding of power and nature of ideology continues to find an important place and attention. In addition, the author recognises that 27

contemporary times are marked by the increasing influence of the cultural pedagogy practiced by the media industry. Critical pedagogy needs to address the issues of authentic subjectivity, alienation of the individual, critical consciousness in order to empower people for active participation in the transformed, inclusive democratic community (Kincheloe, 2007). Although the major theoretical work from the critical pedagogy scholars primary keep focus on the school and formal education field there is recognition that non-formal education programmes and projects may offer opportunities for critical pedagogy, especially considering that Freire’s educational practice was to the most extent in the educational settings that were outside the formal education system.

Conclusions can be made that for both then and now the central aspect in critical pedagogy was the education of critical consciousness of the individuals towards the critical understanding of the role and power of ideologies that support the oppressive practices. In this sense many of the critical scholars in the field of the critical pedagogy are addressing the issues of dominant ideologies of the presence often referring to the main concept and ideas of the critical pedagogy expressed in the works of Freire. Central to the concept of Freire’s critical pedagogy is the participatory and contextualised education practice to liberate the oppressed while empowering them to take the active role in changing their living conditions. Cultural pedagogy and the role of culture and media is something that comes to the attention of critical pedagogy with contemporary scholars in the field. Here can be identified the influence of the critical thought of the Frankfurt School whose links will be highlighted in brief in the next part of this work.

2.1.2. Critical pedagogy in relation to the Frankfurt school of critical theory From its early days of existence, the Frankfurt School had a mission to “argue for critical research about those who govern on behalf of those who are governed” (Schiller in Bettig, 2002, p.84). The primary focus of the scholars was an institutional analysis of the relationship between economic, political, and communications systems mainly because of an increasing recognition in the 1960s that the culture industry played a significant role in suppressing social change (Bettig, 2002). With the rise of the electronic media at the beginning of the last century, namely the radio, movie and television, an oligopolistic culture industry was born transforming culture into the selling commodity, commodity in both senses as “product”, and as “ideology”. Following the Frankfurt School, “this meant that the cultural realm now constitutes central place in the production and transformation of historical experience” (Giroux, 2001 p. 23). Scholars of critical pedagogy recognise and refer to the works of the theorists of the Frankfurt school of critical theory. Giroux (1997) identifies the following valuable contributions for the critical educators and educational 28

theorists that they could find in the works of the Frankfurt school’s theorists:

•

The critique for the dominance of the instrumental rationalism and positivisms in the science, education and society in general, brought with the Enlightenment and which tied education with the functionalists paradigm;

•

The theory of culture that analyses the interrelationship between the power and culture and how the education in general and schools in particular act as agents in reproduction of the social and culture modes and practices in societies;

•

The same theory offers educators source for developing the educational theories and practices that recognise and takes into consideration the history or cultural capital brought by learners belonging to different groups;

•

In addition, a theory of culture emphasizes the importance of consciousness and subjectivity in the learning process opposing the wide spread functionalists orientation in this opening for the hope and the possibility of transcendence;

•

Finally the notion of deep psychology offers new insights for the critical educators to reflect their place and role in opposing the system of social and cultural reproduction that is established and supported with the hidden curricular in education. (Giroux, 2001)

Other scholars4 referred to the works of the Frankfurt school associates when arguing the promise of critical pedagogy to overcome the youth alienation in everyday life (Frymer, 2006), exploring the claim made by critical pedagogy to be a “pedagogy of possibility” (Cho, 2006), elaborating the concerns raised in the critical theory on the reproduction of non-equality through schools (Kanpol, 1999), in constructing the feminist pedagogy to democratise the gender relations in education (Luke and Gore, 1992), discussing the emancipatory qualities of the technology when used in higher education (Cole, 2001), using example of drama and aesthetics education to reach the critical education (Doyle, 1993) and so on. As could be seen from these examples, critical theory is applied to a wide thematic range within the field of critical pedagogy. The critique of the Enlightenment consequences, the theory of culture and the notion of deep psychology, as summarised by Giroux, are paralleled in the theoretical works of Freire. Similarly, Freire (1992) criticised the dominance of the “pragmatic discourse” and “mechanistic objectivism” in education, contradicted the practice of school in “reproducing the authoritarian ideologies”, stressed the importance to consider in the education process the “reading the world in learners language”, argued in favour of education that “awakens the consciousness of the oppressed”.

4

Further references may be found in Rethinking the Frankfurt School – alternative legacies of cultural critique (see in the list of references)

29

2.2. From the critical language literacy towards the critical media literacy in education The theoretical ground of critical pedagogy as it was discussed earlier lays the foundations for the critical education in both language literacy and media literacy. Freire (1992) considered language more than merely as mean of communication but attributed the qualities of transmitting the ideologies, shaping human’s perception of life, establishing and re-establishing power relationships in the society. Most obvious could be the example of a person who does not know how to read and to write and he or she is living in the society dominated by the written texts. Or in another example there an immigrant person does not know the language of the hosting country and needs to survive through the process of getting the residence to live in a country. Obviously, the language and the ability to write and read determine the living conditions and opportunities these people have in the society. But going deeper language may different and be associated with the class, age or social status (Freire, 1992).

Working as a literacy teacher Freire saw his mission of teaching people to read and write not solely as only education for skills but more as a way to teach critical thinking and encourage positive social change. Lankshear (1993) explains that Freire's process of teaching to read and write „literacy becomes a means by which learners can continually expand and refine their own critical awareness, and communicate this to others similarly intent on entering history more fully and consciously” (in McLaren, 2000, p. 150). The education method of critical literacy is based on the assumption that it is impossible to reach the critical thinking of a learner if a teacher is not respecting and taking into “consideration the conditions in which they [learners] are living and the importance of the knowledge derived from the life experience, which they bring with them to school” (Freire, 1998, p. 62). According to McLaren, the central paradigm of Freire's pedagogy was the attempt “to transform through the revolutionary social praxis the “banking concept” of education, in which the teacher-expert deposits knowledge into the learner's memory bank in a mechanical fashion that suggests that content itself is auto-critical” (2000, p. 156).

With his “method” of critical literacy Freire was targeting at liberating the oppressed from the identity imposed by hegemonic power. Through the process of codification and de-codification a learner is empowered to create a distance between self and the reality and later create own identity or even multiply identities. Critical literacy strives to oppose the “identity politics” which are imposed by the dominant powers and/or regimes. McLaren argues, “critical literacy à la Freire is a revolutionary dialectics of interest and theory in which individuals can become self-consciousness of their own self-formation in particular ways of life through an engagement in critical-reflexivity” 30

(2000, p. 155). Freire criticised schools for reproducing the hegemony through pursuing nonliberating education practice suppressed by the education goals set by macro-structures of power and privilege and teachers taking neutral stance in pedagogy. Freire was arguing for direct pedagogy in the sense that educator is not taking a neutral role of facilitator because there is no ideologically neutral education (Tores, 1997). Freire called educators to liberate them from the “cultural capital” through establishing the “organic relationships” with class or group of people they are working with (Mayo in McLaren, 2000).

Despite of the plausible contribution made by Freire his critics draw attention: firstly, on the failure to provide a more systematic body of theoretical work what would illustrate how cultural dominant it reproduced through the school education; and secondly, for not recognising enough the race and gender caused oppression (McLaren, 2000). In conclusions McLaren recognise that first weakness becomes actually the strength of the pedagogy of critical literacy forcing educators develop their own “theory” and ways of education practice; and the second was recognised by Freire himself by trying in later works to address issues of race and gender oppression. Freire’s concept of critical pedagogy was born primary from his experience of teaching to read and write. Contemporary scholars following the main ideas of Freire’s pedagogy of oppressed developed the critical literacy approach further by including extensive attention on multiply media literacies.

Critical media literacy is considered as part of a process of critical pedagogy during which people learn “how their culture, society, and polity are structured and work”. Critical media literacy enables learners “to read and criticize the media and how to produce alternative media and culture” (Kellner, 1995, p. xv). Steinberg and Kincheloe (1995) argue that due to the fact that only rich conglomerates can enter and use media it is important to create alternative spaces where citizens could critically reflect on media impact in shaping their values, desires and influencing their choices and daily lives. The authors share the view that teachers should not reduce to only analysis of text meaning from reading books, but stimulate the reflection on contextual relevance and influence of ideology behind (Steinberg and Kincheloe, 1995). In achieving its goal critical media literacy should first of all challenge the understanding of “coding” and “decoding” which in the media education today is limited only to the learning “the art of media message construction and interpretation” (Sholle and Denski, 1995). Contemporary media education practice should employ Freire's meaning and practice of coding and decoding to bridge the media texts with hegemonic practices in reality. Sholle and Denski (1995) draw parallels between critical media literacy and Freire's pedagogy of critical literacy. At the same time McLaren and Hammer (1995) invite educators to recognise that the present world constitutes from multiply literacies - “post-modern 31

literacies” - where knowledge plays the meaning-making role. In the age of electronic media growing “mediascapes” are dominated by the audio-visual images and challenge the dominance of the printed text. The authors note that it “is a form of literacy that understands media representations – whatever photographs, television, print, film or another form – as not merely productive of knowledge but also of subjectivity” (McLaren an Hammer, 1995, p. 196). They express a need for “a counter-hegemonic media literacy in which subjectivities may be lived and analysed outside the dominant regime of official print culture – culture that is informed by a technophobic retreat from emerging techno-aesthetic cultures of photography, film and electronically mediated messages. (McLaren and Hammer, 1995, p. 199) McLaren and Hammer in their theoretical discourse distinguish, more in symbolic sense than physical, between the symbolic work within the informal cultural space and symbolic work in school setting. The first one allows psychologically feel the “ownership” of creative materials and tools, where the second leaves the “ownership” of books in the power of teachers (McLaren and Hammer, 1995). Therefore critical media literacy should treat human beings not “merely as human capital or labour power, but as creative citizens, full of their own sensuous symbolic capacities and activities and taking a hand in the reconstruction of their own identities” (McLaren and Hammer, 1995, p. 200). However, these authors admit that it is not an “easy task, and there are no guaranties, especially given that symbolic resources are lodged in their own historical patterns of power and logics of production.” (the same).

Hammer (1995) argues that most of the people, especially young, are highly literate in the many kinds of new media, but to a large extent this literacy remains “unconscious, inarticulate, and unrecognised”. High media literacy is achieved with little contribution of school education, but still there is a significant difference in being media literate in the merely functional sense and being critically aware of how media is shaping one's life. From here dthe importance for critical pedagogy derives – educators through critical media literacy encourage young people’s meta-reflection of their media experiences in this way challenging the “background effect” of media. Hammer recognises the limits of traditional education where “a word has a meaning independent of its' context” and criticises “decontextualised approach” as wrong teaching practice. According to Hammer, one possible way of improving education practice is to apply the dialectical method, which in William's explanation is “a contradiction in the course of discussion or dispute to a notion of contradiction in reality” (the same, p. 107). But before applying dialectical method for critical media literacy, Hammer suggest that educators should make a step in becoming media literate themselves. It might seem that the critical media literacy is a very sophisticated and highly 32

cognitive way of learning trying to “reach” consciousness but in reality it starts from the very simple separation of “what they see and hear from what they think and feel” (Kelner and Share, 2007, p. 12).

Kelner and Share (2007) explain that the educational process of critical media literacy starts from the “media arts activities or simple decoding of media texts in the mode of the established media literacy movement” but moving beyond teaching only artistic or technical skills towards by critically exploring the meaning of media texts (e.g. direct vs. hidden, decontextualised vs. contextualised) and challenging the common assumptions (e.g. media portrayed world vs. real world, subject/object vs. world) through, when feasible, the production of alternative media. The authors recommend “a pedagogy of teaching critical media literacy through the project-based media production … for making analysis more meaningful and empowering as students gain tools for responding and taking action on the social conditions and texts they are critiquing” (Kelner and Share, 2007, p. 9). The suggested method perfectly fits with the practice of non-formal education where project-based learning is used widely and even in a more real manner than it is possible to achieve in the frame and structure of the formal education system. This is mainly due to the participatory qualities created by non-formal education. Kelner and Share conclude that in contemporary times „[media] literacy is thus a necessity condition to equip people to participate in the local, national, and global economy, culture and polity” (2007, p. 19) In conclusion, education for critical media literacy in many aspects follows the founding ideas of education for critical literacy. Both concepts similarly recognise that education is not free of ideology; calls to incorporate the social struggle aspect in the education process and through the dialectical process of confronting the contradictions of reality empower people for social changes.

Critical pedagogy scholars recognise that changing media culture demands the multiple literacies and the task of the progressive education while teaching literacies educate the critical consciousness of young people towards themselves and their living conditions. The media education for critical media literacy should include in itself the education for “critical reading” of different media and cultural “texts” while at the same time teaching technical skills needed for counter production of alternative media. The methodology of “critical reading” is based on the coding and decoding of the hidden messages, manipulations and ideologies through rather simple questioning leading to more sophisticated understanding how media industry works as a social agent. Although most of the scholars focus on addressing media literacy in formal education setting, the suggested project-based media education method should fit well into non-formal education practices as well.

33

3. YOUTH NON-FORMAL EDUCATION AND CRITICAL MEDIA LITERACY Earlier in the text it was repeatedly mentioned that although there exist media education practices outside of the formal education field they are often not well researched and documented. Chisholm (2008) explains that the lack of academic research and theoretical works on non-formal education in general is due to: a) the lack of researchers who would dedicate centrally to the rather narrow field of non-formal education and learning; b) it takes time to conceptualise the new field of activity; c) there is no explicit theoretical and conceptual base for non-formal education and learning; d) no accumulated examples from the field is available; and e) limited resources available for the scientific/empirical researches allocated to education in general, and more particular for non-formal education and learning. However there are conceptual accounts made mainly by the practitioners in the field that provide the reference for the understanding and practice of non-formal education.

3.1. Non-formal education in the light of critical pedagogy The concept of non-formal education emerged in the late 60s in response to the failures of the formal education to adapt to the rapidly changing socio-economic conditions in societies (Rogers, 2005; Krezios and Ambrozy, 2008) together with the (re-emerging) debates on the lifelong education/learning (Rogers, 2005; Hager and Halliday, 2006). Although there are scholars, among them Jeffs (2008), who believe that the concept pre-dates the emergence even of the formal education. In attempts to conceptualise the non-formal education practice, Rogers (2005) sees the gap between the theory “what we say we are doing” and the theory in action “what actually we are doing”. This aspect is important also in the context of this work because time-to-time there will be references made to the claims of practitioners in the field instead of referring to the academically established literature and research due to the reasons stated before.

When defining non-formal education, especially on the institutional level, there is often made a reference to the classical trivium of formal education//learning, non-formal education/learning and informal education/learning. Krezios and Ambrozy (2008) note this after careful examining of the definitions of non-formal education/learning in different official documents of international institutions and organisations. There is also the different use of term “education” and “learning” in different attempts to define “non-formal education/learning” where the shift moves towards “learning” at least in the institutional understanding (Krezios and Ambrozy, 2008). The authors explain that often the term “non-formal education” is used when addressing more the context “who is offering it?” – and the term “non-formal learning” is used when the focus is kept on the 34

process “what is happening?”. For practitioners in the field of non-formal education such distinctions seem less of importance as the main significance is on what actually is done (Krezios and Ambrozy, 2008).

In the concept of critical pedagogy such separation is not made but contrary it is even stressed the integrity and interdependence between the “teaching” and “learning” in the act of education (Freire, 1967, 1992). Freire (1992) discusses the dual relation between the education and learning as an interactive process that is based on the dialogue and equally involves both the educator and the learner. For him, „any educational practice always implies the existence of (1) a subject or agent (the person who instructs and teaches); (2) the person who learns, but who by learning also teaches; (3) the object to be imparted and taught – the object to be re-cognized and cognized – that is, the content; and (4) the methods by which the teaching subject approaches the content he or she is mediating to the educand“ (Freire, 1992, p. 93). This rather strong emphasis of the “teaching” role of the educator might be perceived negatively if looked from the learner‘s perspective. But there are far too many arguments put by Freire in favour of the empowerment of the learner during the educational process where “educands learn to learn in learning the reason-for, the “why“ of the object or the content“ (Freire, 1992, p. 68).

Rogers (2004) attempts to offer a new paradigm for classifying the educational practices according the level of contextualisation where the education context and practice depends on the level of learner’s participation. He offers to place any of the educational practice in the following continuum: Chart 2. Education and learning continuum Formal education

Flexible schooling

Participatory education

Informal learning

Source: adapted from Rogers (2004) The author seeks to bring more clarity in the current confusion in the debates on the theory and practice of non-formal education. In the offered continuum author places the non-formal education practices under either: 1) “flexible schooling” – where issues of the time and location of meetings, the dates of “holidays”, and such logistical issues are often left to decisions by the learning group, but the matters of the curriculum and teaching-learning materials, the length of the learning programme, the form and timing of the evaluation process are all matters reserved to the providing agency; 2) “participatory education” – where the issues of the control of the education “pathway” – 35

goals, content, methodology and evaluation – are in control by the learning group and the educator or providing agency is “to accompany” the process with critical interventions (Rogers, 2004, 2005).

The author recognises in the roots of participatory education the influence of theorists of critical pedagogy. Such relative distinction within the practice of non-formal education allows both not to dismiss the value of the attempts in more formal education setting to include participatory elements but at the same time to draw a clearer boarder on where the true participation is practiced in nonformal education setting. The importance of the “ownership” in a learning process is argued by critical pedagogy authors emphasizing that such practice considers learner as the subject, an active agent capable to define learning objectives, ways and strategies of achieving them, active participation and contribution during the learning process and playing the main role in assessing the progress made (McLaren and Hammer, 1995). This partly may explain the current shift in attention from the “non-formal education” towards “non-formal learning” with the emphasis on the empowerment of learners through strengthening their learning to learn competence.

In the European youth work tradition, practitioners of non-formal education consider their activities not as the education for, but education with and by young people. This principle well matches with the beliefs in participatory nature of education expressed in the ideas of critical pedagogy. The authors (Conde and others, 2006) of the practical guide on how to support the youth initiatives identify two levels where participation of young people is empowered by non-formal education activities:

•

Participation on personal level refers to the potential of young people for taking decisions at each stage of the project. It is about encouraging young people to take responsibility for their actions and, in time, for their own lives.

•

Participation at community level refers to the contribution of young people, in terms of ideas and energies, towards the community (local, regional, national or international). It is about giving young people voice, and hence some kind of empowerment in society.

In order to achieve participation, first of all the autonomy should be created for young people to experience “being” and for questioning, reflecting, experimenting and challenging existing understandings, experiences, practices and the order in life. This is a very sensitive process for educators because it requires trust and believes in young people and awareness of not imposing one’s perceptions of the world. In the same way as Freire, the manipulative practices of participation are criticized in the field of non-formal education too (Conde et al., 2006). Another aspect much valued in non-formal education practice is the role of peers. Peer education is a 36

common practice in the non-formal education where more experienced young people takes an active role and responsibility in organising and leading educational activities with other young people. A recently developed reflection tool that aims to promote the recognition of non-formal education and learning in Europe is targeting practitioners, “youth leaders - which we understand to refer essentially to young adults holding a responsibility in a youth organisation, network or any other youth structure, mainly on a voluntary basis, and youth workers holding the same kind of responsibility mainly on a professional basis” (Taylor, Council of Europe, 2006, p. 16).

Concluding it can be said that there are challenges in conceptualising the “non-formal education” due to the lack of more academic works and because of the huge variety of forms and ways of nonformal education practice. In the current debates and attempts to define non-formal education or learning the important is to retain the emphasis on the participatory nature of education as it is argued in the concept of critical pedagogy. Practitioners from the European youth work field and European institutions that support the recognition of non-formal education in the youth sector promote the importance of true participation of young people in the educational practice.

3.2. Critical potential of youth non-formal education in Lithuania The focus on the youth non-formal education in Lithuania does not mean that the European level of non-formal education practice lacks a critical component. As a matter of fact, the important contribution of non-formal education for the development of the critical consciousness it is often stressed by the practitioners and European institutions (Bram, 2000; Baro, 2006; Council of Europe, 2006, European Commission, 2009). The task here is more to frame the focus on the particular practice of non-formal education in Lithuanian context by establishing the theoretical framework for the further research work.

The recent research on the expenses and access to children’s non-formal education in Lithuania identifies different practices within the field that may fall under the “label” of non-formal education. The research identifies at least several educational settings where non-formal education is practiced: 1) non-formal education activities and programmes that are implemented by the children’s and youth centres; 2) music, art and sport schools; 3) school activities and programmes that take place “after-lessons”; 4) extra-curricular educational activities at schools and out of schools; 5) activities implemented by the (youth) non-governmental organisations (Kviestkiene, 2006). Considering that the first four forms of non-formal education are at least to some extent researched due to the belonging to the state sector, the attention of this work will be kept with the 37

youth non-formal education, which in most of the cases, but not exclusively, takes place within the activities and programmes in (youth) non-governmental sector of Lithuania.

After the independence of Lithuania during the past decades, youth (work) sector evolved as a “new way of working” with young people. The “new way of working” is stressed by emphasizing the underlying principles of voluntarism, active participation and responsibility by young people. The importance of such way of working with young people that is mainly offered by (youth) nongovernmental organisations was recognised by the Lithuanian state: first, by adopting the Concept on the Foundations of Youth Policy in 1996 and establishing the responsible body for youth affairs; and later, by adopting the Law on the Foundations of Youth Policy in 2003. Youth non-formal education was also developing alongside with the developments in youth policy in Lithuania achieving limited institutional recognition in the form of a paragraph in the main youth policy law and emphasis of the youth non-formal education in the programmes of the Department of Youth Affairs under the Ministry of Social Security and Labour. Many of the practitioners in the field of youth non-formal education agree that European youth work cooperation and experience played an important role in the developments of youth non-formal education in Lithuania (Mewaldt and Gailius, 1997; Deltuva, 2005; Gailius, 2004, 2008;). The significant importance was of the opportunities to participate and implement non-formal education activities supported with the project grants by the European Foundations of Council of Europe and European Union programmes Youth and Youth in Action and other international and national programmes (Deltuva, 2005; Gailius, 2008).

In the institutional understanding, at least the ones that are active in the youth policy field, youth non-formal education is strongly associated with an emancipatory process of education through the development of consciousness and competences for the responsibility of personal life and active participation in the society (Association of Youth Non-formal Education in Lithuania, Lithuanian Council of Youth Organisations, Department for Youth Affairs). Leading practitioners in the field also argue in favour of the critical potential of youth non-formal education, which creates spaces for young people to experience a “non-pragmatic being”, a space “where young person’s opinions, knowledge, skills meet with the life“, there “alternative choices in life are encouraged and supported” (Deltuva, 2005; Gailius, 2008). Firstly, the main purpose of youth non-formal education is to offer the alternative to the dominant pragmatism in contemporary life – an ideology that is much criticized by the theorist of critical pedagogy. Secondly, the non-formal learning experience comes through the dialectical relationship between the person and the world. Many critical pedagogy scholars would agree that this is the foundation in the development of critical 38

consciousness. Youth non-formal education is concerned with liberating young people from the groundless external restrictions, often imposed by adults and groundless internal restrictions deriving from the values formed on the experiences of the others (Mewaldt and Gailius, 1997).

Mewaldt and Gailius (1997) argue that young people are lacking authentic experience and therefore often are referring to the experiences of others, e.g. ”taught“ by parents, shared by friends, followed by traditions or absorbed through media. In the process of non-formal education they are able to question existing practices and understandings, in Freire’s terms: to challenge the ”reading of world“ presented by the others. This questioning takes place not only in the theoretical realm but also through the real praxis of living, learning and acting in a peer group or a team together with other young people and often accompanied by a youth worker. The task of non-formal educator is to challenge any oppressive practices emerging with in the group/team or in relation to the outside world. The challenging is possible through the common critical reflection on the experience and feedback in a dialogue process. The role of the educator is not only to recognise the oppressive practices but also through reflection and in dialogue way to establish links between the experience in the non-formal education setting and the life in the real world conditions. The ultimate result of the youth non-formal education is critical consciousness (Gailius, 2008).

At least in the spirit youth non-formal education is close to the essential ideas in the concept of critical pedagogy. Of course further research is needed in order prove the case of the claim that youth non-formal education is contributing, as it manifests conceptually, to the development of the critical consciousness and empowerment for the transformative practices in life. But this was the task of this work through the empirical research to provide the case of youth non-formal education and its extent of contribution for the critical media literacy.

3.3. Non-formal education for critical media literacy: empirical research The non-formal education field is rich of diverse practices in implementing educational programmes and projects. In Lithuania, different organisations and institutions implement nonformal education activities with young people. Practitioners in the field recognise the significant impact of European programmes for the development of youth non-formal education in Lithuania (Gailius, 2004, 2008). Starting with the programmes Youth for Europe and European voluntary service in 1998-1999; later with the programme Youth implemented during 2000-2006; and currently being in operation the programme Youth in Action for the period of 2007-2013. During the period of 2000-2006 more than 20 000 young people participated in the different youth projects granted under the programme Youth and during the period of 2007-2008 more than 2353 young 39

people took part in the activities supported with grants within the Youth in Action programme in Lithuania (Agency of International Youth Co-operation, 2006, 2007, 2008). Although the themes and methodologies vary from project to project, there are a great number of projects their theme focus is on media or in their methodology they use media. In this work, from the empirical research, the decision was made to focus on the European Union programme Youth in Action, which supports the non-formal and informal learning opportunities for and with young people.

3.3.1. Research methodology and methods Research stages. The research was prepared and implemented in the following stages: 1. During the planning and preparation stage the contacts with the Agency of International Youth Cooperation were established and main agreement received to support this research.

The interview plans for youth workers and youth leaders were developed (February-March, 2009).

2. Pre-selection of the research sample and establishment of the necessary contacts with the interview participants. Confirmation of the research times and places. (March, 2009) 3. Collecting the research data by implementing the interviews with youth workers and youth leaders (26 March-1 April, 2009).

4. Data input, coding and analysis of the interview content (April-May, 2009).

Research strategy and methods. The qualitative research approach was adopted based on the following assumptions: 1) the research was implemented in a rather narrow segment of non-formal education with specific pre-requirements for the research sample; 2) the research object required detailed and deep inquiry having a goal to capture the essential problems of the non-formal critical media education; and finally, 3) this work approaches critical media literacy which is rather new phenomena in Lithuanian educational practice. Considering these assumptions, from all the ranges of available qualitative research methods the in-depth interview was chosen for this research. When preparing and conducting the interviews the methodological suggestions on the in-depth interview made by Boyce and Neale (2006) and Lewis and Ritchie (2003) were closely followed. The chosen method was appropriate for the research object – a critical component in the non-formal education projects – because it allows exploring deeply the educational practices and learning experiences in this setting from the different perspectives. In the research, following the constructivist paradigm, the research-generated knowledge was constructed combining three different perspectives: 1) youth worker’s perspective on non-formal media education; 2) youth leader’s perspective on non-formal 40

media education; and 3) theory perspective on critical media literacy.

Research instruments. Two kinds of in-depth interview plans were developed for this research.

One was used to guide the interviews with youth workers (see Annex no. 3) and the other one was used during the interviews with youth leaders (see Annex no. 4). Although both of the interviews keep the same focus – critical component in the non-formal education projects – some of the questions were formulated considering the different educational roles youth workers and youth leaders have which influences the interview perspective. Kincheloe and Berry argue that researchers who attempt to consider the complexity in education should “actively construct [the] research methods from the tools at hand rather than passively receiving the “correct”, universally applicable methodologies” (Kincheloe and Berry, 2004, p. 2). For the research in the Youth in Action programme it is very difficult to find a ready-made instrument because there is lack of research done in the field, and also because the non-formal education practices are very unique from project to project.

The guiding interview questions were structured in the three main parts: 1) general introduction questions about the organisation/group, person and the project; 2) concrete in-depth questions focusing on the critical component in the non-formal education for critical media literacy in Youth in Action projects; and 3) general conclusion questions about the media impact on young people, needs for critical media literacy and media competence. In-depth interviews usually include openended questions followed by so-called “probes”, specific questions which deepen exploration of the themes, experiences and behaviours (Lewis and Ritchie, 2003; Boyce and Neal, 2006). During the interviews, firstly people were asked rather open questions on different themes related to media education and learning activities in their project. And only after they shared their responses once more, specific questions were asked to collect more detailed information on the direct research object. The more specific questions were clearly chosen by the researcher and derived from the critical media theories, critical pedagogy and critical media literacy. Such research practice means that the researcher is taking an active role during the process of collecting the data, therefore a certain level of subjectivity is always present.

Research sample. For this research the targeted non-probability sample was formed in several steps. During the first step a pre-selected number of projects were selected from the list of granted projects by the Youth in Action programme in Lithuania during the period of 2007-2008. The preselection was done based on the short project description in the summary submitted together with the project application requesting the grant from the programme. The main pre-selection criteria 41

were: 1) theme/methodology – inclusion of projects which in their short description mentioned media (in any of the understandings) as the central theme or one of the main methodologies; 2) types of project – inclusion of different types of projects which are possible under the programme (see the table in the Annex no. 2); 3) geographical coverage – inclusion of projects which are implemented by the organisations/groups which are based in different districts of Lithuania. At the end of this step the list of 21 potential projects was generated.

During the second step via phone consultation with project organisers, 8 different projects were selected, the organisations or groups, based in 9 different districts in Lithuania, had implemented that. Some of the project organisers during the consultations clarified that the project did not go enough deep with media related activities or some of the potential interview participants were not possible to reach because the distant time from the project realisation. In 4 of the projects it was possible to make interviews with both youth workers and youth leaders ensuring the representation of different perspectives. Finally, the research involved 9 youth workers (4 male and 5 female) and 6 youth leaders (4 male and 2 female) having different educational roles in projects.

There were important considerations made when making a choice to include both the perspective of youth workers and youth leaders. The research, which is informed by the critical theory, should try to involve less-represented groups and individuals empowering them to contribute in constructing knowledge in society in general and in the studied field in particular (Mertens, 1997; Saukko, 2003). In Lithuania such profession as “youth workers” does not exist officially even if a number of people across country commit themselves to the educational work with young people. In society in general young people too often are labelled as “problematic” instead of being perceived as “resourceful”. By involving them in this research the attempt was made to recognise their positive contribution to the society.

Methods for data analysis. The data collected through the interviews was analysed by proceeding with the thematic approach to the content analysis (see the tables in Annexes no. 5 and no. 6), which is one of the most used techniques within the qualitative research practice. The recorded data was transcribed into the text and organised according the thematic groups. Two thematic groups were identified from the theory of critical media literacy and transformed into the questions exploring the different thematic areas more in-depth. Table bellow provides with the overview of the thematic areas covered by the interview questionnaires:

42

Table 3. Thematic areas covered by the interview questionnaires Questions on the non-formal media education context explored such thematic areas: • Personal and organisational media understandings and experience • Place and role of media activities with young people • Motivation to participate in media related activities • Youth relationship with media and media impact on young people • Need for critical media literacy

Questions on education for critical consciousness in the projects explored such thematic areas: • Media related activities in projects and their rationale • Objectives of media related activities • Education and learning for critical thinking and media consciousness • Critical media literacy through the power struggles • Possibilities and limits for media education in nonformal education

At the beginning interview participants were briefly informed about the main research object and to most extent were conscious about their responses. In the content analysis such responses were quoted with reference to the respondent. However some of the aspects, which were explored by the research, needed more informed knowledge on critical media literacy and therefore was only possible to reconstruct through the content analysis and interpretation. The concrete case was with critical media literacy through the power struggles in the projects. This aspect came up during the interviews and later was reconstructed and analysed from the narratives of youth workers and youth leaders (see the table in Annex no. 7). These parts will represent the author’s perspective and contribution constructing the research knowledge.

Each of the thematic group was split into subcategories followed by the coding of the interview content. Only the interview responses that were relevant to the research object were included as a reference in the data analysis. The data analysis was organised and structured in to two main parts: 1) non-formal media education context within the organisation and in general; and 2) non-formal media education practices and experiences in Youth in Action projects.

3.3.2. The context of non-formal media education Media understandings. From the very beginning of the interviews both youth workers and youth leaders were asked to clarify how they understand the term “media”. In the group of youth workers the dominant understanding of media is related to “mass-media” (YW4, YW7, YW9) or “means of mass-media” (YW5, YW8). Two youth workers who were coming from the same organisation related media to “new technologies”, “Internet and video”, more like means and tools for selfexpression (YW1, YW2). Although there were 2 people (YW3, YW7) who in their reply to the question focused not only on the content of the understanding but also its qualities attributing the “narrow meaning” to understanding but from the context the replies differ. One associated “narrow” more with limited usage of Internet based communication technologies such as “web-sites”, “email” and “Skype” (YW3) while the others attributed the term “narrow” in the sense of concreteness and 43

focus on “mass-media” as such (YW7). There were single understandings of media as “all senses” (YW4) and as “education” (YW5). Probably the most interesting response was from a youth worker who identified how in their organisation media understanding was changing, getting very close to the media understanding in critical media literacy theory: “Then, media was still from the practical side, that with media we can unite people and it could be the result of our thoughts and ideas at the same time being our thinking. <…> …it was a group of people who were studying media … they wanted to go deeper that it’s not only the method, it is something different, look, what happens on television, these thoughts came up that it is not just something, I remember, someone said, that it is possible to manipulate and it is done of course. <…> But, because we had questions ourselves we had to lower our ambitions.” (YW9)

It is difficult to set a pattern in how youth leaders understand media because not everyone explained it directly. One interview participant related media understanding with the “educational side” and “public relations” work of organisation (YL1), the other with “mass-media” (YL2) and the third with “technologies” and “communication between people” (YL3). One respondent gave a very explicit explanation of media in his understanding going beyond media technologies and talking about media ecology: “Media is not only photo camera, camera or something else, media is communication between people. Media can be communication with your friends while going out or something else. Media can be that you take photo camera and try to express pictures. Somehow this thing, media, is understood very technically, media is newspaper, video, television, radio, mass-media, but media is everywhere around us.” (YL3)

From the responses of all the interviewed participants it is possible to identify four categories in media understandings: 1) media as means of mass media or mass media in a whole; 2) media as technology and tools for communication, self-expression and representation; 3) media as senses and everything around us; and 4) media as education possibility. The first and fourth understandings are very close to the common understanding of media in the critical media literacy perspective. But here further inquiry is necessary to explore how deep this understanding is related to media manipulations. The second understanding of media is closer to the understanding, which is present in the science of communication and ITC education. The third category falls under the media ecology understanding. It is difficult to establish more reliable connections between understandings of youth workers and youth leaders being from the same project, because only in 2 of the projects both understood media in a very similar way (YW4 and YL3, YW8 and YL3). But theoretical literature suggests that it is important to clarify the media understandings because it influences the stance people have towards media.

44

Place and role of media in activities. Youth workers were asked what place and role media had in their activities. The answers were very diverse and only matching in two cases where youth workers were seeing media as being “attractive” and “interesting” for young people (YW1, YW3). Other answers ranged from media having a “crucial role” for existence of organisation because it is “virtual” but at the same time “not the essential” in the activities (YW1), media being important for “publicity of own activities” and when “you want to see reactions” and “positive image” of own work (YW6) to being indifferent for “media or not” due to the specific educational role (YW8).

Some youth workers recognise the developments which organisation underwent, making a connection with the development of media related activities and change of media understanding.

For example it was said, that “organisation took initiative” on in the Internet based developments including web 2.0 functions and by with this trying “somehow to expand media understanding” (YW3). Or another example, which was quoted earlier with evolving media activities the media understanding was changing from “practical side” to media as tool to “unite people” and reach the understanding that media “is not only the method” but can be used for manipulations (YW9).

Different importance of media in the activities of organisation is influenced by the structure of organisation, e.g. “virtual organisation” (YW1), local context where organisation is operating, e.g.

“I was working … in a small village” (YW6), educational role which a person has with young people, e.g. “because I am a coach” (YW8) or existing interest in the organisation, e.g. “our organisation took initiative” or “it was a group of people … they wanted to go deeper” (YW3, YW9). All these different factors testify the complexity in which organisations are operating and which are important to consider when realising the media education projects with young people. It also confirmed that in each organisation the attitude to media is very individual and subjective. The last aspect, subjectivity, is often caused by personal relationship and experience with media.

Personal relationship and experience with media. The majority of youth workers had previous media education experience, mostly “youth trainings” (YW2, YW1) or “university” education (YW2, YW7), experience of practicing media by “coming to edit movies to one studio in town” and “creating broadcasting for local television” (YW2), by “filming school events” (YW1) or going to EVS “to organise movie evenings” (YW9). A number of youth workers were involved in the media work either in their organisation when it “naturally came together with the wave of all technologies” and after “getting some of the encouragement” (YW1) or professionally “as painter, as designer, as pedagogue” (YW4), “as journalist” (YW6), “working from newspapers” to televisions (YW7). One of the responses is particularly relevant to the subject of this work because 45

it shows how both natural and external causes may influence people to initiate media developments in their organisation but also in their community: „Naturally it came to [organisation] together with the wave of all the technologies and we, maybe after getting certain encouragement, maybe someone published a call for financial support and we decided that we need to create the website of the town, because such did not existed and we imagined that it is needed and that in the future such thing as town’s website will be needed… <…> And later the thought came as the project developed that the website could become more as a space for critical attitude towards the world, express such things, which takes place in the town, both how town affairs are managed and how and which problems exits“ (YW1)

From the interview responses it could be possible to trace how personal media experiences are influencing media understandings and organisational activities. For example, people who had education or working experience as journalists they saw media in the understanding of mass media (YW6, YW7) or a person who had work experience as media professional and designer saw media more from the media ecological perspective (YW4). Also similar connection can be observed in people’s experience with video and Internet technology reflected in their understanding that media is video and Internet technologies (YW1, YW2), as theory of critical media literacy it is stress the importance for educators be media educated and experienced. Here it is important to add that educators who want to engage in the critical media literacy should be able too approach media issues with critical competence. In few interviews youth workers (YW2, YW9) admitted that yet they do not feel fully prepared to work with other people addressing media critically. The following response is eloquent: „After one [training] where people in Italy work extensively with so called social video, and this drives me powerfully, in a sense that they expose the particular social problems through video or photography, in radio journals, by publishing newspapers. <…> I think here one needs much more practice in a sense that theory is not enough and you could see that you need to do and to touch yourself.“ (YW2)

The lack of knowledge and experience may lead to stepping back from engaging in the critical media literacy as one youth worker was explaining that because “we had questions ourselves, we had to lower our ambitions” (YW9).

Motivation to participate in media related activities. The responses about motivation to take part in media related activities among youth leaders varied from motivation to “tell the message” about their activities and to “involve other young people” (YL1), to wish “to have direct contact” and experience with media (YL2) and “gain knowledge” on how media is created (YL6), or being 46

themselves “interested in technologies” (YL3), to having a goal to “express themselves in television” (YL4). Relatively it is possible to group the motives of youth leaders into two groups: 1) motives for personal development in the area of media; and 2) expressing themselves to others by using media with goal to involve. With the progress in the interviews the second aspect was repeatedly mentioned by almost all of the interview participants. Motivations of youth leaders matched some of the responses from youth workers in how they saw media in the activities of their organisations, e.g. “self-expression” and “attractiveness” to young people (YW1, YW3). Scholars as well argue that young people are interested and often experienced in media technologies but what they lack is more conscious awareness how media is shaping their lives. Here is also important to stress that self-expression by respondents were not seen as an end in itself but rather as a meaningful or purposeful activity considering it could be exemplified in the quotation of one of the explanation made by youth leader: “First of all, as the leader of the organisation, I want very much that media would become an important thing to tell the message to young people about what we do, about how and why you want to involve young people, first of all, advertise, that thing and attract other people.” (YL1)

This becomes even more evident from deeper layers of non-formal education practices and experiences in concrete projects shared both by the youth leaders and youth workers.

Youth relationship with media and media impact on young people. Most of the youth workers were expressing their attitude that divided the youth relationship with media on different levels. If it is on a consuming level, on “daily routine” level (YW8) then they “like media” if it is “necessary or irreplaceable” (YW2); if it’s “natural” (YW1), relationship is “positive and favourable” (YW3); “simple, it is consuming” (YW5). But if it comes more from the “educational side” (YW2) then the media for them is “unusual” (YW1), they are “floating on the surface” (YW3) and “do not distinguish what they watch” (YW9) because they “actually consume too little media”, especially analytical media coming from different sources (YW5). There were also thoughts that people make the “sacred cow” out of media thinking, “media does not make mistakes” (YW5); or that people whether “like“ or “hate” media (YW7). Where is the different relationship with different means of media among young people who has “strong relationship with Internet” (YW6) but rather “weak with press” (YW7) and young people “absorb” very different information (YW8). Maybe the most interesting reply was about young people consuming too little media in a sense that they get the news and information only from one source: “They consume too little media and there is too little media. To my point, they should consume much more,

47

there is not enough interest into media as it is. They trust one news, one channel.” (YW5)

When it comes to media impact, the opinions of youth workers ranged highly. Some people said that media “affects differently” (YW2) or similarly at least that “different means” have “different impact” (YW6). People were stating that media has a “huge impact” in “affecting us all” (YW3, YW7). There were voices that media has both positive and negative impact and it depends on how people use it and to what extent they are using it critically because if they consume media without critical view then media is “shaping their attitude” (YW7), often is dulling them (YW1), “convey negative attitude” (YW3) and even is seen as “dangerous” (YW9). It is interesting how one youth worker was explaining the way this impact was changing with the developments of media technology: „It seems that at the beginning when the Internet wave went, it seemed that it made the world more global that you are talking with Argentinean or someone on Skype. Now it seems that this disappeared, at least my point of view is such that it created a bigger village in the sense that you communicate mostly among only friends by using the Skype or email.“ (YW1)

The responses of youth leaders to the questions about the youth relationship with media were almost unanimous in respect that “all people are related” to media (YL1, YL2, YL3, YL5, YL6).

And only one was talking more about the lack of critical attitude towards media where young people are very much “on the very surface”, “they believe what it is told” and limit “to only primitive” media (YL1). One youth leader said about people living in the very mediated world from the very beginnings of they lives: “Simply, you are born in the society, in the society where the media exists from the beginning” (YL4).

Youth leaders explained youth relationship with media in a somehow different way than youth workers did that because of mainly having little recognition that young people miss critical attitude.

But when it comes to the media impact, here some of the youth leaders in a similar way to youth workers recognised the “huge impact” in “shaping the attitude” and the “different things having different impact” (YL2), young people having “consumerism attitude” (YL1) and media having both “bad and good” sides (YL4). What differed is the thinking that the Internet actually “united people” from all over the world: “And now for example, it unites all people more, all the world unites. Now everyone can communicate more free with everyone, talk through Skype, let’s say in another part of the world you may talk to someone.” (YL6)

48

If conclusion from the critical media literacy point of view, youth workers are more aware about the media’s negative impact on people’s life and they emphasized this more often that youth leaders do.

Young people perceive media relationship and impact in a more natural way.

Need for critical media literacy. When talking to youth workers there were little doubts if critical media literacy is important or not for young people. Most people agreed that it is important, but some were pointing out that it depends on which perspective you see, because if it is from the young person’s perspective there are “interesting/not interesting” criteria or even it is “unimportant” (YW1, YW6), but from the educators’ side the criteria are “useful/rubbish” (YW1). The only alarming response was, if looked at it from a critical perspective, the fact that one of the youth workers related critical media literacy only to the level of technical “skills” needed successfully “enter the labour market” (YW3).

Youth leaders responded to the same question in a different way. There were very similar attitudes expressed similarly by youth workers that critical media literacy is “important” (YL1, YL2, YL3) because either people need that or it is because media is making them “dumb” (YL1, YL4). But in some of the responses the understanding of the importance stayed on the level of using the language “correctly” (YL5, YL6).

3.3.3. Non-formal media education practices in Youth in Action projects Media related activities in projects and their rationale. Projects implement different media related activities, for example establishing and using project “web-site” (YW2), creating “films” (YW2, YL1) and organising “movie sessions” (YL1), learning while working in “radio” (YW5), “filming” the movie about the country (YW3), preparing “articles” and “interviews” in newspaper at the district level (YW8, YL2), “going to the places” and making films about people (YL3, YW4), creating “broadcasting” for local television (YW6, YL4), learning how to use “multimedia” with disadvantaged young people (YW9) or learning how to “present activities” of organisation (YW7).

It seems from the responses that the place and role of media differ depending on the type of project.

For example youth initiatives and European voluntary service projects offer opportunities for media to be the central activity of production and the main theme of attention. While in youth democracy project and youth exchange project media is used more as methodology or one of the means to achieve the main goals. In training courses media is approached as learning topic with limited media production possibilities. Many of the interviewed participants saw media not as an end in itself but as a means to achieve other objectives. Probably the most explicit explanation comes from 49

a youth worker involved in a European voluntary service project who explains that the most important aspect is educational process, not media itself: „And concretely this journalist work, not journalist, but just reading … they could even not prepare the coverage. This is just an excuse why they have to read an article. This is just a mean that you have to prepare the coverage and therefore you need to read a lot of articles. The essence is in that education, read a lot…“ (YW5)

Media education which is informed by critical pedagogy looks at education not only on the level of personal or group learning but also includes the level of praxis where real changes happen in the communities where people live. In later stage of the interviews people revealed more in-depth how they experienced power struggles that appeared due to their media related activities in their communities.

The interview with young people confirms clearly that their reasons for media related activities go far beyond media as an end in itself. They see media related activities for inspiring other young people for initiative by bringing “sparkles in their eyes” (YL1), for taking the initiative to create “youth” or “better” media in their communities because they “missed” such thing (YL2, YL4, YL5) or they wanted to “unite people” and make them “think differently” with the help of media (YL3, YL5). The most clearly reasons were stated in the interview with the youth leader who is involved in the youth group running a youth magazine in their district: “The idea was born in such a way that we missed the youth newspaper in the district. <…> And we decided that there is no youth newspaper, let’s say, and that we want to be responsible for creating such newspaper in the district. And that exactly young people could write how they see, let’s say, write about what they see at all, about events, about various themes. <…> Because it is often, let’s say, that adults see the same things differently. And maybe to draw the attention of adults to how young people understand and then maybe find common dialogue [for them], let’s say, with those young people.“ (YL2)

Youth leaders are rather conscious about their rationale for media related activities and their reasons are similar to reasons expressed by youth workers, especially that media is not seen an end in itself.

The difference can be observed only in the trajectory of reasons where youth workers target their objectives related to media education towards young people, participants in the project. Youth leaders have reasons, which are targeted towards community in general or other youth in particular.

This can be explained by different education roles two groups of people have when implementing projects.

50

Objectives of media related activities. Youth workers define many objectives in their projects and some of them are related directly with media related activities. In different expressions most of them set in their objectives the development of critical thinking or consciousness towards media.

They connect the objective of developing critical thinking with “understanding of problems in general” and “begin doing something” (YW2), showing something “through other forms” of media by making comparisons or trying “to look” again critically (YW4), developing the ability to “select” and “evaluate” the media source critically (YW5), developing the “cautions” attitude towards media (YW7) or identifying different levels of critical thinking (YW8). The objective of media consciousness was expressed by explaining that the goal was to understand how young people are “media advanced” in different countries (YW3), that consciousness is the “best weapon” which represents who you are and what you want to (YW3), developing “self-criticality” (YW5), developing “objectivity in mass-media”, “understanding the diversity” and to learn to look at “televisions differently” (YW6), learning to “read in between the lines” and “understanding of different media” (YW7) and objectives “about media as a powerful tool” (YW9). Conclusions can be drawn when youth workers when set the objectives for media related activities the components of critical thinking and consciousness towards media are included. If looked through the lenses of critical pedagogy, youth workers set the objectives that target the development of people’s critical consciousness on how media is or could be influencing the power struggles in the society or community empowering young people for changes. The following explanations on the project objectives are very sound on the critical component in the media related activities: “Well, let’s say, critical thinking was developed [for example, if] media was telling to me “it is good, that we are going to free Iraq”; but while preparing the coverage, while collecting the information, I started to smell that something is wrong. I started to look who is standing behind it, what is out of it. I started to search for other sources, which would deny and critically evaluate them.” (YW5)

“According to me, there are several realms of this critical thinking. As I already mentioned before, this public space where opinions of society, of the newspaper as media and of youth intersected; it was the unique expression of critical thinking in all the directions. <…> Further, it is the internal work of the team. They analyse who is writing what, who does or does not…” (YW8)

“Let’s do not mix media as art and media as a means of expression … Consciousness is the best weapon. Not simple mean but a weapon to represent who you are and who you could be and what you are able to say. To say everything what you want to say, directly and openly … your consciousness, your activity, positivism … from all the political to all the other what you are able to show.” (YW3)

Putting three explanations together would construct the ultimate objective of the critical media 51

literacy, which includes the following elements of critical component: 1) liberation from the oppressive media influences through the development of critical consciousness; 2) engagement in bringing changes through the power struggles in the community/society; 3) empowerment of the powerless for developing and using media as a powerful mean of self-representation and selfexpression. Of course, not in all of the youth worker’s testimonies such attention for critical consciousness was present. For example in the case of a youth exchange when the goal was rather on a practical-technical level to „understand“ how „advanced in a media field“ are young people from different countries (YW3) or in another case where youth worker consciously understood the limitations of having „not enough time“ and „not enough knowledge“ to „transfer and share“ critical media issues with participants (YW9).

Responses from youth leaders confirm similar views as of youth workers on what they want to achieve with their media related activities. People were talking about making other young people „see things differently“, „changing thinking“, „changing attitude“, making them „think about the problems“ (YL1, YL2, YL3). Also it was emphasized the expectation that through presenting critical/youth perspective „to attract, show and create an interest“ of other youth and „give them opportunities to try changing“, „rebel“ or „get engage“ with meaningful activities (YL1, YL4, YL5, YL6). Media is seen as the possibility to „show the world from another angle“, “give inspiration for change” and open new possibilities for critical thinking (YL1), to “represent youth” (YL4, YL6), to deepen the understanding of problems (YL2). One youth leader explains in a very critical spirit what they want to achieve with organising movie watching sessions in their project: “At the same time it gives inspiration for the heart, this belief that I can make the change. I see where it is necessary to make the change, I look at things critically and I find. And after I develop the skill in the sense that I am told information but as Chomsky says: “who announced the information is the one who controls the result”. It is necessary to think who announced it, under which conditions, in which context the subject is announced, why he tells me and does not tell other person, why it is targeted at me.” (YL1)

Critical media literacy has always a goal through learning any technology, from very practical job skill, language or more soft media technology to inspire people for change. Another important issues mentioned by youth leaders is misrepresentation of youth perspective to life which they feel lacking and they believe they are able to change it through being involved in media related activities. Critical pedagogy is emphasizing the importance to ensure the representation of different perspectives, the different worlds and their different readings.

Education and learning for critical thinking and media consciousness. Although youth workers 52

were explaining the education process for critical thinking and media consciousness differently it is possible to establish some common patterns. One obvious similarity is that critical thinking and media consciousness is best developed when people meet with (media) reality and reflection of the experience. There were examples from the education practice in projects where the young people were discovering „different thinking“ while making the movie in international group (YW3), „saw how it works in reality“ (YW7), understanding their real „conditions“ and possibilities to change them in the media project (YW5) and „reflection of the multimedia experience allows to come consciously to what happened“ (YW9). The other common practice is the constant talking and discussing on the issues related to media in general and the particular media experience in the project. Because of different realities and situation in the projects the focus of the discussions was always different. In the case of watching movies the discussion „depends a lot on the movie content“ and „with creating movies“ the discussion is about the process but also the content of them (YW2); people „talked about the impact“ of media, about the negative consequences (YW6); talking about the „media etiquette“ when the work with young people demands certain sensitivity and consciousness (YW9). These discussions were happening in different moments of the educational process, before and after the media experience. They were structured, semi-structured or spontaneous, appearing naturally or from the demand and concrete situations. One common character of all the discussions was that it took place in a dialogue process between the youth workers and young people but also among the young people. Reflections of real living experiences and education in the dialogues process are the key elements emphasized in the critical pedagogy concept of education for critical consciousness. In most of the cases, with maybe only few exceptions, according the interview responses, youth worker acted as an educator but not by imposing his or her views and understandings but rather provoking questionings of certain media related issues as it can be read in the account of one of the interview participant: “Then it starts another thing, [questioning]: are you sure that you told the truth here, are you sure that this is your position or maybe it is not your position, maybe it is imposed, maybe it is, for example, the call of fashion or maybe this is influenced simple by mass-media, maybe your parents told or maybe you even do not think in this way. In a way you attempt to misbalance him in order, maybe, for him to take simple matters in a different way again.” (YW4)

Such practice of education, when the young person is an active subject of learning and change, is argued by the critical pedagogy and to the mostly confirmed by the interviews with youth workers.

But however in few cases it is difficult to say that, or if, education for critical consciousness was really happening. There is not so clear evidence in the response from a youth worker involved in the youth exchange project. Here it is not necessary that young people developed media consciousness 53

in the sense of critical media literacy by discovering “how advanced in media” they are being from different countries and that they “think different” (YW3). Or in another project where the youth worker admits that in the sense of media consciousness they had “not yet gone so deep” but saw it possible in the future the development “of critical attitude towards mass-media” (YW1). Also, the belief of another youth worker that education of media consciousness is possible to achieve media that portrays the world “objectively” and in a “neutral” way, as told by one interview participant (YW6), shows how deeply the instrumental ideology is grounded and is operating as argued in theoretical works of critical scholars. The other youth worker expressed a rather challenging attitude that in the education for critical consciousness he moves forwards and backwards in between “freedom” and “dictate” in educational style sometimes accepting, if needed, “the dictatorship conditions” in education process (YW5). Authors in the critical pedagogy field would definitely challenge such attitude arguing that true liberation and critical consciousness is achieved only through the education, which is fully democratic at any stage of its implementation.

Although youth workers did not want to feel much as educators or they did not see in their role an active intervention as such, most of them took part in reflections and discussions with people on the critical issues or at least they were aware of the critical moments in the projects but letting young people act autonomously. One youth worker concluded how young people learn critical thinking when not accompanied by an educator:

“…I think, that they do not stick to their bed the label with “critical thinking”, they naturally discuss. They even this question, which you ask here, they maybe do not have even the deeper structural ground of this term … They do it on such a realm according to the level of deepness they are. And I imagine that it appears very naturally.” (YW8)

The last point is confirmed by the responses of some of the youth leaders who explain that critical thinking was developing through “constant discussions”, “discussing articles” even in nonstructured free time (YL2); through communication with people “around you” or “inside” the team (YW3, YL4). More strong confirmation comes for the importance of the real media experience which, according to youth leaders, contributed a lot to the critical thinking and media consciousness both of youth leaders and young people who participate in the projects. One of the most convincing evidences of the development of critical consciousness comes from a youth leader who is involved in the youth initiative running a youth television broadcasting: “This thinking itself about the understanding of municipality, the attitude towards such initiatives, towards some celebration days… For me personally, the state itself, governance and political parties and everything

54

else, for me, it distant thing… I know what happens in Lithuania in general but I could not discuss a lot. But then you start from your experience feel some kind bad smell, which comes from that side, automatically you begin to think, you begin to get interested, to search for something new.” (YL4)

The youth leader from the other project shares almost the same experience of how media related activities develop critical consciousness towards the local newspaper: “After all these things thoughts appear that maybe they present not so quality things to us and so on, and you want independent [media], first of all. <…> If there is local newspaper subsidised from the municipality funds, it writes only what municipality likes. And if a young person wants to write they say that the municipality has to pay money in order for the young people’s article appear. [We] are against such defective practice. Such things we recognise.” (YL1)

Some other responses from youth leaders provide concrete evidences of changes either in critical thinking or consciousness towards media. A young leader saw changes “in thinking in different way” and young people doing real actions, e.g. meeting with “neighbourhood officials” or establishing organisation in school “which oppose to someone” or “ideas appear” and the “level of rebelling” raises” when young people needs to stand up to their rights (YL1). Youth leaders recognised changes both in themselves but also in other young people who take part in the project activities. They become more critical towards themselves but also the life around them and local media in particular. From responses of both, youth workers and youth leaders, becomes clear that critical consciousness develops in the most intensive way when young people engage themselves into the power struggles because of their media activities in the projects.

Critical media literacy through the power struggles. In-depth interviews with youth workers and youth leaders made it possible to explore the concrete project experiences where project participants engage in the power struggles. Four projects are particularly relevant to the research object because in these projects the power struggles were happening in the wider social context rather than just within the project structure. This does not mean that in the other four projects the development of the critical consciousness is not relevant to explore but the decision made go beyond the project because of a more real impact. In each on of the projects the process of how people were engaged in the power struggles happened differently, who was involved and which interests were confronted, what were the actions of youth workers and the consequences for young people and their learning.

Each project provides the unique examples with different evidences of critical media literacy through the power struggles. Often, when speaking, youth workers and youth leaders mentioned having the most intense and valuable learning experiences.

55

Case 1: Press conference with local journalists. A youth worker who was working as a trainer in a training course identified “the press conference” as “probably the part where people learnt the most”, “probably the most successful part for critical thinking” (YW7). This was what happened in the words of this youth worker: „The press conference was in a town, in the municipality, in an unfamiliar environment of the country [outside the European Union], where real journalists from the country came. We had selected three, four people who represented different countries what they do and it ended in a way that they where attacked in real. Journalists attacked: „what are you doing, you waste the money of European Union… look we are starving… you came here, you were paid 70 percent and look at us, we are starving here and what are you doing“. And there were very different reactions when a person was saying that „we are playing games and communicate“ and so on.”

(YW7)

After the real experience of media, mass-media people had a reflection and discussion that journalists „playing games“ automatically „associates with simply wasting of money, that people are starving and other come to play games here.“ (YW7). The youth worker highlighted that „not the games are the main point“, but what people gain from that experience. For participants who were presenting at the conference it was a stressful experience and even after they were taking to heart this experience. For others, who were only observing, they „saw from a side how everything works in reality“ and what people took out of it is the understanding of „media manipulations“.

(YW7) In this concrete experience at least free different powers met in one place. It was clearly identified by the youth worker the attention of media on what seemed important for local journalists: „European money wasted“, „starving of local people“ and „you playing games“. The European Union’s priorities in the form of the educational instrument of Youth in Action programme offering “non-formal education and mobility” opportunities for active European citizenship. The third was the intentions of project organisers and participants to “present their activities and project”.

Case 2: “Key” interest of young people to access the public space. In the youth democracy project, paying attention to youth interests, a youth leader recognised how watching different movies and having the reflection and discussion afterwards encouraged young people to engage in activities to change their life conditions. Methodologically what happened before the real action had begun was that young people are encouraged to propose watching a movie. In the group they were discussing the movies and if any of them was “related at least somehow” to project theme they were included in watching play-list. Then they would “select the person who moderates the movie” who 56

prepares in advance by “getting to know about the movie, some facts how it was created, the whole story, director, how it is possible to connect it with the project theme … and also this critical thinking” (YL1). During the discussion the role of a leading person was as explained by the youth leader from his own experience: “…is firstly, as I already said, to make links with reality. Firstly my task is maybe to ask in such a way that a young person would be able to answer. Not to ask in a very sophisticated way or to show off but to try to get to know from him. Not to tell myself but for me to know. <…> So I try to raise the associations how movie can raise some kind of associations, I try. Maybe not always I manage to do this way that it would inspire to act. <…> For me it is important to convince that you can do it through movies that everyone can achieve and do something, really change” (YL1)

And this is the concrete story in brief told by the youth leader about how after the movie watching young people took the action in their community: „…after the „Lennons“ [watching a movie about Lennon] and other things people decided that they for sure need to organise a key from [a lock of] a big hall where they wanted to act, because it was some kind of the institutional nonsense that young people were not given the key. People decided that it is necessary to collect signatures in order to get the key … they collected maybe 250 signatures in different schools and brought to the neighbourhood official and were given this key. But the official said: „People why you did not just come and we would be giving you the key“. And then we organised the discussion where different people participated like the neighbourhood official, people who collected signatures, we from the project, director of the youth centre, [municipality] and coordinator for youth affairs. And together we discussed all the issues, also how we will communicate in the future, why do we collect signatures, maybe, you know, it would be just enough a call. And the neighbourhood official says: „You may as well collect signatures that we would establish something serious and it would be already a serious thing and you would be spending energy more meaningfully.“ (YL1)

Later in the project people admitted that this experience encouraged them and build their confidence “to go simple without stress” to the neighbourhood official and “to tell him what it is” important to them (YL1).

Case 3: Presentation of youth newspaper in public. A youth worker acted as a coach for the youth initiative where the group was running the youth newspaper as part of the local newspaper.

He recognised that the „unique expression of critical thinking in all the directions“ was manifested during the public presentation of the newspaper (YW8). The youth worker felt “the sphere of influences“ already before when the first meeting happened in the youth centre. He recognised the influence of editorial office and its structure, the influence of the youth leader and youth centre as a 57

structure, even himself as an educator. But during the discussion at the cultural house the opinions of „society”, “newspaper as media” and “youth” intersected openly. This youth worker explained what he observed during the public discussion: „During this discussion like in other similar spaces at the beginning everything developed with difficulty. But later, I say, it was provoked successfully and in fact it happened very good. Indeed, man walked from a street and was saying what is how. Of course, we are here a structure, a centre that, of course, cooperates with this media. There are money connections in one line; in the other there is project implementation. But there come a person from the street and openly said: „What are you doing here, some kind of old standard?“ (YW8)

In a very similar way a youth leader from the same project reflected on the experience and public support which the youth group received adding that presence of a coach was also important: „Maybe editorial office, o maybe more editor, she was to much conservative. We simply talked, let’s say, about crooked lines, in some way cut and rotated pictures and she, let’s say not from ill-will, says: „But it is the serious newspaper“. And during this discussion especially, because she was participating, it was expressed those thoughts that the newspaper is too serious, let’s say. And here if not a coach this discussion would be not so successful, but people said a lot of things, which changed here attitude. It changed as much as it was possible. We wanted to change her attitude even more, but it seems to us that it was a huge change.“ (YL2)

In this experience there was also the editorial office, which had its own interests and influence fields. The youth worker was saying that editorial office just wanted „much cheaper, more simple“, better for them (YW8). At the same time the youth group and the youth centre wanted more „freedom“. But the public discussion created possibilities to involve more people from the community, which in turn became the significant power, in the words of a youth worker, “important weapon”, which brought changes. From the responses it is possible identify at least three important moments looking at this situation from the critical perspective. Firstly, a conscious awareness of youth worker on his influences also recognised by the youth leader. Secondly, both the youth worker and youth leader saw differently the reasons behind the power struggles. In the explanation of the youth worker, there was strong emphasis on the structural, financial and even ideological reasons, where as in the expiation of the youth leader the human factor was more emphasized.

Thirdly, even the discussion went on mostly around the technical issues but in reality the real power struggles went on a much deeper level. Three aspects bring evidence on the ideas discussed in the theory of critical media literacy. The first one disclose the fact that any education has its “hidden curricular” and one of the qualities of the critical educator is to have conscious awareness on own influences and the ones which is brought by the education itself. In the particular case, the discussion is around the educational “ideology” which is grounded in the non-formal education in 58

general and Youth in Action programme. The second aspect confirms the often case that young people are media experienced but often see it as a process of production, at best. Where the critical educators see deeper layers of hidden media powers grounded in the media structures, institutions and ideologies and uncover them for the critical consciousness. The third aspect is sound about the critical point that media is not neutral and not simple seen as only pure technology. Technological aspects are the most visible media manifestation, but on the deeper levels constitute what media is really about, at least in the perspective of critical media literacy.

Case 4: The Independence Day broadcasting on local television. A youth leader was talking about their intention to draw the attention to the existing situation in their town in the sense that “young person does not know” about the 11th of March. In their perspective “young people care little” about this day and what it means from the historical perspective (YL4). But when broadcasting went on air, it was received in a controversial way and even provoked wider discussions in the municipality and with young people in the youth centre. In the perspective of the youth leader: „Then the broadcasting about the 11th of March went on air, let’s say, people perceived us controversially.

Authorities shared their complains because in their opinion we were laughing at everything. Though we did not have such an idea. But there were complains from old people, who again, maybe they did not understand.“ (YL4)

But in the youth worker’s perspective, young people maybe are not yet having a professional attitude towards the use of media to inform other young people but they express their perspective towards different issues that are important for them. She recognise that maybe the format they chose was distracting and misleading but what they did was evaluated “from their point of view the celebration of the 11th of March“ (YW6). This youth worker mentioned about the consequences of this broadcasting: „We also talked in the department of education, they also evaluated these broadcastings. They called me on the carpet [asking] how it is, why it is so. But I say: „This is the objective for all of us. Does it really means nothing? Or something to think for us where this citizenship education is heading“. Do we need to hide this or do we let young person to show that to them this does not mean anything…“ (YW6)

The youth worker was talking about being ready to take the responsibility to defend youth group when called by the municipality because “it is their self-expression and reflection of the life they live” (YW6). But even with such youth friendly attitude youth leaders perceive her as “authority” 59

having the opinion that they were “laughing at everything” (YL4). Of course, she was talking to them about what happened and about the responsible media production stressing their responsibility to “the agency, which gave grant“, responsible to „the organisation on behalf which you speak“, responsible to the local „television“ (YW6). But young people feel responsibility even beyond the media responsibility because they are concerned about the issues in their town, about the youth being irresponsible citizens of their living environment. Then, the youth leaders explains their attitude towards the issues raised by their broadcasting: “But the thought itself, let’s say, that we show that young person does not know much for example about 11 March… and this broadcasting went on air, automatically it should raise anxiety, though for the municipality itself. Maybe it criticizes us but why it criticises us and say that we are doing nonsense, that we are making fun of it, but if at the same time in the street, I do not say that all the young people, but then in the street young people do not understand what it is, they do not know.” (YL4)

The youth worker recognise young peoples’ attitude towards what they want from their involvement in the media production: „On the other hand they totally dismiss the option that all the televisions channels does the same already.

[They say:] “And we do not want to do the news as „Panorama“ or show faces and film speeches of mayor and all this trimmed-up image, we want us, we want to express, we want to see, we want to rebel, we want something, we want to do somehow differently.“ (YW6)

But in a away even with such a high awareness on youth perspective towards media, the young people express that they feel misunderstood and not sure if they are reaching the goal it would be evaluated from the youth workers perspective.

The whole situation in the project represents the high complexity in which education and learning is happening. A youth worker in the project is turned to different sides when trying to mediate and find the satisfying compromise. But at the same time both sides, young people on the one hand and municipality on the other feel being right with their expectations towards the media broadcasting and the project itself. In addition to rather open interests and powers influencing the project there are some other influences that shape the project’s experience influencing it from the background.

The youth worker recognised the “accountability to the funding agency” and youth leaders revealed opposite reactions coming from “old people” and “young people”. In some of the moments it is possible to recognise also the influence coming from youth worker who has a rather clear image of media being “neutral” and “objective” or the youth centre as the authority structure which is both “responsible” in the eyes of municipality for what ether young people do but also “defending” the 60

way youth see and show the town reality.

The cases above mentioned, illustrate more deeply the different power struggles faced by youth workers and youth leaders in their projects. There is clear evidence that true involvement in the power struggles contributes not only to the development of critical consciousness but also to real changes on different levels.

Possibilities and limits for media education in non-formal education. Already when speaking with youth workers about their project they stated that attention to media creates both opportunities and difficulties. People also provided examples where young people can develop the critical media literacy by naming the possibilities of their organisations and activities, family influence, school possibilities both in terms of having a separate subject but also as part of computer literacy or having an informal hour. And most of them recognised that at the moment critical media literacy is a rather limited and should there should be more attention paid to that.

Youth workers talked about the possibilities and limits for media education in the non-formal education. The most clear common point was that different youth workers mentioned the “socialising” possibilities in non-formal education from “keeping in touch” with a group by using media technologies (YW2), to “being together, working together” (YW8) and “socialising” (YW4).

Some of the people referred to the “non-formal education principles” as guiding for possibilities (YW1, YW4, YW6). One person saw non-formal education good for “self-advertising” and “selfeducation” (YW6). The youth worker who works a lot with media in non-formal education expressed an extremely valid point: “When you say that media is more, then just take for example the advertisements, what impact it does. You understand that if you would use it targeted, knowing what you want and what you aim at. Let’s look at black technologies, how many are created and who uses what and it will continue to be used. Furthermore, let’s look, how many clerical church systems and various religious use it, everyone is using. In the non-formal education, if I will use media, which are the perfect weapon I do not feel like committing any crime, if everyone is using.“ (YW4)

And in this account the reason for using media in education is not at all for creating another manipulation in reaching own goals as an educator but rather to use media as a „powerful mean“ for liberation from the imposed ideologies and creation of own, alternative thinking. Such understanding of non-formal education is confirmed by the youth leader from the same project when he said that „non-formal education is what you get in general, how changes your thinking, 61

how changes your attitude towards society and so on“ (YL3). Other youth leader, who maybe as well is more familiar with the concept of non-formal education recognise the „huge possibilities“ of non-formal education because: „…because until now non-formal education offers those “techniques” … how to reach young people in a way as no one reached them ever before. There is a very different relationship with young person. He feels differently and realise self, begins to makes things differently and such things appear to him differently. <…> People who do non-formal education they have a different attitude which allows them not to feel somehow overtaken or with shortcomings or somehow problematic. <…> The relationship is based on sincerity.

Sincerity is such non-quantitative thing. <…> Maybe that they do not evaluate with some concrete objective… it allows those young people to be worse somewhere and this is not important.” (YL1)

Relationship, attitude, and methods, this is what makes non-formal education beneficial for media education and especially for critical media literacy. And the limits of non-formal education lie in the danger that while teaching young people “critically understand media you direct them as you want” (YW1). This is “the question of responsibility” of what “knowledge you give and transfer” to young people (YW3). Also, non-formal education is limited in “space, time, understanding and experience” (YW8). And maybe one of the most profound limits and one of the most difficult things to change is the not serious attitude of people towards the critical media literacy as noted by one youth worker: “It is a problem of people, their attitude. Let’s say, here comes a young person to talk, let’s say, as we talked about the newspaper, again, as we talked it is non-formal education this newspaper. He comes, calls to the school, there is a school merging. And he wants to talk to the director who does not talk because you are a child. That is who you are. This attitude especially hinders non-formal education, especially in media. In movie making, photography is easier. But when it comes to journalism, towards search for urgent matters then we often have an attitude that children have to write: “How wonderful the event happened at our place”; children have to write: “How to cook pancakes and something else”...” (YW5)

This simplistic view on media education of young people shows the widely spread attitude that the young person is similar a children that needs a safe playground but not a person who is on the way to becoming an adult. It is maybe easier in this way to direct a person or impose authority on young person treating them as children, but then in this way it is not fair to expect them to take the responsibility as an adult. It also demonstrates a hidden fear of adults, as young people see the world differently, have often-different expectations and understandings, they want to change it and often to change for better.

62

DISCUSSION OF THE RESULTS The in-depth interviews with youth workers and youth leaders revealed many of the aspects of education and learning practices in the youth non-formal education projects implemented under the Youth in Action programme. Although many of the experiences were rather specific because of the context and education experience but there is the possibility to discuss more general issues deriving from the interview data. Some of the issues from the research results are discussed in more details.

Most of the youth workers recognised that the main principles of youth non-formal education and the Youth in Action programme were to make influence on their way of working with young people. Such conscious awareness that implemented education has its own philosophy and ideology well matches with the theory of critical pedagogy which emphases the attitude that education is not â&#x20AC;&#x153;neutralâ&#x20AC;? and is most often charged with certain ideology. However most of the youth workers failed to recognise that their media understanding and experience are also influencing media education approach in their projects. Even if most people in general admitted the negative impact of media and the need for more critical media literacy but there were cases when in projects the media related activities were driven by the less critical media approaches. Theoretical works on critical media literacy should consider this relation carefully drawing attention that not only media experience is important for educators but also their critical media attitude.

Most of people, both youth workers and youth leaders admitted in their interview admitted that the most important and valuable experiences where when the real action was happening. This aspect gets confirmation looking at the power struggles that happened in the different projects. The most intensive and powerful experiences were in projects, which were long term and had strong ties with local context. Youth exchanges and training courses created rather limited possibilities to go beyond the only the learning environment in this way making less impact on changes in real life conditions of young people and community. Critical pedagogy is arguing for the education that includes theory together with praxis. But such educational practice also meaning that learning gets real, including the real consequences. According to interview participants in some of the projects because of media being central learning experience became public and too real loosing youth nonformal education qualities such as: safe environment, possibility to experiment, making mistakes.

Critical media literacy in theory argues that only by engaging in the real media production people become critically conscious and empowered but also it should consider the implications when learning gets more real.

63

Not many of youth workers wanted to take the role of educator in the projects but as interview responses show not in many cases their contribution created added educational value, especially in the education for critical consciousness. Most project practices included either discussions or reflections where youth workers were present and were making their point clear on different issues discussed. Although many times in different projects youth leaders kept discussing and reflecting being autonomous but they acknowledged the important presence of youth worker. In the concept of critical pedagogy educators are given significant role at the same time stressing the importance learner’s contribution and active participation. Youth workers should not doubt their educational role but rather recognise in this way building their confidence in education.

During the interviews most of youth workers and youth leaders admitted that media is having a huge impact on people’s life influencing their attitudes, possibilities and choices. But with the recognition of media’s influence mostly youth workers explored deeper levels of media impact being conscious of ideological powers behind media. At the same time most youth leaders stayed at the practical level giving examples of life situations without having media (tools) around them. But youth leaders who are more experienced and familiar with youth non-formal education are more critical about media’s impact. They are able to recognise its negative influences on people. It is the situation when young people are more media experienced but less critically conscious than educators is also addressed in theory of critical media literacy.

64

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The main attention of this work was given to critical media literacy in theory in general and in reality of non-formal education in particular. Based on both theoretical and empirical knowledge the following conclusions were drawn: 1. The present world more than ever before is enriched with different media technologies leaving little room for the choice to lead our lives and not be influenced by the media.

Critical media theorists recognise and analyse the huge impact of media in many cases concluding that media is shaping the lives of people, while pointing out the oppressive practices around the world. Empirical research showed that youth workers who are practitioners of non-formal education with young people recognise the huge impact of media and its power in shaping the lives of people. Youth leaders were also concerned about the mediaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s impact on lives but at the same time where taking more natural approach to media.

2. Critical education scholars, researchers and various studies of the current situation with media education confirm that there is still a lack of the critical media literacy in education in different countries across the world and the need for that is urgent. Research on the literature on media education reveals that the theoretical understanding is rapidly changing towards the media education in the sense of media literacy. It is also confirmed by the recent attention to the issue in the agendas of international intergovernmental institutions and organisations. Lithuanian reality reveals that there are different media education practices, which occasionally offer possibilities for young people to develop critical media literacy, but at this stage it is very unsystematic, little researched and unrecognised by the formal institutions and organisations acting in the field of education. In the empirical research stage interview data with non-formal educators to the large extent confirmed similar views that possibilities to develop critical media literacy is rather limited in Lithuania.

3. In theory, critical media literacy is grounded in the critical theory in general and critical pedagogy perspective in particular. There is a rich body of literature, which comes from the critical media theory and cultural studies. Educators who are engaged in the education for critical media literacy should be well informed by these theories and be prepared to face the complexity within the media education work in the contemporary conditions. The main concern of critical media literacy is liberation of people from the oppressive powers that use media to shape the unfair conditions of people through the development peopleâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s critical thinking in general and media consciousness in particular. Empirical research revealed that, 65

in the reality of youth non-formal education in Lithuania, youth workers often engage in the media education work because of their background either in media education, media experience or media work or a combination of all these things. The interviewed youth workers felt confident enough to develop critical thinking due to their background in nonformal education, however not all of them felt confident and well prepared to address media issues with young people critically.

4. Theories normally note that young people often are rather experienced in media because to them it is seems natural and constitute a part of their identity. But in many case their understanding remains unconscious and non-critical. The main task of the critical educator is therefore, to reveal media experiences and especially their impact on oneâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s consciousness.

Interviewed youth leaders confirm to the large extent that for young people media is a very natural part in their lives and they have a somewhat strong relationship with it. And only few recognised the need to develop more critical attitude while at the same time most of the youth workers agreed that development of critical consciousness attitudes towards media is very important for young people.

5. Theoretical studies on critical media literacy provide an extensive account on the educational process and practice media education in the field of media. They emphasize the importance of developing practical media skills but move beyond only technical media technology by exploring the political, economical, social, cultural implications of media.

Education for critical media literacy does not remain consisting of only learning in theory but in an ideal case it involves people in the counter production of media. Such media education practice often engages people in real power struggles grounded in media itself or society/community in general. Empirical research provided evidences that in the projects where media has a central place and/or it is one of the main methodologies and the youth worker is acting following the non-formal education methodologies, then most of such projects experience different power struggles with both very positive and negative results in the end. Both youth workers and youth leaders referred to those experiences as the most intense on the one hand but on the other hand the most valuable for developing critical consciousness of young people and for their empowerment for changes. Projects, which were less local context oriented or they had the primary approach to media as the means for creation they faced less power struggles in a wider sense but experienced struggles within the context and structure of the project. Youth workers and youth leaders in these projects still admitted their educational value for the development of both the critical thinking and media consciousness.

66

6. The concept of critical pedagogy recognises the important role of the educator in the educational process. It draws emphasis on democratic participatory education and conscious awareness of educator, in the sense that his or her education is never neutral and the importance to start from and always include the perspective and perseption of the world shared by a learner acting as a subject and not as an object. Most of the principles, values and attitudes of critical pedagogy are embedded in the practice and understanding of nonformal education in general and in the European Unionâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s programmes Youth in Action in particular. Participants of the empirical research, both youth workers and youth leaders, to a large extent manifested in their responses their strong commitment for the inclusion of youth perspective in their media related activities during the projects. In most projects, especially local youth initiatives and youth democracy project, because of their structure and practice created democratic participatory educational and learning possibilities. However some of the experience in the projects were limited and could be improved in the higher level of youth participation and engagement, especially in respect to their active role in the communities they live. Youth workers saw differently their role in the projects but most of them with no doubts contributed in different ways to the educational process of young people. And most of them they were aware of their influences because of their educational role and position, media background, their belief in non-formal education principles, values and attitudes or guidelines and priorities of Youth in Action programme.

The insights and inspiration of this work both from the theory and the research part gives possibilities to draw some recommendations for the further development of education policy and practice in Lithuania: 1. Lack of attention in Lithuanian education policy and practice to media education manifests the denial that media is a part of people daily life and their understanding of the world. To continue this situation would mean to ignore the very significant part of peopleâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s life, especially that media is considered as one of the most powerful institutions of the present that shapes peopleâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s life and decides even their future. The recommendation would be to draw more attention to media education in general and critical media literacy in particular on the same level of the importance as language literacy and computer literacy.

2. In order to begin, the urgent task in education policy and practice is to approach first the areas where critical media literacy is already implemented at least partially or where it has the easiest access possibilities. Initially, it is important to recognise, support and encourage initiatives, projects and programmes that are already contributing to the development of 67

critical consciousness and are implemented in Lithuanian schools and non-formal practices.

The latter is equally important because it opens the full potential to educate and learn while at the same time being involved in the real media production in the community. Educational theorists and also interviewed practitioners recognise that the most direct entrance possibility for the critical media literacy to the classrooms of schools is through the change in the paradigm of computer literacy teaching. Attention should be equally given to both the development of practical skills and knowledge and critical media consciousness.

3. In the long run, the goal of the Lithuanian education policy developments should include the changes in teachersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; training, equally including the educators that work outside the formal education system. If there is a significant amount of time devoted to reading books in the training programme of teachers and educators, there should be similar attention paid to studying contemporary culture and media as one of the main components in the sense of reality but not only arts. The beginning could be done by teachers who are teaching computer literacy, languages, technology studies, history and political sciences, music and arts. The approach should not be aimed at adding the additional content to the education curricular but rather to evaluate and change the balance of attention. For example in the computer literacy, language teaching, history and political sciences, music and art programmes to evaluate critically the objectives, content and expected results excluding what is not essential and including content components of the critical media literacy.

4. Change the direction in the current research done by the Lithuanian Ministry of Education and Science giving more attention for media literacy. Both theory and practice confirms the tendency that computer technologies and media technologies are merging which means that it does not make sense to separate both literacies in future research. The research of the field of youth non-formal education should be also supported and encouraged because up till now little attention is given in the field of non-formal education because it is up until now little attention is given and it can enrich most educational practices.

68

LIST OF REFERENCES 1. Baro X. Education will be global or will not be // Coyote, Issue 11, May 2006, pp. 3-6 2. Bettig, R. V. The Frankfurt School and the political economy of communications // in Rethinking the Frankfurt School – alternative legacies of cultural critique, 2002, pp. 81-97 3. Bibliotek( ir informacijos centr( vadybos magistrantai. Informacinis ra!tingumas lietuvoje: dabartis ir ateitis // Konferencijos informacinio ra!tingumo tema: „IR...Ar tu esi?“ med"iaga, Vilnius, 10 December 2008 4. Boyce C. and Neale P. Conducting in-depth interviews: a guide for designing and conducting in-depth interviews for evaluation input // Pathfinder International, 2006, p. 14 5. Bram M. Resistance in Non-formal Education // Coyote, Issue 3, December 2000, pp. 28-29 6. Carnoy M., Foreword for Pedagogy of the Heart // Continuum International Publishing Group, 1998, pp. 7-21 7. Chisholm L. Continue the pathways towards recognition: recognition of non-formal learning in the youth field. The point of view of researchers // Contribution to the European Commission and Council of Europe Partnership Expert Workshop on Non-formal Learning in cooperation with the Youth in Action National Agency for the Czech Republic, Prague, 9 June 2008.

8. Conde E. (ed.) and others, Coaching youth initiatives. Guide for supporting youth participation // SALTO Youth Initiatives Resource Centre, 2006, p. 153 9. Cymermonien' N. Kauno j'zuit( gimnazija ir IRM // seminaro „Informacinis ra!tingumas mokykloje“ med"iaga, Kaunas, 27-28 October 2008 10. Deltuva, A. JNU – kaip TAI atsirado arba lyrinis nukrypimas tema „Prad"ioje nebuvo nieko“ // Pokalbiai apie jaunimo neformal(j& ugdym#: jnu vakar, !iandien, poryt, Lietuvos jaunimo neformalaus ugdymo asociacija, 2005, pp. 2-4 11. Department for Youth Affairs under the Ministry of Social Security and Labour, http://www.jrd.lt 12. Domaille K. and Buckingham D., UNESCO. Survey Report on Approaches to Youth Media Literacy // London University, 2001, p. 87 13. Enzensberger H. M. and Roloff M. The consciousness industry – on literature, politics and the media // Seabury Press, 1974, p. 184 14. European Parliament. Report on media literacy in a digital world // Committee on Culture and Education, 2008/2129(INI), 2008, p. 14 15. Fairclough N. Global Capitalism and Critical Awareness of Language // Language Awareness, Vol. 8, No. 2. (0 1999), 1999, pp. 71-83 69

16. Fedorov A. On Media Education // Alexander Fedorov, 2008, 157 psl.

17. Frau-Meigs D. and Torrent J. ed., Mapping Media Education Policies in the World: Visions, Programmes and Challenges // The United Nations-Alliance of Civilizations in co-operation with Grupo Comunicar, 2009, p. 261 18. Freire P. Pedagogy of the heart // Continuum International Publishing Group, 1998 p. 141 19. Freire P., Barr R. R. Pedagogy of hope – reliving Pedagogy of the oppressed5 // Continuum International Publishing Group, 2004, p. 215 20. Freire P., Macedo D. P., Ramos M. B. Pedagogy of the oppressed6 (30th edition) // Continuum International Publishing Group, 2000, p. 183 21. French D. and Richards M. Media education across Europe // Routledge, 1994, p. 217 22. Gailius ,. ir Mewaldt A. Praktinis vadovas jaunimo lyderiams // Lietuvos jaunimo organizaciju taryba, 1997 23. Gailius ,. Jaunimo neformaliojo ugdymo samprata ir aktualijos // Kult)ros aktualijos 2(37), 2004, pp. 6-10 24. Gailius ,. Nieko n'r pasaulyje geriau... ES programa "Jaunimas" jau 10 met( Lietuvoje // Janimo tarptautinio bendradarbiavimo agent)ra, 2008, http://www.jtba.lt/biblioteka/50 25. Giroux H. A. Pedagogy and the politics of hope – theory, culture, and schooling: a critical reader // Westview Press, 1997, p. 290 26. Giroux, H. A. Theory and resistance in education: towards a pedagogy for the opposition // Greenwood Publishing Group, 2001, p. 280 27. Hager P. and Halliday J. Recovering Informal Learning – Wisdom, Judgement and Community // Springer, 2008, p. 277 28. Hammer, R. Rethinking the dialectic: a critical semiotic meta-theoretical approach for the pedagogy of media literacy // in Rethinking media literacy: a critical pedagogy of representation, 1995, pp. 33-87 29. Hart A. and Süss D. Media Education in 12 European Countries. A Comparative Study of Teaching Media in Mother Tongue Education in Secondary Schools // Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Zurich, 2002, p. 158 30. Hart A. Teaching the media – international perspectives // Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1998, p. 208 31. Jaunimo tarptautinio bendradarbiavimo agent)ra. Programa „Veiklus jaunimas“ Lietuvoje 2008 m. U" kult)r( dialog# // JTBA, redaguojamas

5 6

First time published in 1992 First time published in 1967

70

32. Jeffs T. First lessons: historical perspectives on informal education // in Recovering Informal Learning – Wisdom, Judgement and Community, 2008, pp. 34-5 33. Kalvaitis A. and Tamo!i)nas T., Lithuanian Ministry of Edcation and Science. Visuotinio kompiuterinio ra!tingumo tyrimas. Pakeliui & skaitmenin& ra!tingum# // Lietuvos suagusi(j( !vietimo ir informavimo centras, 2008, p. 156 34. Kellner D. and Share J. Critical media literacy, and the reconstruction of education // in Media literacy: a reader, 2007, pp. 3-24 35. Kellner D. Preface in Rethinking media literacy. A critical pedagogy of representation // P. Lang, 1995, pp. xiii-xvii 36. Kiauleikis V. Profesin' kompetencija ir informacinis ra!tingumas // Konferencijos informacinio ra!tingumo tema: „IR...Ar tu esi?“ med"iaga, Vilnius, 10 December 2008 37. Kincheloe J. L. and Berry K. S. Rigour and complexity in educational research– conceptualizing the bricolage // McGraw-Hill International, 2004, p. 189 38. Kincheloe J. L. Chomsky, the Empire, and media literacy: contextualising Chomsky’s “New world order” // in Media literacy: a reader, 2007, pp. 79-86 39. Korte, Werner B. and Hüsing, Tobias. Benchmarking Access and Use of ICT in European Schools 2006: Results from Head Teacher and A Classroom Teacher Surveys in 27 European Countries. // eLearning Papers, vol. 2 no. 1. 2007 40. Krezios A. and Ambrazy M. here2say: a handbook on non-formal learning and its social recognition // Kids in Action, 2008, p. 77 41. Kvieskien' G. Lietuvos Respublikos !vietimo ministerija. Neformaliojo vaik( !vietimo s#naudos ir prieinamumas // VPU Socialin's komunikacijos institutas, 2006, p. 88 42. Legal Acts of the Republic of Lithuania, http://www3.lrs.lt/dokpaieska/forma_e.htm 43. Lewis J. and Ritchie J. Qualitative research practice – a guide for social science students and researchers, SAGE, 2003, p. 336 44. Lietuvos Respublikos Seimas. Lietuvos jaunimo politikos pagrind( &statymas // Valstyb's "inios, Nr. 144-5238, 10-12-2005 45. Lithuanian Agency for International Youth Co-operation, http://www.jtba.lt 46. Lithuanian Centre for Children and Youth, http://www.lvjc.lt 47. Macedo D. and Steinberg S. R., ed. Media literacy: a reader // Lang, 2007, p. 710 48. McLaren P. and Hammer R. Media knowledges, warrior citizenry, and postmodern literacies // in Media literacy: a reader, 2007, pp. 116-140 49. McLaren P. and Kincheloe J. L. (eds.) Critical pedagogy: where are we now? // Peter Lang, 2007, p. 411 50. McLaren P. and others. Rethinking media literacy – a critical pedagogy of representation // 71

P. Lang, 1995, p. 259 51. McLaren P. Che Guevara, Paulo Freire, and the pedagogy of revolution, Rowman & Littlefield, 2000, p. 220 52. McLuhan M. Understanding Media– The Extension of Man (2nd edition) // Routledge, 2001, p. 392 53. Meno avilys, http://www.menoavilys.org/ 54. Mertens D. M. Research methods in education and psychology– integrating diversity with quantitative & qualitative approaches // Sage Publications, 1997, p. 422 55. Michelkevicius V., ed. Medij( kult)ros balsai: teorijos ir praktikos // Mene, 2009, p. 296 56. Miller K. Communication Theories – Perspectives, Processes, and Contexts (2nd edition) // McGraw-Hill, 2004, p. 355 57. Orintien' G. Projekto tolimesn's veiklos // seminaro „Informacinis ra!tingumas mokykloje“ med"iaga, Kaunas, 27-28 October 2008 58. Programa „Veiklus jaunimas“ Lietuvoje 2007 m. U" lygias galimybes // JTBA, 2007, p. 45 59. Rogers A. Looking again at non-formal and informal education – towards a new paradigm // the

encyclopaedia

of

informal

education,

2004,

http://www.infed.org/biblio/non_formal_paradigm.htm.

60. Rogers A. Non-formal Education– Flexible Schooling Or Participatory Education? // Springer, 2005, p. 316 61. Rossatto C. A. Engaging Paulo Freire's pedagogy of possibility – from blind to transformative optimism // Rowman and Littlefield, 2005, p. 185 62. Rossatto C. A., Allen R. L. and Pruyn M. Reinventing (eds.) Critical pedagogy: widening the circle of anti-oppression education // Rowman and Littlefield, 2006, p. 258 63. Sakadolskis R. Informacinis ra!tingumas 21 am"iuje // Konferencijos informacinio ra!tingumo tema: „IR...Ar tu esi?“ med"iaga, Vilnius, 10 December 2008 64. Saukko P. Doing research in cultural studies– an introduction to classical and new methodological approaches // SAGE, 2003, p. 219 65. Sholle D. and Denski S. Critical media literacy: reading, remaping, rewriting // in Rethinking media literacy: a critical pedagogy of representation, 1995, pp. 7-33 66. Smalinskaite M. Romas Sakadolskis: Informacinis ra!tingumas neleid"ia paklysti informacijos sraute // 2006, http://www.bernardinai.lt/index.php?url=articles/51146 67. Tautkevi*ien' G. Informacinio ra!tingumo ugdymas auk!tojoje mokykloje // Konferencijos informacinio ra!tingumo tema: „IR...Ar tu esi?“ med"iaga, Vilnius, 10 December 2008 68. Taylor M. (ed.) and others, European Commission. Youthpass guide. Making the most of your learning. SALTO-YOUTH Training and Cooperation Resource Centre, 2009, p. 91 72

69. Taylor M., Council of Europe. Critical approach to the media in civic education – final report // Council of Europe, 2002, p. 124 70. Taylor M., Council of Europe. European Portfolio for youth leaders and youth workers // Directorate of Youth and Sport, 2007, p. 52 71. Taylor P. A. and Harris J. L. Critical Theories of Mass Media – Then and Now // Open University Press, 2008, p. 233 72. The Centre for Civic Initiatives, http://www.pic.lt 73. Torres, R. M. The million Paulo Freires // Adult basic education and training journal, No. 3, 1997 74. Universidad Autonoma de Barcelona, European Commission. Current trends and approaches

to

media

literacy

in

Europe

//

European

Commission,

2007,

http://ec.europa.eu/avpolicy/media_literacy/studies/index_en.htm 75. V!- „Nacionalin's pl'tros institutas“. ES programa „Jaunimas“ Lietuvoje 2000 – 2006 metais. Tyrimo ap"valga // JTBA, 2006, p. 28 76. Winkler, H. Mediendefinition // Medienwissenschaft, No. 1/2004, 2004, http://www.unipaderborn.de/~winkler/medidef.html 77. Wood J. T. Communication Theories in Action – An Introduction // Wadsworth Pub., 1996, p. 417

73

ANNEXES Annex no. 1. The overview of the reports, studies and researches on the situation of media education in different countries during the past two decades Authors

Time (a) 1990-2000

Countries (b) France, United Kingdom, Germany, Canada, Australia, USA, Russia

Level and field of education (c) Different levels and fields of education

Report/study/research object (d) Historical overview of the media education evolution

French and Richards

1992-1994

Italy, Spain, Dutch-speaking Belgium, Great Britain, Sweden, the Netherlands, France and Germany

University, formal education

Hart

1994-1998

England, Northern Ireland, South Africa, Australia, USA, Canada,

Secondary schools, formal education

Taylor, Council of Europe

1997-1999

Romania, Slovenia, Hungary, Poland, The Netherlands

Hart and S端ss

1999-2001

Domaille and Buckingham, UNESCO

2001

Belgium, Great Britain, Finland, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Norway, Russia, Slovenia, Spain and Switzerland 35 countries from Africa, Asia, Central/Latin America, Europe, Middle East, North America and also including Australia and New Zealand

Schools, formal education, but also including attention to non-formal education Secondary schools, formal education

University media and communication education practices and potential for collaboration in the subject across the continent at higher educational level Teaching paradigms and practices in media education in the secondary schools of English speaking countries Civic and media education in different countries

European

2007

27 Member States of the

Fedorov

Teaching paradigms and practices in media education in mother tongue in secondary schools

Schools, formal education

Current state of development of media education around the world

Different levels and

Current trends and approaches to

74

Methods of gathering and analysing data (e) Providing the overview of the media education developments by referring to the most relevant researches and practices in the field Comparing of the case studies submitted as papers for the colloquium and drawing arguments from the outcomes of the discussions during the event Observing teachers while teaching media and interviewing about their teaching by using the agreed frameworks for interviewing and observation Collecting the necessary data with the questionnaires distributed by the experts

Observing teachers while teaching media and interviewing about their teaching by using the agreed frameworks for interviewing and observation Conducting the survey research with individuals, who included academics, policymakers and educational advisers together with extrapolations from an extensive review of print and web-based materials relating to media education Identifying theoretical media literacy

Commission

Alliance of Civilization

2009

European Union and the EEA Member States

fields of education

media literacy in Europe

Mexico, Switzerland, Morocco, India, USA, Hong Kong, South Korea, Canada, Ghana, Egypt, Argentina, Spain, United Kingdom, Turkey, Zambia, Finland

Different levels and fields of education

Media education policies and practices with the underlying educational and media cultures that support them.

75

approaches, gathering information from country reports and case studies, and drawing conclusions from the expert discussions and analysis Offering the interpretative perspectives from the case studies and the examples of practice

Annex no 2. Youth in Action programme projects and their structural nature Project type Youth Exchanges

Target group Groups of young people from 16 to 60 participants coming from different European countries

Duration From 6 to 21 days of activity programme

National Youth Initiatives

Groups of young people from 4 members minimum, coming from the same country

From 3 to 12 months of activity programme

Youth Democracy Projects

Young people in local and international groups

From 3 to 18 months

European Voluntary Service

Individuals and groups of young people coming from different European countries

From 2 to 12 months

Training courses

Groups of youth leaders, youth workers coming from different European countries

Not more than 10 days of the activity programme

Main characteristics Is build around the common themes and interest of young people, involves international partnership, learning takes place in international group, includes preparation and follow-up phases, offers limited impact on local community Is build around the interest of young people and their community, learning takes place in the peer group, is implemented by the youth group, requires strong local impact Is build around the theme of democratic youth participation, involves local and international partnership, active participation methodology is highly stressed, requires strong local impact Promotes voluntary activities in the community, individual learning process is highly stressed, often has a central theme based on the volunteer activities Is build around the specific topic, aims to improve participantsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; competence in the youth work in general, and Youth in Action projects specifically

Educational roles Group leaders who accompany young people in their learning process

If needed coach is supporting the youth group empowering them for participation and supporting their learning process There are no roles specified

Mentors who support the individual learning process of volunteers

Trainers who facilitate the educational process of participants

Source: Adopted from the Youth in Action Programme Guide (European Commission, 2009)

76

Annex no. 3. In-depth interview plan with youth workers General introductory questions: 1. In general terms, tell about your organisation: who you are, what are your goals, what are you doing? o What place and role has media in the activities of your organisation: how do(es) you(organisation) understand the term â&#x20AC;&#x17E;mediaâ&#x20AC;&#x153; and what are the reasons for media related activities?

2. In brief, tell about yourself: what is your relationship and experiences with media?

3. In general terms tell about the Youth in Action project: what was/is the idea, and main activities? o What were the media related activities in the project and why?

Main questions around the critical media literacy: 4. What objectives did/do you set related to media education in youth project? o Which of the objectives and how were/are related to education for critical thinking and media consciousness?

5. Tell, how was/is media education happening: what were/are methods and activities implemented? o How was/is the educational process of critical thinking and media consciousness happening? o What was/is your role as educator during this process?

6. What was/is important in the educational process: what principle, values and attitudes?

7. What results did/do project manage to achieve in the area of media education? o How did/does youth critical thinking and media consciousness change?

8. How did/does the attention for media is influencing the non-formal education process: what opportunities did/does it create and what difficulties were/are if face?

General concluding questions: 9. In your opinion, what is the youth relationship with media and how media is influencing people?

10. In your opinion, to what extent is for young people important critical media literacy and why?

11. Where can young people develop critical media literacy in Lithuania: what opportunities do exist already and what is still needed to create?

12. What knowledge, skills and attitudes are important for young people when developing media competence?

13. What are the possibilities and difficulties for media education in non-formal education setting?

77

Annex no. 4. In-depth interview plan with youth leaders General introductory questions: 14. In general terms, tell about your group: who you are, what are your goals, what are you doing? o What place and role has media in your activities: how do(es) you(group) understand the term „media“ and why you take part in media related activities?

15. In general terms tell about the Youth in Action project: what was/is the idea, and main activities? o What were the media related activities in the project and why?

Main questions around the critical media literacy: 16. What did/do your group want to achieve with media related activities in the project? o Which of the objectives and how were/are related to learning the critical thinking and media consciousness?

17. Tell, how was/is media related activities: what were/are methods and activities implemented? o How was/is the learning process of critical thinking and media consciousness happening? o What was/is your role as youth leader during this process?

18. What was/is important in the process: what principle, values and attitudes?

19. What did your and other young people learn in the area of media education? o How did/does your/your group’s critical thinking and media consciousness change?

General concluding questions: 20. In your opinion, what is the youth relationship with media and how media is influencing people?

21. In your opinion, to what extent is for you and other young people important critical media literacy and why?

22. What are the possibilities and difficulties for media education in such kind of projects as yours?

78