Discourse, Context and Media 12 (2016) 20–31

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Discourse, Context and Media

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/dcm

Appropriation through guided participation: Media literacy

in children's everyday lives
Pål Aarsand a,n, Helen Melander b,1
a
Department of Education, Norwegian University of Technology and Science, Department of Education, 7491 Trondheim, Norway
b
Department of Education, Uppsala University, SE-750 02 Uppsala, Sweden

art ic l e i nf o a b s t r a c t

Article history: This article explores media literacy practices in children's everyday lives and some of the ways in which
Received 17 August 2015 young children appropriate basic media literacy skills through guided participation in situated activities.
Received in revised form Building on an ethnomethodological perspective, the analyses are based on video recordings doc-
9 March 2016
umenting the activities in which four target children, aged 6–7 years old, participated at home and in
Accepted 12 March 2016
school. Through the detailed analysis of two mundane media literacy activities – online calling and word
Available online 19 March 2016
processing – similarities and differences in media usage within and out-of-school are examined. It is
Keywords: shown how children's media literacy activities encompass verbal, embodied and social competencies
Media literacy practices that are made relevant, and thus accessible for learning, in interaction between the adults and children in
Ethnomethodology
the form of norms and guidelines for what constitutes knowledgeable participation in media literacy
Children
activities, and that are appropriated and reactualized by the children in interaction with their peers. The
Multimodality
Learning findings show how the participants coordinate their actions on and in front of the screen and where
Appropriation spatiality and temporality are oriented to as crucial aspects of the organization of the activities. More-
over, it is demonstrated how old and new technologies are linked together in culturally and historically
embedded conceptualizations of literacy.
& 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction as well as how it is acquired (e.g. Buckingham, 2007; Gee, 2010;

Leander and Lovvorn, 2006). Moreover, a distinction is often made
In this study we explore how young children participate in between learning that takes place within educational settings and
media literacy activities at home and in school and how they learning that takes place out-of-school (e.g. Burnett and Merchant,
appropriate social and cultural norms and rules for how to use 2013; Marsh, 2003). This line of research focuses on how media
digital media technologies. Digital and Media literacy (henceforth literacy practices differ across time and space, emphasizing how
referred to as media literacy) is nowadays considered a basic learning and literacy are culturally and socially situated (van
competence on the same level as numeracy and literacy (European Deursen and van Dijk, 2014). However, when underlining differ-
Commission, 2006). In Sweden, learning how to use digital media ences there is a tendency to ignore that media literacy practices
is since a few years back part of the curriculum for Art, Music, may connect and support each other across sites. In such a vein,
Mathematics, Swedish and Technology (The Swedish National Furlong and Davies (2012) argue that there is no clear-cut dis-
Agency for Education, 2011). Digital media technologies play an tinction between informal learning as something that takes place
important role in children's everyday lives both within and out-of- at home and formal learning as something taking place in school.
school, and media usage in homes is at least as important for Rather, formal learning can be a part of activities at home, in the
children's development of media literacy (e.g. The Swedish Media same way as informal learning is a part of school activities (see
Council, 2013). also Erstad and Sefton-Green, 2013; Leander and Lovvorn, 2006).
Despite a long-standing attention to media literacy within Drawing on ethnomethodological and conversation analytic
education, there is still a debate among researchers concerning perspectives (henceforth EMCA, e.g. Goodwin, 2000; Schegloff,
how to understand and describe what constitutes media literacy 1996), we will explore how different forms of media literacy
practices are constituted in interaction. Our analytical attention is
n
directed to what resources and strategies children use when they
Corresponding author. Tel.: þ 47 73 59 02 84.
E-mail addresses: pal.aarsand@svt.ntnu.no (P. Aarsand),
are handling digital media in two recurrent and mundane media
s

helen.melander@edu.uu.se (H. Melander). activities: online calling at home (Skype ) and word processing
s
1
Phone: þ 46 18 471 16 80. (Microsoft Word ) in school. The aim is to explore similarities and

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.dcm.2016.03.002
2211-6958/& 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 P. Aarsand, H. Melander / Discourse, Context and Media 12 (2016) 20–31 21

differences with regard to how these media literacy activities are (Goodwin, 2000; Schegloff, 1996). In the analysis, we focus on how
carried out in situ as well as how they connect and/or disconnect participants in social interaction mobilize a set of resources for the
across practices. In order to develop an understanding of how locally situated, intersubjective and methodic organization of
children appropriate media literacy, we will focus on what com- action and how media literacy activities are accomplished in
petencies that are taken for granted or treated as new in the interaction. We focus on the linguistic, embodied, material and
activities, and how the competencies required to perform the cultural resources that children and adults draw upon when par-
various media literacy activities were made available to the ticipating in and (re)creating media literacy practices (cf. Goodwin,
children. 2000; Mondada, 2014). The analyses address the emergent prop-
erties of objects (e.g. media technologies) and participants’ bodies,
and we pay specific attention to the ways in which verbal as well
2. Media literacy as hybrid practices as bodily conduct are reflexively produced in a material environ-
ment (Goodwin, 2000). The analyses thus trace how social action
Digital media technologies are social and cultural artifacts that gradually evolves; how participants produce intelligible and
constitute an intrinsic part of many children's everyday lives. The accountable actions whilst interpreting and acting upon publicly
study of media literacy concerns both how people use technolo- displayed and mutually available actions.
s s
gies such as Microsoft Word and Skype , and the norms, con- We conceptualize media literacy activities as epistemic ecolo-
ventions and rules that guide the activities and that are connected gies (Goodwin, 2013) in which knowledge is distributed across
to socially and culturally situated practices (Jenkins et al., 2009; participants and artifacts. Knowledge appears in and is defined in
Street, 2000). Media literacy encompasses reading and writing as a and through the relations between people who engage in shared
form of practice within and across different communities. Literacy activities (cf. Melander, 2012). The social and material environ-
practices (re)appear across time and place (Lam and Rosario- ment is intrinsic to local definitions of what it means to know
Ramos, 2009; Leander and Lovvorn, 2006), and demands, expec- something and what is considered relevant knowledge is both
tations and restrictions are made relevant not only within but also dynamic and changing. The epistemic ecology includes the his-
across media practices. torical sedimentation of ways of knowing developed by pre-
We connect to an understanding of literacy as a set of social and decessors (Goodwin, 2013; cf. Bolter and Grusin, 1999), shaping
cultural practices that are interconnected with different participant “how diverse communities know the word that is the focus of
positions (e.g. Gee, 1990; Street, 1984). From such a perspective, one their action in very different ways, and the types of action that can
learns through changing participation in situated sociocultural be performed, as new ways of action […] emerge.” (Goodwin
activities, thus becoming a member of a community of practice (Lave 2013:19). Learning emerges through participation in situated col-
and Wenger, 1991; Rogoff, 2003). In our understanding, media lit- laborative activities (Lave and Wenger, 1991; Melander 2012)
eracy encompasses guidelines for what digital media to use, as well where the children are guided into more fully engaged ways of
as when and how. Children do not participate in media activities in a participating in media literacy activities (Rogoff, 2003). From an
social and cultural vacuum, rather, they use their surrounding epistemic perspective, we analyze how the participants produce
environment to guide their actions. The notion of guided participa- actions that are seen as competent (or not) in the situation at hand
tion is used to conceptualize how humans learn through observation and how children appropriate the competencies and knowledge
and participation in situated activities (Rogoff, 2003). Within a required for participation in mundane media literacy activities.
community of practice, there may be several different participant
positions where different ways of acting are expected. For example,
we expect adults and children to occupy different participant posi- 4. Research setting and data
tions within the community of practice, although adults as well as
peers, as we will show, may have the guiding function that is The analyses are based on video recordings from a project
implied in the notion of guided participation. documenting Swedish children's everyday lives in school and at
In this article, we are interested in how young children learn home. Four target children (two girls and two boys) and the
basic media literacy in interaction with their peers and with adults. activities in which they participated were video recorded during
Street (1984) argues that in order to understand literacy events one week. The children were between 7 and 8 years old and went
(what we refer to as literacy activities), one has to investigate how to schools that were located in the countryside in the vicinity of
these activities are part of larger literacy practices. For such pur- two medium-sized Swedish cities. From this data set we have
poses, we have examined two different literacy activities (word chosen to analyze two digital media activities in which children,
processing and online calling) that took place in two different set- adults and well-known software come together. One of the
tings (school and home), and that involved different media tech- activities was recorded in a first grade classroom where the chil-
s s s
nologies (Microsoft Word and Skype ). We conceptualize media dren learn to use word processing software: Microsoft Word
literacy as a hybrid practice that encompasses various competencies (excerpts 1 and 3). The other activity was recorded in the home of
concerning as well skills in handling digital media as social and a family where a mother and two of her children were preparing
s
cultural norms for appropriate and knowledgeable participation. We an online telephone call using Skype (excerpts 2 and 4). In both
will show how the chosen media literacy activities are organized in cases we first analyze parts of the activities in which the children
interaction and how knowledge about how to handle the technol- participate under the guidance of an adult. We then go on to
ogies is distributed, displayed and thus made accessible for the explore another part of the same activity in which the children
children to learn, as well as for the analyst to discern what the participate on their own. The reasons for choosing these activities
participants orient to as crucial knowledge. were threefold. First, they are mundane activities in which the
children in the data recurrently participated. Second, the choice of
one activity within school and one at home provides ground for a
3. Learning and participation in situated media literacy discussion of differences and similarities in media usage across
activities settings. Third, the children are novices and new to the technol-
ogies that they are using. Basic ways of handling the technologies
To understand how children appropriate media literacy, we as well as norms and rules for appropriate conduct are thus dis-
approach children's media activities from an EMCA perspective played in the participants’ interaction.
22 P. Aarsand, H. Melander / Discourse, Context and Media 12 (2016) 20–31

The chosen video excerpts have been transcribed following practices are always situated and thus differ with regard to what
conventions developed within CA (Jefferson, 2004; Appendix A). In technology is used when as well as to where the activities are taking
order to study how participants draw upon a multitude of place (e.g. Ito et al., 2010). Based on the analysis of our data, we will
resources for the organization of action, it is necessary to create show how social and cultural norms guide the participants when
transcripts that encompass the temporal adjustment between talk accomplishing media literacy activities.
and other resources (e.g., body postures, object manipulations In the remaining part of this article, we analyze two different
etc.), the coordination between the temporal unfolding of gestures media literacy activities in which children learn how to use media
and other actions by all participants, and the synchronization of technologies at home and at school, together with adults as well as
various multimodal resources that are mobilized by the partici- other children. We will demonstrate how social and cultural
pants (Mondada, 2007:815). Hence, we have embedded line norms are used as resources when instructing the children about
s s
drawings of video frames in the transcripts. Not all details are how to write a text in Word and make a call on Skype , and how
included in the drawings, which represent a filtering and an the children appropriate these norms. We will also explore how
upgrade of what can be seen in the frame grab (cf. Lynch, 1990). the organization of interaction in media literacy activities differs
Figure-ground relations are emphasized thus highlighting analy- (or not) across sites and constellations of participants.
tically relevant embodied actions and the participants’ orienta-
tions to the material environment. In order to capture the tem- 5.1. Media literacy in the classroom
porality, coordination and synchronization of mobilized resources
and actions, verbal descriptions of actions are also included and Being able to write a text in a document in a word processing
timed in relation to the ongoing talk. As the participants in our program constitutes a basic media literacy skill today. The children
data are speaking Swedish, we have moreover included transla- in our data practice and learn this in school and in the following
tions into English in the representations. we will explore an activity in which the children are assigned a
s
task that involves the transformation of a short text in Word .
Through a detailed analysis, we will show the complex interac-
5. Guided participation in media literacy activities tional organization of this seemingly simple task and what
knowledge and competencies that are made relevant by the par-
Although it is common that people use media technologies indi- ticipants in the activity. In the first excerpt, the student Tobias has
vidually, in our data, the children often use digital media together with logged in with his user name and password on the computer when
others. We begin the analysis (Sections 5.1 and 5.2) by focusing on his teacher, Margareta, arrives at his desk, placing her body so that
activities in which adults and children together engage with digital she can simultaneously look at the screen and at what Tobias is
media technologies. As previous research has shown, media literacy doing on the keyboard.
 P. Aarsand, H. Melander / Discourse, Context and Media 12 (2016) 20–31 23

The activity is framed by the teacher focusing the student's understand and use digital media are developed as people
attention on specific aspects of the task and by establishing where encounter new media technologies at the same time as old con-
the starting point is for this particular child. When the teacher has ventions, norms and rules are reproduced. When Tobias famil-
positioned herself behind Tobias, she first states that “↑no:w iarizes himself with word processing, he learns to use the software
you’re on that page”, where the expression “that page” links the by drawing on previous experiences using paper and pen, as well
utterance to something that they can both see. When the page has as by developing new knowledge concerning how to open a
finished loading, Margareta tells Tobias that he must now have a document on a computer.
paper to write on (line 3), thus directing his attention to the next Within the frame of this digitally mediated school task, differ-
step of the activity and orienting him to the aim of the task, that is, ent participant positions on knowledge about how media tech-
that he is going to write. Writing is a particular cultural practice nologies are used appear in a dynamic relation with each other (cf.
that includes a range of artifacts, for instance something to write Goodwin, 2013). While Tobias does not know where to find the
with and to write on. But, equally important, how to write follows “paper” (line 6), he displays that he knows what to do to continue
certain cultural norms like where to start and the size of the let- from the icon. He moves the cursor to the software icon so that it
ters. When the teacher asks the student whether he remembers is marked and then double clicks to open the software (see
where to look for the paper (line 5), she explicitly makes relevant drawing in excerpt 1). How to use the computer is not considered
Tobias’ previous experiences of writing on the computer to sup- problematic by either participant as no instructions are given and
port the activity in the here and now. This simultaneously creates no questions asked, for example about how to use the mouse.
an expectation that Tobias should be able to know both what task Tobias also displays that he knows how to point with the cursor
he is facing and how to accomplish it. However, by shaking his and to click in order to make something happen on the screen. The
head Tobias shows that he does not remember. required technical competencies are thus taken for granted in the
An instructional sequence follows, in which the teacher initially activity whereas, in contrast, recognizing symbols, being able to
instructs the student about where to find the paper by pointing at denominate them and find them on the screen is treated as new to
s
the Word icon as she says “it's (.) up the:re.”. The pointing and the Tobias and he, for example, also needs help to find the correct icon.
verbal utterance work together to visually highlight one part of the By using talk and gestures to instruct Tobias, along with the fact
screen as a relevant place to look at and it directs Tobias’ gaze in a that he is the one in control of the technology, the teacher sup-
certain direction (cf. Goodwin, 2003). Next, Margareta adds the ports the student so that he can work through the task. In sum,
technical description “Microsoft wo:rd” followed by a written this is an example of how writing is accomplished as a cultural
language mediated description of what the icon looks like; that it practice in this classroom.
looks like a “W.” The placement of the software icon on the screen
is linked to the particular computer and it can be found in different 5.2. Media literacy activities at home
places on other computers. Saying the name of the software and
providing a distinguishing feature of the symbol makes relevant We will continue our exploration of children's media literacy
knowledge about how and where to find the software in a more practices by analyzing an activity in which a mother, Helena, and
generic way. Finally, the teacher links back to the “paper” and the two of her children, Pernilla, who is six years old, and Max, who is
local situation in the here and now: “then one can know that it's a a couple of years younger, are sitting in the family's living room
s
paper” (line 10). She thus highlights what Tobias is supposed to preparing a Skype call to the children's cousins. As will be
find in four distinct ways: she points to the icon on the screen, she demonstrated, participation in this digital media activity is con-
s
says the trade mark Microsoft Word , then adds a written- stituted through a coordination of several modalities: aural, visual,
language based description “W” referring to the icon, and finally spatial, embodied and temporal. We will also show how the use of
s
the vernacular “paper.” By calling the document a paper, the tea- Skype is established as a collective and distributed activity that
cher uses terminology that draws on a traditional artifact asso- encompasses different kinds of participant positions. The mother
ciated with written language (cf. Jenkins, 2006). This indicates the has been sitting on the couch with a laptop for some time, as she
complexity of media literacy practices where media from different puts the computer on a small table in the corner. When excerpt
times and settings merge and appear as partly new (Bolter and 2 begins, Pernilla is sitting on the floor playing whilst Max is
Grusin, 1999). Conventions, norms and rules concerning how to standing beside the couch looking at his mother and the computer.
24 P. Aarsand, H. Melander / Discourse, Context and Media 12 (2016) 20–31
 P. Aarsand, H. Melander / Discourse, Context and Media 12 (2016) 20–31 25

When the mother in line 1 asks the children whether they touch” in line 22) but that he should sit so that he is in the
see something, they are in different places in the room (see camera's range (lines 25–26). However, he can participate by
picture in excerpt 2). The question works as a way of focusing verbally commenting on what is happening (line 9). All in all,
everyone's attention and initiates an activity that the children the mother takes control over the activity and moves it forward
are invited into. Max moves towards Helena, leaning forward by being the one who maneuvers the artifacts and by con-
and saying, “I↑see something”. In saying that he sees something, tinuously explaining what she is doing, on the one hand, and
Max confirms the mother's invitation to participate, which in telling Max what to do, on the other.
turn makes it possible to progress in the activity. Thus, we can Temporality constitutes an important aspect of the organi-
understand the mother's question “shall we try calling again?” zation of action and as a resource in instructions of how to act
as oriented towards the next step in the activity, one that is in media activities. We have shown how the question of tem-
formulated as a collective activity through the use of the per- porality is related to the performance of actions in a specific
sonal pronoun “we.” Max comments on what happens on the order, and, moreover, to a coordination of modalities (aural and
screen (line 9), probably referring to the symbol of a receiver visual, space and embodied actions). Being a competent par-
that is shown when the call is being made. By mentioning the ticipant in the media literacy activities analyzed here, pre-
symbol Max displays knowledge of its meaning and that he has supposes coordination of actions in time and space, with
previous experience of both the software and the activity. Once respect to technology and software as well as to other
again we see how old technologies merge with new (Jenkins, participants.
s
2006); the call through Skype is mediated through a computer In this first part of the analysis, we have focused on how
using a microphone and camera but denominations such as adults guide children in how to participate in two different
“receiver” live on in symbols and language. media literacy activities. The analysis of excerpt 1 shows how
In line 10 Helena places the call. As she clicks the mouse she the child is performing the actions with the help of the adult.
explains that she is trying again and that she is clicking on “call.” The activity is simultaneously social and individual as the aim
s
While the part of the Skype conversation that is about placing the is that the child should solve the task himself rather than the
call is initiated, the mother reaches for the camera. Max says “now participants doing it together. In the analysis of excerpt 2, we
I want to ta:lk¿” while he crawls up onto the couch. Earlier the have demonstrated how the mother controlled the activity by
mother informed the children that they should see something on continuously commenting upon and explaining her actions.
the screen. Max is now orienting to something that in addition to The aim here is not primarily that the children should be able
s
visual aspects can be understood as central to the activity: that you to set up the Skype call themselves, but that they are going to
should talk to someone. This is also a participant position that he use the computer for communication. In these examples,
claims for himself; it is an “I” who wants to talk. The mother online commentaries and instructions are similar in that they
confirms that he is going to talk, but again orients to the impor- make the complex organization of the activity available to all
tance of the visual aspect by saying that they are going to have a the participants who are present. An important difference
camera too (line 17). As Max sits down on the couch, she again between the activities is which participant who is in control of
asks if he sees something. Max leans towards the camera and asks the technology (i.e. the more or the less knowledgeable par-
if he can push, something that Helena immediately stops by ticipant). Consequently, the instructions were aimed at helping
replying no (line 23), stretching her arm to grab the camera, the child do something whilst the adult was watching, whereas
thereby physically stopping him from touching it. She adjusts the online commentaries made explicit to the children what the
camera as she says “you should just sit there somewhere so that more knowledgeable person was doing.
you can be seen in this ca:mera” (line 25). The participants orient
to the computer as a shared focus of attention, and participation in
the call presupposes that you are close to the computer to be able 6. Children interacting in media literacy activities
to hear/be heard and to see/be seen. We can thus see how Max
gradually moves closer to the spatial center of the activity and how The everyday life of children includes various media technologies,
the positioning of the body in the room constitutes another aspect settings and social constellations. In the previous section we explored
that is of importance for the organization of the activity. There is how the competencies required to perform the various media literacy
moreover a shift from what can be seen on the screen here and activities were made available in different ways to the children and
now in this room, to being seen in the camera's range. The latter some of the resources that the participants drew upon in the orga-
orients to the camera as a medium that so far is about what the nization of participation. In this section, we focus on how media
participants see in this room but that will transform into what can activities are accomplished in interaction between the children. We
be seen by the person(s) they are calling to. will explore what happens sometime later into the activities, when the
The mother is continuously commenting on what she is children take control and make relevant some of the skills and com-
doing and she explains her actions as she performs them (lines petencies that they have appropriated concerning how to open a
s
5, 10, 13). By telling what she is doing and formulating her document in Words and how to make a Skype call.
actions in a “we”-form (lines 5, 13) she keeps the children
informed about where in the activity she is (cf. online com- 6.1. Collaboratively solving a task at school
mentary, Heritage and Stivers, 1999) while also constructing the
activity as a collective activity. But even if the activity is shared, Returning to the classroom activity, we will now focus on how
the participant positions are accomplished through expecta- Tobias uses what the teacher has shown him as a resource when
tions about what the various participants can and should do. For he helps another student, Minna. We will show how the children
example, the children are expected to wait while Helena pre- collaboratively work to solve a school task that originally was
pares the call. Another example is that the mother is the one designed as an individual task and are positioned and position
who is making the call and handling the media technology, themselves as more or less knowing within the epistemic ecology
whereas Max says that he wants to talk (line 16) and his mother (Goodwin, 2013) through engaging in sub-teaching activities
gives him permission by saying that you will get to do that (line (Tholander and Aronsson, 2003). Minna is sitting at the same desk
17). That “we” are getting a camera does not mean that Max is as Tobias but in front of the laptop. Excerpt 3 begins when Minna
allowed to manipulate the camera (see correction “no don’t asks what she is supposed to do.
26 P. Aarsand, H. Melander / Discourse, Context and Media 12 (2016) 20–31
 P. Aarsand, H. Melander / Discourse, Context and Media 12 (2016) 20–31 27

When Minna asks “what were you supposed to do he:re then,”, it should be a “W” (line 18). Referring to the symbol provides a
Tobias walks up to Minna, looks at her screen and tells her to wait. more precise clue as to how Minna should find the software icon
He stands beside her for a few seconds and then adds an expla- than by referring to its spatial placement on the screen. After a
nation of what is happening: “it just has to finish loading first.” while Edwin confirms that he understands by saying “it says
thereby displaying knowledge about how the medium works. The double ‘W’ (.) the:re.” as he simultaneously points at the screen,
digital medium has an inbuilt temporality that the participants rather far down on the left side (see drawing in excerpt 3). Tobias
have to take into account. In the same way as in excerpt 1, the also confirms that he can see it and Minna adds “there.”. She
children have to wait until the right page appears on the screen double clicks on the icon and the software starts up.
before they can continue. When she asks where she should click, Minna mobilizes help
Tobias walks back to his computer and continues his work. He says from Tobias in the first place. When Tobias uses the written-
to himself “uh:: 4what should one write(hh).o”, as he simulta- language based distinguishing feature that the teacher introduced
neously looks down at the instruction sheet, thus displaying that he for identifying the symbol, he tells Edwin what he should look for.
knows where to look for the answer to the question. Even though Edwin is initially not being ratified as knowing, with
Edwin, another boy in the class, has approached Minna and the help of the others he is now able to find the symbol and points
Tobias and asks Minna if she needs help. Minna answers no (line at it so that Minna can open the software. In the interaction in the
10). In spite of her negative answer, Edwin insists that he knows
peer group an array of multimodal resources are used to make
through adding “I know how to do it.”. After a brief moment of
various participant positions relevant and where the boys position
silence he begins to instruct Minna about where to click: “you click
themselves as sub-teachers (Tholander and Aronsson, 2003).
up there. farthest up¿ ne:xt farthest up I think.” (line 13). The
Hence, although designed as an individual task, the digitally
addition of “I think” here marks a greater epistemic uncertainty
mediated school task is organized as a collaborative and dis-
than Edwin has previously displayed (line 11). As it turns out,
tributed activity in the children's interaction.
Edwin cannot find the symbol that you are supposed to click on,
and Minna quietly asks “°°but where do you (look/click) now then.
°°”. Edwin informs her that the icon is always in the same place, 6.2. Playing with digital media at home
whereas the software icons can in fact be found in different places s
on the screen. Tobias hears this and rises from his chair and walks We will now return to the Skype -call and investigate how the
toward Minna again. Edwin and Tobias situate themselves behind children explore and challenge the borders of the digitally medi-
Minna so that all three have a direct view of the screen as a shared ated activity as it has been set up by the mother. Once the call has
focus of attention. Tobias now makes use of his experience from been placed and the mother has left the room, there is a shift to a
when the teacher used written-language based explanations to play activity in which the children take control over the activity. In
describe what the symbol on the screen looked like and says that line 2, Pernilla greets the camera: “hi hi camera.”
28 P. Aarsand, H. Melander / Discourse, Context and Media 12 (2016) 20–31
 P. Aarsand, H. Melander / Discourse, Context and Media 12 (2016) 20–31 29

When Helena comes back into the room and sits down on the orient to the technology as mediator, that is, the camera as a
couch, Pernilla is leaning toward the camera. She sits up and her medium to communicate and play with the cousins.
mother stretches over the computer in front of the children and
adjusts the camera. The image changes and Pernilla and Max start
making playful sounds. Cousin Nils and Pernilla greet each other; 7. Media literacy practices in children's everyday lives
Nils says “hi hi” and Pernilla leans into the camera as she says “hi
hi” again. Helena stops the children in a playful way by laughingly In this article we have analyzed the interplay between active
saying “wai(hai)t not so clo(ho)se” (line 10). She is still oriented engagements, guided participation and shared expertize in two
towards the children being visible in the camera and towards the different digital media activities and settings. We have done this
conversation with the cousins as the main activity, rather than the by viewing the different activities as not only preparing for media
children playing with the image itself and what can be seen literacy, but by exploring them in their own right, with a focus on
through the visual medium. At the same time the children's the place of new technology in the ecology of meaning-making as
actions show that it is possible to simultaneously play with the a context for children's learning (Burnett and Merchant, 2013).
camera and treat it as a mediating artifact. For example, when When new technologies are made part of children's everyday lives,
Pernilla greets the camera in line 2, thereby addressing the tech- these are socially and culturally embedded in ways that connect
nology, this does not stop Nils from greeting back in line 6 and them to previous technologies and times as well as to different
entering into a playful exchange of greetings even though the activities in different sites such as home and school. Children's
children have actually already spent some time talking to media literacy practices are thus anchored culturally and histori-
each other. cally through the ways in which old and new media are linked
Cousin Gustav now enters into the conversation by greeting the together. Digital media are often described as new phenomena
others (line 11). Helena answers, while Max leans forward in front that require completely new ways of understanding, relating to
of Pernilla saying “I ca:n’t be ↑se:en:.”. The mother adjusts the and communicating with others (Bolter and Grusin, 1999). The
camera a little saying “but now you can be seen”. Overlapping the ways in which the participants in our examples discuss and
mother's turn, Pernilla is linking to Max's utterance and leans to coordinate activities on and in front of the screen makes visible
the left behind him, at the same time as she – imitating Max's children's practical understanding of how different media are used
chanting prosody – also says that she cannot be seen. In this stage in everyday activities. Here we see how the children use digital
the activity is about to change character and focus, but the mother notions such as “load,” “click” and “press” about actions that are
s
manages to maintain the frames for the Skype activity as a con- performed in order to write, read and call on the computer. At the
versation with the cousins by shushing the children and saying same time we see a continued use of notions that are clearly
that they should not push each other (line 17). Max continues lying linked to older media. For example, metaphors from traditional
down with Pernilla on top of him and Pernilla repeats that she telephony (“receiver”) as well as written language-based practices
cannot be seen. The mother now states that it is true that they (“paper”) are actualized in the adults’ instructions about how the
cannot be seen and says: “you have to be where the camera is”. In newer media should be used.
the Swedish utterance in line 19, there is an epistemic particle ju In the present study, we have shown how local social and
that underscores that what is being said is something they all cultural norms are made relevant with regard to how media lit-
know (Heinemann et al., 2011). The utterance is also produced in a eracy activities are carried out in situ as a way of exploring how
playful manner and its corrective aspect is downplayed. The chil- children appropriate media literacy. As we have seen, in research
dren continue playing but soon Pernilla moves so that she is sit- on literacy a distinction is often made between “in-school” and
ting beside Max instead and says “↑there” displaying that she “out-of-school” media use. The distinction is frequently discussed
knows that she is in the right place. She repeats yet another time in terms of continuities and discontinuities between homes and
that she cannot be seen (line 23) but this is of a slightly different educational settings. In our data, media literacy practices at
character than before where the point was to hide from and play schools and homes involve both adults and children. Whether or
with the camera while she now seems to strive to be seen. Helena not adults are part of media activities has consequences with
complains, saying “but can’t you be still”, as she once again aims regard to how these are carried out. For example, we have shown
the camera toward the children and states that they can now both that in the child-adult interaction in the classroom, the teacher's
be seen (line 27). actions were designed as instructions where the participants in
The question of being visible to the camera is, as we have interaction oriented to critical aspects of the media literacy
shown, an essential part of the children's participation in the activity, such as identifying the correct symbol (tool) on the
s
Skype activity. Initially, the mother is the one who orients to the screen. What became obvious was that basic skills in handling the
arrangement of technology and children in ways that make it media technology were taken for granted. The practice of writing
possible for the children to be seen. The analysis of excerpt offers norms and guidelines to how the school task should be
4 shows how the children pick up the visual project, but transform carried out, which includes the kind of artifacts that the partici-
it into a playful activity through engaging with the digital medium, pants need to look for and know how to handle. The distribution
and how they in that way take control over the development of of positions in the examples from the home looks slightly differ-
the activity. The mother's efforts to ensure that the children can be ent. In the living room, the mother shows the children how to
s
seen become a resource for the children's play based on what can Skype through online explanations and thereby makes visible the
be seen in the camera's range. social and cultural expectations regarding how the media should
In conclusion, the participants orient to the visual mediation of be used and what counts as important in the situation. The mother
the activity, departing from the question of what can be seen in displays the social and cultural norms related to online calling:
the camera in slightly shifting ways during different parts of the that this is an activity where you talk with someone in a way that
activity. Three different foci of attention are in play. First, the involves placing the body in a location where you can be seen,
attention is on the here and now in the room, that is, the parti- focusing attention on the screen and to talk at the right places/
cipants look at the computer and, for example, ask if you can see timing in the conversation. When the children were Skyping on
something. Second, the technology periodically constitutes the their own, they used the social and cultural norms and guidelines
main focus, such as when the participants direct their attention to in that they oriented to the media technologies as the mediating
the camera itself by greeting it or leaning into it. Third, they also artifact as they were simultaneously playing with the norm of
30 P. Aarsand, H. Melander / Discourse, Context and Media 12 (2016) 20–31

being placed in a position where the person on “the other side” competencies are made relevant in the form of norms and
can see them. guidelines for what constitutes appropriate and knowledgeable
When discussing the organization of classroom activities, it is participation in media activities and the activities are accom-
easily assumed that all students occupy similar positions, but as plished through guided participation within specific contexts, such
has been shown, this is an oversimplification (cf. Tholander and as schools and homes. The different forms of communication that
s
Aronsson, 2003). For instance, in the Word activity one child says the participants use show how social and cultural aspects often are
that they need to click an icon, a second talks about where the icon salient in children's participation in media literacy activities. In
should be placed whereas the third child knows what it looks like. spite of the differences in social constellations and different loca-
All the participants orient to displaying themselves as competent tions, there seems to be some aspects of what it means to be
and skilled computer users but work through the individually media literate that cut across settings. For example, you have to be
designed task collectively as part of a social activity where able to handle technologies such as a screen, a camera, a keyboard
knowledge is distributed between the participants, thus colla- and a mouse. You also have to know where to be located physically
boratively solving the challenge. Initially, some of the students first in order to see and be seen (i.e. spatiality) and in which order
acted as co-teachers that wanted to help, and later on they become actions should be carried out (i.e. temporality), competencies that
more equal parts in solving the school task. are closely related to the unfolding organization of the activity.
Differences in media literacy activities at school and at home do Moreover, what constitutes media technology competence is
not mean that, for instance, online commentaries and explana- predominantly the same in the two settings that we have ana-
tions always occur at home while instructions take place at school. lyzed. In sum, the appropriation of media literacy involve media
Rather, the appropriation of media literacy is a hybrid practice that technology competence but even more importantly it encom-
involves multiple activities. We argue that there are social and passes verbal, embodied and social competencies that interact
cultural competencies that are specifically related to particular with and are integrated in the participant's cultural knowledge
media activities and the settings in which they take place. These about how to act in specific situations.

Appendix A

wo[rd ] Overlapping talk; square brackets mark the beginning and end
[word]
(0.8) (.) Numbers in parentheses indicate silence. A dot in parentheses indicates a micro-pause
., ¿? The punctuation marks indicate intonation. The period indicates falling intonation, the comma continuing intonation,
the inverted question mark slightly rising intonation and the question mark indicates rising intonation
word- A hyphen after a word indicates a cut-off or self-interruption
wo:rd Colon indicates prolongation or stretching of the immediately preceding sound
word Underlining indicates some form of stress or emphasis. The more the underlining the greater the emphasis
°word° The degree signs indicate that the talk between them was quieter than its surrounding talk
↑word The up arrow marks a sharp rise in pitch
o word4 Left/right carats indicate that the talk between them is slower than surrounding talk
4 wordo Right/left carats indicate that the talk between them is faster than surrounding talk
¼ Equal signs indicate no break or gap between the lines
hh Audible outbreath4
wo(ho)rd Laughter particles
(( )) Double parentheses are used to mark transcriber's descriptions of events
() Empty parentheses indicate that something is being said but no hearing can be achieved
*word* Asterisk marks that talk and embodied action occur simultaneously
*double
click*
MARGARETA Name in upper-case indicates adult
Max Name in lower-case indicates child

References
Bolter, J.D., Grusin, R., 1999. Remediation: Understanding New Media. MIT Press, Gee, J.P., 2010. New Digital Media and Learning as an Emerging Area and "Worked
Cambridge, MA. Examples" as One Way Forward. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Buckingham, D., 2007. Beyond Technology: Children's Learning in the Age of Digital Goodwin, C., 2000. Practice of seeing, visual analysis: an ethnomethodological
Culture. Polity Press, Cambridge. approach. In: van Leeuwen, T., Jewitt, C. (Eds.), Handbook of Visual Analysis.
Burnett, C., Merchant, G., 2013. Learning, literacies and new technologies: the Sage Publications, London, pp. 157–182.
current context and future possibilities, The Sage Handbook of Early Childhood Goodwin, C., 2003. The semiotic body in its environment. In: Coupland, J., Gwyn, R.
Literacy. Sage Publications, London, pp. 575–586. (Eds.), Discourse, the Body, and Identity. Palgrave/Macmillan, New York,
Erstad, O., Sefton-Green, J. (Eds.), 2013. Identity, Community, and Learning Lives in pp. 19–42.
the Digital Age. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Goodwin, C., 2013. The co-operative, transformative organization of human action
European Commission, 2006. Key Competencies for Lifelong Learning: a European and knowledge. J. Pragmat. 46 (1), 8–23.
Reference Framework. Directorate-General for Education and Culture. Retrieved Heinemann, T., Lindström, A., Steensig, J., 2011. Addressing epistemic incongruency
at 〈http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/education_training_youth/lifelong_ in question-answer sequences through the use of epistemic adverbs. In: Stivers,
learning/c11090_en.htm〉, 11 April 2010. T., Mondada, L., Steensig, J. (Eds.), The Morality of Knowledge in Conversation.
Furlong, J., Davies, C., 2012. Young people, new technologies and learning at home: Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 107–130.
taking context seriously. Oxf. Rev. Educ. 38 (1), 45–62. Heritage, J., Stivers, T., 1999. Online commentary in acute medical visits: a method
Gee, J.P., 1990. Social Linguistics and Literacies: Ideology in Discourses. Taylor & of shaping patient expectations. Soc. Sci. Med. 49 (11), 1501–1517.
Francis, London.
 P. Aarsand, H. Melander / Discourse, Context and Media 12 (2016) 20–31 31

Ito, M., Baumer, S., Bittanti, M., boyd, D., Cody, R., Becky, H.-S., Tripp, L., 2010. Mondada, L., 2007. Commentary: transcript variations and the indexicality of
Hanging out, messing around, and geeking out. Kids Living and Learning with transcribing practices. Discourse Stud. 9 (6), 809–821.
New Media. The MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts. Mondada, L., 2014. The local constitution of multimodal resources for social inter-
Jefferson, G., 2004. Glossary of transcript symbols with an introduction. In: Lerner, action. J. Pragmat. 65, 137–156.
G.H. (Ed.), Conversation Analysis. Studies from the First Generation. John Ben- Rogoff, Barbara, 2003. The Cultural Nature of Human Development. Oxford Uni-
jamins Publishing Company, Amsterdam/Philadelphia, pp. 13–31. versity Press, New York.
Jenkins, H., 2006. Convergence Culture. New York University Press, New York and Schegloff, E.A., 1996. Confirming allusions: toward an empirical account of action.
London. Am. J. Sociol. 102, 161–216.
Jenkins, H., Purushotma, R., Weigel, M., Clinton, K., Robinson, A.J., 2009. Confronting Statens medieråd, 2013. The Swedish Media Council. Ungar & Medier 2012/13,
the Challenges of Participatory Culture: Media Education for the 21st Century. Stockholm.
MacArthur Fundation. Skolverket, 2011. Curriculum for the Compulsory School, Preschool Class and the
Lam, W.S.E., Rosario-Ramos, E., 2009. Multilingual literacies in transnational digital Recreation Centre. The Swedish National Agency for Education, Stockholm,
mediated contexts: an explanatory study of immigrant teens in the United Skolverket.
States. Lang. Educ. 23 (2), 171–190. Street, B.V., 1984. Literacy in Theory and Practice. Cambridge University Press, New
Lave, J., Wenger, E., 1991. Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. York.
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Street, Brian V., 2000. Literacy events and literacy practices: theory and practice in
Leander, K.M., Lovvorn, J.F., 2006. Literacy networks: following the circulation of the "New Literacy Studies" (red.). Jones, K., Martin-Jones, M. (Eds.), Multilingual
texts, bodies, and objects in the schooling and online gaming of one youth. Literacies: Comparative Perspectives on Research and Practice. John Benjamins,
Cogn. Instr. 24 (3), 291–340. Amsterdam.
Lynch, M., 1990. The externalized retina: selection and mathematization in the Tholander, M., Aronsson, K., 2003. Doing subteaching in group work: positionings,
visual documentation of objects in the life sciences. In: Lynch, M., Woolgar, S. resistance and participation frameworks. Lang. Educ. 17 (3), 208–234.
(Eds.), Representation in Scientific Practice. MIT, Cambridge, pp. 153–186. van Deursen, A.J., van Dijk, J.A., 2014. The digital divide shifts to differences in
Marsh, J., 2003. One-way traffic? Connections between literacy practices at home usage. New Media Soc. 16 (3), 507–526.
and in the nursery. Br. Educ. Res. J. 29 (3), 369–382.
Melander, H., 2012. Transformations of knowledge within a peer group. Knowing
and learning in interaction. Learn., Cult. Soc. Interact. 1 (3–4), 232–248.