Abstract:

The promotion of media literacy in universities is mostly targeted on students as the primary targeted group and emphasizes the progress especially of information literacy (e.g. Gapski & Tekstor 2009). It is often ignored that teachers as well as students have to catch up with media literacy unless it is conceived as competence in designing learning environments (see Mayrberger,2010;Wedekind, 2004). Although media are widely diffused neither teachers nor students are normally customized to use media in a self organized way useful for studying and learning. The integration of this field into academic courses is constrained by various factors such as lack of knowledge about the possibilities of using media or by well-rehearsed routines of lecturers and students. Beyond the microdidactic level, additional challenges have to be faced in planning and development of curricula which define media use on the level of the university’s strategy. Since the winter term 2011/12 the Faculty of Business & Social Sciences of Hamburg University of Applied Sciences (HAW Hamburg) responds to this challenge: qualification and increase in professionalism of lecturers and students especially in the field of (digital) media are in focus. The media curriculum will be implemented targeting centralized and decentralized elements of media literacy. (1)Basic offers are to qualify lecturers and students in media skills such as the use of computers, and they will be encouraged to attend media literacy workshops and trainings. These offers aim to initiate a reflexion of one’s learning or teaching habits regarding the potential of media use. Topics could be, for example, the management of work organization or the awareness on the limitations of media (see Grell & Rau, 2011, page 19; Reinmann, 2008). (2) autonomy to practice self-help in media issues is supported by media experts which provide advice. The virtual presentation gives insight into conceptional considerations before the implementation of the media curriculum and points out challenges posed by its implementation with the said department of the HAW Hamburg serving as an example.

References:
Gapski, H. & Tekster, T. (2009). Informationskompetenz in Deutschland. Überblick zum Stand der Fachdiskussion und Zusammenstellung von Literaturangaben, Projekten und Materialien zu einzelnen Zielgruppen. Düsseldorf: Landesanstalt für Medien Nordrhein-Westfalen (LfM).
Grell, P. & Rau, F. (2011). Partizipationslücken – Social Software in der Hochschullehre. Medienpädagogik. 21, 1–23.
Mayrberger, K. (2010). Web 2.0 in der Hochschullehre – Überlegungen zu einer (akademischen) Medienbildung für „E-Learning 2.0“. In B. Herzig, D. M. Meister, H. Moser & H. Niesyto (Hrsg.), Jahrbuch Medienpädagogik 8. Medienkompetenz und Web 2.0 (S. 309–328). Wiesbaden: VS.
Reinmann, G. (2008). Selbstorganisation im Netz – Anstoß zum Hinterfragen impliziter Annahmen und Prämissen (Arbeitsbericht Nr. 18). Augsburg: Universität Augsburg, Institut für Medien und Bildungstechnologie, Professur für Medienpädagogik.
Wedekind, J. (2004). Medienkompetenz an Hochschulen. In C. Brehmer & K. E. Kohl (Hrsg.), E-Learning-Strategien und E-Learning-Kompetenzen an Hochschulen (S. 267–280). Bielefeld: Bertelsmann.

Keywords:

Media Literacy.