THE FORUMTESOL Quarterly invites commentary on current trends or practices in the TESOLprofession. It also welcomes responses to rebuttals to any articles or remarkspublished here in The Forum or elsewhere in the Quarterly.

TESOL and Media Education: Navigating OurScreen-Saturated Worlds

CARLA CHAMBERLIN-QUINLISKThe Pennsylvania State University, Abington CollegeAbington, Pennsylvania, United States

doi: 10.1002/tesq.7

& When I was first learning French as a foreign language, memorizinggrammar rules and decontextualized phrases was a central part of myexperience. From time to time an authentic language sample (newspa-per, magazine, or film) would make its way into the classroom, offer-ing a glimpse into the mysterious world where people actually usedFrench in their daily lives. Much has changed for todays languagelearners. The people, artifacts, and popular culture of a target lan-guage are often highly accessible to language learners and teachers,despite geographical barriers. This accessibility, of course, is possiblethrough mass media and electronic forms of communication. In par-ticular, the screens of movies, televisions, computers, billboard adver-tisements, and handheld devices saturate our lives with text andimages that tell us stories about people, places, and events around theglobe. What this means to language learning and teaching is that theonce-mysterious worlds of target language cultures can be evoked withthe mere touch of a button or screen. This is phenomenal. But withthis unprecedented accessibility comes serious questions about themedia we have at our disposal and about the role of media educationin the TESOL profession.

Not only do we need to pay attention to images of cultures as theyare packaged by mass media, but we need to understand how mediaenters into our profession and consider how we want to respond to it.Several scholar-practitioners have initiated a critical response todominant discourses in our profession by contesting representations

TESOL QUARTERLY Vol. 46, No. 1, March 2012

2012 TESOL International Association

152

of cultural ideologies in textbooks (Matsuda, 2002; Schneer, 2007;Taylor-Mendes, 2009) and challenging a native speaker/nonnativespeaker dichotomy (Amin, 1997; Braine, 1999; Kamhi-Stein, 2004;Kubota, 2009; Leung, Harris, & Rampton, 1997). Such critical perspec-tives frame English language teaching and learning through the lensesof power, race, identity, and politics and force us to question howmeaning and values are imposed on our practice (Benesch, 2001;Ibrahim, 1999; Kubota & Lin, 2009; Morgan, 1998; Motha, 2006;Phillipson, 1992). It is within this context of critical reflection that Iwant to broaden the conversation about the role of popular media inour classrooms. As Silberstein (2003) points out in her discussion ofmedia coverage of the O.J. Simpson trial in the United States, mediatell stories, often nuanced and contradictory, of how a culture viewsitself as an imagined community. Silberstein concludes that languagestudents should be able to apply a critical/contradictory lens to theirown cultures and to the imagined communities they might like tojoin (p. 328), adding that this kind of work requires investigatingboth positive and negative aspects of a culture and must be carriedout with an informed outlook and a gentle hand to open truly pro-ductive and insightful cultural discussions (p. 329).

In this forum, I propose media education as one way to develop thisinformed outlook and initiate conversations among language educa-tors and students. Media tell powerful stories about race, culture, lan-guage, identity, and power, and we must question the pedagogical,social and epistemological impact of media on language education.The media messages on which I focus (though not exclusively) in myown practice and in this forum include corporate-produced massmedia that saturate our environments through multiple formats (tele-vision, film, radio, print, websites, games, advertisements, etc.). I beginwith an introduction of media education as a way to create a publicsphere for discussion within the classroom. I then share some exam-ples of how media analysis engages students with language issues, andfinally I highlight several media-related arenas that merit further con-versation, debate, and research in TESOL.

WHAT IS MEDIA EDUCATION?

Media education refers to classroom practices in which studentsactively engage, both as critical consumers and as producers, with thestories conveyed by media. Media education does not necessarily sub-scribe to a single pedagogical approach but can draw on theoreticallenses from various academic disciplines in which media is examined(e.g., communication, journalism, anthropology, education, cultural

THE FORUM 153

studies, psychology, educational technology). Because the emergingfield of media studies offers such a wide range of perspectives andpossibilities, I follow Gees (2010) suggestion that scholars in thisfragmented area share ideas and offer working examples for criticalfeedback as we work toward common theories and models of practice.Thus, I present a working model of media education here thatmaintains a critical approach to second language studies as it bringsmedia literacy, critical media studies, and media ecology into ourpractice.

Media literacy refers to the development of skills to use traditionaland emerging media effectively, to the expanded use of multimodalliteracies, and to the ability to decode media and understand the mar-keting strategies behind their messages. Although one focus of medialiteracy involves helping individuals see through the profit-drivenforces of media production, Potters (2008) seminal textbook onmedia literacy argues for a balanced approach that acknowledges bothpositive and negative media effects and focuses on helping consumersto distinguish between the two. The term media literacy has also beenexpanded by scholars who frame it as part of a democratic processthrough which hegemony and social hierarchies can be challenged.Lewis and Jhally (1998) have argued that media literacy should beabout helping people to become sophisticated citizens rather thansophisticated consumers (p. 109). This more critical stance recognizesmedia as constructing realities with ideological, social, and politicalimplications.

Critical media educators are concerned with the ways in whichaudiences negotiate meaning with media and ultimately find ways toexpress identities that are not bound to strict and limited mediatedimages, but are discursively constructed through diverse relationships.In this perspective, Wyatt and Silva (2007) argue that the classroomcan become a place for public discussion and debate in which medi-ated images and stories are challenged. They concur with Habermas(1991) that the notion of the public sphere in which people oncedebated and talked about issues has been replaced by a mediatedspace in which issues and opinions are presented to the public forthe purposes of consumption. Media education can help to reclaim,in part, the public sphere within the classroom. Language learnersmay, for example, follow a public issue in a target language throughvarious media sources, gaining vocabulary and authentic languageuse along the way, but they may also contest these sources and talkabout the voices that are excluded or minimized. They might evenbecome producers of their own media as a response. In this way,media education provides a venue for language learners to challengemedia messages.

TESOL QUARTERLY154

I also view media ecology as a key component of media education.According to Lum (2006), Neil Postman was the first to define mediaecology as a way of studying complex communication systems in anattempt to unveil their implicit structures and impact on human per-ception, understanding, and feeling (p. 28). Marshall McLuhan(1964), also considered one of the founders of media ecology, claimedthat the medium is the message (p. 7), emphasizing that meaningcreated by the character of the form of delivery determines content.McLuhan said, Indeed, it is only too typical that the content of anymedium blinds us to the character of the medium (p. 8).1 In class-room settings, for example, the use of instructional software and man-agement tools may reorganize the presentation of ideas, influencepatterns of classroom interaction, and legitimize certain ideas andskills as more valuable than others. Likewise, outside of the classroom,electronic forms of communication continuously (re)shape socialnorms, (re)draw boundaries between public and private information,and (re)define an individuals participation in communities of prac-tice. Media ecologists vary on the degree to which they believe mediaenvironments impact or determine social organization, but many takethe moderate stance I adopt here that recognizes human agency as ameans of resistance.

HOW CAN WE BRING MEDIA EDUCATION INTOLANGUAGE CLASSROOMS?

In my own second language and intercultural communication class-es, students conduct media analysis within a hybrid framework thatincludes both quantitative and qualitative approaches. I draw on moretraditional media effects methodology to identify the consistency andfrequency of rhetorical and visual elements (Berger, 1998; Gerbner,Gross, Morgan, & Signorelli, 1994), and I turn to a critical studiesapproach to question the symbolic nature of media and producerconsumer relationships (Carey, 1992). After identifying their subjects,collecting samples, and transcribing discourse, students first conduct acontent analysis with a focus on linguistic and pragmatic features (syn-tax, vocabulary, grammar, amount of talk, interruptions, etc.) as well

1 Although Postman (1985) and McLuhan (1964) are best known for their commentarieson television, both scholars were concerned with various media. Postmans (1992) workquestions the effects of electronic discourse on society. McLuhan defines media as anyextension of ourselves (p. 7), and media scholar James C. Morrison (2006) notes,Although identified in the public mind with television, McLuhan was aware from thebeginning of the growth of computer networking and referred to it regularly throughouthis work, and only now can we appreciate the fruits of that awareness (p. 170).

THE FORUM 155

as nonverbal dimensions (appearance, artifacts, paralinguistic elementsof speech, etc.) and production elements (placement in scenes, timeon screen, physical context). Then, from a cultural perspective,students look at the characters again in terms of their social contexthow they live, what they do, with whom they interact, and so on(Chamberlin-Quinlisk, 2003). At this point students question screenportrayals as stereotypic, complex, damaging, flattering, or anything inbetween. These questions cultivate discussions of why certain imagesare appealing to audiences, how alternative representations are ormight be received, and how the nature of media shapes the kinds ofstories that can be told. Such hybrid approaches are recognized as use-ful for engaging students in analysis of media messages as well asexamining the economic, social, and political forces that shape mediacontent (Lewis & Jhally, 1998; Scharrer, 2002, 2007).

Once the critical analysis is completed, the ultimate goal of mediaeducation takes shape as students share their findings, concur andcontest interpretations, and create a space for public response. Thisresponse occurs at different levels. For some, it means speaking out inclass; for others, it involves responding in a public arena (blogging,proposals to school administrators, workshops for colleagues), indivi-dual creative productions (website development, short film), or socialresearch (surveying peers about media use and social attitudes). Inany case, using media as a starting point for discussions of identity,values, and social attitudes allows students to focus on fictional charac-ters as an alternative to sharing personal stories. The followingexamples offer a glimpse into the possibilities for student-generatedcritical analysis and response.

Laughable Images of Nonnative Speakers of Englishon Screen

Occasionally I ask students in English as a second language (ESL),applied linguistics, or intercultural communication classes to describeexamples of positive and likeable characters from popular media whoare portrayed as nonnative speakers of English. They quickly generatea list of characters from movies and television programs (U.S.-basedprograms dominate discussions in this teaching context), and thegenre is almost always comedy. From a linguistic viewpoint I ask themto select an excerpt of their choice and transcribe the language tocompare the speech of the nonnative and native speakers. Studentsoften find few errors, mastery of sociolinguistic norms, and excel-lent command of slang and cultural innuendo in the speech of the

TESOL QUARTERLY156

nonnative-English-speaking characters. They find this surprisingbecause these same characters are also portrayed as being linguisticallyincompetent. Accent and identity as a foreigner supersedes languageproficiency in how these characters are judged. And when we look atthe social roles of these characters, they are often subordinate to theirnative-English-speaking counterparts. Other characterizations that ariseinclude nonnative speakers of American English as disempowered (Rajin the sitcom Big Bang Theory, who is unable to speak in the presenceof females), stuck in menial jobs (Rosario the maid in the sitcom Willand Grace), unmotivated and irresponsible (Ula in the romantic com-edy 50 First Dates), and rarely shown in their own living spaces (Fez inthe sitcom That 70s Show). This is only part of a more complex repre-sentation, however. In comedy, these characters are also funny andendearing. So although some students are critical of the derogatoryimages, others have argued that its not so bad. One bilingual stu-dent, for example, said she liked the character Nazo in the Hollywoodfilm Big Daddy, despite his demeaning portrayal. She affiliated with thecharacters ethnicity and was relieved that he was not portrayed as acriminal (an image she said was too common). The ensuing class dis-cussion centered on the recognition of individual experiences as partof the interpretive process. As follow-up I asked students to find posi-tive media representations with which they connected individually, andour conversations about language and identity continued. They beganto think about whose voices were marginalized, essentialized, or invisi-ble on screen and realized that some people had to look harder thanothers to find positive representations with which they could affiliate.

Immigration and ESL in Print and Online

When a local newspaper ran a series of articles about immigration,a contentious debate arose in one of my teacher education coursesabout the role of media in shaping public opinion about immigrationand language learning. Some argued that the accusatory rhetoric ofthe headlines (Is an immigrant going to take your job?, Is ESLputting a strain on our schools?) was justified as a way of drawingattention to the issues. Others argued that it would only feed the fearsof those who felt threatened by immigrants. What grew out of thisdiscussion, in the form of a homework assignment to be shared in thenext class, was an informal investigation of how ESL is rhetoricallyframed in public media. Later in the semester, many of these in-ser-vice teachers wanted to find out more about public attitudes towardESL and surveyed non-ESL colleagues and community members. Theydiscovered consistencies between the attitudes in the surveys and the

THE FORUM 157

negative framing of ESL issues in the media. Although causality couldnot be claimed, the notion of media as symbolic representations thatwe impose on our environments to simplify and manage complexitiesbecame a point of discussion (Carey, 1992).

One student responded to our discussion of public images of ESLby examining the format in which information about ESL programs isconveyed through school district websites. She explored the problemof accessibility to technology, the visual layout, the content, and thediscourse used to describe policies and procedures. Additionally, shenoted the number of pages and links that had to be navigated inorder to access information. She concluded that access was challeng-ing not only for families, but also for teachers themselves. The formatdid little to encourage action or conversations among teachers, par-ents, and students. In the end, this student proposed alternative waysfor schools to communicate to invested community members, such asclass newsletters, phone calls, and personal invitations to school events.Incorporating a media ecology perspective, the student questionedhow the format itself impacts the limits of what messages can be con-veyed and whether a place exists for the target audience to respond tothese messages.

WHY DO WE NEED TO BRING MEDIA EDUCATIONINTO LANGUAGE TEACHING?

The extent to which media education should be incorporated intolanguage learning and second language teacher education depends, ofcourse, on students, learning contexts, and access to and interest inmedia. Having taught in many English as a second language andEnglish as a foreign language settings, both vocational and academic, Iunderstand that media may not be relevant in every teaching context.However, if we want to use mass media (films, video programs, etc.) inour classes, if we use articles and advertisements from print or elec-tronic sources, and if students are interested in using English in newmedia environments, then media education does have something tooffer. We may want to integrate media analysis into class assignments,rethink the cultural messages of the materials we use, or simply be pre-pared to talk about media with students in an informed way. In anycase, the decision to incorporate media education in class should notbe about imposing one specific critical ideology but about respondingto the contexts in which students are using or preparing to use(including teaching) English. In the end, it is up to students to wel-come or resist media education.

TESOL QUARTERLY158

We must also keep in mind that media education is not limited tothe examination of realia through the model of critical media analysisI present here, nor is it limited to examining representations of iden-tity in corporate-based mass media. Media education can address manyforms of technology (games, instructional software, YouTube, Twitter,Facebook, etc.) and the various ways in which these technologies com-municate ideas. Though far from comprehensive, the following listhighlights major themes that educators have begun to address andposes questions for further investigation and conversation.

Speaking With an Accent

All characters in films, television programs, animated videos, printedtexts, and even video games who have a speaking role convey powerfulmessages through not only what they say, but how they say it. Whencharacters have accented speech, this often becomes the critical mar-ker of their identity (Lippi-Green, 1997). Although popular mediainclude principal characters who speak English with an accent, thesedepictions are not always as positive as they seem. Often, there issomething foreign, exotic, or childlike (nave, innocent, or tempera-mental) about these characters. They may be likeable and attractive,but their status is inextricably woven into the fact that they are notnative speakers of English. When positioned with native-speaker char-acters, are nonnative speakers equally ambitious, creative, and success-ful? Do we see them mostly in their homes, with their families, or dothey appear most often in spaces that they do not own? If stable andrepeated media images do cultivate social attitudes (Gerbner et al.,1994), how might these mediated identities impact the professionallives of highly competent second language speakers? Likewise, how arethe variations of English spoken around the world represented in massmedia? Whose voices do we hear?

Accessibility and Local Ways of Knowing

Globalization has had a profound effect on language policy andpractice (Block & Cameron, 2002; Canagarajah, 2005), and massmedia that travels almost instantly around the world helps to shapethese processes. TESOL professionals work across the globe in enor-mously diverse circumstancesfrom high-tech media-saturated smartclassrooms to schools and communities with few electronic resources.The quality and quantity of available media resources vary greatly andmust be evaluated not only as products of the cultures in which they

THE FORUM 159

are produced, but also as commodities in the countries in which theyare distributed. In what ways does media distribution reflect power(e.g., commercial distribution, government control)? How do varyingdegrees of accessibility, from basic access to high-tech productiontools, impact users participation? How do imported media interactwith local viewers? How are media part of the activity of social life andunderstood as local practices (Pennycook, 2010)? Moreover, from amedia ecology perspective, we should question the epistemologicaltensions between local ways of knowing and globalized one size fitsall ideologies.

Electronic Discourse and Interactions

New media provide students with new ways of communicatingincluding communities with their own social norms and specialized lan-guages. We are now exploring the potential of media formats (texting,social networking sites, etc.) to increase accessibility to diverse dis-course communities (Abraham & Williams, 2009), and we must also askourselves how these formats impact expectations for language learnersparticipation in social communities, intercultural interactions, and pro-fessional contexts outside of the classroom. As electronic formats forgechanges in language, what role does such e-discourse play in languagelearners participation in interactions in English? How is the e-dis-course of social networking addressed in language teaching? Moreover,as new media cultures offer increased access to electronic publicspheres, questions of accessibility arise (Wodak & Koller, 2010), andlanguage learners opportunities for participation in these communitiesof practice constitute a rich area of investigation.

Language Learning and Social Climate

What we see in media may not always be a direct reflection of whatthe public wants, but the success of certain programming may indicateat least what mass audiences are willing to accept without much resis-tance. For example, an audience may be comfortable with a nonnativespeaker as a funny, nonthreatening, powerless character, but mightreact differently to the same character as an assertive, ambitious, orheroic individual. Reactions to media, often measured by profits, maytell us how comfortable people are with seeing minority characters inroles equal to their majority counterparts. In turn, we can ask our-selves how this level of comfort is related to public opinion about lan-guage learning, school policies, and immigration. When nonnative

TESOL QUARTERLY160

speakers on screen seem content with their subordinate roles andneed no further opportunities or education, does this reflect a largersocial climate in which exclusionary language and immigration policiesare supported? The nature of the symbolic relationship between massmedia and the culture in which it is produced is indeed multilayeredand dynamic (Carey, 1992; Silberstein, 2003), and exploring this rela-tionship involves, among other things, a critical examination of socialhierarchies and hegemony. Are such discussions limited to scholarlyjournals and teacher education courses? When is it appropriate andproductive to engage students in these conversations? In my experi-ence, media have provided a nonthreatening point of entry into dis-cussions of social climate by allowing students to focus on fictionalcharacters rather than personal experiences.

Definitions of Language Competency

A few decades ago, when definitions of communicative competencywere being debated, students were not texting and social networkingonline (OMG!), and new electronic formats for communication andlearning were not appearing at a startling rate. Media impact com-municative competency by continuously creating and renegotiatingnew forms of communication, social patterns, and norms of appropri-ateness. Kress and van Leeuwens (2006) theory of multimodal com-munication expands notions of competency by recognizing thatmeaning articulated by multimodal media resources is constructed atvarious levels and through various modes. For example, text, voice,music, film, and drawing can all combine and reconfigure to expressemotion and action. What difference do format and multimodalitiesmake in our definitions of competency? Are we teaching in an envi-ronment in which electronic media are the conveyors of truth?How do we validate and respect various modes of expression? Donew formats such as video games and graphic novels offer opportuni-ties for students to process information and engage in learning insocially relevant ways?

CONCLUSION

For some of us, questioning media and mediated stories in our livesis like questioning our own identities. Although most of us may find itquite easy to critique media that we do not like, the challenge is to cri-tique media we do likethe images and rhetoric that are intertwinedwith our memories, the class materials we have grown accustomed to

THE FORUM 161

using, the new technologies we embrace with enthusiasm. The screensthat saturate many lives today bring access to the once-mysteriousworlds of others, but these screens and the stories they tell also pres-ent constant new challenges to pedagogy. I marvel at the technologythat allows teachers and students to move into previously inaccessibleterritories and to produce their own responses to the world aroundthem, and I am hopeful that media education can guide us throughour ever-changing electronic landscapes.

THE AUTHOR

Carla Chamberlin-Quinlisk is an associate professor of applied linguistics/commu-nication arts and sciences at The Pennsylvania State University, Abington College.Her teaching and research focus on intercultural communication and the role ofmedia in language teaching.

REFERENCES

Abraham, L. B., & Williams, L. (Eds.). (2009). Electronic discourse in language learn-ing and teaching. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.

Amin, N. (1997). Race and the identity of the nonnative ESL teacher. TESOLQuarterly, 31, 581583. doi:10.2307/3587841

Benesch, S. (2001). Critical English for academic purposes: Theory, politics, and practice.Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Berger, A. A. (1998). Media research techniques. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Block, D., & Cameron, D. (2002). Globalization and language teaching. New York,

NY: Routledge.Braine, G. (Ed.). (1999). Non-native educators in English language teaching. Mahwah,

NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Canagarajah, S. A. (2005). Reclaiming the local in language policy and practice.

Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Carey, J. W. (1992). Communication as culture: Essays on media and society. New York,

NY: Routledge.Chamberlin-Quinlisk, C. R. (2003). Media literacy in the ESL/EFL classroom:

Reading cultural images and stories. TESOL Journal, 12(3), 3540.Gee, J. P. (2010). New digital media and learning as an emerging area and worked

examples as one way forward. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Gerbner, G., Gross, L., Morgan, M., & Signorelli, N. (1994). Growing up with

television: The cultivation perspective. In J. Bryant & D. Zillman (Eds.), Mediaeffects: Advances in theory and research (pp. 1741). Hillsdale, NJ: LawrenceErlbaum.

Habermas, J. (1991). The structural transformation of the public sphere: An inquiry intoa category of bourgeois society. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Ibrahim, A. (1999). Becoming Black: Rap and hip-hop, race, gender, identity, andthe politics of ESL learning. TESOL Quarterly, 33, 349369. doi:10.2307/3587669

Kamhi-Stein, L. D. (Ed.). (2004). Learning and teaching from experience: Perspectiveson non-native English-speaking professionals. Ann Arbor: University of MichiganPress.

TESOL QUARTERLY162

Kress, G., & van Leeuwen, T. (2006). Reading images: The grammar of visual design.New York, NY: Routledge.

Kubota, R. (2009). Rethinking the superiority of the native speaker: Toward a rela-tional understanding of power. In M. D. Neriko (Ed.), Native speakers revisited:Multilingualism, standardization, and diversity in language education (pp. 233247).Berlin, Germany: Mouton de Gruyter.

Kubota, R., & Lin, A. (Eds.). (2009). Race, culture, and identities in second languageeducation: Exploring critically engaged practice. New York, NY: Routledge.

Leung, C., Harris, R., & Rampton, B. (1997). The idealized native speaker, reifiedethnicities, and classroom realities. TESOL Quarterly, 31, 543560. doi:10.2307/3587837

Lewis, J., & Jhally, S. (1998). The struggle over media literacy. Journal of Communi-cation, 48, 109120. doi:10.1111/j. 1460-2466.1998.tb02741.x

Lippi-Green, R. (1997). English with an accent: Language, ideology, and discriminationin the United States. New York, NY: Routledge.

Lum, C. M. K. (2006). Notes toward an intellectual history of media ecology. InC. M. K. Lum (Ed.), Perspectives on culture, technology, and communication: Themedia ecology tradition (pp. 160). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.

Matsuda, A. (2002). Representations of users and uses of English in beginningJapanese EFL textbooks. JALT Journal, 24, 8098.

McLuhan, M. (1964). Understanding media: The extensions of man. New York, NY:McGraw-Hill.

Morgan, B. (1998). The ESL classroom: Teaching, critical practice and community devel-opment. Toronto, Ontario, Canada: University of Toronto Press.

Morrison, J. C. (2006). Marshall McLuhan: The modern Janus. In C. M. K. Lum(Ed.), Perspectives on culture, technology, and communication: The media ecologytradition (pp. 163200). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.

Motha, S. (2006). Racializing ESOL teacher identities in U.S. K12 public schools.TESOL Quarterly, 40, 495518. doi:2307/40264541

Pennycook, A. (2010). Language as social practice. New York, NY: Routledge.Phillipson, R. (1992). Linguistic imperialism. Oxford, England: Oxford University

Press.Postman, N. (1985). Amusing ourselves to death: Public discourse in the age of show busi-

ness. New York, NY: Penguin Books.Postman, N. (1992). Technopoly: The surrender of culture to technology. New York, NY:

Alfred A. Knopf.Potter, J. W. (2008). Media literacy (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Scharrer, E. (2002). Making a case for media literacy in the curriculum: Outcomes

and assessment. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 46, 354358.Scharrer, E. (2007). Closer than you think: Bridging the gap between media

effects and cultural studies in media education theory and practice. In A.Nowak, S. Abel, & K. Ross (Eds.), Rethinking media education: Critical pedagogyand identity politics (pp. 1735). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.

Schneer, D. (2007). (Inter)nationalism and English textbooks endorsed by theMinistry of Education in Japan. TESOL Quarterly, 41, 600607.

Silberstein, S. (2003). Teaching culture: Imagined communities and nationalfantasies in the O.J. Simpson case. Journal of Language, Identity, and Education, 2,319330. doi:10.1207/S15327701JLIE0204_6

Taylor-Mendes, C. (2009). Construction of racial stereotypes in English as aforeign language (EFL) textbooks: Images as discourse. In R. Kubota & A. Lin(Eds.), Race, culture, and identities in second language education: Exploring criticallyengaged practice (pp. 6480). New York, NY: Routledge.

THE FORUM 163

Wodak, R., & Koller, V. (Eds.). (2010). Handbook of communication in the publicsphere. Berlin, Germany: Mouton de Gruyter.

Wyatt, W., & Silva, K. (2007). Reviving a culture debating public through mediaeducation. In A. Nowak, S. Abel, & K. Ross (Eds.). Rethinking media education:Critical pedagogy and identity politics (pp. 116). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.

TESOL QUARTERLY164