Course Description

The course explores the interplay between the mass media and various facets of modern society, including political, economic, and cultural issues. An examination of media on a global scale will facilitate contrasts and comparisons of media systems, highlighting how media communication influences the quality of human life.

Course Objectives

The objectives of this course are integrated with the general outcomes of the graduate degree, MA in Communication. Upon completion of this course, you should be able:

1. to identify and review major historical and theoretical foundations in the study

of media communication as a discipline (philosophical base);

2. to critique existing media theories and research designs (research methods);

3. to appraise how meaning is mediated through the effective use of media

technologies and develop a heightened sense of media literacy

(communication skills, new technologies);

4. to evaluate mass communications from a Biblical perspective (Christian

ethics);

5. to examine the interplay between popular culture, cross cultural content and

the mass media, and analyze the implications of this interplay (theoretical

application, contemporary assimilation)

Texts

Baran, Stanley J. & Davis, Dennis K. (2003). Mass Communication Theory

(Third Edition). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

Postman, Neil (1985). Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of

Show Business. NY: Penguin Books.

Bradbury, Ray (1979). Fahrenheit 451. NY: Del Rey/Ballantine.

Requirements

1. Complete all readings as assigned and participate in class discussions and group activities.

2. Students will write a 4-5 page critique/response paper based on the book "Fahrenheit 451" Students should address two areas: First, critique the book in terms of storyline, character development, writing style etc. discussing what you liked and didn't like about the book as well as any other observations you may have. Second, specifically discuss Bradbury's view of the media and its impact on individuals and society.

3. Students will write a 4-5 page response to Postman, critiquing and analyzing his view of the media. Use of outside sources to bolster your critique is encouraged but not required.

4. Students will complete a group project that explores a current media issue and its relevance to today's society. The project should explore theoretical issues, practical applications and concerns, and Biblical responses. The project will consist of two components; a group paper (10-15 pages) and a presentation. The paper will consist of an introduction to the topic, a literature review exploring theoretical and research approaches to the topic, and recommendations for how research could be conducted by the group to further explore the topic. In addition, each group will present their topic to the rest of the class during the final class session. Group project topics must be approved by the instructor.

More information on these requirements will be given in class.

Grading

Class participation	35%
451 paper	15%
Postman critique	20%
Group project	30%

COM 610

ADVANCED MEDIA COMMUNICATION

MASTER OF ARTS IN COMMUNICATION

TENTATIVE CALENDAR

Session One

December 2

Preliminary Assignment:

Begin thinking about possible group topics.

Read Chapters 1 - 2 in Baran & Davis.

Bring a Bible.

Class Agenda:

Introduction to the course.

Lecture/Discussion on Biblical View of Mass Communication.

Lecture/Discussion on Media Communication.

Formation of Groups.

Link to Media Theology

Link to Ellul

Link to Theology Answer

Link to Baran and Davis 3-5

Link to Baran and Davis 6-9

Link to Baran and Davis 10-12

Session Two

December 9

Preliminary Assignment:

Read “Fahrenheit 451.”

451 paper due.

Read Chapters 3 - 5 in Baran & Davis.

Class Agenda:

Discussion of “Fahrenheit 451.”

Lecture/Discussion on Chapters 3 - 5 in Baran & Davis.

Approval of Group Project Topic.

Session Three

December 16

Preliminary Assignment:

Read Chapters 6 - 9 in Baran & Davis.

Class Agenda:

Lecture/Discussion on Chapters 6 - 9 in Baran & Davis.

Session Four (On-line)

January 13

Preliminary Assignment:

Read "Amusing Ourselves to Death."

Postman paper due. (This paper should be submitted electronically as an email attachment)

Class Agenda:

Participate in on-line discussion forum (Postman).

Note: Forum will open on 12/17 and run until the end of class on 1/13.

Session Five

January 20

Preliminary Assignment:

Read Chapters 10-12 in Baran & Davis.

Group preparation for presentations.

Class Agenda:

Lecture/Discussion on Chapters 10-12 in Baran & Davis.

Session Six

January 27

Preliminary Assignment:

Prepare group paper and presentation.

Class Agenda:

Present.

Group papers due.

A Brief Eclectic Reading List - Media Effects & Christian Critiques of Media

Andriacco, Dan (2000). Screen Saved: Peril and Promise of Media in Ministry.

Cincinnati, OH: St. Anthony Messenger Press.

* Babin, Pierre (1991). The New Era in Religious Communication. Minneapolis,

MN: Augsburg Fortress.

* Babin, Pierre, & Zukowski, Angele Ann (2001). The Gospel in Cyberspace:

Nurturing Faith in the Internet Age. Chicago, IL: Loyola Press.

* Berners-Lee, Tim (1999). Weaving the Web: The Original Design and Ultimate

Destiny of the World Wide Web by Its Inventor. San Francisco, CA:

HarperSanFrancisco.

*Birkerts, Sven (1994). The Gutenberg Elegies. New York: Fawcett Columbine.

* Briner, Bob (1993). Roaring Lambs. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing

House.

Bryant, Jennings, & Zillman, Dolf (Eds.) (1986). Perspectives on Media Effects.

Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

*Bryant, Jennings, & Zillmann, Dolf (Eds.) (1994). Media Effects: Advances in

Theory and Research. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

**Bryant, Jennings, & Zillmann, Dolf (Eds.) (2002). Media Effects: Advances in

Theory and Research (Second Edition). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

*Carey, James W. (1989). Communication as Culture: Essays on Media and Society. Boston, MA: Unwin Hyman.

* Chesebro, James W. & Bertelsen, Dale A. (1996). Analyzing Media. New York:

The Guilford Press.

Czitrom, Daniel J. (1982). Media and the American Mind. Chapel Hill, N.C.:

University of North Carolina Press.

* Ellul, Jacques (1985). The Humiliation of the Word. Grand Rapids, MI: William

B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

Forster, E. M. (1947). Collected Short Stories of E. M. Forster (The Machine Stops).

London: Sidgwick & Jackson Limited.

Gabler, Neal (1998). Life: The Movie. New York, NY: Vintage Books.

* Groothuis, Douglas (1997). The Soul in Cyberspace. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker

Books.

* Healey, Jane M. (1990) Endangered Minds. New York: Simon & Schuster.

*Hunt, Arthur W. (2003). The Vanishing Word: The Veneration of Visual Imagery in the

Postmodern World. Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books.

* Huxley, Aldous (1998). Brave New World. New York, NY: Perennial Classics.

Innis, Harold A. (1991). The Bias of Communication. Toronto: University of

Toronto Press.

Jeffres, Leo W. (1997). Mass Media Effects (Second Edition). Prospect Heights, IL:

Waveland Press, Inc.

Lewis, Tom (1991). Empire of the Air: Men Who Made Radio. New York, NY:

Edward Burlingame Books.

Lin, Carolyn A. & Atkin, David J. (2002). Communication Technology and Society. Cresskill,

NJ: Hampton Press.

McKibben, Bill (1992). The Age of Missing Information. New York: Random

House.

*McLuhan, Marshall (1962). The Gutenberg Galaxy. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

* McLuhan, Marshall (1999). Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man.

Cambridge, MA The MIT Press.

* Medved, Michael (1992). Hollywood vs. America. New York, NY:

HarperCollinsPublishers.

* Myers, Kenneth A. (1989). All God's Children and Blue Suede Shoes.

Westchester, IL: Crossway Books.

* Negroponte, Nicholas (1995). Being Digital. New York, NY: Vintage Books.

Ong, Walter (1967). The Presence of the Word. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota

Press.

* Ong, Walter (1988). Orality and Literacy. New York: Routledge.

* Orwell, George (1983). 1984. New York, NY: A Signet Classic.

* Pavlik, John V. (1998). New Media Technology: Cultural and Commercial

Perspectives (Second Edition). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

* Postman, Neil (1979). Teaching As A Conserving Activity. New York, NY:

Delacorte Press.

Postman, Neil (1992). How to Watch TV News. New York, NY: Penguin Books.

* Postman, Neil (1992). Technopoly. New York, NY: Alfred A. Knopf.

Postman, Neil (1994). The Disappearance of Childhood. New York: Vintage Books

Postman, Neil (1999). Building a Bridge to the 18th Century. New York: Vintage Books.

* Potter, W. James (2001). Media Literacy (Second Edition). Thousand Oaks, CA:

Sage Publications.

* Putnam, Robert D. (2000). Bowling Alone. New York: Simon & Schuster.

* Romanowski, William D. (1996). Pop Culture Wars. Downers Grove, IL:

InterVarsity Press.

* Romanowski, William D. (2001). Eyes Wide Open: Looking for God in Popular

Culture. Grand Rapids, MI: Brazos Press.

* Schultze, Quentin J. (Ed.) (1990). American Evangelicals and the Mass Media.

Grand Rapids, MI: Academie Books.

* Schultze, Quentin J. et al. (1991). Dancing in the Dark. Grand Rapids, MI:

William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

* Schultze, Quentin J. (1992). Redeeming Television. Downers Grove, IL:

InterVarsity Press.

* Schultze, Quentin J. (2000). Communicating For Life: Christian Stewardship in

Community and Media. Grand Rapids, MI: BakerAcademic.

Schultze, Quentin J. (2002) Habits of the High-Tech Heart. Grand Rapids, MI:

Brazos Press.

* Slouka, Mark (1995). War of the Worlds: Cyberspace and the High-Tech Assault

on Reality. New York, NY: Basic Books.

* Sommerville, C. John (1999). How the News Makes Us Dumb. Downers Grove,

IL: InterVarsity Press.

Sparks, Glenn G. (2002). Media Research Effects: A Basic Overview. Belmont, CA:

Wadsworth Thomson Learning.

Standage, Tom (1998). The Victorian Internet. New York, NY: Walker and

Company.

Stevens, Mitchell (1998). The Rise of the Image, The Fall of the Word. New York: Oxford

University Press.

* Stoll, Clifford (1999). High Tech Heretic. New York: Doubleday.

* Veith, Gene Edward Jr. (1994). Postmodern Times: A Christian Guide to

Contemporary Thought and Culture. Westchester, IL: Crossway Books.

Veith, Gene Edward Jr., & Stamper, Christopher L. (2000). Christians in a .com

World: Getting Connected Without Being Consumed. Wheaton, IL:

Crossway Books.

* Wallace, Patricia (1999). The Psychology of the Internet. New York, NY:

Cambridge University Press.

* Webber, Robert E. (1980). God Still Speaks: A Biblical View of Christian

Communication. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers.

*Winter, Richard (2002). Still Bored in a Culture of Entertainment. Downers Grove, IL:

InterVarsity Press.

*Wood, Andrew F. & Smith, Matthew J. (2001). Online communication: Linking

Technology, Identity, & Culture. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates,

Publishers.

* means the book is available in the LRC or the Seminary Library

** means the book is available as an e-book through the Bethel Library

Group Project Paper Guidelines

A research paper generally starts with a question exploring a relationship. For example, "Does watching violent programming affect children?" I would suggest that you explore a relationship your group is interested in or wants to learn more about (or even thinking long-term, what might make for a good thesis!).

Once a research question has been formulated, you can then start asking "What do we already know about this relationship?" This is where you'll dig into the research and find out what we already know. Further, you can ask "How has this relationship been studied?" which will tell you something about the methodologies that have been applied.

As you gather this information, you need to synthesize it and present it in a clear and concise fashion. Reinard in "Introduction to Communication Research" suggests several organizational strategies:

1. Known to unknown	Reviews literature by considering what is known separately about each variable in the research question and then announces what remains to be learned.

2. Deductive	Reviews literature by considering what is known in general categories followed by increasingly specific categories that are related to the topic.

3. Problem-Solution	A problem and its cause are suggested followed by a research suggestion that might solve the problem

4. Chronological	Studies are summarized in their order of publication from the oldest to the most recent.

5. Inductive	Study findings in a general area are summarized by producing general propositions that are demonstrated by each subcollection of them (studies are grouped by their findings).

6. Topical	Studies are summarized by reference to content categories into which the studies fall.

Once what is known has been presented, your task is to describe how you would further the study of your relationship. For example, after you synthesize what is known about the relationship between violent programming and children, propose how you would add to that body of knowledge. You may find conflicting evidence that you could test, you might find gaps that need addressing or you may even find that the knowledge about your relationship suggests an hypothesis that no one has tested before or a methodology that hasn't been tried. I only require you to tell me how you would add to the body of knowledge. I don't expect you to carry out that study. For example, if you find that violent cartoons have been studied in terms of their effects on children but that no one has really looked at how violent radio programming affects children, you could propose a course of research that would help address that gap in knowledge. Furthering the example, you might find that the vast body of research has been experimental and that you might want to try a focus group approach.

Participation Criteria for On-line discussion

1. There are two ways students can address a question on the Discussion Board:

Write an original response to the question including content from readings and speakers or personal experiences/examples. This can be done by going to the Discussion Board area of the course Blackboard site, clicking on the question to which you would like to respond, writing your entry in the text box, then clicking submit at the bottom of the page.
Respond to another person’s post. This response can agree or disagree, but must also include additional points to ponder or examples. You can respond to another person’s post by going to the Discussion Board area of the course Blackboard site, clicking onto the question, then clicking another person’s response (not their name or the e-mail window will appear). Read their post and formulate a response. Then click reply, write your response in the text box and click submit.

2. Postings will be graded according to the following rubric:

· "A" range - entry is complete and thoughtful and includes references to readings or class discussions/speakers. Students should also use appropriate grammar and spelling. This means that students should proofread postings before submitting them. Use of appropriate emoticons

" :)" or shorthand (LOL, BTW etc.) is allowed.

· "B" range and below - entry includes only opinion, doesn’t use any rationale from readings or class discussions, and/or responds to another person’s post by merely agreeing or disagreeing rather than adding anything to the other’s comments. Grammar and spelling indicate a hasty or less than well thought out response.

In addition to the "quality" dimension addressed above, participation grades will also be influenced by the "quantity" of postings each student submits. There is no set formula that says so many postings equals an "A" or so many a "B" etc. Rather, your participation grade will be based upon both quality and quantity dimensions. However, please note that I would rather have students emphasize quality rather than quantity. In other words, don't post just to post.

In addition to the above criteria, the final discussion grade will also include performance during the two face to face class sessions.