Youth, Technology, and DIY: Developing Participatory Competencies in Creative Media Production
Abstract
Traditionally, educational researchers and practitioners have focused on the development of youths' critical understanding of media as a key aspect of new media literacies. The 21 st Century media landscape suggests an extension of this traditional notion of literacy - an extension that sees creative designs, ethical considerations, and technical skills as part of youth's expressive and intellectual engagement with media as participatory competencies. These engagements with media are also part of a growing Do-It-Yourself, or DIY, movement involving arts, crafts, and new technologies. The purpose of this chapter is to provide a framework and a language for understanding the multiple DIY practices in which youth engage while producing media. In the review, we will first provide a historical overview of the shifting perspectives of two related fields—new media literacies and computer literacy —before outlining the general trends in DIY media cultures that see youth moving towards becoming content creators. We then introduce how a single framework allows us to consider different participatory competencies in DIY under one umbrella. Special attention will be given to the digital practices of remixing, reworking, and repurposing popular media among disadvantaged youth. We will conclude with considerations of equity, access, and participation in after-school settings and possible implications for K-12 education.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Situated, game-like or DIY learning through design are just a few ways that global scholars describe online learning.
“Situated, game-like or DIY learning through design are just a few ways that global scholars describe online learning (Gee, 2003(Gee, , 2009;;Denner, 2011;Kafai & Peppler, 2011;Hayes & Game;2008).”
From Reclaiming and Learning Indigenous Languages on Social Media with Digital Activists: Insights from Lampung, Mayangna and Miskitu Youth (2020) · cites this paper as Kafai & Peppler, 2011
Cites
The Wealth of Networks: How Social Production Transforms Markets and Freedom
(2006) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.44-0999 · Cited by 1,903 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Constructionist Gaming: Understanding the Benefits of Making Games for Learning
Kafai, Y. B., & Burke, Q. (2015) · Educational Psychologist · doi:10.1080/00461520.2015.1124022 · Cited by 383 · see citing works
Self-citationDeveloping Computational Thinking with Educational Technologies for Young Learners
Ching, Y.-H., Hsu, Y.-C., & Baldwin, S. (2018) · TechTrends · doi:10.1007/s11528-018-0292-7 · Cited by 202 · see citing works
An Assessment Instrument of Technological Literacies in Makerspaces and FabLabs
Blikstein, P., Kabayadondo, Z., Martin, A., & Fields, D. (2017) · Journal of Engineering Education · doi:10.1002/jee.20156 · Cited by 119 · see citing works
Soleimani, A., Herro, D., & Green, K. E. (2019) · International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1016/j.ijcci.2019.01.002 · Cited by 31 · see citing works
Hinton, L. L., & Putra, K. A. (2020) · The Journal of Second Language Acquisition and Teaching (JSLAT) · doi:10.2458/jslat.2161 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
- Authors
- Kafai, Y. B., & Peppler, K. A.
- Affiliations
- University of Pennsylvania (US)
- Indiana University (US)
- Venue
- Review of Research in Education
- Published
- 2011-03
- Volume
- 35
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 89-119
- ISSN
- 0091-732X (ISSN-L)
- 1935-1038
- OpenAlex
- W2168761256
- Cited by
- 232
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 12 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 21 · 2017: 21 · 2016: 21 · 2015: 22 · 2014: 15 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 199.18
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Review of Research in Education (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Literature and Literary Theory › Literacy, Media, and Education
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Speech and Hearing › Digital Storytelling and Education
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Participatory Visual Research Methods
- Keywords
- youth, DIY culture, new media literacy, media production, remix, disadvantaged youth, computer literacy, content creation, after-school programs, K-12 education, access and equity
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review