Joint  Media  Engagement  and  Bi-­‐Directional  Television:  “Nana,  do  you  want  to  try?”  

   

Abstract:  Bi-­‐directional  television,  programs  that  engage  viewers  through  physical  responsiveness,  provides  a  new  medium  for  joint  media  engagement  that  incorporates  in-­‐room  contexts.  This  could  hold  promise  for  younger  learners,  particularly  as  children’s  media  research  has  demonstrated  how  intergenerational  screen  time  and  instructive  mediation  can  result  in  positive  outcomes.  This  case  study  investigates  the  experiences  of  two  children  and  their  caregivers  as  they  engage  with  an  episode  of  Kinect  Sesame  Street  Television.  The  findings  demonstrate  that  meaningful  interaction  between  a  caregiver  and  child  are  supported  by  (though  not  a  requirement  for)  physically  interactive  designs.  In  addition,  the  study  shows  that  as  young  viewers  gain  expertise  in  this  genre,  instructive  mediation  may  be  initiated  by  the  adult  OR  child.    

   Purpose  of  the  Study  The  role  of  children’s  educational  television  (TV)  experienced  a  revolution  in  the  1970s  through  the  production  and  growth  of  Sesame  Street,  with  research  indicating  that  the  traditional  Sesame  Street  television  format  produces  learning  gains  (Ball  &  Bogatz,  1970;  Bogatz  &  Ball,  1971;  Fisch  &  Truglio,  1991).  There  are  short  and  long  term  benefits  of  educational  programming  on  both  specific  knowledge  and  general  skills,  including  school  readiness  (Fisch,  2004).  In  the  1990s,  shows  like  Dora  the  Explorer  and  Blues  Clues  further  expanded  the  role  of  active  participation  in  educational  TV.  In  2012,  Microsoft  Studios  released  Kinect  Sesame  Street  TV  (KSSTV),  which  marked  another  paradigm  shift.  KSSTV  utilizes  the  Kinect  (a  motion  capture  Xbox  peripheral  device)  to  respond  to  a  viewers  physical  interaction  with  the  designed  system,  therefore  enabling  active  participation,  rather  than  simply  encouraging  it  as  would  a  standard  TV  show.    The  dialogic  nature  of  media  participation  does  not  simply  reside  between  the  media  and  a  single  viewer.  Media,  particularly  games  and  other  interactive  media,  can  serve  as  a  dialogic  catalyst  for  viewers  in  the  room  (Stevens,  Satwicz,  &  McCarthy,  2008;  Squire,  2011).  There  have  been  very  few  studies  on  the  nature  of  joint  media  engagement  (described  in  detail  below)  using  newer  forms  of  media,  particularly  between  young  children  and  caregivers.  This  study  queries  interactions  around  bi-­‐directional  TV,  with  its  blends  of  traditional  elements  of  TV  viewing  and  game-­‐like  activities  for  learning.  I  will  specifically  dig  into  the  nature  of  joint  media  engagement  through  bi-­‐directional  TV  by  asking,  what  kinds  of  mediation  does  the  parent  provide?  How  do  children  perform  their  knowledge  of  episode  content?  And  how  do  participants  engage  with  episode  segments  that  call  for  varying  amounts  of  physical  interactivity?        Theoretical  Framework  This  study  brings  together  work  regarding  the  socio-­‐cultural  connections  between  media  and  learning.  KSSTV  attempts  to  build  on  Sesame  Street’s  strongly  documented  educational  media  format.  Enabling  physical  interaction  may  impact  the  kinds  of  co-­‐participation  that  take  place,  particularly  between  a  young  child  and  adult.  Early  research  on  Sesame  Street  looked  at  the  role  of  coviewing  as  a  means  to  increase  educational  outcomes  (Reiser,  Tessmer,  &  Phelps,  1984).  

The  positive  outcomes  from  interacting  with  others  while  viewing  educational  TV  has  been  well  documented.  However,  particularly  as  media  participation  has  evolved  with  new  kinds  of  programs  and  delivery  platforms  (Squire,  2011;  Steinkuehler,  2007;  Jenkins,  2006;  Gee,  2007),  new  questions  about  the  nature  of  media  participation  emerge,  particularly  between  adults  and  young  children  who  stand  to  gain  developmentally  through  the  process.  Stevens  and  Penuel  (2010)  refer  to  the  broader  social  experiences  in  media  participation  as  “joint  media  engagement”  (JME),  which  refers  to:    

...spontaneous  and  designed  experiences  of  people  using  media  together.  JME  can  happen  anywhere  and  at  any  time  when  there  are  multiple  people  interacting  together  with  media.  Modes  of  JME  include  viewing,  playing,  searching,  reading,  contributing,  and  creating,  with  either  digital  or  traditional  media.  JME  can  support  learning  by  providing  resources  for  making  sense  and  making  meaning  in  a  particular  situation,  as  well  as  for  future  situations.  

 Joint  attention  and  meaning  making  is  not  a  new  concept,  and  arises  from  a  swath  of  disciplines  (Bruner,  1990;  Fiske,  1989;  Witehurst,  Falco,  Lonigan,  Fischer,  DeBaryshe,  Valdez-­‐Menchaca,  &  Caulfield,  1988).  For  a  young  child,  parental  mediation  can  impact  attention  placement,  and  thus,  impact  learning.  Styles  of  parental  mediation  were  originally  introduced  by  Valkenburg  and  her  team  (Valkenburg,  Krcmar,  Peeters,  &  Marseille,  1999),  and  included  “instructive  mediation,”  “restrictive  mediation,”  and  “social  coviewing.”  This  scale  has  been  used  and  adapted  to  demonstrate  rules  of  content  and  frequency  (restrictive),  sharing  the  same  space  but  not  engaging  in  talk/activity  about  the  media  (social  coviewing),  or  watching  and  talking  about  the  media  together  as  it  is  viewed  (instructive).  For  this  study,  I  focus  on  the  natures  of  social  coviewing  and  instructive  mediation  as  part  of  joint  media  engagement.      Methods  I  designed  the  original  study  to  provide  an  experimental  data  set  through  which  I  could  explore  emerging  themes  through  various  lenses  of  inquiry.  A  group  of  forty-­‐two  three  and  four  year-­‐olds  contained  a  mix  of  girls  and  boys  from  the  Seattle  area.  Participants  were  required  have  access  to  an  Xbox  360  and,  have  never  viewed  KSSTV  episodes,  and  be  proficient  in  English.  Data  was  collected  at  the  Microsoft  User  Research  Labs,  and  consisted  of  video  footage,  observation  notes,  pretests  and  posttests,  and  parent  surveys  (including  demographic  data).  Before  the  episode,  caregivers  were  encouraged  to  engage  with  the  child  during  the  episode  in  any  way  that  felt  natural  or  comfortable  for  them.  The  participants  came  to  the  lab  for  a  first  viewing,  returned  home  with  a  disc  of  the  episode  specific  to  their  group  to  be  played  over  the  next  two  weeks,  then  returned  to  the  lab  for  a  final  viewing.  Preliminary  observational  analysis  of  the  original  dataset  indicated  participants  interacted  with  the  media  in  diverse  ways,  which  warrants  deeper  investigations  not  only  in  the  child’s  engagement  and  participatory  practice,  but  also  in  the  ways  the  experience  shaped  their  demonstration  of  content  knowledge  (Rothschild,  Internal  White  Paper,  Microsoft,  2013).  In  considering  their  engagement  with  the  media,  individual  participation  cannot  be  easily  separated  from  the  larger  system  in  at  work  in  the  study  environment,  which  included  the  child,  the  media  (KSSTV  episode),  the  caregiver  in  the  room,  and  the  researcher  in  the  room  (Stevens,  Satwicz,  &  McCarthy,  2008).    I  am  now  using  an  instrumental  case  study  (Stake,  1995)  to  investigate  the  different  kinds  of  parent-­‐child  interactions  that  emerged  during  an  episode  of  KSSTV  in  order  to  better  understand  the  nature  of  caregiver-­‐child  joint  media  engagement  with  bi-­‐directional  TV.  Each  

case  is  bound  by  what  took  place  in  the  user  labs  during  both  viewing  sessions.  In  addition,  I  selected  specific  segments  from  the  episode  to  more  closely  investigate,  to  maximize  what  can  be  learned  from  different  kinds  of  interactions  and  interaction  designs.  The  two  cases  for  this  study  are  a  purposive  sample  based  on  observations  of  the  interactions,  selecting  one  case  for  high  parent-­‐child  interaction,  and  one  case  with  limited  interaction  both  between  parent  and  child,  and  child  and  media.  Segments  from  the  KSSTV  episode  include  a  highly  physical  interaction  design  (“Rainforest”,  throwing  activity  about  relational  concepts  with  Elmo),  and  an  element  with  no  physical  interaction  design  (“H”,  video  of  words  that  begin  with  the  letter  H).  This  study  is  limited  by  the  fact  that  the  study  took  place  in  a  lab  study  rather  than  in  the  child’s  natural  home/family  environment.  However,  I  have  tried  to  mitigate  this  in  the  selection  of  cases  that  show  a  variety  of  interaction.  The  cases  selected  will  still  be  able  to  demonstrate  a  range  of  engagement  activities  between  parent,  child,  and  media.    Data  Sources  and  Evidence  I  transcribed  video  data  of  the  playing  episode  synced  against  video  footage  of  the  room.  An  observational  protocol  helped  guide  the  transcription  of  activity,  including  questions  related  to  utterances,  gestures  and  physical  interaction,  and  posture.  Interpretations  are  based  on  the  observations  of  parent-­‐child  exchanges,  and  participant-­‐media  interactions.      Results  “The  Dance”  Ty  is  a  three-­‐year-­‐old  who  came  to  the  studio  for  the  first  visit  with  his  mother,  and  with  his  grandmother  for  the  second  viewing.  The  interactions  with  his  mother  and  grandmother  were  very  different,  in  part  because  of  the  difference  in  relationships,  but  in  part  by  his  demonstration  of  expertise  for  his  grandmother.  During  the  first  viewing,  he  and  his  mother  interacted  frequently,  with  his  mother  initiating  with  direction  and  cues,  and  Ty  initiating  with  laughs  and  “I  did  it!”  statements.  Physically  Ty  and  his  mother  demonstrated  meaningful  exchanges,  with  his  mother  participating  with  him  in  the  throwing  activities  (though  standing  off  center  so  Ty  was  still  the  central  agent  to  the  Kinect),  or  moving  back  to  the  chair  in  the  rear  of  the  room  to  offer  him  a  chance  to  demonstrate  independent  competence.  Ty,  on  the  other  hand,  would  jump  with  excitement  when  he  was  threw  Paul  Ball  successfully,  and  would  laugh  and  turn  to  his  mother.  At  times  her  praise  entailed  her  walking  up  and  touching  his  arm,  then  moving  back  to  the  seat.  It  felt  like  a  dance,  back  and  forth,  between  the  two  of  them.  With  his  grandmother,  his  demeanor  was  more  authoritative,  telling  her  to  try,  and  explaining  what  was  going  on  for  her.  “We’re  playing  catch.  See  those  two  trees  with  Elmo?”  he’d  say.  Or  “Now  it’s  your  turn.  You’ve  gotta  stand  up,  like  me  (See  Figure  1  on  the  next  page).”  He  demonstrated  not  only  content  knowledge  for  her  during  the  throwing  activity,  but  also  his  knowledge  of  the  structure  and  expectations  of  the  segment  design  (Crawley,  Anderson,  Santomero,  Wilder,  &  Williams,  2002).  Ty  was  the  initiator  of  most  interactions  with  “Nana”,  and  she  would  try  anything  he  asked  her  to  do.  In  this  dance  of  exchanges,  Ty  was  very  much  in  the  lead.    

Figure  1.  Ty  throwing  Paul  Ball  to  Elmo  in  the  Rainforest  segment  of  the  episode.    “The  Fidget”  Sophia  is  a  playful  three-­‐year-­‐old  dual  language  learner.  A  youngster  with  a  lot  of  energy,  she  spent  significant  time  moving  from  the  floor  by  the  researcher,  then  to  sit  with  her  father  or  drink  juice,  then  to  the  center  of  the  room  to  spin  and  swing  her  arms.  She  was  not  disruptive,  but  she  spent  considerable  time  in  both  viewings  with  her  eyes  not  on  screen.  The  Kinect  had  a  difficult  time  following  her  movements—sometimes  untargeted  motions  became  triggers  for  action  in  the  narrative  because  the  Kinect  registered  them  as  responsive  “throwing”.  For  much  of  the  time,  there  was  limited  conversation  between  Sophia  and  her  father,  save  for  the  occasional  “good  job”  or  “I  saw  you  throw  it,”  or  “don’t  you  want  to  throw  to  Elmo?”.  During  the  second  viewing  of  the  letter  H  segment  (showing  two  children  playing  in  an  outdoor  playhouse  and  highlighting  words  that  began  with  the  letter  H,  like  hook,  hat,  hose,  helping,  etc.),  Sophia  initiated  a  conversation  with  her  father  that  maintained  for  the  entire  segment,  continually  built  on  screen  content,  and  connected  her  life  to  the  context  of  the  narrative  (See  Figure  2).    Turn  #   Speaker   Utterance/Activity  1   Sophia   I  want  to  buy  that  house  2   Dad   You  want  to  buy  that  house?  3   Sophia   Yeah.  4   Dad   That’s  amazing.  I  like  that  house  too....  It’s  a  tree  house.  Do  you  know  what’s  a  tree  

house?  5   Sophia   Yeah.  Can  we  buy  the  tree  house?  6   Dad   We  can  get  some  tree  house  for  you  to  play,  Sophia.  7   Sophia   Because,  can  we  buy  that-­‐,  can  we  buy  that  home?  8   Dad   I  don’t  think  so.  9   Sophia   But  I  love  that  home.  10   Dad   You  love  that  home?  But  we  can  get  someplace  for  you  to  play  in  a  tree  house.  11   Sophia   But  I  want  to  take  my  friends  there  to  play  with  me.  12   Dad   You  want  to  take  your  friends  to  play  with  you  there?  Alright,  we  take  them.  (Sophia  

sits  quietly  watching  the  rest  of  the  clip  and  Dad  repeats  from  show)  H  is  for  home....    Figure  2.  Conversation  between  Sophia  and  her  father  regarding  episode  content.    Sophia  connected  the  media  content  to  her  own  life,  experiences,  and  desires.  The  exchange  with  her  father  moved  from  largely  “social  coviewing”  to  include  “instructive  mediation”  (Valkenburg  et  al,  1999).  Her  father  asked  clarifying  questions,  connected  to  potential  new  knowledge  (“tree  house”),  validated  her  desires  the  importance  of  her  social  relationships  as  

she  wanted  to  bring  friends  to  play,  and  reinforced  media  content  with  repeating  the  key  concept,  “H  is  for  home...”.      Scholarly  Significance  Bruner  (1990)  described  the  need  to  investigate  both  doing  and  saying,  paying  specific  attention  to  situated  action  –  “action  situated  in  a  cultural  setting,  and  in  the  mutually  interacting  intentional  states  of  the  participants.”  The  actions  and  intentions  of  caregivers  and  children  played  out  through  joint  media  engagement  at  the  Microsoft  Studios  while  watching  an  episode  of  KSSTV.  I  do  not  intend  to  make  causative  claims  about  the  nature  of  joint  media  interactions  in  bi-­‐directional  TV,  but  the  case  studies  represented  in  this  study  allow  me  to  make  assertions  about  participant  experiences  when  engaging  with  a  system  that  includes  the  media  and  individuals  in  the  room  (Stake,  1995).  Ty’s  case  demonstrated  how  the  interactivity  can  elicit  joint  physical  engagement,  but  that  the  “instructive  mediation”  can  take  place  with  the  parent  or  child  as  mediator,  particularly  as  the  child  has  the  chance  to  develop  their  own  viewing  expertise.  The  physically  interactive  components  of  both  cases  elicited  more  physical  engagement  between  the  child  and  the  media,  however,  one  of  the  more  in-­‐depth  conversations  that  connected  media  content  to  personal  meaning  took  place  between  Sophia  and  her  father  during  the  more  passive  video  about  the  letter  H.  These  findings  present  challenges  for  educators  and  media  designers.  Designed  environments  that  bridge  intergenerational  participatory  experiences  can  benefit  the  development  of  new  meanings,  particularly  for  young  children.  Designing  for  bi-­‐directional  TV  presents  a  new  opportunity  for  experience  that  goes  beyond  the  interface  and  elicits  meaningful  interaction  in  the  viewing  space.    References  Ball  S.,  &  Bogatz,  G.A.,  (1970).The  first  year  of  Sesame  Street:  an  evaluation.  Princeton,  N.J.:  Educational  Testing  Service.    Bogatz,  G.A.,  &  Ball,  S.,  (1971).  The  second  year  of  Sesame  Street:  a  continuing  evaluation.  Princeton,  N.J.:  Educational  Testing  Service.    Bruner,  J.  (1990).  Acts  of  Meaning.  Cambridge,  MA:  Harvard  University  Press    Crawley,  A.  ,  Anderson,  D.  ,  Santomero,  A.  ,  Wilder,  A.  ,  Williams,  M.  (2002).  Do  children  learn  how  to  watch  television?  The  impact  of  extensive  experience  with  blue’s  clues  on  preschool  children’s  television  viewing  behavior.  Journal  of  Communication,  52(2),  264.    Fisch,S.M.  (2004).  Children’s  learning  from  educational  television:  Sesame  Street  and  beyond.  Mahwah,  N.J.:  Erlbaum.    Fisch,  S.  M.,  &  Truglio,  R.  T.  (2001).  "G"  is  for  growing  :  thirty  years  of  research  on  children  and  Sesame  Street.  Mahwah,  N.J.:  Erlbaum.    Fiske,  J.  (1989).  Moments  of  television:  neither  the  text  nor  the  audience.  Remote  control:  television,  audiences,  and  cultural  power.  New  York,  NY:  Routledge  (56-­‐78)    Gee,  J.P.  (2007).  Good  Video  Games  and  Good  Learning.  New  York,  NY:  Peter  Lang.    

Jenkins,  H.  (2006).  Convergence  Culture:  Where  Old  and  New  Media  Collide.  New  York,  NY:  New  York  University  Press.      Reiser,  R.A.,  Tessmer,  M.A.,  &  Phelps,  P.C.  (1984).  Adult-­‐child  interaction  in  children’s  learning  from  Sesame  Street.  Educational  Technology  Research  &  Development,  32(4),  217-­‐223.    Squire,  K.  (2011).  Video  Games  and  Learning:  Teaching  and  Participatory  Culture  in  the  Digital  Age.  New  York,  NY:  Teachers  College  Press.    Stake,  R.  (1995).  The  art  of  case  research.  Newbury  Park,  CA:  Sage  Publications.    Steinkuehler,  C.  (2007).  Massively  multiplayer  online  gaming  as  a  constellation  of  literacy  practices.  E-­‐Learning  4(3),  297-­‐318.      Stevens,  R.  &  Penuel,  W.R.  (2010).  Studying  and  fostering  learning  through  joint  media  engagement.  Paper  presented  at  the  Principal  Investigators  Meeting  of  the  National  Science  Foundation’s  Science  of  Learning  Centers,  Arlington,  VA.    Stevens,  R.,  Satwicz,  T.,  &  McCarthy,  L.  (2008).  In-­‐game,  in-­‐room,  in-­‐world:  Reconnecting  video  game  play  to  the  rest  of  kids’  lives.  The  ecology  of  games:  Connecting  youth,  games,  and  learning  (pp.  41-­‐66):  MIT  Press.    Valkenburg,  P.M.,  Krcmar,  M.,  Peeters,  A.L.,  &  Marseille,  N.M.  (1999).  Developing  a  scale  to  assess  three  styles  of  television  mediation:  “Instructive  mediation,”  “restrictive  mediation,”  and  “social  coviewing”.  Journal  of  Broadcasting  and  Electronic  Media,  43(I),  52-­‐66.    Whitehurst,  G.J.,  Falco,  F.L.,  Lonigan,  C.J.,  Fischer,  J.E.,  DeBaryshe,  B.D.,  Valdez-­‐Menchaca,  M.C.,  &  Caulfield,  M.  (1988).  Accelerating  language  development  through  picture  book  reading.  Developmental  Psychology,  24,  552-­‐559.                    Cite  as:  Rothschild,  M.  (2014,  April).  Joint  media  engagement  and  bidirectional  television:  “Nana,  do  you  want  to  try?”  Roundtable  paper  presented  at  the  2014  American  Educational  Research  Association  Annual  Meeting  and  Exhibition.  Philadelphia,  PA.