An honest tale speeds best, being plainly told (Richard III, Act 4 Scene 4): Media Literacy and the Role of the School Library

An “unreliable” source of inspiration

I was recently very intrigued and inspired by a docudrama that resonated with me as both a school librarian and an academic researcher. The film evocatively captured the power of historical misinformation, and demonstrated how individuals can become victims of manipulative storytelling, even centuries after their time.

The Lost King (2022) retells the story of amateur historian, Phillippa Langley, who challenged academics, scholars, and researchers in her efforts to find the lost remains of King Richard III, which were subsequently excavated from a carpark in Leicester in 2012, over 500 years after his death (Carson et al., 2018; Langley, 2023). Langley’s pursuit of historical truth led to a ceremonial reburial of King Richard III at Leicester Cathedral, but her journey, and the subsequent film narrative, has brought the legitimacy of the last Plantagenet king to intense public debate once again (Jennifer Harby, 2022; Vanessa Thorpe, 2022).

Richard III’s reign was marred by controversy. He was painted as a ruthless usurper responsible for heinous acts such as the alleged murder of his young nephews. However, historical re-evaluations have led to a more balanced understanding of the monarch, ascribing this negative portrayal to Tudor propaganda, perpetuated through narratives and accounts of his life thereafter. (Alexander, 2016; Leas, 1971; Warpole, 2005). 

It is challenging to pinpoint the very first cases of media misrepresentation in history, but Richard III could most certainly be described as a victim of the early forms of “fake news” that shaped public perception during his time, even to this day. With Johannes Gutenberg’s invention of the printing press in 1439, it became even more challenging to verify “real” news, and false reports could travel with greater endurance (Soll, 2016).Thomas More’s published History of King Richard III (1557) described the monarch as: ‘malicious, wrathfull, envious, and from afore his birth, ever frowarde.’ He reported that Richard was deformed and had a difficult birth, born feet first and with teeth (The British Library, 2023).

More’s graphic accounts became a source of inspiration to Shakespeare (Myers, 1968; The British Library, 2023) who wittingly dramatized Richard’s villainy and in 1623, Shakespeare’s First Folio was printed ensuring the play, and Richard’s reputation, lived on to the present day. 

Critical scepticism of these documentations ensures that Richard III will continue to develop a devoted contemporary fan base, but Myers (1968) signalled that most will continue to perceive the historical figure as a malevolent, murderous, hunchback as “Shakespeare’s spell ensures the immortality of the hostile Tudor tradition.”

In an interesting interplay of connections, the school library I manage is called The More Library, honouring the very figure accused of spreading false stories about King Richard III. The library currently serves as a repository of knowledge for our students, and the irony of this connection is hard to overlook. Even more intriguing, our school’s archives is home to a copy of Shakespeare’s First Folio. Only 235 copies are known to have survived with 50 books held in UK collections. It is hard to say whether the truth about Richard III will ever be properly unearthed, but the stories have certainly stood the test of time. Having the opportunity to turn the pages of this historical manuscript evoked in me an admiration for its literary resilience.

This led me to contemplate parallels with our contemporary landscape, where media and technology now also wield significant influence on our understanding of the world. Fake news and misrepresentation have clearly been around for centuries, but I find myself reflecting on the modern-day responsibilities of the library and the importance of critical thinking, not just in terms of the information students encounter, but also in the information they produce. It must transcend the traditional role of providing academic resources; it should inspire them to cultivate a future marked by genuine, transparent, and credible representations in the media. So, as we nurture new thinkers akin to Thomas More and Shakespeare, how can libraries promote honesty, integrity, and authenticity?

This narrative literature review aims to delve deeper into these themes, mapping the field of the role of school libraries in media literacy education today. 

Media Literacy Today

Historically, professional librarians have played a key role in advocating and supporting information literacy in schools (ALA, 1989; CILIP, 2018; Melnick, 1967). But in a time of “radical change” and “information disorder” (McDougall, 2021; O’Connell, 2018; Wine, 2016) is information literacy still enough or do we need to teach a new skill set to make sense of it all?

A report produced for UNESCO in 2008 positioned Information Literacy as the highest order communication skill and the term was used to describe the ability to identify an information need, the capability to locate, retrieve, evaluate, and use information, and respecting intellectual property in communicating information and knowledge (Catts & Lau, 2008). Media literacy also featured in this framework but, with a separate skillset involving practical ICT skills and analysing specific media messages.

Recently, information literacy and media literacy have become more tightly interwoven as media users now engage and interact with the information that they encounter online (DCMS, 2021b; De Abreu, 2019). Subsequently, there is an emphasis on the need to upskill users as the digital world becomes increasingly entwined with the physical one (DCMS, 2021b)

It is useful to observe how UNESCO later acknowledged overlapping skills in an increasingly networked world, and merged information and media literacy with further literacies under the new umbrella term of “digital literacy” describing it as the ability to “define, access, manage, integrate, communicate, evaluate and create information safely and appropriately through digital technologies and networked devices for participation in economic and social life. It includes competences that are variously referred to as computer literacy, ICT literacy, information literacy, data literacy and media literacy.” (2018, p.21).

The Digital Competence Framework for Citizens (DigComp 2.2) expanded on this, highlighting five specific competence areas. It encompassed not only the analysis and interaction with information but also the creation, management, and safeguarding of content (Vuorikari et al., 2022).

In line with this, Grisham (2021) blogged that digital literacy also seeks to enhance our comprehension of the tools and technologies that govern and impact the information we encounter. As we see the rise of data-driven automated technologies, there is the possibility of a continuously expanding list of competencies including understanding algorithms, artificial intelligence, deep learning, and the further technological strides of the future (Head et al., 2020; Ridley & Pawlick-Potts, 2021; Selwyn, 2022). Scholars have therefore argued that the concept of “literacy” needs to be reframed to encompass the ever-changing nature of literacy practices (Courtney et al., 1996; Gillen et al., 2010; Lankshear & Knobel, 2011). Potter and McDougall (2017) propose that we think of literacies as “dynamic” rather than static and that we need to be flexible and adaptable in our approach to teaching these skills.

Belinha De Abreu, the President of the International Council for Media Literacy, emphasizes that critical thinking continues to be at the core of media literacy (De Abreu, 2019). She argues that critical media literacy is essential to address the emergence of new digital inequalities and disadvantages, just as Jeff Share and Doug Kellner debated its importance for social justice and democracy in their recent Mediacy podcast (Share & Keliner, 2021). Similarly, The Chartered Institute of Library and Information Professionals (CILIP) in the United Kingdom also highlight the importance of critical thinking and an understanding of the ethical and political implications of using any type of information, including text, images, videos, and audio (CILIP, 2018) suggesting that information literacy and media literacy remain very much aligned.

It is perhaps most important to note that, whilst competencies merge and overlap and terminologies evolve, these schools of thought are all driven by the overarching aim of supporting children and young people to navigate the modern, technologically driven world. If we must label it, Professor Sonia Livingstone’s definition of media literacy concisely encompasses the need for traditional critical thinking skills in information consumption, and also in media production activities, stating that media literacy is ability to access, analyse, evaluate, and create messages across a variety of contexts (Buckingham, 2004; Livingstone, 2004). But are we embedding this media literacy in a meaningful and effective way in our schools today?

Media Literacy Education in UK Schools Today

In many parts of the world, media literacy is fast becoming a mandatory part of the school curriculum, but not in the United Kingdom (McDougall, 2022). The Online Media Literacy Strategy (DCMS, 2021b) has been recently introduced with the aim of promoting safe online behaviour among children and young people, highlighting the importance of critical evaluation skills (The National Literacy Trust, 2021) but it is not compulsory for schools in the United Kingdom to implement this strategy. It highlights how younger children are less able to judge information based on factors such as context and relevance, and older children are particularly vulnerable to harmful content which can contribute to mental health problems and low self-esteem (Byron, 2008).

In line with this, Keeping Children Safe in Education Guidance (Department for Education (DfE), 2015; Gov.UK, 2018) has placed further emphasis on educators being aware of the online threats our young people encounter, alongside safer internet provision in schools. Some secondary schools deliver this through non-statutory Personal, Social, Health and Economic (PSHE) education lessons, or through statutory Relationships and Sex Education (RSE) lessons (Department for Education (DfE), 2021). However, in a small-scale study, Davies & Matley (2020) indicated that teachers do not always feel knowledgeable about the topics they are expected to discuss with pupils. They rely on subject leaders training them on effective teaching about issues such as internet safety (Davies & Matley, 2020; The All-Party Parliamentary Group on Media Literacy, 2022) and can access accredited materials such as videos and worksheets to support the curriculum (DCMS, 2021b; Department for Education (DfE), 2015, 2021; National Literacy Trust, 2018). Discussing his own experiences as an educational leader, Bromley (2019) explained that PSHE resources could quickly become out-dated and disjointed, he clearly felt the subject required a more holistic approach. Furthermore, Bromley (2019) suggested that teachers don’t always see the subject as their responsibility saying: “they were teachers of English, math, science and so on, but not teachers of PSHE” and topics discussed with young people in PSHE therefore become compartmentalised.

School assemblies can also be a way to deliver PSHE lessons, with external speakers presenting on specialist topics offering both benefits and challenges (Percy et al., 2019; The PSHE Association, 2019). Livingstone (2018) criticized the use of corporate-sponsored programmes, arguing that media education should be embedded within the curriculum, evaluated in terms of learner outcomes, and not in measures of reach. In her blog post, she agreed that media literacy is indeed critical thinking and ideally should be taught across all subjects.

The UK government maintains that media literacy is taught across the national school curriculum, particularly through the Computing and Citizenship curricula (Committee, 2019). Polizzi and Pagliarello (2021) agree that media education is delivered through some subjects such as English, History, and Mathematics, encouraging students to use digital technologies safely and responsibly and to develop their critical thinking skills. However, the pressure to perform well in school may make it difficult for teachers to justify deviating from the prescribed curriculum to teach media literacy (Ball, 2013).

Despite this, it is reported that 90% of teachers do want media literacy to be included in the curriculum (The All-Party Parliamentary Group on Media Literacy, 2022) and this suggests that a compulsory, standalone media education course, with specialist teachers could provide the solution. Media studies does exist as a qualification-based subject but is only an optional subject taken by a minority of UK students at GCSE and A-level.

It is argued that it should be introduced for all (Buckingham, 2004; Cannon et al., 2022; McDougall, 2019; Polizzi & Pagliarello, 2021) but in a format that goes beyond simply teaching about epistemology, such as the Theory of Knowledge (TOK) course, a compulsory component of the International Baccalaureate (IB) qualification offered in many international schools which teaches critical thinking skills and reflective learning (Cole et al., 2015; Eskelinen, 2018).  There is potential for Media Studies to be revolutionary, but it needs to be in the centre of the school curriculum (McDougall, 2019).

Not a solutionist approach!

Another problem is, media education in schools is often seen simply as a tool to tackle a plethora of social problems (McDougall, 2019) such as obesity, eating disorders, bullying, grooming, radicalisation etc. Globally, there is growing debate over the internet being a powerful educational tool, but also a socio-cultural threat (Livingstone et al., 2017; Milosevic et al., 2022; Northwestern University, 2013). In Norway especially, where children spend more time using the Internet than in other European countries, concerns are raised over the negative effects of the media on physical and mental health (Milosevic et al., 2022). Similarly, in the United Kingdom, the Covid-19 pandemic led to increased reliance on digital technology for education and, in turn, intensified worries about its implications for young people’s well-being (Cox & Brewster, 2022; DCMS, 2021b; Kim & Yang, 2022; Milosevic et al., 2022; The ACRL Research Planning and Review Committee, 2020). These anxieties about the negative effects of media consumption have led to calls for media detoxification and zero-risk policies and some schools even implement ban measures during the whole or part of the school day (Byron, 2008; Ravalli & Paoloni, 2016).

In terms of screen time, the Goldilocks hypothesis suggests that getting the right balance is most useful for children’s health and well-being (Milosevic et al., 2022; Przybylski & Weinstein, 2017). In contrast to digital minimalism, it is argued that children should be proactively encouraged to engage in online activities and develop digital skills, providing positive development opportunities in accessing, analysing, evaluating, and creating messages across a variety of contexts. (Buckingham, 2004; Livingstone, 2004, 2008).

In other words, as educators, we should help pupils to gain a critical understanding of the media, to help them identify fake news, misinformation and bias (Bulger & Davison, 2018; Head et al., 2020; Lee, 2018; McDougall, 2019), but also inspire them to use digital technologies creatively (Burton et al., 2022; Cannon, 2016; Cannon et al., 2018, 2022; Livingstone, 2004; The All-Party Parliamentary Group on Media Literacy, 2022; The Durham Commission, 2019).  In an engaging Mediacy podcast, David Gauntlett, advocates for media-making (Gauntlett, 2021) stating that “making is connecting” and that a maker-curriculum nurtures critical thinkers.

In fact, it is a child’s legal right to be allowed to engage with media-based activities in order to fully participate in society: “The child shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any other media of the child’s choice.” (Cannon et al., 2022; Livingstone, 2019; UNCRC, 1989).

Of course, we know that children do use the media creatively, but mostly at home. Research carried out by multiple agencies as part of the Global Kids Online initiative, identified that globally, school is not usually the place where young people engage and interact with the media (Livingstone et al., 2015). Consistent with cross-national research findings, a study in Asia (Bulger & Burton, 2020) explained that children primarily use media products at home, for information-seeking, communication, and entertainment. Similarly, in a study carried out in Portugal (Dias & Brito, 2021), children interviewed discussed how they enjoyed creating multimedia content, but not particularly in a school-like setting. They also reported the appeal of “learning-by-doing”, particularly related to simulation games and applications. Likewise, in Asia, children participate in online chat groups and in games, and in the generation of content, including YouTube channels (Bulger & Burton, 2020) and the internet plays an important role in the social & cultural Identity of many young people. In a study of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children, it was described as a central place for meeting people, as a source of information and as an outlet for creative expression. (eSafety Commissioner, 2022).

In line with this, Potter and McDougall (2017b) advise educators to be more ambitious with pedagogy and learning in digital media culture, and that it should align more closely with pupils’ out-of-classroom interests and experiences. Subramaniam (2016) explained that young people today see themselves as “producers” of knowledge as much as “consumers” of knowledge, and that a participatory culture in education has the potential to be transformative, connecting informal and formal learning for greater academic outcomes. In concurrence, Canon et al. (2022) evidenced how sustained media production projects in school are integral to media education because they allow students to express themselves creatively using and, at the same time, giving them a sense of ownership and responsibility. This points towards a need for connected learning opportunities across home, school, community, and peer contexts (Mizuko et al., 2013) and there is a growing belief that libraries could be the perfect backdrop for this (Bilandzic, 2016; DCMS, 2021b; Mizuko et al., 2013; Subramaniam, 2016; The Libraries Taskforce, 2018).

Third Space Learning & School Libraries

School libraries are being identified as “third spaces” in which experiential learning (Kolb & Kolb, 2022) can be facilitated; a space that is neither the home nor the classroom but can generate meaningful connections between them both (Bruxvoort, 2016; McDougall, 2021; Subramaniam, 2016).

The term “third place” (now often referred to as “third space”) was introduced by Ray Oldenburg in his book The Great Good Place (Oldenburg, 1989). Oldenburg wrote that people flourish within a combination of three social spaces: the first place of home, the second of workplace or classroom, and a third that represents a person’s informal life. Coffee shops, parks, museums, are amongst those classically defined places by Oldenburg as third places, with a special set of characteristics.

Evidence shows that public libraries (Subramaniam, 2016) and higher education libraries (Bruxvoort, 2016; Pinfield, 2001; The ACRL Research Planning and Review Committee, 2020) are progressively implementing this model and the benefits are often aligned with well-being and inclusion (Bruxvoort, 2016; Korodaj, 2019; Raffaele, 2021). It involves promoting a welcoming, open, and accessible space that offers patrons a feeling of belonging (Bruxvoort, 2016; Raffaele, 2021).

In schools, this also relies on libraries evolving from being places of books and quiet study to being diverse learning facilities (Holzweiss and Evans, 2018). It means relaxing the rules and using the library for non-academic purposes, such as student-led clubs, makerspaces, and creative workshops etc. (Besson, 2018; Bruxvoort, 2016; Child, 2018; Raffaele, 2021). The ‘third space’ environment of the school library can provide a safe space for pupils to try out new skills and take on new responsibilities, promoting critical thinking skills, problem solving and self-confidence (Child, 2018; Korodaj, 2019). In his famous Ted Talk, Sir Ken Robinson encouraged this approach to pedagogy stating: “we need to educate our children for unpredictability…if you’re not prepared to be wrong, you’ll never come up with anything original” (Robinson, 2015). This was an influential call for creative learning environments.

It is argued that this third space environment in the school library can act as a hyperlink between the home and the classroom (Bilandzic, 2016; Korodaj, 2019), helping young people to explore connections between their lived experiences and the curriculum they are being taught in the classroom (Erstad et al., 2007; Potter & McDougall, 2017b). In simpler terms, the school library can offer resources, programs and activities that are relevant to students’ interests but develop skills that can be used positively in the classroom.

This poses a great opportunity for the development of practical media and information skills in the library, with the potential for libraries to design programs and activities aligned with student’s abovementioned creative digital media interests. Not only this, the International Association of School Librarianship (IFLA) School Library Guidelines (Schultz-Jones & Oberg, 2015) state that a library should be a “physical and digital learning space where reading, inquiry, research, thinking, imagination, and creativity are central to students’ information-to-knowledge journey and to their personal, social, and cultural growth” (p16), and should provide “a diverse range of technology tools, software, and expertise for the creation, representation, and sharing of knowledge” (p17), with the aim “to develop information literate students who are responsible and ethical participants in society” (p7). This suggests that it is a librarian’s duty to provide students with media-related learning opportunities.

With evidence demonstrating that an experiential approach is most successful in environments beyond the confines of the structured classroom (Erstad et al., 2007; Subramaniam, 2016) are school libraries fulfilling their potential?

There is evidence of some direct guidance and advice to support librarians in the development and implementation of media production initiatives (Hobbs et al., 2012; Maxwell, 2020) but it is challenging to find any literature which discusses the extent to which they are being implemented and the outcomes of these library-based initiatives in terms of critical media literacy. At ground-level, there does not seem to be much related discussion in the professional communities of practice in the United Kingdom.  There isn’t a clear picture of whether we are fully embracing this opportunity.

What is stopping us?

In some parts of the world, school libraries are making technology more readily available, for example, in the United States, Canada, Australia, and Denmark school library facilities are more commonly referred to as media centres. Most school librarians are degree certified and identify as “Teacher-Librarians” or “School Library Media Specialists” (Barnett, 2015; Johnston, 2015; Kapanka, 2021; Oberg, 2009) usually having a teaching degree along with professional library qualifications and can run the library at a technical level.  (Marca, 2021; M. Merga, 2021; Oberg, 2009).

However, in the United Kingdom school libraries are reported to be underfunded and place more focus on reading for pleasure. Here they are often managed by staff who were unqualified or carrying out conflicting roles in school e.g. a teaching assistant running the school library ((All Party Parliamentary Group (APPG), 2014; Great School Libraries, 2019; Martineau, 2010; Teravainen & Clark, 2017; Wanless et al., n.d.).

The All Parliamentary Group (2014) highlighted the fact that there is no statutory requirement for schools in the United Kingdom to have a dedicated library space and similar studies show that there is a lack of evaluation of the quality of school libraries in Ofsted inspection reports (Shenton, 2007). Therefore, libraries within mainstream schools in the UK remain very much unregulated and vary in form, there are inconsistencies in school library provision across different local education authorities (Gildersleeves, 2012).  There is less written about library regulation in independent schools in the UK but the APPG report (2014 p.20) explained that “The International Baccalaureate Organisation requires any school it endorses for the International Baccalaureate Diploma to have a library and expects a qualified librarian to play a role in teaching information skills” but there are currently just 80 schools offering the IB curriculum to global students studying here in the UK. There is currently a total of 32,163 schools in the UK (BESA, 2022).

Despite this, grey literature strongly advocates the role of school libraries in the United Kingdom. The positive impact they have on pupil’s academic attainment and personal wellbeing has been well documented (Clark & Teravainen-Goff, 2018; Softlink, 2022) and it is acknowledged that school libraries also play a valuable role in raising standards of lifelong literacy, information literacy and reading skills  (School Library National Advisory Group, 2018; Softlink, 2022; Teravainen & Clark, 2017; The National Literacy Trust, 2010). However, there is a tradition of misconceptions about the role of the school librarian (Luthmann, 2007; Roper, 2019) and meeting the needs of today’s students can be challenging without the confidence and support of the wider school community (Gildersleeves, 2012; Hartzell, 2002; M. K. Merga, 2019).

The way forward…

In his Richard III play, Shakespeare’s words “An honest tale speed best, being plainly told” suggest that truth and simplicity are often the most powerful ways to communicate. However, the literature review reveals that, in today’s complex media landscape, media literacy involves much more than consuming information in a passive way. It also involves understanding how media messages are constructed and conveyed, and how they can be used to inform, persuade, or entertain. It is also evident that the library environment has the potential to offer great opportunities for students to put this into practice for good purposes, in preparation for the future (Holzweiss & Evans, 2018). Libraries can be more responsive than set curricula, and librarians are adept at evolving. That is our unique selling point!

However, there isn’t a one-size-fits-all approach for school libraries to adopt when looking to develop media literacy programmes. As highlighted, school libraries vary in presentation, funding and staffing, and the specific needs of pupils also vary from school to school (Clark & Teravainen-Goff, 2018; Teravainen & Clark, 2017; Wood et al., 2020). Whilst it is also evident that children around the world are benefiting from using digital media, the specific opportunities, and risks that they experience depend on their own unique contexts (Livingstone et al., 2015; Milosevic et al., 2022).

Therefore, we should consider all these contributing factors to develop effective media literacy interventions. The EU Kids Online (revised model) is a framework primarily designed for researching children’s online risks and opportunities but could also be used to support tailored intervention design (Livingstone et al., 2015).

To better understand the specific needs of our individual school settings, we must engage in conversation and collaboration with the wider school community, the pupils, teachers, senior leaders, pastoral and safeguarding teams. It is important to cultivate a safe, third space environment in which they can explore these issues of significance.

In other words, the impact of any library intervention could be maximized when the pupils’ direct needs are considered, regardless of the budget or the level of elaboration. The range of media production opportunities that librarians can facilitate is extensive, from creating library news stories for social media to the creation multimedia book and video game reviews, podcasting, or film-making clubs (Bryan M. Jenkins, 2022; Cannon, 2016; Maxwell, 2020; Parsons, 2020; Scolari, 2018). This has the potential to provide students with meaningful creative opportunities in which they can explore the concept of identity, learn how to identify and challenge harmful stereotypes, understand how the media and technology shapes beliefs and attitudes, and develop their own voices and perspectives as responsible producers of media content. This approach is consistent with CEMPs Theory of Change for Media Literacy (McDougall, 2022), which emphasizes the importance of understanding the consequences of our actions and using our capabilities for positive consequences.

The fact that an alumnus of my school is the current Executive Officer of CNN (having previously worked as president and CEO of The New York Times Company, Director-General of the BBC, and Chief Executive of Channel 4), is testimony to me that as educators we are indeed nurturing media producers of the future. Despite the challenges, libraries must start to play a proactive role in this, and new research can help to analyse impact. Therefore, as I move into the next phase of this project, I aim to use design-based research methods to develop and implement an adaptable library-led media literacy scheme and will explore ways to help our young people use their media literacy skills to make a positive impact in school and beyond.

References

ALA. (1989). Presidential Committee on Information Literacy: Final Report.

Alexander, H. (2016). Recreating Richard III : The Power of Tudor Propaganda [Undergraduate Honors Theses., East Tennessee State University]. https://dc.etsu.edu/honors/338

All Party Parliamentary Group (APPG). (2014). THE BEATING HEART OF THE SCHOOL: Improving Educational Attainment Through School Libraries And Librarians. 1–32.

Ball, P. S. J. (2013). Policy Paper Education , justice and democracy : The struggle over ignorance and opportunity Series : A Social State for 2015. October.

Barnett, C. (2015). The more things change the more they stay the same. Knowledge Quest, 43(4), 30–38. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1063979.pdf

BESA. (2022). Key UK Education Statistics. https://www.besa.org.uk/key-uk-education-statistics/

Besson, R. (2018). The hypothesis of cultural third places. The Conversation. https://theconversation.com/ the-hypothesis-of-cultural-third-places-93509%0ABland,

Bilandzic, M. (2016). Connected learning in the library as a product of hacking, making, social diversity and messiness. Interactive Learning Environments, 24(1), 158–177. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2013.825811

Bromley, M. (2019). Leading an effective programme of PSHE. SecEd. https://www.sec-ed.co.uk/content/best-practice/leading-an-effective-programme-of-pshe

Bruxvoort, D. (2016). Library as third place: a strategic framework. SCONUL Focus, 68, 13–14. https://www.sconul.ac.uk/publication/library-as-third-place-a-strategic-framework%0Ahttps://www.sconul.ac.uk/page/sconul-focus

Bryan M. Jenkins. (2022). Doing Black Podcast Studies: Exploring the Black Oral Tradition and Critical Media Literacy in Alternative Media (Issue July). Howard University.

Buckingham, D. (2004). The Media Literacy of Children and Young People: A review of the research literature on behalf of Ofcom.

Bulger, M., & Burton, P. (2020). Our lives online, Use of Social Media by Children and Adolescents in East Asia: Opportunities, Risks and Harms. In Unicef East Asia and the Pacific Regional. www.unicef.org/malaysia

Bulger, M., & Davison, P. (2018). The Promises, Challenges, and Futures of Media Literacy. Journal of Media Literacy Education, 10(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.23860/jmle-2018-10-1-1

Burton, P., Bwalya, M., & Sihubwa, S. (2022). Zambia Kids Online: A Global Kids Online Study. http://globalkidsonline.net/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/FINAL-ZKO-Study-Report-APRIL-2022.pdf

Byron, T. (2008). Safer children in a digital world : the report of the Byron Review : be safe, be aware, have fun.

Cannon, M. (2016). Media-making matters: exploring literacy with young learners as media crafting, critique and artistry [Bournemouth University for]. http://dspace.unitru.edu.pe/bitstream/handle/UNITRU/10947/Miñano Guevara%2C Karen Anali.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y%0Ahttps://repository.upb.edu.co/bitstream/handle/20.500.11912/3346/DIVERSIDAD DE MACROINVERTEBRADOS ACUÁTICOS Y SU.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=

Cannon, M., Connolly, S., & Parry, R. (2022). Media literacy, curriculum and the rights of the child. Discourse, 43(2), 322–334. https://doi.org/10.1080/01596306.2020.1829551

Cannon, M., Potter, J., & Burn, A. (2018). Dynamic, Playful and Productive Literacies. Changing English: Studies in Culture and Education, 25(2), 180–197. https://doi.org/10.1080/1358684X.2018.1452146

Carson, A., Ashdown-Hill, J., Langley, P., & Johnson, W. (2018). Finding Richard III: The Official Account of Research by the Retrieval and Reburial Project. Imprimis Imprimatur.

Catts, R., & Lau, J. (2008). UNESCO. Information for All Programme (IFAP). Towards Information Literacy Indicators.

Child, J. (2018). School libraries enhancing student well-being. SCIS Connections, 105. https://www.scisdata.com/connections/issue-105/school-libraries-enhancing-student-wellbeing

CILIP. (2018). The definition of information literacy 2018. CILIP Information Literacy Group, 1–8. https://www.cilip.org.uk/news/news.asp?id=421972&hhSearchTerms=%22literacy+and+information%22

Clark, C., & Teravainen-Goff, A. (2018). School libraries: Why children and young people use them or not, their literacy engagement and mental wellbeing Findings from our annual literacy survey 2017/2018. http://greatschoollibraries.edublogs.org/

Cole, D. R., Ullman, J., Gannon, S., & Rooney, P. (2015). Critical thinking skills in the International Baccalaureates “theory of Knowledge” subject: Findings from an Australian study. Australian Journal of Education, 59(3), 247–264. https://doi.org/10.1177/0004944115603529

Courtney, C., Bill, C., Norman, F., Jim, G., Mary, K., Kress, G., Allan, L., Carmen, L., Michaels, S., & Nakata, M. (1996). A pedagogy of multiliteracies: Designing social futures. Harvard Educational Review, 66(1), 60–92. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.66.1.17370n67v22j160u

Cox, A., & Brewster, L. (2022). Aligned but not integrated: UK academic library support to mental health and well-being during COVID-19. Library Management, 43(1–2), 108–127. https://doi.org/10.1108/LM-09-2021-0075

Davies, E. L., & Matley, F. (2020). Teachers and pupils under pressure: UK teachers’ views on the content and format of personal, social, health and economic education. Pastoral Care in Education, 38(1), 4–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/02643944.2020.1713868

DCMS. (2021a). Literacy Strategy Mapping Exercise and Literature Review – Phase 2 Report. April, 1–62. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1010027/2021-02-25_DCMS_Media_Literacy_Phase_2_Final_Report_ACCESSIBLE_v2.pdf

DCMS. (2021b). Online Media Literacy Strategy (Issue July). https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1004233/DCMS_Media_Literacy_Report_Roll_Out_Accessible_PDF.pdf https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/online-media-literacy-strategy

De Abreu, B. (2019). Teaching Media Literacy (ebook). American Library Association. https://www.google.co.uk/books/edition/Teaching_Media_Literacy/T8nVDwAAQBAJ

Department for Education (DfE). (2015). Keeping Children Safe in Education. September, 57.

Department for Education (DfE). (2021). Guidance: Personal, social, health and economic (PSHE) education. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/personal-social-health-and-economic-education-pshe/personal-social-health-and-economic-pshe-education

Dias, P., & Brito, R. (2021). Criteria for selecting apps: Debating the perceptions of young children, parents and industry stakeholders. Computers and Education, 165(January), 104134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104134

Erstad, O., Øystein, G., & de Lange, T. (2007). Re‐mixing multimodal resources: multiliteracies and digital production in Norwegian media education. Learning, Media and Technology, 32(2), 183–198. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439880701343394

eSafety Commissioner. (2022). Cool, beautiful, strange and scary: The online experiences of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children and their parents and caregivers (Issue March).

Eskelinen, M. (2018). Critical media literacy among International Baccalaureate Diploma Programme graduates [University of Lapland]. https://lauda.ulapland.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/63776/Eskelinen.Mona.pdf?

Gauntlett, D. (2021). Making is an essential part of media literacy education but how is it connected to critical thinking? [PODCAST]. Mediacy with Carol Arcus and Neil Anderson. https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/making-is-an-essential-part-of-media-literacy/id1459917252?i=1000524628897

Gildersleeves, L. (2012). Do school libraries make a difference? Some considerations on investigating school library impact in the United Kingdom. Library Management, 33(6), 143–5124. https://doi.org/10.1108/01435121211266212

Gillen, J., David, B., Kress, G., & Fred, G. (2010). Digital Literacies. Digital Literacies. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003262541

Gov.UK. (2018). Working Together to Safeguard Children. Office, 14(March), 393. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/working-together-to-safeguard-children–2 http://informahealthcare.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13561820020003919

Great School Libraries. (2019). Great School Libraries Survey Findings and Update on Phase 1.

Grisham, J. (2021). Media Literacy and Digital Literacy: how they differ and why they matter. Echo Breaking News. https://echo-breaking-news.com/blog/media-literacy-vs-digital-literacy/

Hartzell, G. (2002). The Principal’s Perceptions of School Libraries and Teacher-Librarians. 8(1), 92–110.

Head, A. J., Fister, B., & MacMillan, M. (2020). Information Literacy in the Age of Algorithms: Student experiences with news and information, and the need for change. In Project Information Literacy. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED605109.pdf https://projectinfolit.org/pubs/algorithm-study/pil_algorithm-study_2020-01-15.pdf

Holzweiss, K., & Evans, S. (2018). Hacking school libraries : 10 ways to incorporate library media centers into your learning community. Times 10 Publications.

Jennifer Harby. (2022, October 8). The Lost King: Legal action “likely” against Richard III film. BBC News.

Johnston, M. P. (2015). Blurred Lines: The School Librarian and the Instructional Technology Specialist. TechTrends, 59(3), 17–26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-015-0849-7

Kapanka, H. (2021). School library media specialists: An evolving profession in a pandemic. https://doi.org/10.1177/03400352211011494

Kim, Y., & Yang, E. (2022). Academic library spaces and student activities during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 48(4), 102529. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2022.102529

Kolb, A. Y., & Kolb, D. A. (2022). Experiential Learning Theory as a Guide for Experiential Educators in Higher Education. Experiential Learning and Teaching in Higher Education, 1(1), 38. https://doi.org/10.46787/elthe.v1i1.3362

Korodaj, L. (2019). The library as ’ third space ’ in your school: supporting academic and emotional well-being in the school community. The Journal for Educators, 38(10), 2–9.

Langley, P. (2023). Looking For Richard Project. https://philippalangley.co.uk/looking-for-richard.html

Lankshear, C., & Knobel, M. (2011). New Literacies. McGraw-Hill Education.

Leas, S. E. (1971). “Richard III”, Shakespeare, and History. The English Journal, 60(9), 1214. https://doi.org/10.2307/812772

Lee, N. M. (2018). Fake news, phishing, and fraud: a call for research on digital media literacy education beyond the classroom. Communication Education, 67(4), 460–466. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634523.2018.1503313

Livingstone, S. (2004). What Is Media Literacy? Intermedia, 32(3), 18–20. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483387581.n3

Livingstone, S. (2008). A Rationale for Positive Online Content for Children. Communication Research Trends, 28(3), 12–17. http://ehis.ebscohost.com.nukweb.nuk.uni-lj.si/ehost/detail?sid=f2d634f8-5f9b-47d6-baa7-7ad99d7f0664%40sessionmgr115&vid=1&hid=115&bdata=Jmxhbmc9c2wmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3D%3D#db=ufh&AN=44451879

Livingstone, S. (2018). Media literacy – everyone’s favourite solution to the problems of regulation. London School of Economics and Political Science. https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/medialse/2018/05/08/media-literacy-everyones-favourite-solution-to-the-problems-of-regulation/

Livingstone, S. (2019). Rethinking the rights of children for the Internet age. LSE Media Policy Project Blog. [Online]. https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/medialse/2019/03/18/rethinking-the-rights-of-children-for-the-internet-age/

Livingstone, S., Lemish, D., Lim, S. S., Bulger, M., Cabello, P., Claro, M., Cabello-Hutt, T., Khalil, J., Kumpulainen, K., Nayar, U. S., Nayar, P., Park, J., Tan, M. M., Prinsloo, J., & Wei, B. (2017). Global perspectives on children’s digital opportunities: An emerging research and policy agenda. Pediatrics, 140(November), S137–S141. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2016-1758S

Livingstone, S., Mascheroni, G., & Staksrud, E. (2015). Developing a framework for researching children’s online risks and opportunities in Europe. EU Kids Online, November, 1–21. www.eukidsonline.net

Luthmann, A. (2007). Librarians, professionalism and image: stereotype and reality. Library Review, 56(9), 773–780. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1108/00242530710831211

Marca, S. La. (2021). An Enabling Adult. IASL Annual Conference Proceedings. https://doi.org/10.29173/IASL7553

Martineau, P. (2010). School Librarians: Vital Educational Leaders. Education Digest, 75(6), 4–6. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ofs&AN=504385481&site=ehost-live

Maxwell, L. (2020). Podcasting with youth : a quick guide for librarians and educators. Libraries Unlimited.

McDougall, J. (2019). Fake News vs Media Studies : Travels in a False Binary. Springer International Publishing AG. https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/bournemouth-ebooks/reader.action?docID=5987670

McDougall, J. (2021). Critically Literate: Fake News vs School Libraries. International Teacher Magazine. https://consiliumeducation.com/itm/2021/06/21/critically-literate/

McDougall, J. (2022). Every Child Needs Media Literacy: How a Media Literacy Education Bill Could create a generation of young people who will use Media Critically and Responsibly with Good Outcomes for Society. https://www.sla.org.uk/filedownload/842f691e511f7319c8db0f948d000c26d9e3ba54/ea13f4f8ba7501c9cb24195fd7ba1f792093888e

Melnick, V. (1967). The Librarian’s Role. Theory Into Practice, 6(1), 40–43. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1475620

Merga, M. (2021). Why are teacher librarians an excellent investment in contemporary schools? https://doi.org/10.3316/informit.674196817661903

Merga, M. K. (2019). Do Librarians Feel that Their Profession Is Valued in Contemporary Schools? Journal of the Australian Library and Information Association, 68(1), 18–37. https://doi.org/10.1080/24750158.2018.1557979

Milosevic, T., Bhroin, N. N., Ólafsson, K., Staksrud, E., & Wachs, S. (2022). Time spent online and children’s self-reported life satisfaction in Norway: The socio-ecological perspective. New Media and Society. https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448221082651

Mizuko, I., Gutierrez, K., Livingstone, S., Penuel, B., Rhodes, J., Salen, K., Schor, J., Sefton-Green, J., & Watkins, S. C. (2013). Connected Learning: An Agenda for Research and Design.

Myers, A. R. (1968). RICHARD III AND HISTORICAL TRADITION. History, 53(178), 181–202. https://www.jstor.org/stable/24407008

National Literacy Trust. (2018). Fake news and critical literacy: The final report of the Commission on Fake News and the Teaching of Critical Literacy in Schools. National Literacy Trust, 36. https://literacytrust.org.uk/documents/1722/Fake_news_and_critical_literacy_-_final_report.pdf

Northwestern University. (2013). Media use in the Middle East.

Oberg, D. (2009). Libraries in schools: Essential contexts for studying organizational change and culture. Library Trends, 58(1), 9–25.

O’Connell, J. (2018). Change has arrived at an iSchool library near you. In Information Literacy Beyond Library 2.0 (pp. 215–228). Facet. https://doi.org/10.29085/9781856048804.020

Parsons, M. (2020). Preparing for Society 5.0: Podcasting with Children. Hannan Ronshu, 55(2), 83–90. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/322534847.pdf

Percy, C., Rehill, J., Kashefpakdel, E., & Chambers, N. (2019). Speakers for schools: Exploring the impact of guest speakers in schools. https://www.educationandemployers.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Speakers-for-Schools-Report.pdf

Pinfield, S. (2001). The changing role of subject librarians in academic libraries. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 33(1), 32–38. https://doi.org/10.1177/096100060103300104

Polizzi, G., & Pagliarello, M. C. (2021). Two parallel but disconnected tracks: Bridging media literacy and citizenship education. The London School of Economics and Political Science. https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/medialse/2021/04/27/two-parallel-but-disconnected-tracks-bridging-media-literacy-and-citizenship-education/

Potter, J., & McDougall, J. (2017a). Digital Media, Culture and Education. Palgrave Macmillian.

Potter, J., & McDougall, J. (2017b). Digital Media, Culture and Education : Theorising Third Space Literacies. Palgrave Macmillan. https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/bournemouth-ebooks/detail.action?docID=4853109.e

Przybylski, A. K., & Weinstein, N. (2017). A Large-Scale Test of the Goldilocks Hypothesis: Quantifying the Relations Between Digital-Screen Use and the Mental Well-Being of Adolescents. Psychological Science, 28(2), 204–215. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797616678438

Raffaele, D. (2021). Cultivating the ‘ Third Place ’ in school libraries to support student wellbeing. Synergy, 19(1). https://slav.vic.edu.au/index.php/Synergy/article/view/489

Ravalli, M. J., & Paoloni, P. C. (2016). GLOBAL KIDS ONLINE ARGENTINA Research study on the perceptions and habits of children and adolescents on the use of technologies, the internet and social media (Issue November).

Ridley, M., & Pawlick-Potts, D. (2021). Algorithmic literacy and the role for libraries. Information Technology and Libraries, 40(2). https://doi.org/10.6017/ITAL.V40I2.12963

Robinson, S. K. (2015). Do Schools Kill Creativity? TED TALKS. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iG9CE55wbtY

Roper, L. (2019). Dispelling the myths surrounding Librarian stereotypes. UCEM Articles. https://www.ucem.ac.uk/whats-happening/articles/dispelling-the-myths-surrounding-librarian-stereotypes-guest-blog-by-our-information-governance-manager-lucy-roper/

School Library National Advisory Group. (2018). Vibrant Libraries, Thriving Schools.

Schultz-Jones, B., & Oberg, D. (2015). International Association of School Librarianship (IFLA): School Library Guidelines (Issue June). https://www.ifla.org/files/assets/school-libraries-resource-centers/publications/ifla-school-library-guidelines.pdf

Scolari, C. A. (2018). TEENS, MEDIA AND COLLABORATIVE CULTURES. EXPLOITING TEENS’ TRANSMEDIA SKILLS IN THE CLASSROOM. In Transliteracy H2020 Research and Innovation Actions. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483346397.n152

Selwyn, N. (2022). What should ‘digital literacy’ look like in an age of algorithms and AI? DigiGen. https://www.digigen.eu/digigenblog/what-should-digital-literacy-look-like-in-an-age-of-algorithms-and-ai-neil-selwyn/

Share, J., & Keliner, D. (2021). Exploring Critical Media Literacy – What is it and why is it more important now than ever? [PODCAST]. Mediacy with Carol Arcus and Neil Anderson. https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/exploring-critical-media-literacy-what-is-it-and-why/id1459917252?i=1000522149978

Shenton, A. K. (2007). OFSTED and libraries in first and primary schools: Some observations on expectations. JOURNAL OF LIBRARIANSHIP AND INFORMATION SCIENCE, 39(2), 99–111. https://doi.org/10.1177/0961000607077580

Softlink. (2022). School Library Survey Report 2021/22.

Soll, J. (2016, December). The Long and Brutal History of Fake News. Politico Magazine. https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/12/fake-news-history-long-violent-214535/

Subramaniam, M. (2016). Designing the Library of the Future for and with Teens: Librarians as the “Connector” in Connected Learning. The Journal of Research on Libraries and Young Adults. https://www.yalsa.ala.org/jrlya/2016/06/designing-the-library-of-the-future-for-and-with-teens-librarians-as-the-connector-in-connected-learning/

Teravainen, A., & Clark, C. (2017). School Libraries A literature review of current provision and evidence of impact. www.literacytrust.org.uk

The ACRL Research Planning and Review Committee. (2020). 2020 Top Trends in Academic Libraries a Review of the Trends and Issues Affecting Academic Libraries in Higher Education. College and Research Libraries News, 81(6), 270–278. https://doi.org/10.5860/crln.81.6.270

The All-Party Parliamentary Group on Media Literacy. (2022). Research into the current media literacy landscape in England Our Objectives (Issue April).

The British Library. (2023). Thomas More’s History of King Richard III. https://www.bl.uk/collection-items/thomas-mores-history-of-king-richard-iii

The Durham Commission. (2019). Durham Commission on Creativity and Education. Durham University, 95. https://www.dur.ac.uk/resources/creativitycommission/DurhamReport.pdf

The Libraries Taskforce. (2018). Libraries deliver: Ambition for public libraries in England 2016-2021. https://doi.org/10.3145/thinkepi.2018.22

The National Literacy Trust. (2010). School Libraries: A plan for improvement.

The National Literacy Trust. (2021). The government’s media literacy strategy: what do schools need to know? https://literacytrust.org.uk/blog/the-governments-media-literacy-strategy-what-do-schools-need-to-know/

The PSHE Association. (2019). Selecting External Visitors [Podcast]. https://soundcloud.com/pshe-association/podcast-ep-1-selecting-external-visitors

UNCRC. (1989). Convention on the rights of the child. United Nations Treaty Series, 1577, Treaty no., 3–178. https://treaties.un.org/doc/Treaties/1990/09/19900902 03-14 AM/Ch_IV_11p.pdf

UNESCO Institute for Statistics. (2018). A draft report on a global framework of reference on digital literacy skills for indicator 4.4.2: Percentage of youth/adults who have achieved at least a minimum level of proficiency in digital literacy skills. March, 1–63. https://bit.ly/2Sr9MdO

Vanessa Thorpe. (2022). Royal row erupts over Steve Coogan film about Richard III. The Guardian.

Vuorikari, R., Kluzer, S., & Punie, Y. (2022). DigComp 2.2. The Digital Competence Framework for Citizens. With new examples of knowledge, skills and attitudes. https://doi.org/10.2760/115376

Wanless, P., Sheard, K., Barrett, L., Clarke, T., & Jones, A. (n.d.). School Libraries: A plan for improvement.

Warpole, H. (2005). The Project Gutenberg eBook of Historic Doubts on the Life and Reign of King Richard the Third (M. Fulton, Ed.). https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/17411

Wine, L. D. (2016). School Librarians as Technology Leaders. Journal of Education for Library and Information Science, 57(2), 207–220. https://doi.org/10.2307/90015219

Wood, C., Clark, C., Teravainen-Goff, A., Rudkin, G., & Vardy, E. (2020). Exploring the Literacy-Related Behaviors and Feelings of Pupils Eligible for Free School Meals in Relation to Their Use of and Access to School Libraries. 23, 2165–1019. www.ala.org/aasl/slr