Teacher(s)
Language
French
Prerequisites
The prerequisite(s) for this Teaching Unit (Unité d’enseignement – UE) for the programmes/courses that offer this Teaching Unit are specified at the end of this sheet.
Learning outcomes
At the end of this learning unit, the student is able to : | |
|
|
Content
The teaching unit goes in depth into a series of theoretical and conceptual frameworks of user studies and reception studies, including recent developments in relation to digital media and technologies. The approaches and issues addressed in this teaching unit revolve around the following conceptions of “media use”:
- media use as motivated and selective exposure to media ;
- media use as text-reader interaction;
- media use as a socially and culturally organised activity;
- media use as participation in a collective experience;
- media use as an identity process;
- media use as intervention in a process of socio-technical innovation.
- media use as motivated and selective exposure to media ;
- media use as text-reader interaction;
- media use as a socially and culturally organised activity;
- media use as participation in a collective experience;
- media use as an identity process;
- media use as intervention in a process of socio-technical innovation.
Teaching methods
This teaching unit is composed of lectures and seminar sessions.
During the lectures, the professor elaborates on the course content using visual presentations. Several discussion or application activities are organized as well. The lectures are recorded in order to 'help out' the students who are unable to attend any of the sessions for a legitimate reason (illness, work commitment, etc.).
For the seminar, the students work in subgroups of 3 or 4 members. The seminar is dedicated to:
- the in-depth reading of a selection of scientific texts. Guiding questions are provided and the texts are discussed in class (at a distance if it is required by the sanitary situation). At least one exam question relates to the texts;
- the writing and the oral defense of a written paper focused on the problematization of an initial research question related to media/ICT use or reception (exact topic to be determined according to the guidelines provided by the teaching assistant).
As course material, the students have at their disposal course notes provided by the professor, the visual presentations used for the lectures, detailed guidelines regarding the problematization work, and a copy of the mandatory texts that are the focus of the seminar. The teaching unit is also present on Moodle
During the lectures, the professor elaborates on the course content using visual presentations. Several discussion or application activities are organized as well. The lectures are recorded in order to 'help out' the students who are unable to attend any of the sessions for a legitimate reason (illness, work commitment, etc.).
For the seminar, the students work in subgroups of 3 or 4 members. The seminar is dedicated to:
- the in-depth reading of a selection of scientific texts. Guiding questions are provided and the texts are discussed in class (at a distance if it is required by the sanitary situation). At least one exam question relates to the texts;
- the writing and the oral defense of a written paper focused on the problematization of an initial research question related to media/ICT use or reception (exact topic to be determined according to the guidelines provided by the teaching assistant).
As course material, the students have at their disposal course notes provided by the professor, the visual presentations used for the lectures, detailed guidelines regarding the problematization work, and a copy of the mandatory texts that are the focus of the seminar. The teaching unit is also present on Moodle
Evaluation methods
The assessment method includes a written individual exam, which weights for 60% of the final grade, and a subgroup paper (including its oral defense) consisting in the problematization of a preliminary research question, which weights for 40% of the final grade. The weighting remains the same no matter whether the teaching unit is organized face-to-face or at a distance.
The exam covers the content of the lectures and the texts discussed in the seminar sessions.
In a face-to-face situation, the exam includes two parts. The first part focuses on the lectures. No course material is allowed. The second part focuses on the scientific papers that have been discussed during the seminar sessions. For this part, the students may have with them a copy of the (annoted) texts as well as their personal notes on these texts and the reading guides. Any other material is prohibited. The questions on the texts do not necessarily come from the reading guides.
In distant mode, the exam covers the lectures and the scientific papers that have been discussed in the seminar sessions. The students will be allowed to use their course material (course notes provided by the professor, personal notes, resources available on Moodle). They can also have with them a copy of the texts as well as their personal notes on the texts and the reading guides. Any other material is prohibited. The questions on the texts do not necessarily come from the reading guides.
The problematization paper is carried out in subgroups. The grade for the paper is awarded according to the following distribution: 3/4 of the points for the paper and 1/4 of the points for the oral presentation of the paper during the defense (this presentation may be subject to individual grading). The points of the paper result both from the written work itself, with a grade awarded to the entire subgroup, and from the discussion as it took place during the oral defense, which may be assessed individually. In this way, the discussion during the oral defense allows to refine the grading of the written work.
In the case of a failure in January, the student must re-submit the failed component(s) in the second session (the final grade for the seminar is aggregated). If one of the components of the seminar is not performed, this automatically results in a 0/20 for the final grade (the grade for the component that was performed is kept provided that it is passed).
If the oral presentation is successful but the overall seminar is unsuccessful, the points of the presentation will be kept and taken into account when resubmitting the paper in the second session. An oral defense will still have to be reorganized for the discussion of the new paper.
If the student is required to re-submit the seminar assignments in the second session, the “copy visit” will be the only chance for students to receive feedback on the work. It is therefore strongly encouraged that students who failed the seminar attend the “copy visit”.
The paper and the oral presentations are original productions. Students are expected to scrupulously respect the rules and good practices of citation, referencing and non-plagiarism.
The use of generative AI is accepted as long as it is occasional and limited. The use of AI must be explicitly indicated. Any part of the work relying, in any way, on generative AI must be clearly identified (for example, by a footnote), specifying which generative AI tool was used and for what purpose.
“Reusing” a personal or group assignment carried out within the framework of any other teaching unit requires a great deal of caution. Exceptionally, such an approach may be considered provided that the student (1) requests permission from the assistant, (2) justifies this “reuse”, which, as a whole, must obviously constitute an original contribution compared to the first work, and (3) scrupulously applies the rules of citation and referencing to any use of this assignment. Failure to comply with these rules may be considered an irregularity (self-plagiarism).
Any failure to apply the rules set out above may lead to an academic and/or disciplinary sanction for plagiarism and/or irregularity, in accordance with the general regulations for studies and examinations.
Class attendance is checked for the seminar sessions (4 in total). The student who is absent for a non-justified reason at any of the sessions will get a 0/20 as a final grade for the entire teaching unit in January. The supporting documents must be sent to the teaching assistant and the faculty administration according to the procedures explained in the implementing provisions of the RGEE. Attendance of the seminar is not taken into account for the second session.
The exam covers the content of the lectures and the texts discussed in the seminar sessions.
In a face-to-face situation, the exam includes two parts. The first part focuses on the lectures. No course material is allowed. The second part focuses on the scientific papers that have been discussed during the seminar sessions. For this part, the students may have with them a copy of the (annoted) texts as well as their personal notes on these texts and the reading guides. Any other material is prohibited. The questions on the texts do not necessarily come from the reading guides.
In distant mode, the exam covers the lectures and the scientific papers that have been discussed in the seminar sessions. The students will be allowed to use their course material (course notes provided by the professor, personal notes, resources available on Moodle). They can also have with them a copy of the texts as well as their personal notes on the texts and the reading guides. Any other material is prohibited. The questions on the texts do not necessarily come from the reading guides.
The problematization paper is carried out in subgroups. The grade for the paper is awarded according to the following distribution: 3/4 of the points for the paper and 1/4 of the points for the oral presentation of the paper during the defense (this presentation may be subject to individual grading). The points of the paper result both from the written work itself, with a grade awarded to the entire subgroup, and from the discussion as it took place during the oral defense, which may be assessed individually. In this way, the discussion during the oral defense allows to refine the grading of the written work.
In the case of a failure in January, the student must re-submit the failed component(s) in the second session (the final grade for the seminar is aggregated). If one of the components of the seminar is not performed, this automatically results in a 0/20 for the final grade (the grade for the component that was performed is kept provided that it is passed).
If the oral presentation is successful but the overall seminar is unsuccessful, the points of the presentation will be kept and taken into account when resubmitting the paper in the second session. An oral defense will still have to be reorganized for the discussion of the new paper.
If the student is required to re-submit the seminar assignments in the second session, the “copy visit” will be the only chance for students to receive feedback on the work. It is therefore strongly encouraged that students who failed the seminar attend the “copy visit”.
The paper and the oral presentations are original productions. Students are expected to scrupulously respect the rules and good practices of citation, referencing and non-plagiarism.
The use of generative AI is accepted as long as it is occasional and limited. The use of AI must be explicitly indicated. Any part of the work relying, in any way, on generative AI must be clearly identified (for example, by a footnote), specifying which generative AI tool was used and for what purpose.
“Reusing” a personal or group assignment carried out within the framework of any other teaching unit requires a great deal of caution. Exceptionally, such an approach may be considered provided that the student (1) requests permission from the assistant, (2) justifies this “reuse”, which, as a whole, must obviously constitute an original contribution compared to the first work, and (3) scrupulously applies the rules of citation and referencing to any use of this assignment. Failure to comply with these rules may be considered an irregularity (self-plagiarism).
Any failure to apply the rules set out above may lead to an academic and/or disciplinary sanction for plagiarism and/or irregularity, in accordance with the general regulations for studies and examinations.
Class attendance is checked for the seminar sessions (4 in total). The student who is absent for a non-justified reason at any of the sessions will get a 0/20 as a final grade for the entire teaching unit in January. The supporting documents must be sent to the teaching assistant and the faculty administration according to the procedures explained in the implementing provisions of the RGEE. Attendance of the seminar is not taken into account for the second session.
Other information
For the problematization paper, the students may be required to read scientific texts in English, depending on their research question and the available bibliographic resources.
Online resources
The teaching unit has a course website on Moodle.
Bibliography
Lectures obligatoires :
- Dessinges, C. et Perticoz, L. (2019), « Les consommations de séries télévisées des publics étudiants face à Netflix : une autonomie en question », Les Enjeux de l’information et de la communication, vol.20, n°1, pp.5-23. DOI : 10.3917/enic.026.0005. URL : https://www.cairn.info/revue-les-enjeux-de-l-information-et-de-la-communication-2019-1-page-5.htm
- Jauréguiberry, F. (1997), « L'usage du téléphone portatif comme expérience sociale », Réseaux, n°82-83, pp.149-165. URL : https://www.persee.fr/doc/reso_0751-7971_1997_num_15_82_3061
- Nicol, C. et Millette, M. (2022), « Fanfictions audiovisuelles d’Harry Potter : co-création et espaces blancs », Études de communication, vol.59, mis en ligne le 01 janvier 2025, consulté le 04 janvier 2023. DOI : https://doi.org/10.4000/edc.15022. URL : https://journals.openedition.org/edc/15022
- Pasquier, D. (1999), La culture des sentiments. L’expérience télévisuelle des adolescents, Paris, Maison des sciences de l’homme, pp.175-213 (chapitre « Publics et communautés sociales »).
Bibliographie indicative :
- Bilandzic, H., Patriarche, G. et Traudt, P. J. (dir.) (2012), The Social Use of Media: Cultural and Social Scientific Perspectives on Audience Research, Bristol, Intellect.
- Carpentier, N., Schrøder, K.C., et Hallett, L. (dir.) (2014), Audience Transformations. Shifting Audience Positions in Late Modernity, New York, Routledge.
- Certeau, M. de (1990), L'invention du quotidien. 1. Arts de faire, Paris, Gallimard.
- Cervulle, M. et Quemener, N. (2018), Cultural Studies. Théories et méthodes, 2ème éd., Paris, Armand Colin.
- Dayan, D. (1992), « Les mystères de la réception », Le Débat, n°71, pp.146-162.
- Dayan, D. (dossier coord. par) (1993), « A la recherche du public. Réception, télévision, médias », Hermès, n°11/12.
- Esquenazi, J.-P. (2003), Sociologie des publics, Paris, La Découverte.
- Flichy, P. (1995), L’innovation technique. Récents développements en sciences sociales. Vers une nouvelle théorie de l’innovation, Paris, La Découverte.
- Glevarec, H., Macé, E. et Maigret, E. (dir.) (2008), Cultural Studies. Anthologie, Paris, Armand Colin/INA.
- Jauréguiberry, F., et Proux, S. (2011), Usages et enjeux des technologies de communication, Toulouse, Toulouse, Érès.
- Jenkins, H. (1992), Textual Poachers. Television Fans & Participatory Culture, New York & Londres, Routledge.
- Livingstone, S. et Lunt, P. (1993), Talk on television. Audience participation and public debate, Londres, Routledge.
- Lohisse, J., avec la collab. de Patriarche, G., et Klein, A. (2009), La communication. De la transmission à la relation, 4ème éd., Bruxelles, De Boeck.
- Lull, J. (1980), « The social uses of television », Human Communication Research, 1980, vol. 6, n°3, p.197-209.
- Morley D. (1992), Television, Audiences and Cultural Studies, Londres, Routledge.
- Picone, I. (2017), « Conceptualizing media users across media: The case for ‘media user/use’ as analytical concepts », Convergence. The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies, vol.23, n°4, pp.1-13.
- Schrøder, K. C. (1994), « Audience semiotics, interpretive communities and ‘the ethnographic turn’ in media research », Media, Culture & Society, vol.16, pp.337-347.
- Zoonen, L. van (2005), Entertaining the citizen. When politics and popular culture converge, Lanham, Rowman & Littlefield.
- Dessinges, C. et Perticoz, L. (2019), « Les consommations de séries télévisées des publics étudiants face à Netflix : une autonomie en question », Les Enjeux de l’information et de la communication, vol.20, n°1, pp.5-23. DOI : 10.3917/enic.026.0005. URL : https://www.cairn.info/revue-les-enjeux-de-l-information-et-de-la-communication-2019-1-page-5.htm
- Jauréguiberry, F. (1997), « L'usage du téléphone portatif comme expérience sociale », Réseaux, n°82-83, pp.149-165. URL : https://www.persee.fr/doc/reso_0751-7971_1997_num_15_82_3061
- Nicol, C. et Millette, M. (2022), « Fanfictions audiovisuelles d’Harry Potter : co-création et espaces blancs », Études de communication, vol.59, mis en ligne le 01 janvier 2025, consulté le 04 janvier 2023. DOI : https://doi.org/10.4000/edc.15022. URL : https://journals.openedition.org/edc/15022
- Pasquier, D. (1999), La culture des sentiments. L’expérience télévisuelle des adolescents, Paris, Maison des sciences de l’homme, pp.175-213 (chapitre « Publics et communautés sociales »).
Bibliographie indicative :
- Bilandzic, H., Patriarche, G. et Traudt, P. J. (dir.) (2012), The Social Use of Media: Cultural and Social Scientific Perspectives on Audience Research, Bristol, Intellect.
- Carpentier, N., Schrøder, K.C., et Hallett, L. (dir.) (2014), Audience Transformations. Shifting Audience Positions in Late Modernity, New York, Routledge.
- Certeau, M. de (1990), L'invention du quotidien. 1. Arts de faire, Paris, Gallimard.
- Cervulle, M. et Quemener, N. (2018), Cultural Studies. Théories et méthodes, 2ème éd., Paris, Armand Colin.
- Dayan, D. (1992), « Les mystères de la réception », Le Débat, n°71, pp.146-162.
- Dayan, D. (dossier coord. par) (1993), « A la recherche du public. Réception, télévision, médias », Hermès, n°11/12.
- Esquenazi, J.-P. (2003), Sociologie des publics, Paris, La Découverte.
- Flichy, P. (1995), L’innovation technique. Récents développements en sciences sociales. Vers une nouvelle théorie de l’innovation, Paris, La Découverte.
- Glevarec, H., Macé, E. et Maigret, E. (dir.) (2008), Cultural Studies. Anthologie, Paris, Armand Colin/INA.
- Jauréguiberry, F., et Proux, S. (2011), Usages et enjeux des technologies de communication, Toulouse, Toulouse, Érès.
- Jenkins, H. (1992), Textual Poachers. Television Fans & Participatory Culture, New York & Londres, Routledge.
- Livingstone, S. et Lunt, P. (1993), Talk on television. Audience participation and public debate, Londres, Routledge.
- Lohisse, J., avec la collab. de Patriarche, G., et Klein, A. (2009), La communication. De la transmission à la relation, 4ème éd., Bruxelles, De Boeck.
- Lull, J. (1980), « The social uses of television », Human Communication Research, 1980, vol. 6, n°3, p.197-209.
- Morley D. (1992), Television, Audiences and Cultural Studies, Londres, Routledge.
- Picone, I. (2017), « Conceptualizing media users across media: The case for ‘media user/use’ as analytical concepts », Convergence. The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies, vol.23, n°4, pp.1-13.
- Schrøder, K. C. (1994), « Audience semiotics, interpretive communities and ‘the ethnographic turn’ in media research », Media, Culture & Society, vol.16, pp.337-347.
- Zoonen, L. van (2005), Entertaining the citizen. When politics and popular culture converge, Lanham, Rowman & Littlefield.
Teaching materials
- Usage et réception des médias - Syllabus
- Usage et réception des médias - Vade-mecum du séminaire
Faculty or entity
Programmes / formations proposant cette unité d'enseignement (UE)
Title of the programme
Sigle
Credits
Prerequisites
Learning outcomes
