After the first-year pilot of the Writers’ Studio, the instructional team conducted an assessment of the English 101 and 102 portfolios to make improvements for future incarnations of the curriculum (for more information on the assessment, see T. Bourelle, Rankins-Robertson, A. Bourelle, & Roen, 2013). During the assessment sessions, our team looked at portfolios focusing on six criteria for evaluation: organization of content, clear sense of purpose, clearly stated claims with critical reflections, sufficient evidence, addresses the five areas of the WPA Outcomes Statement along with eight habits of mind, and conventions (see Appendix B for portfolio scoring guide and links to example portfolios). These were the same criteria used for evaluation by the instructors during the semester. In particular, the criterion regarding the course outcomes was particularly helpful.
The results of the assessment revealed that while students generally understood the outcomes and were able to demonstrate learning in those areas, they were also confused about specific aspects within particular outcomes areas. For example, the WPA outcome to “Understand the relationship among language, knowledge, and power” within the area “Critical Thinking, Reading, and Writing” was particularly difficult for students to understand. Nevertheless, the portfolio assessment told us that we needed to include more instruction within the course on the outcomes so that the more complex ones would be clearer. For most of the outcomes, however, the students articulated an understanding of not only what they were supposed to learn, but also how they learned it.
In hindsight, we recognize that there would have been value in adding another criterion, one specifically addressing the multimodal nature of the course. For future research projects, we would like to see an assessment completed that further studies the use of multimodality in such classes. For example, an assessment could pay particular attention to the “Composing in Electronic Environments” section of the WPA Outcomes, or the particular outcomes, such as those under the “Rhetorical Knowledge” heading, where multimodality is implicitly emphasized. However, based on the comments made by students in their portfolios, we have anecdotal evidence that students benefitted from the multimodal instruction and the requirements to develop multimodal projects.
Digital Multimodal Composition
The student comments revealed that the focus on digital literacy challenged students, and many generally expressed surprise and appreciation that the classes had placed such an emphasis on multimodality. One student stated in her end-of-the-semester reflection, “At the start of the semester, I was expecting our assignments to be your standard Word essay.” Another stated, “I was most used to writing essays before enrolling in this class. Other than print, I used PowerPoint but during this semester; I learned many different types of ways I can get my point/message to my audience.”
Another student stated that because she ended up creating a blog using WordPress and developed her final portfolio using Google Sites, she wrote in ways that were new to her and therefore beneficial. “I have used Microsoft Word to produce most of my work, however I have also been exposed to online blog sites and website creation,” she stated, adding, “This has been beneficial to my writing process in that it […] takes me out of my comfort zone by trying some new forms of electronic media.” In other words, she and many other students had become used to the routine of composing “essays” in their previous English courses; they were surprised that these courses pushed them into unfamiliar territory.
These student comments show that—apart from the goals of multiliteracies pedagogy—the digital multimodal components engaged and challenged students in ways they didn’t expect. Other students expressed how stepping outside of their comfort zones and working with new media helped them understand the concept of genre, and how form and medium—and not just subject matter—are important to consider when addressing an intended audience. One student stated, “As technology improves, there are more options for reading and writing. New genres are becoming available all the time. Newspapers, blogs, cartoons, advertisements, etc. are all ways of communicating and for each genre the writing style is different.” Like this student, others emphasized that they had never fully grasped how technology can be used to enhance the rhetorical effectiveness of writing. One student stated, “[T]echnology gives us the opportunity to compose our work in an effective way to reach our target audience.” Likewise, other students addressed in particular how writing in different media helped them better understand the importance of audience consideration. Another student stated that after creating a blog and a website for her final portfolio—activities she had never attempted before—she had a better understanding of how to think about audience in a rhetorical situation. She stated, “Technology continually changes and evolves, and I have learned over this past semester, that we too as writers must also evolve. In order to engage the audience, the writer has to be creative and use the technology resources that are available to us.” Similarly, another student commented that “[w]e are able to make websites, write blogs, share ideas through networking, messengers, and emails. The medium is important when it comes to choosing which way to get your message to your audience.” The student further went on to say that she had previously felt comfortable writing print-based essays, but now she felt she could address more types of audiences. “Now,” she stated, “I am more comfortable in using different mediums and know how the differences can really affect my writings.” From these types of comments, we deduced that these students did not simply learn to work in new media; they also gained a broader, more fully developed understanding of the importance of the rhetorical situation, audience awareness, and other aspects of writing. Students didn’t only benefit by practicing writing with new technological programs; they benefited by expanding their knowledge of multimodality.
Multimodal Instruction
Other students commented on the multimodal instruction as a route to learning to create multimodal projects. In one class, the instructor gave written feedback on the projects and screen-capture comments for the electronic portfolio. The students appreciated the comments in the form of a video, as Stannard (2007) suggested they would. One student expressed his gratitude for the screen capture, thanking the instructor for taking the time to create the helpful video. Another student commented on his ability to revise in light of the screen capture comments, saying, “Thank you so much for the feedback and encouragement. […] I love how you do the video/voice feedback, it is extremely useful and gave this online course a little bit of an in-class feel.”
Students also claimed to benefit from the videos provided by instructors. One student in particular cited an example PSA provided that showed actor Jeremy Irons talking to viewers about the death penalty. She stated “this particular video was crisp, professional, executed wonderfully, and was backed up by a credible (I’m a fan) actor” (her parentheses). She explained that she did not use the same format for the PSA, but it helped her understand how to communicate effectively in this format. She stated, “After viewing this particular video, I knew that I could convey my message to an audience in a tasteful manner. I used what I saw in a Jeremy Irons video to create five or six short sentences which I then placed in a backdrop and looped it with the sound of the ocean.” She added, “I liked the finished product of my video and became a fan of this format based on the video which was presented to us in class.” As mentioned previously, multimodality was also emphasized through discussion postings, as students were prompted to find examples on the Internet and analyze the media before posting and discussing with classmates. Several students found this exercise to be helpful when creating digital multimodal projects.
In the end, we found the students better understood how genre and medium could significantly impact their messages, depending on the rhetorical situation. For example, one student stated, “This class taught me that print and electronic processes can each be beneficial for a specific assignment. An APA-formatted term paper may present a study more effectively than a PowerPoint presentation. A short PSA video can have a greater impact than a scholarly journal regarding diminished health from smoking.” These are important concepts for students to learn. A short video is not necessarily superior or inferior to a scholarly journal article—depending on the situation. Using them effectively depends on the purpose of the message and its intended audience. All genres and forms—newspaper editorials, public service announcements, problem-solving proposals, travel reviews, blogs—have different goals, purposes, and audiences. No writing course alone can teach students to compose an effective “text” in every genre, medium, and discourse; however, what a writing class can do is expose students to the idea of how writing and rhetorical communication can differ. When offering multimodal instruction and the opportunity to develop multimodal projects, the students have the tools necessary to adjust to new ways of writing and to the new online environment.