Previous Page

 

"Retuning" Pedagogy

The appeal of using multimodal compositions in conjunction with traditional, written forms of composition to assist in the analysis and explanation of material revolves around the idea that such compositions enable students to develop deeper engagements with research material early on in their writing processes. Specifically, intervening at the beginning of the writing process also helps students narrow down topics and focus ideas into manageable arguments.  As we consider the impact of using multimodality to support students’ ability to focus their writing we must remember that multimodality is not a new concept.  Expanding on the role of multimodality in writing and rhetoric, David M. Sheridan, Jim Ridolfo, and Anthony J. Michel (2012) point to the fact that,  “humans experience the world through multiple senses simultaneously, and practices of sociality have always reflected this” (xiv). It seems to makes sense, then, that we begin to help students tap into these “multiple senses” to understand and find purpose in writing assignments. As explained in the section on incentive, such assignments can utilize multiple semiotic modes of composing (aural, visual, textual, etc.) or combinations of modes to assist students in connecting to research material and developing arguments.


Pedagogical approaches advocating the inclusion of multimodal pedagogies in institutions that value print products might be additionally supported by evidence showing that conventional modes of writing and speech are not always the preferred mode of communication of the students in modern American classrooms, “Today’s children pass through childhood receiving information multimodally through television, through multimodal books, through the computer screen and through electronic games.”(Vincent, 2006, p.51) In his book, “The New Digital Storytelling: Creating Narratives with New Media” Bryan Alexander also points to evidence that today’s students are fluent with the various forms of digital media and communication technologies; they are “mixing and matching” various forms of media to create complex, multimodal, multimedia texts outside of the classroom (Alexander, 2008).  Although these sources point to the ubiquity of digital technologies, it is important to remember that not all students have access to and are technology fluent when they enter our classrooms. As instructors working to integrate technology in the classroom, we must be careful and sensitive to these students. We must work to provide extra support, give extra time, and make sure we are prepared to assist them in learning the technology (as it can be especially daunting for some) or adjusting assignments as necessary.

 

Additionally, Bump Halbritter (2013) offers some good advice in reminding us that as instructors of writing it is important that we “retune” our pedagogies, “Learning what our students know—learning how they write already—however they write—in whatever form, can open opportunities to lead our students to make the metaphoric associations between what they know and the forms of writing that we are attempting to help them learn” (54). Halbritter goes on to explain that such an approach helps students and teachers understand that the lessons of process are portable, that knowing multiple forms of writing helps writers discover more productive means of identification between forms (54).  These approaches to pedagogy and process support my project design which integrates a multimodal project that requires students to consider visual, aural, and textual modes as they work to focus and develop argumentative purpose. As the results indicate, at least in one particular classroom, the insight gained as a result of the integration of a multimodal project does transfer into traditional, written academic research papers.
Next Page