The first section, “Space,” focuses on the design of the physical and the network environs central to a multiliteracy center. James A. Inman’s “Designing Multiliteracy Centers: A Zoning Approach” suggests to zone from need instead of from a catalogue, nothing that centers design around furnishings and technologies rather than the work (20). Using governmental zoning as a point of entry for multiliteracy center design, Inman posits that “. . . zoning offers an effective means for utilizing space” (22). His work is compelling from a design perspective; it renders the landscape of space to that of how students will use the space instead of shaping the space around objects that might not fit the needs of students. In the conclusion, Inman summarizes the points needed to craft a zoning plan for stakeholders, thereby providing a practical service to users of his zoning proposal.

Morgan Gresham’s “Composing Multiple Spaces: Clemson’s Class of ’41 Online Studio” walks readers through the networked spaces users might need in crafting an online multiliteracy studio and the limitations creators of such spaces might face in the initial design of such a studio. Her discussion of the design includes an “electronic cabinet,” “asynchronous communications,” and “synchronous communications and assistance,” noting “working in these stages helped us plan to modify the design as the physical Studio opened and developed” (41-42). These stages may help readers plan for their own online multiliteracy spaces by considering the networked environments needed to host a wide array of student needs in such centers.

"Based on the prior methodology, the best approach to multiliteracy center design beings with an evaluation of what clients will actually be doing." - James A. Inman (22)