Multimodal assignments in language arts involve student learning through not only print and verbal language activities but also visual, kinesthetic, aural, and spatial activities. Language arts teachers can use these elements as a means of developing stronger critical thinking among their students. Traditionally, in language arts classrooms, print media has been at the top of the media hierarchy. Multimodality instead posits print texts as part of a wider range of communication options. Students who participate in multimodal activities fall into one of three groups: students who struggle to connect the multimodal course activities with what they see as real language arts and literacy work; students who connect quite actively and dramatically with multimodal course activities and see them as highly relevant to language arts; and students who are not certain how nonprint and print texts are connected but who start to accept such connections as important over time. These contradictions within student experiences highlight a need for educators to carefully consider both the conditions under which multimodal assignments are given and the underlying reasons for bringing multimodal thinking into the classroom. Multimodality can free students' thinking, but only if students understand that multimodal activities are part of an overall orientation towards thinking and communication. If students see them as a temporary change of pace before returning to print-based thinking, then such activities can easily be devalued or seen as a way to avoid traditional reading and writing as well as thinking. Larger curricular goals also need to be made clear for students so that they have an opportunity to move beyond a mindset of assignment completion and think about how multimodal thinking fits into broader communication purposes.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AdlerM. J.Van DorenC. (1940). How to read a book: The classic guide to intelligent reading. New York: Simon & Schuster.
2.
ApplebeeA. N. (1974). Tradition and reform in the teaching of English: A history. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.
3.
AtwanR. (2002). Convergences: Message, method, medium. New York: Bedford St. Martins.
4.
AtwellN. (1987). In the middle: Writing, reading, and learning with adolescents. Montclair, NJ: Boynton/Cook.
5.
BartonD.HamiltonM.IvanicR. (2000). Situated literacies: Reading and writing in context. London: Routledge.
6.
BigumC. (2002). Design sensibilities, schools and the new computing and communication technologies. In SnyderI. (Ed.), Silicon literacies: Communication, innovation and education in the electronic age (pp. 130–140). London: Routledge.
7.
BlackR. W. (2007). Digital design: English language learners and reader reviews in online fiction. In KnobelM.LankshearC. (Eds.), A new literacies sampler (pp. 115–136). New York: Peter Lang.
8.
BloomA. (1987). The closing of the American mind. New York: Simon & Schuster.
9.
BrandtD. (2001). Literacy in American lives. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
10.
BruceB. C. (2002). Diversity and critical social engagement: How changing technologies enable new modes of literacy in changing circumstances. In AlvermannD. E. (Ed.), Adolescent literacies in a digital world (pp. 1–18). New York: Peter Lang.
11.
BuckinghamD.Sefton-GreenJ. (1994). Cultural studies goes to school: Reading and teaching popular media. London: Taylor & Francis.
CisnerosS. (1991). The house on Mango Street (2nd ed.). New York: Vintage Books.
14.
CliffordG. J. (1989). A Sisyphean task: Historical perspectives on writing and reading instruction. In DysonA. H. (Ed.), Collaboration through writing and reading (pp. 25–83). Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.
15.
CopeB.KalantzisM. (2000). Multiliteracies: Literacy learning and the design of social futures. London: Routledge.
16.
De CastellS.LukeA. (1988). Defining “literacy” in North American schools. In KintgenE. R.KrollB. M.RoseM. (Eds.), Perspectives on literacy (pp. 159–174). Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
De SaussureF. (1966). Course in general linguistics. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company.
19.
EbertsJ. (Producer), & RedfordR. (Director). (1992). A river runs through it [Motion picture]. United States: Allied Filmmakers.
20.
EdsonM. (1999). Wit. London: Faber & Faber.
21.
EricssonS. (Producer), TalrejaS. (Producer), & JhallyS. (Director). (1999). Tough guise: Violence, media & the crisis in masculinity [Motion picture]. United States: Media Education Foundation.
22.
FreireP. (1993). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: Continuum International Publishing Group.
23.
GallasK. (1994). The languages of learning: How children talk, write, dance, draw, and sing their understanding of the world. New York: Teachers College Press.
24.
GeeJ. P. (1999). An introduction to discourse analysis: Theory and method. London: Routledge.
25.
GeeJ. P. (2000). New people in new worlds: Networks, the new capitalism, and schools. In CopeB.KalantzisM. (Eds.), Multiliteracies: Literacy learning and the design of social futures (pp. 43–68). London: Routledge.
26.
GlassM. L. (1979). Sputnik to Proposition 13: Exploding the myths. The English Journal, 68(6), 23–27.
27.
GlovinI. (Director), & SpielbergS. (Director). (1993). Schindlers list [Motion picture]. United States: Universal Pictures.
28.
GraffG. (1987). Professing literature: An institutional history. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
29.
HirschE. D.Jr.TrefilJ. S. (1987). Cultural literacy. New York: Houghton Mifflin.
30.
JhallyS. (Producer/Director). (1999). Killing us softly 3 [Motion picture]. United States: Media Education Foundation.
31.
KellnerD. M. (2002). Technological revolution, multiple literacies, and the restructuring of education. In SnyderI. (Ed.), Silicon literacies: Communication, innovation and education in the electronic age (pp. 154–169). London: Routledge.
32.
KingJ. R.O'BrienD. G. (2002). Adolescents' multiliteracies and their teachers' needs to know: Towards a digital détente. In AlvermannD.E. (Ed.), Adolescents and literacies in a digital world (pp. 40–50). New York: Peter Lang.
33.
KistW. (2005). New literacies in action: Teaching and learning in multiple media. New York: Teachers College Press.
34.
KnobelM.LankshearC. (2007). Online memes, affinities, and cultural production. In KnobelM.LankshearC. (Eds.), A new literacies sampler (pp. 199–227). New York: Peter Lang.
35.
KressG. (2003). Literacy in the new media age. London: Routledge.
36.
LankshearC.KnobelM. (2003). New literacies: Changing knowledge and classroom learning. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
37.
LankshearC.SnyderI. (2000). Teachers and technoliteracy: Managing literacy, technology and learning in schools. St. Leonards, Australia: Allen & Unwin.
38.
LeanderK.SheehyM. (2004). Spatializing literacy research and practice. New York: Peter Lang.
39.
LewisC. (1998). Rock ‘n’ roll and horror stories: Students, teachers, and popular culture. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 42, 116–120.
40.
LewisC.FabosB. (2005). The functions of instant messaging: Language use, social networks, and monitoring in a digital landscape. Reading Research Quarterly, 40, 470–501.
41.
LewisC.FindersM. (2002). Implied adolescents and implied teachers: A generation gap for new times. In AlvermannD. E. (Ed.), Adolescents and literacies in a digital world (pp. 101–113). New York: Peter Lang.
42.
LoaderJ. (Producer/Director), & RaffertyK. (Producer/Director). (1982). The atomic café [Motion picture]. United States: The Archives Project.
43.
LukeA. (1998). Getting over method: Literacy teaching as work in “New Times.” Language Arts, 75, 305–313.
44.
LukeA. (2002). What happens to literacies old and new when they're turned into policy. In AlvermannD. E. (Ed.), Adolescents and literacies in a digital world (pp. 186–203). New York: Peter Lang.
45.
LukeC. (2000). Cyber-schooling and technological change: Multiliteracies for new times. In CopeB.KalantzisM. (Eds.), Multiliteracies: Literacy learning and the design of social futures (pp. 69–91). London: Routledge.
46.
MerriamS. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
47.
MojeE. B.YoungJ. P.ReadenceJ. E.MooreD. W. (2000). Reinventing adolescent literacy for new times: Perennial and millennial issues. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 43, 400–410.
No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB), Pub. L. No. 107-110, § 115 Stat. 1425.
53.
NeilsenL. (1998). Playing for real: Performative texts and adolescent identities. In AlvermannD. E.HinchmanK. A.MooreD. W.PhelpsS. F.WaffD. R. (Eds.), Reconceptualizing the literacies in adolescents' lives (pp. 3–26). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
54.
The New London Group. (2000). A pedagogy of multiliteracies designing social futures. In CopeB.KalantzisM. (Eds.), Multiliteracies: Literacy learning and the design of social futures (pp. 9–42). London: Routledge.
55.
ObidahJ. E. (1998). Black—my story: Literate currency in everyday schooling. In AlvermannD. E.HinchmanK. A.MooreD. W.PhelpsS. F.WaffD. R. (Eds.), Reconceptualizing the literacies in adolescents' lives (pp. 51–71). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
56.
O'BrienD. G. (1998). Multiple literacies in a high-school program for “at-risk” adolescents. In AlvermannD. E.HinchmanK. A.MooreD. W.PhelpsS. F.WaffD. R. (Eds.), Reconceptualizing the literacies in adolescents' lives (pp. 27–49). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
57.
OhtahR.TobinJ. (1995). Video literacy at Waiau Elementary School. The Kamehameha Journal of Education, 6, 91–104.
58.
PeirceC. S. (1931-1958). Collected papers of Charles Sanders Peirce. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
59.
RichardsJ. C.McKennaM. C. (2003). Integrating multiple literacies in K—8 classrooms: Cases, commentaries, and practical applications. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
60.
ShortK. G.KauffmanG.KahnL. H. (2000). “I just need to draw”: Responding to literature across multiple sign systems. The Reading Teacher, 54, 160–171.
61.
SiegelM. (1995). More than words: The generative power of transmediation for learning. Canadian Journal of Education, 20, 455–475.
62.
SnyderI. (2002). Silicon literacies: Communication, innovation and education in the electronic age. London: Routledge.
63.
StoneJ. C. (2007). Popular websites in adolescents' out-of-school lives: Critical lessons on literacy. In KnobelM.LankshearC. (Eds.), A new literacies sampler (pp. 49–65). New York: Peter Lang.
64.
StraussA.CorbinJ. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
65.
StreetB. (1985). Literacy in theory and in practice. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
66.
ThomasA. (2007). Blurring and breaking through the boundaries of narrative, literacy, and identity in adolescent fan fiction. In KnobelM.LankshearC. (Eds.), A new literacies sampler (pp. 137–165). New York: Peter Lang.
67.
TobinJ. (2000). “Good guys don't wear hats”: Children's talk about the media. New York: Teachers College Press.
