refereed article: Composition Studies
citation
Atkins, Anthony; Anderson, Daniel; Ball, Cheryl; Homicz Millar, Krista; Selfe, Cynthia; & Selfe, Richard. (2007, forthcoming). Integrating multimodality in composition curricula: Survey methodology and results from a CCCC Research Initiative grant. Composition Studies, 35(1).
abstract
This article describes methodology and outcomes of a national survey conducted in 2005 to discover how instructors use multimodal composition practices in their writing classrooms and research. The authors describe the procedures they used to collect and analyze data from writing teachers about the production, distribution, interpretation, and consumption of multimodal composition. Supported by a research initiative of the Conference on College Composition and Communication, the survey was designed to identify the instruction occurring at institutions with a nascent or established curriculum of multimodal pedagogy in which students and faculty members produce texts that combine words, images, and sound as composing resources. The aim of this project was to produce a snapshot of those programs working to define multimodal composition and to integrate these new semiotic forms into writing classes.
co-authors
- Dr. Anthony Atkins, University of North Carolina-Wilmington
- Dr. Daniel Anderson, University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill
- Krista Homicz Millar, PhD candidate, University of Michigan
- Dr. Cynthia Selfe, The Ohio State University
- Dr. Richard Selfe, The Ohio State University
contribution
- principle investigator on survey research
- 25% authoring on 40 manuscript pages
- contact author
publisher
Composition Studies is the “oldest independent periodical in its field.” See it’s website. The editors are Brad Lucas and Carrie Leverenz, and the journal is hosted at Texas Christian University.
accompanying materials
pre-press copy of article [PDF]
refereed article: Convergence
citation
Ball, Cheryl E. (2006, November). Designerly ≠ readerly: Re-assessing multimodal and new media rubrics for writing studies. Convergence: The International Journal for Research into New Media Technologies, 12, 393–412. Special issue on re-assessing new media.
abstract
In this article, I draw on Gunther Kress and Theo van Leeuwen’s (2001) Multimodal Discourse: The Modes and Media of Contemporary Communication and Lev Manovich’s (2001) The Language of New Media, which have become prevalent texts in US writing studies fields—a place where multimodal and new media theories have made inroads in the last five years. I briefly describe each of the rubrics the authors used and show how they help readers determine the materialities of multimodal or new media texts. I also argue, however, that writing studies scholars should not rely solely on these rubrics because they function in descriptive ways rather than in interpretive ways for new media texts. In other words, I will show that while a reader could use these rubrics to describe some of the design elements in new media texts, readers cannot use the rubrics to interpret those design elements in ways that would allow them to form a reading of the text. I apply the rubrics to a new media text, “While Chopping Red Peppers” (Ankerson, 2000), to show their limited use and to suggest that while these multimodal and new media theories have a place in writing studies, we need better methods and/or reading heuristics in order to interpret (and teach) such works.
publisher
Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies, Sage Publications. See their website. Acceptance rate is 30%.
accompanying materials
uncorrected article proof [pdf]
a note about the proof
The proof contains one major error; in the title and running header, the equal sign should be an inequal sign — as in, designerly is not the same as/does not equal readerly strategies. The published-article PDF will be ready in November 06 with the correction.