Topic - “Multiple Literacies”
In emphasizing the urgency to supply education that’s critical of the “popular spheres” (The Web, Iconic media such as movies and magazines) where our youth, as Alexander puts it, form cultural identities for themselves much more so than in the classroom…
We will ask…
• Should there be critical analysis of video games, the copious audio/video compositions that exist in mass and variety, and Web pages? What about e-mail? Should the above modes or multi-modes receive proportionate critical attention to that of literature? Will this lead us to production of stronger compositions in these genres? Will this provide students with the skills (literacy) needed to analyze and think critically of increasingly complex compositions to come? How do we teach active “reading” of multi-modal discourse?
• Can we teach students to approach multi-modal discourse by separating, isolating, and thinking critically of the streams of information one-by-one?
We will give examples through experience…
• By creating both a textual composition and an a/v composition with the same exigency to contrast the separated audiences’ reactions in a way that shows why critical thinking of multi-modal discourse should receive greater attention in the classroom.
We will consider forces of resistance…
• You can’t even look up the word literacies (notice the red squiggle) because the dictionary publishers are skeptical or disturbed, and the acceptance of such a word would advocate both considering, then closing the gap between the composers and audiences, the fortunate and unfortunate, in multi-modal critical thinking skills.
Video:
One camera shot dominates the video. It is of a blank space on a table that slowly gets filled with images participants collect, select, and assemble (speed elapsed)
Then, ask participants to read the composition and contrast their responses in another shot.
Afterwards, I will transcribe their responses to text and write a textual overview of the assembly project.
One group at the conference will see the video while another will just be given transcribed text. We will then assemble and talk about the imprecision and deception of images as well as text.
*I feel like this is a poorly grounded idea in the readings, but there is some relation to Sirc, Alexander, and Wysocki.
9 comments:
"Should there be critical analysis of video games, the copious audio/video compositions that exist in mass and variety, and Web pages? What about e-mail? Should the above modes or multi-modes receive proportionate critical attention to that of literature? Will this lead us to production of stronger compositions in these modes? Will this provide students with the skills (literacy) needed to analyze and think critically of increasingly complex compositions to come? How do we teach active “reading” of multi-modal discourse?"
I think these are very interesting and worthwhile questions to pose.
Using the standards given to us by Dr. Rouzie, I find myself looking for a solid assertion; do you have answers to these questions you want to show us, or are we simply exploring the possibilities?
I like the set-up of your proposal, Russ. Breaking the elements of your proposal into different sections really helped me see how they flowed from one to the next and how you envisioned the presentation moving from general questions about "reading" multi-modal discourse into "how" you plan on addressing the need for instructors to bring this analysis into the classroom by presenting a textual and an A/V presentation that demands interpretation. The questions I seem to have about your proposal are more about logistics than content. Do you plan on the A/V and textual presentations to have a predetermined meaning? Are you planning on having a specific message in mind (so that those who interpret it correctly can consider themselves savvy in multi-modal discourse and those who do not can realize the limitations of our current approach to analysis)? I also wonder whether this presentation might work as a workshop presentation in which you present the original project idea and then work with members to experiment with multi-modal discourse. (This is something I'm struggling with in my own proposal) As is, your proposal seems as though it is a blend of the creative with the interactive. I wonder if a hands-on workshop might let you bend the boundaries a bit more and really interact with your audience and the material. What do you think?
I like the idea, but I'm not sure how practical it is to shoo out half the audience to watch (or not watch) a clip. UNLESS, this is a workshop, and then, I think, it would be pretty cool.
I don't think this is poorly grounded, instead, I think it covers too many bases for just a short paper. In short, I think this proposal just needs more sniper-like focus. What is it you want attendees to walk away with?
What do you want them to think about when you are speaking? What types of questions will they have?
...
Great comments y'all!
I think what I need to focus on is how it is critical to expand lessons in multi-modal discourse for the two fold need to teach students how to think critically of commercial media and appreciate educational media.
Good thinkin' Rock.
I guess the whoel split up audience idea is not so hot. Maybe just do all that within a video, show the whole audience both sides.
Okay, other idea:
An argument that multi-modal discourse lessons need to be expanded in the field.
A video-narrative essay about trying to produce a visual piece similar to a textual piece to show the strengths and weaknesses of each as communication modes. Then, I could follow that with producing a multi-modal piece where text and image are working together, emphasizing how text is taking on new tasks with the advent of new technology.
I could bring ideas of audience implication or baggage they bring when interpreting images, along with what they are commonly accepted to represent.
Whatcha think?
Russ,
I am fascinated with your video experiment, but less so with your introductory questions and assertions. You might want to convert some of the questions into assertions. Keep in mind that the conference is multi-disciplinary and so readers may not understand the reference to literature as clearly as English studies people.
It seems to me that your video centers on questions of what words accomplish versus what visuals do, and then what they can do together. And how to critically approach interpreting them (and composing them?). Will this lead to a method of critical analysis of video games and A/V compositions? Your lead-in would raise that expectation, so you might want to articulate a specific method/theory--Stuart Hall's articulation theory a la Johnson-Eilola, e.g.
Sirc and Wysocki should be brought in substantively and specifically to support and explain your aims.So I would revise the whole shebang to include your newer description of the video and use the theories to express and support the assertions you wish to explore through the video.
"Be sure to make your proposal accessible to reviewers across disciplines. In other words, avoid discipline-specific language and do not assume discipline-specific expertise from your reviewers."
This comes from the conference guidelines, and I think Dr. Rouzie has already spoken to this, but I think many of our presentations might be due for a little revision in order to make them more accessible across disciplines.
Russ, I really like the questions you ask (that Brett repeated in his Sayback)--excellent, especially the third question (Yes! it will! it will lead to stronger compositions in these modes!). Like Rebecca, I like how you have structured this proposal. I wonder if time may be an issue? All are good questions, but discussing just the first two or three might take up the time. However, posing questions, discussing some, and ending on more questions should not be a problem. Some of the best presentations do that, use questions to conclude to get us thinking . . .
Russ would your paper fit on a panel with me and melanie? Answer quickly if you can.
Multiple literacies reflects the notion that meaningful inquiry often crosses disciplinary boundaries and that it is often useful to apply tools. Literacy today goes far beyond reading and writing to embrace multiple literacies across multiple technologies.
-----------------------
jnny
Internet marketing
Post a Comment