Both articles acknowledged that DST may have certain 'thorns' - using Dr T's term in his PPT slides - especially in terms of time (Dr Nelson's took 17 weeks (!!)). But I do agree that engaging in multimodal texts, gives the authors opportunities to express themselves more creatively especially when their language proficiency could be a hindrance in expressive writing in the traditional sense. The integration of other modes to communicate messages would allow the 'writing product' to be more meaningful in delivering its intent or message. Initially I felt that this could also be a reason why we have integrated project work (IPW) in schools, to acknowledge that some students who may not be very good in writing can also showcase their ability in presentation, IT skills, etc. But after reading Ware, I realised that the use of PPT in her case study school is actually quite similar to what is happening in our Singapore classrooms too!
Like what Dr Nelson concluded, we may not be cheerleaders of ICT but we cannot negate the fact that technological presence have "changed the landscape of communication" (Bearne & Kress, 2001). Because of the shift in the roles of image and writing in many domains, it is crucial that we acknowledge this shift as there are implications to teaching and learning. New kinds of identity are also being formed for students and teachers. The access to technology has enabled our students to be 'authors'. Kress (2007) (I'm intrigued by his work, or perhaps it's the beard...lol) posits that a new curriculum and pedagogy that acknowledges and values the semiotic work of students should be in place, so that it will be in tandem with the changes in communication. But how ready are we for that?
My concern is still in the area of assessment. How do we then assess these multimodal works of our students? Are we ready to allow their 'authorial voices' to be heard?
Assessment is definitely an area of concern. If the multimodal works are school-based assignments, I suppose standardised rubrics will work. To minimise subjectivity, standardisation of students' work must be very tight and teachers must be clear of the objectives of the task. However in high-stakes national examinations, students' knowledge of multimodal texts are not tested. If such knowledge are not tested/valued, teachers may not be motivated to get students to work on multimodal texts given the focus is on print traditional literacy. Teachers might be ready to allow students' authorial voices to be heard but because of assessment, they might be pressured to focus on print literacy instead.
ReplyDeleteI am wondering if the model of including CCA points for entrance to schools can be used to promote value of multiliteracies. I am not familiar with the entrance systems but I thought if it worked to a certain extent in promoting other talents besides being exam smart, perhaps it can be considered for multiliteracies too?
ReplyDelete