|
THE IMPORTANCE OF MULTIMODALITY IN MODERN STRATEGIES FOR TEACHING READING AND WRITING
DOI: 10.23951/2782-2575-2023-3-38-51
In this article, the author proposes to interpret the main judgments of modern scholars about reading and writing from the point of view of multimodal teaching methods. Multimodality generally means that more than one way of representing the meaning of messages is expressed in the text. In particular, recording words as graphemes can be combined with visual images to convey the meaning of concepts. The author outlines two controversial trends in the development of the topic of multimodality in science and education. On the one hand, multimodality shows various ways of representation and dissemination in different fields of knowledge and skills. On the other hand, there are no methodological tools in the arsenal of modern researchers that allow a clear reading and description of this phenomenon. Consequently, it is challenging to master and apply a multimodal approach in educational practice. The author of this article examines the theoretical aspects of the multimodal approach in education. The main method of research is comparative analysis. In this context, implementing pedagogical reflection helps answer the question: ‘Have the possibilities of conventional forms of teaching been exhausted?’ The presentation of the research results consists of two sections. The first research section is devoted to the transformation of reading in the digital age. The author’s reflections on the transformations of reading contribute to raising the question of semiotic sources and forms of knowledge. The discussion of this question ensures the authenticity of writing texts in schools and universities and the use of these techniques in writing scientific papers. The second part of the research is devoted to the limits of multimodal methods of teaching writing in modern education. The research helps discover the critical points of the multimodal variant of writing texts as messages in the digital environment. In this case, the research shows that the possibilities of conventional forms of teaching have not been exhausted yet. Conventional forms of teaching ensure the development of skills related to basic knowledge. They can save students time in completing their tasks. In general, the author states that the possibilities of conventional forms of instruction are still relevant in the digital age. Moreover, the possibilities of conventional teaching are in demand in the final stages of study. Therefore, it is necessary to combine innovative and conventional teaching approaches because only in this way it is possible to increase the effectiveness of the initial stages of education and reduce the burden on students at the stage of preparation of final papers.
Ключевые слова: multimodality, teaching, screen-based texts, semiotic sources, augmented reality
Библиография:
1. Guilford W.H. Teaching Peer Review and the Process of Scientific Writing. Advanced Physiology Education. 2001;25(3):167–175. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1152/advances.2001.25.3.167
2. Blake R. Technology and the Four Skills. Language Learning & Technology. 2016;20: 129-142.
3. Chun D., Smith B., & Kern R. Technology in language use, language teaching, and language learning. The Modern Language Journal. 2016;100(Suppl. 2016):64-80. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/modl.12302
4. Jiang L. Digital Multimodal Composing and Investment Change in Learners’ Writing in English as a Foreign Language. Journal of Second Language Writing. 2018;40 (June 2018):60-72. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2018.03.002
5. Pantaleo S. The Semantic and Syntactic Qualities of Paneling in Students’ Graphic Narratives. Visual communication. 2019;18(1):55-81. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1470357217740393
6. Cohn N. Visual Narrative Comprehension: Universal or Not? Psychonomic Bulletin and Review. 2020;27(2):266-285. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-019-01670-1
7. Grogan K.E. Writing Science: What Makes Scientific Writing Hard and How to Make It Easier. The Bulletin of the Ecological Society of America. 2021;102(1):e01800. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/bes2.1800
8. Applebee D., Bennett-Day B., Ferrari J., Pritchard P., Boettger-Tong H. Multimodal Training Improves Spatial Reasoning Skills in Female College Students. Journal of Science Education and Technology. 2021;30(1):539-549. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-020-09898-6
9. Salimpour S., Fitzgerald M.T., Tytler R., Eriksson U. Educational Design Framework for a Web-Based Interface to Visualise Authentic Cosmological “Big Data” in High School. Journal of Science Education and Technology. 2021;30(5):732-750. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-021-09915-2
10. Wu H.-K., Lee S. W.-Y., Chang H.-Y., Liang J.-C. Current Status, Opportunities and Challenges of Augmented reality in education. Computers & education. 2013;62 (March 2013):41-49. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.10.024
11. Petrová Z., Nemec R. Changing Reading Paths in a Digital Age: What are the Consequences for Meaning-Making? Journal of Pedagogy. 2019;10(2):65-85. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/jped-2019-0007
12. Serafini F. Reading the Visual: An Introduction to Teaching Multimodal Literacy. New York, NY, Teachers College Press, 2014, 189 pp.
13. Turbek S.P., Chock T.M., Donahue K., Havrilla C.A., Oliverio A.M., Polutchko S.K., Shoemaker L.G., Vimercati L. Scientific Writing Made Easy: A Step-by-Step Guide to Undergraduate Writing in the Biological Sciences. The Bulletin of the Ecological Society of America. 2016;97(4):417-426. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/bes2.1258
14. Belcher D.D. On Becoming Facilitators of Multimodal Composing and Digital Design. Journal of Second Language Writing. 2017;38(December 2017):80-85. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2017.10.004
15. Pullman G. Writing online: Rhetoric for the digital age. Indianapolis, Hackett, 2017: 224 p.
16. Kim Y., Belcher D. Multimodal Composing and Traditional Essays: Linguistic Performance and Learner Perceptions. RELC Journal. 2020;51(1):86-100. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688220906943
17. Hafner C. A., Ho W. Y. J. Assessing digital multimodal composing in second language writing: Towards a process-based model, Journal of Second Language Writing, 2020, vol. 47, p. 100710, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2020.100710
18. Shipka J. Toward a Composition Made Whole. Pittsburgh, PA, University of Pittsburgh Press, 2011:179 p.
19. Shin D., Cimasko T., Yi Y. Development of Metalanguage for Multimodal Composing: A Case Study of an L2 Writer’s Design of Multimedia Texts. Journal of Second Language Writing. 2020;47:100714. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2020.100714
20. Mills K.A., Stone B.G., Unsworth L., Friend L. Multimodal Language of Attitude in Digital Composition. Written communication. 2020;37(2):135-166. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088319897978
21. Stornaiuolo A., Hull G., Hall M. Cosmopolitan Practices, Networks, and Flows of Literacies. In: K. Mills, A. Stornaiuolo, J. Pandya, & A. Smith (eds.), Handbook of Writing, Literacies, and Education in Digital Cultures. Abingdon, Taylor & Francis, 2017:xxiv−1
22. Van Leeuwen, T. Aesthetics and Text in the Digital Age. In: K. Mills, A. Stornaiuolo, J. Pandya, & A. Smith (Eds.) Handbook of Writing, Literacies, and Education in Digital Cultures. Abingdon, Taylor & Francis, 2017:329-348.
23. Hesse C. Books in Time. In: G. Numberg (Ed.). The Future of the Book. Berkley, Los Angeles, University of California Press, 1996:21-33.
24. Jacobs D. Graphic Encounters: Comics and the Sponsorship of Multimodal Literacy. London, Bloomsbury, 2013:240 p.
25. Martin J.R., White P.R.R. The Language of Evaluation: Appraisal in English. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005;XII:278 p. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230511910
26. Neupane Bastola M., Hu G. “Commenting on Your Work is a Waste of Time Only!”: An Appraisal-Based Study of Evaluative Language in Supervisory Feedback. Studies in Educational Evaluation. 2021;68:100962. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2020.100962
27. Kress G. Multimodality: A social semiotic approach to contemporary communication. London, UK, Routledge, 2010, 212 pp.
28. Berkenkotter C. Genre change in the digital age: Questions about dynamism, affordances, evolution. In: C. Berkenkotter, V. K. Bhatia, & M. Gotti (Eds.) Insights into academic genres. Pieterlen and Bern, Peter Lang, 2012:31-45.
29. Unsworth L. Towards a Metalanguage for Multiliteracies Education: Describing the Meaning-Making Resources of Language-Image Interactions. English Teaching: Practice & Critique. 2006;5(1):55-76.
30. Hafner C. Remix Culture and English Language Teaching: the Expression of Learner Voice in Digital Multimodal Compositions. TESOL Quarterly. 2015;49:486-509. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.238
31. Almusharraf N.M., Engemann J.F. Postsecondary Instructors’ Perspectives on Teaching English as a Foreign Language by Means of a Multimodal Digital Literacy Approach. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning. 2020;15(18):86-107. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v15i18.15451
32. Liang W.J., Lim F.V. A Pedagogical Framework for Digital Multimodal Composing in the English Language Classroom. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching. 2021;15(4):306-320. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17501229.2020.1800709
33. Serafini F., Moses L., Kachorsky D., Rylak D. Incorporating Multimodal Literacies Into Classroom‐Based Reading Assessment. The Reading Teacher. 2020;74(3):285-296. DOI: https://doi.org/doi:10.1002/trtr.1948
( 459.69 kB ) 
( 450.73 kB )
Выпуск: 3, 2023
Серия выпуска: Issue 3
Рубрика:
Страницы: 38 — 51
Скачиваний: 463