Wednesday, August 22, 2012

Week 1 - Lauer and Wysocki

This week’s readings:
Lauer, Claire (2012). What's in a Name? The Anatomy of Defining New/Multi/Modal/Digital/Media Texts. Kairos: A Journal of Rhetoric, Technology, and Pedagogy, 17(1). http://kairos.technorhetoric.net/17.1/inventio/lauer/index.html

Wysocki, Anne Frances. "Opening New Media to Writing: Openings and Justifications." from Writing New Media. 1-41.

The readings this week were an intersting combination. I read Lauer’s text first since (ironically) it was digital and because I could start reading it while I was waiting for the bus on my tablet. What struck me most about this text is the lack of a clear, unified definition for terms that we use daily in composition. I realize that I throw around the term “multimodality” as if everyone understands it and as if everyone shares my definition (using various modes of composition as a means of persuasion/communication). I realize also that, although I do define this term in my FYC class, that I don’t do a very good job of SHOWING my students what I mean. Wysocki discusses the impact of vague terminology on the student experience and even on the potential agency of the user/student. She also points out the dangers of decontextualizing writing, resulting in the “real world” vs. “school” divide. This decontextualization is, most certainly, a part of the alienation of students through ineffectual/ill-defined/unclear terminology. If students don’t understand what we’re saying because we’ve jargonized our classroom activities to the point of failed utility for the student, then we are failing as teachers. I’m certainly guilty of this in terms other than multimodal discussions. I’ve tried to stop using terms like rhetorical and genre analysis for assignments and I’ve replaced them with more student-friendly and specific terms like argument analysis and assignment type analysis. Students don’t need to get bogged down in OUR professional terminology as FYC students.

Students aside, in terms of my OWN, professional preference for terminology in this field of study,  I prefer “multimodality” precisely for the same reason that Cyndie Selfe mentions in the secion on terminology being “precise”. She states that multimodality is esentially using all available means of persuasion (in whatever mode/form) to effectively complete the task at hand. THIS is how I present multimodality to my students. I explain that there are various modes of communication and that some of them are more situationally appropriate than others and that their task is to determine the most rhetorically effective mode for each given task. Students seem to understand this and when I explain that this comes from Aristotle’s definition of rhetoric, well, that just adds to my own ethos. In this case, multimodality has a very precise definition for me and for my FYC class.

Finally, I very much appreciated Wysocki’s call for generous reading and encouraging more teachers to study new media since “writing teachers focus specifically on texts and how situated people (learn how to) use them to make things happen” (Wysocki, p.5). I’m expecially intrigued when she points out the lack of scholarship on “help[ing] composers of texts think usefully about effects of their particular decisions as they compose a new media text, to help composers see how agency and materiality are entwined as they compose” (Wysocki, p.6). For me, this entails more discussion (a la Selfe and Banks) in the FYC classroom to encourage students to see behind the interface and terms to better understand their situation as a student and as an individual.

Wysocki also does a very nice job of encouraging us to teach alertness within our students towards differnet types of composition/production and their appropriateness. This alertness is also key for us as teachers since we should encourage a “generosity toward the positions that others produce, no matter how awkward-looking or –sounding” (Wysocki, p.23) which is something that I want to better encourage in my classroom. Of course, this selection of readings doesn’t address issues of assessment which complicates this “generosity” in reading such texts. But, that is another entry all together.

1 comment:

  1. Great post.

    This:
    "Of course, this selection of readings doesn’t address issues of assessment which complicates this “generosity” in reading such texts. But, that is another entry all together."
    Yes! This is so huge. I was talking with Diane K-R about this recently. It's a huge obstacle for many writing programs, not to mention teachers themselves. I'm not sure we'll directly address this via readings this semester, though hopefully it will come up in our discussions. If not...maybe a final project idea for you? (or not)

    Thanks for the post!

    ReplyDelete