As I explore the literature on assessing new media compositions, I’m connecting more dots between problems expressed by scholars and theories that address those problems. With an interest in what causes instructors to balk at teaching and assessing digital writing, I am struck by a statement made by Kathleen Yancey in her 2004 article, “Looking for sources of coherence in a fragmented world” (Computers and Composition, 21 (1), 89-102):
“...we seem comfortable with intertextual composing [in which print and digital literacies overlap], even with the composed products. But we seem decidedly discomforted when it comes time to assess such processes and products.”
My blog posts over recent days are relevant to Yancey’s point about lack of writing instructors’ comfort with assessments. One would think that along with new technologies comes new thinking and expectations for adapting one’s ways to new applications. But her point and my recent observations covered in earlier posts raise a question about the reason for instructors' discomfort. Perhaps the discomfort stems from a another factor; perhaps it relates to style--choices by instructors of what and how to teach; student’s choices of elements to include in compositions; and instructor’s choices of how to interpret these elements.
What's the connection between multimodal composition, assessments, and style? I am discovering this while developing another project, a syllabus for a freshman composition class centered on the theme of “style.” I submitted my first draft of this in a recent graduate class, “Teaching Writing in High Schools and Colleges.” It should get students interested in developing a writing style, like a dancer chooses her dance steps, a musician chooses his performance style, etc. Style is all about choices, and choices reflect who the individual is.
During my subsequent exploration into “style,” I found the work of Winston Weathers in The Writing Teacher’s Sourcebook (368) (edited by Edward Corbett, Nancy Myers, and Gary Tate, 2000), originally published in 1970 in College Composition and Communication. Weathers’ article, “Teaching Style: A Possible Anatomy” discusses how writer’s choices of words, collections of words, and "larger units" of composition all designate a writer’s style. I couldn’t help but connect his concept to multimodal composition.
Weathers writes that “in the art of choosing what to write, one can and must choose from something. We need to explain that certain real materials exist in style--measurable, identifiable, describably...Real material that serves as the substantive foundation of style is of three general kinds: individual words; collections of words into phrases, sentences paragraphs; and larger architectural units of composition.”
In 1970, before computers or the idea of multimodal compositions ever hit classrooms, Weathers noted these larger units of composition that appear to be beyond words. I translate this to our contemporary term, visual rhetoric, that can include video, audio, graphics, photos, etc., as larger architectural units of composition.
Weathers says, “What the teacher writes on the blackboard in front of the student, or even what the teacher writes outside of class and brings to read to his students, is the teacher’s commitment to the style he is urging his students to learn. Perhaps some of the difficulties in teaching style arise because of teacher failure, not failure in sincerity or industry or knowledge, but failure in demonstrating an art and a skill. Teacher failure ever to write and perform as a master stylist creates an amazing credibility gap.”
Master stylist? I doubt that few instructors who find themselves teaching multimodal composition in writing classrooms today would call themselves master stylists of this craft.
Weathers also says, “Many students write poorly and with deplorable styles simply because they do not care; their failures are less the result of incapacity than the lack of will.” Applying his idea to instructors, it’s understandable why an instructor might find it daunting to introduce any digital technology which the instructor has not yet mastered. But what we master as well as what we avoid or ignore is our choice. So I’m thinking, a teacher’s style of teaching--i.e. traditional methods versus 21st Century ones, could stem from a lack of will to invest in shifting gears and learning something utterly new when an instructor’s role is already challenged enough by the daily routine. But at the end of the day, choices reflect the teacher’s style.
Weathers says, “I think we should confirm for our students that style has something to do with better communication, adding as it does certain technicolor to otherwise black-and-white language. But going beyond this “better communication” approach, we should also say that style is the proof of a human being’s individuality; that style is a writer’s revelation of himself; that through style, attitudes and values are communicated; that indeed our manner is a part of our message...how we choose says something about who we are.”
Just as students who compile a rhetoric comprised of words and other modes are developing a style of composition through their choices, a teacher who hasn’t does this herself is hardly able to grade or assess such work, and thus has a style somewhat incompatible with her student’s.
I find Weathers’ approach to the matter of style to be quite insightful. It enables me to connect the concept of style with multimodal composition and see why an instructor might be uncomfortable assessing such work if she has not partaken in it herself. What to do about this is part of my journey.
“...we seem comfortable with intertextual composing [in which print and digital literacies overlap], even with the composed products. But we seem decidedly discomforted when it comes time to assess such processes and products.”
My blog posts over recent days are relevant to Yancey’s point about lack of writing instructors’ comfort with assessments. One would think that along with new technologies comes new thinking and expectations for adapting one’s ways to new applications. But her point and my recent observations covered in earlier posts raise a question about the reason for instructors' discomfort. Perhaps the discomfort stems from a another factor; perhaps it relates to style--choices by instructors of what and how to teach; student’s choices of elements to include in compositions; and instructor’s choices of how to interpret these elements.
What's the connection between multimodal composition, assessments, and style? I am discovering this while developing another project, a syllabus for a freshman composition class centered on the theme of “style.” I submitted my first draft of this in a recent graduate class, “Teaching Writing in High Schools and Colleges.” It should get students interested in developing a writing style, like a dancer chooses her dance steps, a musician chooses his performance style, etc. Style is all about choices, and choices reflect who the individual is.
During my subsequent exploration into “style,” I found the work of Winston Weathers in The Writing Teacher’s Sourcebook (368) (edited by Edward Corbett, Nancy Myers, and Gary Tate, 2000), originally published in 1970 in College Composition and Communication. Weathers’ article, “Teaching Style: A Possible Anatomy” discusses how writer’s choices of words, collections of words, and "larger units" of composition all designate a writer’s style. I couldn’t help but connect his concept to multimodal composition.
Weathers writes that “in the art of choosing what to write, one can and must choose from something. We need to explain that certain real materials exist in style--measurable, identifiable, describably...Real material that serves as the substantive foundation of style is of three general kinds: individual words; collections of words into phrases, sentences paragraphs; and larger architectural units of composition.”
In 1970, before computers or the idea of multimodal compositions ever hit classrooms, Weathers noted these larger units of composition that appear to be beyond words. I translate this to our contemporary term, visual rhetoric, that can include video, audio, graphics, photos, etc., as larger architectural units of composition.
Weathers says, “What the teacher writes on the blackboard in front of the student, or even what the teacher writes outside of class and brings to read to his students, is the teacher’s commitment to the style he is urging his students to learn. Perhaps some of the difficulties in teaching style arise because of teacher failure, not failure in sincerity or industry or knowledge, but failure in demonstrating an art and a skill. Teacher failure ever to write and perform as a master stylist creates an amazing credibility gap.”
Master stylist? I doubt that few instructors who find themselves teaching multimodal composition in writing classrooms today would call themselves master stylists of this craft.
Weathers also says, “Many students write poorly and with deplorable styles simply because they do not care; their failures are less the result of incapacity than the lack of will.” Applying his idea to instructors, it’s understandable why an instructor might find it daunting to introduce any digital technology which the instructor has not yet mastered. But what we master as well as what we avoid or ignore is our choice. So I’m thinking, a teacher’s style of teaching--i.e. traditional methods versus 21st Century ones, could stem from a lack of will to invest in shifting gears and learning something utterly new when an instructor’s role is already challenged enough by the daily routine. But at the end of the day, choices reflect the teacher’s style.
Weathers says, “I think we should confirm for our students that style has something to do with better communication, adding as it does certain technicolor to otherwise black-and-white language. But going beyond this “better communication” approach, we should also say that style is the proof of a human being’s individuality; that style is a writer’s revelation of himself; that through style, attitudes and values are communicated; that indeed our manner is a part of our message...how we choose says something about who we are.”
Just as students who compile a rhetoric comprised of words and other modes are developing a style of composition through their choices, a teacher who hasn’t does this herself is hardly able to grade or assess such work, and thus has a style somewhat incompatible with her student’s.
I find Weathers’ approach to the matter of style to be quite insightful. It enables me to connect the concept of style with multimodal composition and see why an instructor might be uncomfortable assessing such work if she has not partaken in it herself. What to do about this is part of my journey.
No comments:
Post a Comment