Multimodality in the Context of English Language Learners - Assignment Example

Multimodality in the Context of English Language Learners Q.1: Competence in the second language, being the target, has naturally taken primacy in the second-language classroom, but this has been at the expense of any real attention being paid to the interrelationship between language and other semiotic systems’ (Royce 2007: 362). Using concrete examples, discuss the contexts in which the multimodal literacy of English language learners might be important and/or ways in which it can be enhanced. Introduction In today’s teaching, there has been a shift from the traditional communication through writing and reading from traditional texts. Attention has been shifted towards realization of the role played by visual communication modes in enhancing literacy especially for English language learners (ELL). Multimodality in English language learning involves the use of combined communication modes like images, sounds, videos and pictures as well as graphic representations among other modes (Denton and Sewell 2011). Studies on English learning have demonstrated that multimodal communicative modes are more captivating to learners and can add more value to student learning. As Royce (2007) points out; competence in English as a second language has been overemphasized without giving due consideration to the relations between various semiotics in order to determine the characteristics that bring the visual-verbal coherency in multimodal texts. Kampf, Kastberg and Maier (2007) observe that integrating verbal and visual discourses remains a major challenge in language teaching hence the need to enhance the connections between different modes involved in ESL learning. This paper examines the importance of multimodal literacy for English language learners and the possible ways of enhancing literacy for ELL. Multimodality and its importance in English language teaching Following technological advancements, there has been a shift from the traditional literacy practices towards new forms of literacies in language learning. New technologies provide a range of applications which can be utilized to generate new stylistic types which have expanded the range of language expression (Wu 2010). Lim and O’Halloran (2011) observe that instead of fragmenting literacy into various literacy forms like visual, emotional, verbal and digital literacy among other forms which disregard the power of traditional literacy, it should be viewed as a dynamic process of enhancing understanding using multimodal semiotic discourses. In multimodal literacy, discourse design is explored by examining the role of various semiotic resources like language, images and gestures used in different modalities like visual, somatic and aural modes (Liu and O’Halloran 2011). It also seeks to examine how the various communication modes integrate and interact with each other to generate a coherent text. Multimodal communication involves the use of multiple discourses within a variety of sign systems whose meanings can be socially construed. According to Jewitt and Kress (2003), multimodal theory comprises of four aspects which define an individual’s depiction of meaning in constructed texts: materiality, design, framing and production. Materiality aspect in multimodality comprises of the resources and materials used in depicting meaning, their quality and ability to communicate the intended message in a variety of ways (Jewitt and Kress 2003). Examples of materials include music, still images, concepts, fabric and transitions among others (Albers and Sanders 2009). Framing in multimodality is used to define the manner in which different aspects of a visual are spaced, exist together or exhibit color continuity or discontinuity, connect or move along the material Jewitt and Kress 2003). For instance in digital texts like WebPages, films and PowerPoint presentations, framing entails placing a visual image, selecting the appropriate image for the intended message, choosing the right text, font size and image size among others (Albers and Sanders 2009). In the creation of such texts, it is important to consider the relationship between the elements and how their interrelationship is likely to influence the student’s interpretation. Design in multimodality context entails the manner in which students utilize the materials at their disposal to generate their representation (Jewitt and Kress 2003). Design represents the theoretical part of expression which is independent of the real product. Production involves the manner in which the representation is created and organized. Production entails the real product like movies plays or visual texts among other products as well as the technical abilities employed in creating the text (Lim and O’Halloran 2011). Studies in multimodality enhance the understanding on how the lives of ELLs and instructors are exposed in the framing, design and the production of texts as well as the philosophies of their creations (Albers and Sanders 2009). Multimodality acknowledges that for many ELL’s, there is a shift in knowledge construction from the traditional static texts to dynamic texts which are supported by audio and visual cues. As Denton and Sewell (2011) further observes, construction of knowledge has become more social and is based on situational contexts. Mills (2010) notes that owing to the domination of multimedia as a form of communication, competency in written texts is no longer sufficient in achieving meaningful participation across different circles of life. There has been an exponential expansion of literacy from the initial confines of writing and reading written and printed texts to multimodal forms utilizing new technologies. Many people are able to use audio, visual and technology based media to create and print various products. This new development has also been realized in English language teaching for ELL’s). This implies that though written text is still important in learning, language instructors should change from the conventional literacy practices towards a multimodalities teaching approach where texts can be presented through movies, websites, transcript texts, cards, pictures and other forms (Denton and Sewell 2011). Multimodality in the context of ELL is majorly concerned with the different methods in which English language can be best acquired b y learners. As a pedagogic philosophy in English language, multimodality holds that learning is best achieved when learners are engaged in multifaceted, socially oriented, individually relevant, creative generation and reading of texts that include different meaningful discourse modes (Albers and Sanders 2009). Multimodal literacy in English teaching is important since it is deeply embedded in the way the society interacts. For this reason, it is possible to use the learners’ out-of-school competencies and experiences to enhance their performance in classroom (Denton and Sewell 2011). Another importance of using multimodality is to enhance the students’ competitiveness in the workforce by equipping them with the requisite knowledge on multimodality. In teaching English language to learners, teachers should think outside the confines of what they expect students to know. Besides concerning themselves with what constitutes literacy to the students, English language instructors should be guided by certain fundamental issues. First, instructors should understand the everyday literacies that can be incorporated in classroom learning (Albers and Sanders 2009). Secondly, English language teachers should have a proper understanding on how to assess and integrate the out-of-school literacies into their teaching activities. Understanding these fundamental issues helps in enhancing the relevancy of literacy to students while creating a favorable environment within the English language classroom for students and instructors to create and share various texts (Hagood and Skinner 2008). To illustrate the nature of contemporary literacy and importance of multimodality in teaching, consider the following woodcut print tilted Entangled. Woodcut print titled ‘Entangled’ by James Sanders; source (Albers and Sanders 2009, p. 1.) In the above print, the artist uses different layers combining different shapes, colors, and varying textural effects to generate a complete image that cannot be complete without the synergistic effect of each of the layers (Albers and Sanders 2009). Similar to the above print, Creation and interpretation of multimodality involves many modes that exist in a dynamic and interactive as well as in an integrative manner to communicate the artist’s objective. This work serves a visual metaphor for illustrating that ways in which literacy in today’s world can be viewed. This example assists teachers in understanding their responsibility in providing ELLs with a variety of opportunities in order to expand their ability to communicate in English. Multimodality helps teachers to realize that engaging students with questions and arousing their desire to learn new skills as well as using digital, musical, visual and spatial tools enhances their performance (Albers and Sanders 2009). Exploiting the synergy between various modes in English language teaching confers many benefits to students and instructors. One of the common applications of multimodality is in the interaction between textual and visual communication modes. The synergistic roles of visual and text discourse can be explained as using text to enhance the students’ understanding of the information contained in the visuals (Kampf, Kastberg and Maier 2007). By introducing, discussing and interpreting visuals within the text, teachers can help learners in understanding the message contained in the visual. Kampf, Kastberg and Maier (2007) further observe that visuals an be viewed as a simplification of text and purport that students appreciate visuals more due to their ability to enhance understanding, enable comparisons and depict relationships between different objects. Visuals are also useful for ELL’s as they act as a means of persuading and drawing the students’ attention to important topics, providing clarification, providing simplification to students who are not conversant with the topic context and to help distracted students in focusing on the main information (Lannon, 2005). Tools for enhancing multimodality among English Language learners Various tools can be used to enhance the interaction between various semiotic forms in language teaching. Some of the effective means of enhancing multimodality in teaching English language is through use of digital story telling, use of texture in linguistic text, use of homospatiality and parallel structures (Jewitt and Kress 2003). (a) Digital story telling Digital story telling is a connection process whereby instructors work in collaboration with students to assist them in exploiting the potential of voice and images in linking people and the community using technology that is relevant to the contemporary context (Hagood and Skinner 2008). Through digital story telling, students are able to create narrative and texts using multiple media graphics, voices videos and titles among others. The digital stories can then be saved as movie files to be played on the computer or be uploaded to the internet or in form of DVDs. Digital stories can be created using digital software like Moviemaker and Photostory among others (Hagood and Skinner 2008). Using the above software, ELL’s can be allowed to create digital stories that integrate their culture, out-of-school literacies and classroom literacies. (b) Texture as a tool for enhancing multimodality in ELL Texture comprises an important part of linguistic texts. Texture is a combination of semantic arrangement of cohesion and registers in which cohesion forms the standard upon which texts can be distinguished from non-text materials (O’Halloran and Yu 2009). The creation of texture through cohesion can be illustrated by the following example; Wash and peel two onions. Place them in the cooking pan. In this sentence, the phrase ‘two onions’ and ‘them’ makes up a cohesive link that interrelates the two phrases in a manner that creates texture. O’Halloran and Yu (2009) argue that cohesion and texture are closely related to the extent that even if a particular text is incomplete in structure, it must have texture. (c) Use of inter-semiotic parallelism in multimodality Parallelism is a vital tool for creating text as it forms a layer of meaning which could not be explained by examining the situation. Inter-semiotic parallelism can be viewed as a cohesive relation that is used to connect language and visual texts in cases where two semiotic elements have a similar form (Royce 2007). Inter-semiotic parallelism can occur either as parallel structures at the communication layer or in form of homospatiality which occurs at the expression layer. Homospatiality is a form of cohesive relation between pictures and language occurring at the expression layer. For instance, homospatiality can be illustrated by using a graphic representation of a camp fire with some contours to represent smoke embedded on the text hot. In this hypothetical example, homospatiality can be used to intensify the heat and smoke from the fire. The term hot has a semantic relationship with the graphic image of fire since ‘hotness’ is an attribute that is naturally associated with fire and both are expected to occur in the same context. In this case, homospatiality acts as a tool to construe the ‘hotness’ originating from the camp fire. (d)Use of parallel structures to enhance inter-semiotic relations in English language Language and picture are used to construe experience through transitivity structures. Inter-semiotic parallel structures can be used to enhance understanding where an image and a piece of text have a similar transitivity process. Use of parallel structures can be illustrated using an example of visual elements in an announcement (Djonov 2010). For instance, the text; Cheap, but not too cheap appears as an elliptical phrase which can be viewed as a form of casual communication hence attracting the viewer to interact with the announcement. The announcement acts as a characteristic in which the mood aspect is brought out clearly. The text can be structurally construed as (A is) cheap, but (A is) not too cheap. This illustration brings out the cohesive relation created by inter-semiotic parallelism (Kress and Van Leeuwen 2006). Conclusion In today’s English language teaching, there is need to shift from the conventional communication through writing and reading from texts towards realization of the role played by multimodal texts in enhancing literacy especially for English language learners . Competence in English as a second language has been overemphasized without giving due consideration to the relations between various semiotics in order to determine the characteristics that bring the visual-verbal coherency in multimodal texts. In enhancing ESL understanding, there is need to integrate verbal and visual discourses in order to bring out the connections between different semiotics involved in ESL learning. To bring a better understanding in English teaching, instructors should think outside the confines of what they expect students to know in order o understand the everyday out-of-class literacies that can be incorporated in the classroom teaching. English language teachers should have a proper understanding on ways of assessing and integrating the out-of-school literacies into their teaching activities. Using Multimodality in teaching ELLs creates synergy between different modes like visual, text, images and videos among which enhances understanding. References Ajayi L. 2009. English as a second language learner’s exploration of multimodal texts in a junior high school. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, vol. 52, no. 7, pp. 585-595. Albers P. & Sanders J. 2009. Multimodal literacies: an introduction. Literacies, the arts and Multimodality, 1-25. Denton S. & Sewell W.C. 2011. Multimodal literacies in the secondary English classroom. English Journal, vol. 100, no. 5, pp. 61-65. Djonov, E. N. 2010. Book review: Carey Jewitt, Technology, literacy and learning: a multimodal approach. Visual Communications, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 117-125. Hagood M. C. & Skinner E. N. 2008. Developing literate identities with English language learners through digital story telling. The Reading Matrix, vol. 8, no. 2: 12-38. Jewitt C. & Kress G. 2003. Introduction. In C. Jewitt & G. Kress (Eds.), Multimodal literacy. New York: Peter Lang. Kampf C., Kastberg, P. & Maier C.D. 2007. Multimodal analysis: an integrative approach for scientific visualizing on the web. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, vol. 52, no. 4, pp. 453-478. Kress, G. & Van Leeuwen, T. 2006. Reading Images: The Grammar of Visual Design. London: Routledge. Lannon, J. 2005. Technical Communication. (10th edition). New York: Longman. Lim F. V. & O’Halloran K. L. 2011. Dimensions of multimodal literacy. Video Learning, vol. 10, pp. 14-21. Mills K. A. 2010. Shreks meets Vygotsky: rethinking adolescents’ multimodal literacy practices in schools. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, vol. 54, no. 1: 35-41. O’Halloran K. & Yu L. 2009. Inter-semiotic texture: analyzing cohesive devices between language and images. Social Semiotics, 1-39. Royce T. 2007. Inter-semiotic complementarity: a framework for multimodal discourse analysis. In new directions in the analysis of multimodal discourse, eds. Terry D. Royce and Wendy L. Bowcher. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Wu, H. 2010. Multimodal literacy practice and identity in Standard English learning: a case study in Taiwan. The JALT CALL Journal, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 129-142. Read More