Multimodal composition is a discipline at an intersection: technology, communications, and English come together in a messy and vital way, leaving the unprepared (or those who think they’re unprepared) in the dust. My first observation about the class was the tremendous drop rate, particularly among female students. It took two class meetings to convince perhaps a quarter of those enrolled that multimodal composition was not for them, and I wonder why. This, to my mind, relates to the unfortunate masculinization of computers. This is hardly a sociological survey, and I think that any overt perception of gendering would be glassed over by the fact that the professor was female; however, my other English classes didn’t have the same attrition as multimodal. Intermediate poetry kept all of its students. The introductory English Studies course also kept the vast majority of its students. There is the possibility that the format was daunting- the one night per week structure is unfamiliar to most, although I understand that this allows the professor to stay engaged with the field, which in turn increases the classroom quality. In short, students like myself (technically literate, academically established, and confident with technology) stayed, while students who would have benefitted from the class hemorrhaged out. This can be largely attributed to lacking preparatory coursework; if freshman composition really, systematically trained students to think outside the (alpha-literate) box, then multimodal composition would be an easy rehash. If these marginal students are to be included in later classes, then it seems to me that remedial technical instruction should be offered on a case by case basis. The small class size allows for individual attention, so that the unsure students can be kept and brought up to speed.

My (blunt) metaphor in the introductory image is that multimodal composition is a toolbox. It allows me to access meaning quickly, easily, and in such a way that nontraditional audiences can receive my message. Multimodal composition is built out of three components: technological proficiency, creative license, and written composition. The class was a fine instrument of written composition; the blogs in particular kept me writing, toward the weekly assignments. For some students, the blogs were an unfamiliar technology, which are in high use among English professionals.  I felt also that I was invited to explore different formats for creative expression; this is exactly the ingredient that is missing in freshman composition. Rarely, if ever, are students engaging in heavy technological projects in basic composition courses. Powerpoint is typically the extent of multimodality, which allows students to skate by with the bare minimum (or less!) of creative ability. This is fine in an academic setting, if Illinois State University plans to be a degree mill; if, however, we intend to produce either employable or knowledgeable students (or best, both!), then classes like multimodal composition need to be integrated into the general curriculum. This way the dropouts from the course who probably felt overwhelmed by the requirement for pre-existing technological skill would be eased into the world of academia which, like the world at large, demands high computer literacy.

For the student who comes in with adequate technical training, the class works great; I can say that I had a blast, tooling around with video editors and trying to get my Linux OS to do what I wanted it to do.  If I could offer any suggestion to engage the highly competent students, it would be to have more leeway with the projects. Video is a format I had never worked with before (I believe as a function of confidence and basic technical skills I was able to succeed with it), but there are many other formats that I feel would be important to integrate. For instance, and this is my hobbyhorse so pardon me, graphics. The Call for Papers for Kairos was a neat exercise, and one that I felt built an experience base for us to bring video to other classrooms; however, if I had had it my way, it would have been a poster or a static image call for papers. Not saying that the digital aspect would be taken out, because we periodically do see graphics brought in really cool ways into web design and even that old dinosaur e-mail; I think that a digital graphics project would ultimately play better to my skills and interests than a video project. Of course, that is just one spectrum of many that I am sure exist; Dan works with radio, so he would be suited to do an audio project. I’m sure students exist who would rather write code poetry or explore really out of left field techno-literate stuff; my only suggestion would be to open the course to them earlier on. Of course, the final project was totally up to us, so this is already integrated into the classroom, but I might just suggest doing it sooner.

From McKenzie

Review for your Twitter piece:

Hey guys, so I am not a twitter user. It was not readily apparent to me that it is
bottom-to-top. I hear you’re going to add a “how-to,” which is groovy . My advice
is to add this in the text box up top, so that old dinosaurs like me who aren’t hip to
the new thing like Twitter. Also, the word learning is misspelled up top .

As far as content, DAMN! This is SHORT! I can appreciate brevity, particularly on a topic
like Twitter and burst texting, but this is about a page, if I am navigating it right. I
fear I am navigating it wrong, and that there is more, but I’d love to see it .
I like the visuals, which are quite gnarly and professional looking. Okay, I think I
found the navigation buttons- I was stuck on Kate’s piece . So, it is perfect length. I
would embed the videos and links, so that the user is not inconvenienced by having to
open external stuff.
Some of these sources are a little bootleg. Youtube videos and Washington Post articles
are unusable for traditional scholarship (at least in the history department). I
understand that they are good for getting the point across, so I would not excise them,
but I would make sure to include a substantial traditional scholarship, preferably from
peer reviewed journals. Have no fear, it’s out there .

Aside from that, I don’t have too much. This piece doesn’t work for me only on the basis
that I have very little interest in Twitter and allied technology. I am sure that it is
fertile terrain for (academic) research, so you’ll have no problem finding resources. As
is, your project will work toward its aims. I have no substantial revisions in mind, I
would accept with small revisions already mentioned.

All in all, I like it.

That’s what I got

Choice A: Convert the PDF to an .EXE. This requires any small freeware utility, and circumvents using Adobe applications. Obviously, you would need an emulator to make it happen on a Mac, but seeing how Linux comes standard with one, this is my personal offline method.

Choice B: Email the PDF to yourself. GMail has a “view as HTML” feature which converts the text into a savable, printable HTML page. Go go, Google magicians! Thanks for making my tech problems comically easy to solve.

Choice C: Use a black hat type program to remove copy protections. These are also freely available online, and a quick search brings up a fistful of them.

McKenzie, 3. The Man, 0. Now we shouldn’t have any more issues with PDFs.

Research component: Also strong. Good choice of genre for presentation. The primary research is apparently the MLA conference, so research is perhaps limited in scope.

Form & Conent: Again, a good choice of genre.

Creative realization: This is the area of most noticably lacking design. The audio does not correspond with the topic; light techno music provides a pleasant ambiance, but ultimatly the purpouse of the piece would be better served by speech. When speech is incorporated late in the video, it sounds computer generated; while this does fit with the genre, it lacks in execution and takes away from the presentation. Similarly, the textual and visual elements had several noticable deficits. The orange text against a background image was jarring, and seeing that this was made in 2008, an online audience expects more attention paid to design. The whole presentation had a “web 1.0″ feeling, especially given that one of the co-authors is a sound designer. The multitude of images flashed was successful in creating the impression of a vast digital knowledge base, but the resolution could have been easily improved for a smoother viewing experience.

I could make a prose description of Kairos, or link to their previous publications. This would allow unfamiliar students to access it. A visual presentation, like a poster, would also be effective, despite the digital nature of the magazine. Maybe a digital poster.