The layout of the text interchanges the directives of "enter" and "access", challenging users to not make distinctions between the two, but rather to emphasize more inclusive objectives of understanding disability studies within composition and rhetoric. In thinking about our language, Yergeau et al. stress that forcing people to identify as disabled or using language in our pedagogical directions forcing one to identify as disabled invokes disclaimers that students are not ready to present (or may never want to). The main objective of the publication is to analyze the specific ways in which mulitmodal composing would benefit from a deep understanding and mindfulness in considering disability studies.
According to the "Over There" section in the introduction, Selfe and Howes offer that "those who experience barriers to access, and often unnoticed by those whose bodies, minds, and abilities, and resources allow them to occupy the role of default user". One of the main arguments of this work is that the consideration of disability studies should not come as an addition to our pedagogy or designing multimodal material, but rather should be present within the interface development. Within that argument, Selfe and Howes stress that "what's good for people with disabilities often ends up being good for everyone". As I considered this argument, I began to think about the various manipulations of multimodal content and that it offers users a sense of agency in their learning process.
By being mindful of disabilities and how they might play into a users experience of our compositions, such consideration and perhaps adaptations allows users to choose which format they learn through best. In fact, it appears that crafting multimodal projects in such a way that is considerate of others rather then the "default user" has serious benefits.
Selfe and Howes stress the moral obligations that we have as teachers of composition to be more inclusive and to consider ways in which we can foster such inclusivity, something that Margaret Price elaborates upon more fully in the section titled "Space". For Selfe and Howes however, they stress that "for educators, it is ethically questionable to practice pedagogies and construct spaces that categorically exclude entire classes of people. We need to pay more attention to the teaching of composition through a lens of disability studies to remind ourselves of just how much we have been content to ignore."
As I reflect upon my own teaching, I began to notice how much I gloss over the ADA statement in my syllabus, and how I often fail to consider barriers students may have and the constraints that my assignments may have for them. I've always been a huge advocate for multimodal composition, however, I wonder a lot about what Stephanie Kerschbaum in her section titled "Modality" argues where she states "multimodal texts can miss their rhetorical mark when they don't 'offer primary information through more than one mode' and when they are not 'flexible enough' for users as well as authors to modify and alter them". Later on in the text, Yergeau et al. argue "while many of us celebrate multimodal richness, when considered from a disability perspective, multimodality can be a problem rather than an asset. That is to say, multimodal texts and environments can frustrate participants ability to effectively engage within a variety of kairotic spaces. "As I was thinking about this, I thought about how the publication in and of itself was failing to do a lot of what they advocated. Sure, the publication was available digitally, however, wheres the incorporation of sound? Wheres the ability to manipulate the text in a way that better enhances the content for the reader? Where's the video (I only saw one in the entire work)? Why doesn't our EN101 book that we use for a LARGELY diverse audience of students offer these things?
Even in composing this post, I tried to break up a lot of the text, incorporating relevant images that I felt contributed visually to points in the text that I was making where the images were inserted. I began to think more about what I prefer, and how at times, multimodal texts can be very frustrating for me (even though I'm a huge proponent for their inclusion in the classroom..hmm). This text has encouraged me to be more mindful and hospitable to students, recognizing that more conversations need to be had about the different accommodations that can be made to better include all types of students. As the text notes, sometimes psychological disability is not part of the conversation and has a negative stigma associated with it. As a teacher, I have to admit that I often forget to have conversations with students about the free counseling services, or perhaps to be more inquisitive rather than dismissive if I notice a student is missing a lot of class and failing to turn in homework assignments. I'm really interested in looking at access, agency, and multimodal design as it pertains to disability studies, because I think it is an ethical and moral conversation that we are nearly scratching the surface of.
No comments:
Post a Comment