Alexander and Rhodes On Multimodality: New Media Composition Studies

It was really great to read Alexander and Rhodes On Multimodality: New Media in Composition Studies after Palmeri. Whereas Palmeri did an excellent job framing the reconceptualization of the history of composition and how multimodality fit within that historical narrative, Alexander and Rhodes do a great job of positioning new media alongside our students, detailing a powerful narrative of how new media challenges and redefines our conceptions of literacy and what affordances multimodal composing does for students in allocating the marriage of "classroom" and "home" literacies. (I also really really loved the stuff about the zombies because I teach my comp class as a "themed" zombie course :) )

Within the text, Alexander and Rhodes continue to refer to a handful of scholars. Within these references include Kress, Gee, Hailwasher, Waren & Selfe (alongside others). To me, all of these scholars grapple with the expansion of what we conceive as what it means to be literate within the 21st century. With this, Alexander and Rhodes encourage teachers to question their own conceptions of literacy, stating "teachers themselves must critique and design multimodally if they are to teach future students well" (118). In reference to the critical literacies within multimodal composing, Alexander and Rhodes refer to "techno-literacies", which calls for students to be more critical and analytical about the ways in which they arrange, ordering, and making sense of their multimodal composing process (118). Within chapter 4 titled "Collaboration Interactivity, and the Derive in Computer Gaming" Alexander and Rhodes discuss the notion of gaming as an inherently multimodal process, noting the collaborative nature and critical literacies that are obtained in order to foster and facilitate effective participation and success. In reference to communication, these literacies are often learned through failure (such as the French Canadian who used inappropriate language because he thought it was a social norm within the game), where participants are learning (and teaching) alongside one another in order to effectively participate and prosper within the rules and objectives of the game. As Alexander and Rhodes mention, we (as composition teachers) have much to take away from the dichotomy of the gaming world in not only how the nature of the objective fosters multimodal composing, but also in the inherent collaborative nature that the relationship and communication between gamers fosters and is dependent upon.

I was so happy to read within Alexander and Rhodes about the body and the material. Although the Palmeri was incredibly thought provoking I felt as though this was a bit of an important gap that needed to be discussed. Alexander and Rhodes discussion of the body is an important one, noting the "norming" of bodies and how new media technologies can have a powerful impact photo manipulation. Within Alexander and Rhodes discussion of "techne" within queer sexuality states that "the body cannot be ignored" (116). I thought about this alongside chapter 5 and the discussion of the Virginia Tech shooting. Much of the focus of the YouTube video's and the shooters writing delt with his "aptitude" in his composing process. In focusing on the caliber of his written text, the commenters and largely forgetting about the shooters body and the material, his identity. In juxtaposing this notion with the ever present discussion of literacy throughout the book, I'm drawn to Alexander and Rhodes call for a more "humanistic--yet still critical--literacy of technology, one that takes as part of its ecology the affective realm of technology and technology use" (190). Rather than focusing on the written text, analyzing the rhetorical choices present and the influence of new media and information dissemination can help us understand Cho's literacy techno-literacy and rhetorical choices in his ability to use technology. Alexander and Rhodes approach this issue by asking a fundamentally important question: "how can we use new media to open up spaces, not just for immediate response but also for critical reflection?" (177).

metadata tags: #newmedia, #technoliteracy, #functionalliteracy, #collaboration, #queercomposition

-----------------------
Questions:
1. I really really loved the conversation centering around non-western rhetorical practice and the colonization within composition as a discipline, stating "the Web does not constitute a neutral compositional space, and that people who compose for the Web, who use new and multimedia, work in specific sociocultural contexts, bounded by intricacies of location, access, ability, and the ideology" (35). How do we create assignments within our FYC that foster and highlight "non-western" rhetorical practices with new media? How do we avoid perhaps stereotyping or assuming cultural practices that are more of a social construct than a cultural one?

2. How can we foster more collaborative multimodal assignments in FYC that equally disseminate responsibility? How do we assess multimodal collaborative work? Palmeri advocates that he lets students choose to be collaborative or to work independently. Do you agree with this? Why or why not?

---------

Here is my multimodal Palmeri response from last week

So because Zarah created the account for our multimodal response to Palmeri, my articulation of how I would incorporate Alexander and Rhodes voice into it would be from the perspective of the student. Whereas we have Palmeri as the central character within the majority of our slides, I believe that Alexander and Rhodes would be the voice of the student, advocating that within new media studies, our conceptions of literacy is coming primarily from our students. Alexander and Rhodes advocate for playing and unfinished work, Palmeri mainly historicies and offers more digitally nuanced approaches to historical applications of multimodality. Alexander and Rhodes ask us to be critical and questioning to the technology and new media we choose to work with, noting is collaborative nature and its potential to queer of composing practices and definitions of what it means to be literate and how we envision the ways in which we position or bodies and our identities within the technologies we use. For me, their message would be instead of "Tread carefully" it would be "Play Critically", encouraging us to mess around and try new ways of teaching and composing with our students. Rather than positioning ourselves as a literate person within the field of composition, Alexander and Rhodes push us to learn alongside our students, challenging our conceptions of what our assignments are asking and how we can approach them. With that being said, while our mutlimodal response is primarily visual, I might make it a bit more interactive and collaborative to better exemplify Alexander and Rhodes due to not only their call to collaborate in the classroom, but also to play and learn through collaboration (as though it's a fun game). I might add some photo manipulation too :)