Theme: IT’s up here for thinking!
Conference stream: ICT across the curriculum
Limit 3500 words including ref, less than 20 refs
Multiliteracies Pedagogy In Action: A Case Study
Anne Scott
Australian Catholic University
This paper reports the challenges and achievements of a junior primary
student as he worked with multimodal texts. Also examined are two learning
tasks in light of a framework proposed by The New London Group (Cazden et
al., 1996) for teaching multiliteracies.
The introduction of new communication technologies has revolutionalised the way we create and
exchange messages; often texts are multimodal, that is, they contain ‘words with visual images and/or
sound and/or movement’ (Noad, 2005, p. 1). Furthermore, a wide variety of texts permeate every
aspect of our daily activities. Even young students use them. For example, in a day a student may
watch a cartoon program on television, listen to a song on the radio, follow instructions on a hand-held
computer game, create a text message on a mobile phone, or perform a search on the internet. These
experiences are typical of those from middle-class Western society and have implications for literacy
education especially if being literate necessitates learning the social practices of one’s group (Gee,
1989; Luke, 1993) and some children are already working with multimodal texts beyond the
classroom. In this context then it is not only important to capitalise on such learning opportunities but
also essential to examine the appropriateness of current teaching practices to accommodate them.
For a number of years now educators and researchers have described design elements and processes
involved in deconstructing and constructing linear and non linear multimodal texts (Sansom, 2002;
Walsh, 2006) and have proposed appropriate pedagogies for working with these new literacies
(Cazden et al., 1996; Noad, 2005). Perhaps it is timely to describe the challenges and opportunities a
student encounters when he works with multimodal texts with guidance from a teacher using one of
the proposed frameworks for teaching them.
In this paper, information about the emergence of the term multiliteracies and its associated pedagogy
provides background for the discussion of some current literacy teaching practices and learning tasks
used in primary classrooms. In particular, these questions are addressed:
 What might multiliteracies teaching and learning look like?
 What challenges might a student and teacher face?
 What are the learning and teaching opportunities?
Overview of Multiliteracies
The New London Group (Cazden et al., 1996), comprising ten prominent literacy educators argued
that the changing social environment facing students and teachers necessitated a new understanding of
literacy which involved working efficiently with multiliteracies. Ryan and Anstey (2003) defined a
multiliterate person as one who can ‘make meaning and communicate in a variety of modes and
media, critically analyse texts in all representational forms, and engage in the social responsibilities of
interaction associated with texts’ (p. 10). This is the working definition used in this paper.
To include all forms of texts the New London Group (Cazden et al., 1996) argued the discourse of
being multiliterate used six meaning-making processes including: ‘Linguistic Meaning, Visual
Meaning, Audio Meaning, Gestural Meaning, Spatial Meaning, and Multimodal patterns of meaning’
(p. 65). They also proposed a framework for a multiliteracies pedagogy comprising four components:
Situated Practice draws on students’ real-life experiences, Overt Instruction equips them with the
required metalanguage and knowledge of differing text-types, Critical Framing helps students to
interpret the social context and inherent biases of texts, and Transformed Practices enables them to
use the discourse for their own real purposes. Components integrated earlier work of members of the
New London Group (Cazden et al., 1996) to such an extent that Ryan and Anstey (2003) stated that
the framework for the multiliteracies pedagogy incorporates and extends existing literacy pedagogy
rather than replacing them. In other words, the framework presents already known literacy teaching
strategies as four interrelated components. Each may be revisited on several occasions during the
completion of any one task and in combination present a process for using multimodal texts
effectively.
Overview of the study
Qualitative in nature the case study describes a student working with multimodal texts at the
commencement of his second year of primary school.
Anecdotal notes taken by the researcher recorded observations of and discussions with the student
throughout the ten-hour data collection period under three headings: prior understandings and
established skills, new uses of texts and/or skills, and other. For example, the student told the
researcher what he knew about the topic Safety in the home and the researcher wrote these verbatim
under prior understandings. Student’ work samples were also examined for evidence of techniques
and skills previously used. New uses of texts and/or skills included experiences or skills the student
declared as being previously unknown such as animating an image in a file.
In this case study, the student through frequent contact knew the researcher. This familiarity possibly
influenced the participant’s intentions and actions and may limit other researchers’ abilities to
replicate similar conditions in the future. It is also acknowledged that a case study describing the
behaviours and experiences of one student and teacher is limited. Nonetheless, it is envisaged that
given sufficient details about the context and the tasks completed readers may gain some insights
about learning opportunities and teaching practices associated with similar tasks.
Results and discussion
This section describes the participant, two activities, and how he worked with multimodal texts in light
of the framework for multiliteracies pedagogy (Cazden et al., 1996).
M is 6-year old male commencing his second year of primary school. Throughout the ten-hour
observation period M appeared relaxed, happy, keen to talk with the researcher and was mostly
engaged in his work.
Activity 1- Safety in the home
The aims of the activity were:
 to explore and discuss safety issues in the home; and,
 to produce reasonable action plans.
The discussion about safety in the home prompted M to identify three potentially dangerous
situations: being burned, electrocuted, and cut with sharp objects. Following the discussion M created
two slides using Microsoft Powerpoint97(Microsoft Corporation, 1995), one alerting younger
children to the dangers of playing with glass objects and another instructing how to telephone for
assistance in the case of an emergency.
With reference to the first slide, M took a digital photograph of glass objects commonly found in
homes and typed this sentence: Don’t play with glass objects because you might break them and hurt
yourself.
With reference to the second slide, the researcher and M enacted the anticipated conversation between
a telephone operator and a caller during an emergency situation. Later M inserted a picture of an
ambulance from clipart alongside relevant details: In an emergency call 000 and ask for the
ambulance. My name is M. My address is .…
It seemed that M knew about potential dangers in the home. In cases of an emergency, M suggested
gaining assistance from neighbours and he referred to emergency details beside the residential
telephone. During the role-play M was unsure of his residential address and correct spelling of his
surname.
Figure 1 presents the events of Activity 1 within the framework for the multiliteracies pedagogy.
Components of
Descriptions of events
framework
Situated practice
The discussion about safety in the home drew on M’s experiences and prior
knowledge of his family’s safety rules. M used the mouse device efficiently
but had limited knowledge of the location of letters on the keyboard.
Overt instruction
The researcher demonstrated and articulated the steps needed to complete
the task using the digital camera and software program for example
inserting and editing images. Specific metalanguage was used so that M
could talk about the functions accurately.
Critical framing
On several occasions the researcher challenged M to consider the degree of
danger in fictitious situations and asked that he identify the most
appropriate type of assistance, for example, alerting a neighbour or dialling
000 given particular circumstances.
Transformed
M chose to create the slides informing young children of the dangers of
practice
playing with glass objects and the procedure for calling for an ambulance in
an emergency. M alternated between printed text version and files of
images. Using the index of the clipart reference book he attached small
adhesive notes to mark suitable pages before viewing images on screen.
Figure 1: A description of the events in each of the four components of the framework for
multiliteracies pedagogy.
Overall the activity provided opportunities for specific and timely instruction within each of the four
components of the framework of the pedagogy and events within the activity flowed logically building
on M’s prior knowledge and experiences. During the activity, there were times when the researcher
moved back and forth between components of the framework, revising, restating, and building on the
child’s knowledge and/or skills. In completing the task M revised his skills as an early writer
(Department of Education Victoria, 1997) and developed new metalanguage and knowledge of
desktop publishing functions such as inserting an image into a file. Using the index of the 800-page
clipart reference book M located suitable pages and deepened his knowledge of and skills in place
value, in other words, he located pages more efficiently as he became familiar with the text and turned
towards the appropriate sections of the text by noting the sequence of page numbers.
Activity 2 – Creating a narrative with animated images
The aims of the activity were:
 to develop the child’s knowledge of and skills with composing a narrative text; and,
 to animate graphics to enhance the meaning of the text.
M interested in dragons, dinosaurs, and story-telling prepared himself to compose a short narrative in
the form of a slideshow presentation. First he spent time viewing images of creatures, castles and
backgrounds using both the clipart resource book and the files on the CDrom. He noted the file name
of his favourites on a notepad. Then he told the researcher his ideas for the plot and setting before
beginning his first slide. Using the same process to create each slide he described his intentions for the
characters, chose suitable images, edited them, and added the text to complete the slide.
It was obvious that M knew the structure of a narrative: orientation, complication, and resolution
(Derewianka, 1990) and he recalled the steps for inserting and editing images into slides from his
experience in activity 1.
Figure 2 presents the events of Activity 2 within the framework for the multiliteracies pedagogy.
Components of
Descriptions of events
framework
Situated practice
The process of writing involved prior knowledge of planning, composing
and revising narratives. M consolidated his skills in inserting and editing
images and text.
Overt instruction
The researcher demonstrated and articulated the steps for animating images
providing M with the necessary metalanguage so that he could talk about
the specific functions accurately. Other advice addressed M’s use of
spelling strategies.
Critical framing
The researcher encouraged M to consider the most appropriate action for
the animations of characters to enhance the meaning of the text. For
example: Which of these two dinosaurs runs faster? What makes you think
so? He referred to one of his dinosaurs books to provide evidence.
Transformed
M was responsible for the choice, position and size of images and sequence
practice
of animations.
Figure 2: A description of the events in each of the four components of the framework for
multiliteracies pedagogy.
Activity 2 provided several teaching and learning opportunities similar to those in Activity 1. In a
comparison of M’s writing samples, the slideshow included more elaborated text than other recently
handwritten pieces which were all recounts less than three sentences long. An interesting observation
noted during this activity was the way unprompted M would predict and act out what the animation
might be like before clicking the preview button. Then he commented briefly on the level of accuracy
of his prediction by cheering or mimicking the unexpected action. During his experimentation M’s
language became more specific and technical and his decisions about the most appropriate animations
became more sophisticated. For example M said:
I’m going to have the fierce dragon blowing fire spiral in from the right side and land so that the fire
touches the brachiosaurus’ tail. See, it looks like he’s swooping down.
Clearly, M was using the tools of the program to add to the excitement of the narrative. Throughout
activity 2 M used various types of texts: an 800-page clipart reference book, a selection of files among
ten CDrom which complemented the book, other non-fiction texts about dinosaurs, and the menu and
prompt boxes of the slideshow presentation program.
About a week following the observation period, M showed the researcher that he had started a new
narrative about a red sports car. It seemed that he had navigated his way through the menus
independently to successfully create a new presentation, insert and edit images, add an opening
sentence in a text box, and save the file as presentation 3. While he located and opened the file M
described the steps he had taken accurately using the metalanguage he had acquired the previous
week. Despite his achievements, M was disappointed that he had forgotten how to insert a new slide.
Following a brief reminder from the researcher M asked for some notation of the steps for future
reference.
Figure 3 summarises M’s prior skills and knowledge as observed during Activities 1 and 2.
Prior understandings
of topics and
experiences
11 points about safety
in the home recorded
on separate sheets
Previously established
skills
New uses of texts and/or skills

Used a digital camera to take photographs of
glass objects

Role-played calling for an ambulance

Stated name and address, phone details

Learnt how to spell surname (9 characters in
length)
Knew how to use the
index section of a book

Became faster at finding page nos. in the
clipart book e.g., went directly to the back of
the book for p. 735
Knew how to turn on
and shut down the
computer

Opened program and chose appropriate files

Inserted image

Created text box

Moved and edited images by cropping and
resizing

Created speech bubbles

Changed fill-in colours

Read pop-up boxes and cancelled them

Used delete and backspace buttons
appropriately

Saved file by clicking button on menu bar

Customised animations

Predicted the effect of animations and
selected most appropriate effect to suit text

Added slide transitions

Increased familiarity with the keyboard

Learnt to use shift key to create capitals
letters

Inserted space by moving cursor to correct
position
Had observed the
creation of slides in
and use of
Powerpoint97
program (Microsoft
Corporation, 1995)
Used mouse
Limited keyboard skills
Aware of the texttype’s components
Evidence of having
Completed two narratives each more than 15
written only recounts
sentences long
less than three
sentences long earlier
Figure 3: A summary of M’s prior knowledge and skills observed during Activities 1 and 2.
These data suggest that M gained about 20 skills as a result of completing these two activities.
Most of these were associated with using the program and gave the student different
experiences in which he was able to think creatively.
Conclusion
The issue of whether the pedagogy of multiliteracies is a new approach or an extension of existing
literacy practices is irrelevant. Of greater importance is that the four components of the framework are
present in these activities which are typical of those used in primary classrooms and with timely
intervention from the researcher using the framework there were noticeable gains in this child’s ability
to work with multimodal texts. Being mindful of the components of the framework made the
researcher’s input well-balanced as the advice addressed many aspects of working with multimodal
texts. The creation of a narrative slideshow facilitated the opportunity for the development of
knowledge of the functions of the program and its associated metalanguage in a form of story telling
which could not have been achieved by pen and paper alone. Further, M remained purposefully
engaged on the task for an extended period and initiated a new text in his leisure time independently. It
seemed that the use of technology made a positive impact on this student’s motivation and provided
opportunities for thinking creatively.
Overall given this context the researcher and student faced few challenges. It is anticipated that in
classroom settings teachers and students would encounter more challenges given a wider range of
abilities and demands on time. Teachers may need to consider ways of providing the overt instruction
to small groups of students and establishing peer support systems to reduce the demands placed on the
teacher for assistance using the software program.
In sum, perhaps there is something to be gained by teachers auditing their teaching practices and
choices of activities for evidence of the four components: situated practice, overt instruction, critical
framing, and transformed practice; and, by addressing each component deliberately.
References
Cazden, C., Cope, B., Fairclough, N., Gee, J., Kalantzis, M., Kress, G., et al. (1996). A
pedagogy of multiliteracies: Designing social futures. Harvard Educational Review,
66(1), 60 - 92.
Department of Education Victoria. (1997). Teaching Writers in the Early Years. Keys to life:
Early literacy program. South Melbourne: Longman.
Derewianka, B. (1990). Exploring how texts work. Newtown: Primary English Teaching
Association.
Gee, J. (1989). Literacy, discourse and linguistics: Introduction. Journal of Education, 171(1),
5-17.
Luke, A. (1993). The social construction of literacy in the primary school. In L. Unsworth
(Ed.), Literacy Learning and Teaching: Language as Social Practice in the Primary
School (pp. 1-53). Melbourne: Macmillan Education.
Microsoft Corporation. (1995). Microsoft Office PowerPoint97. USA: Microsoft Corporation.
Noad, B. (2005). Reading multimodal texts. (PEN 149), 1-8.
Ryan, M., & Anstey, M. (2003). Identity and text: Developing self-conscious readers.
Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, 26(1), 9 - 22.
Sansom, L. (2002). New technologies, new literacies, new learning. Paper presented at the
Conference Proceedings, 17th Australian Council for Computers in Education:
Linking learners, Hobart.
Walsh, M. (2006). The 'textual shift": Examining the reading process with print, visual and
multimodal texts. Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, 29(1), 24-37.