One example of new media that often seems to lack the kind of self-awareness Wysocki's definition requires is Powerpoint. Powerpoint software encourages the production of multimodal texts, and it has been widely available since 2003. Because of it's seeming ubiquity in academic and business settings, Powerpoint presentations have developed their own genre conventions (backgrounds, length, number of slides, etc.), and while these continue to evolve and are not concrete constraints, they have created a kind of uniformity between most of the presentations composed with the software. When these conventions are combined with default settings and backgrounds (along with the other exigencies of the rhetorical situation), we can see how it is not at all common for Powerpoint presenters to be "aware of the range of materialities of texts and who then highlight the materiality" (Wysocki 15). After all, students and employees alike often perceive Powerpoint as more of an obligation than a writerly choice.
Wysocki's definition of new media also seems to stress a kind of transparency that I am not convinced exists in much of what we or our students view as new media. Composers of new media, she suggests, should be forthright as well as self-aware: "Such composers design texts that make as overtly visible as possible the values they embody" (15). Perhaps composers who fit the rest of her definition would exhibit this quality in their work, but I'm not sure how well it applies to much of what our students consume on the internet. Apart from matters of honesty, my skepticism may simply tie back into the issue of self-awareness. If a composer is not aware of the values their composition embodies, then how can they make those values overtly visible? Perhaps, then, Wysocki's definition better describes a pedagogical aim than a material reality. We may want all of our students to develop and exhibit this kind of awareness; however, we have to be aware that much of what they consume--whether through YouTube, Facebook, or a Powerpoint presentation--probably does not exactly fit this definition.
Wysocki, Anne F. Writing New Media: Theory and Applications for Expanding the Teaching of Composition. Logan: Utah State UP, 2004. Print.
I like the focus you've put on Wysocki's condition of awareness in the new media definition. Wysocki probably would (at least as far as I can guess from her introduction) feel that Powerpoint is not necessarily new media, particularly in those cases where Powerpoint presentations are composed with little or no self- or audience-consciousness on the part of the composer (and, I'll admit it right now, I've been guilty of that charge in the past). I'm curious as to how much of a difference there can be between the new media "technology" and the new media "composer". Would Wysocki feel there can be, or that there should be, a possible difference between these two? Not sure. Probably not.
ReplyDeleteIn my tirade against new media, I want to focus on one word you mentioned: obligation. You said, "After all, students and employees alike often perceive Powerpoint as more of an obligation than a writerly choice." EXACTLY! Just as some students choose not to improve their reading literacy, perhaps some students will not want to improve their new media literacy.
ReplyDeletePerhaps some teachers will not want to either. What happens then?
As you said, John, Powerpoint certainly is multimodal. When students use it, of course, it is often out of obligation, or the feeling that a presentation must necessarily involve Powerpoint. When you brought up the widespread use of Powerpoint, I was reminded of how many bad Powerpoint presentations I have seen (just as I have seen many bad student papers). In using new media such as Powerpoint, I think we as instructors also face the problem of evaluation. We have been trained in how we should evaluate student papers, but what about training in evaluating multimodal forms of composition? Do we need training in that? Just as with regular papers, students do multimodal projects because they are assigned to do them, and so we must evaluate. This, I think, is one important fear that I, and perhaps other instructors, have about using multimodal assignments. How should we grade them? I watched several of the student projects on Miami Universitys website last week, and I found them less impressive than they were made out to be.
ReplyDeleteSo, with Powerpoint or any other form of multimodal assignment, the students are still doing them, for the most part, out of obligation to fulfill an assignment, and we are still assigned the task of evaluating their work.
I'm going to respond to Amanda's and Matthew's comments together as they both address my discussion of Powerpoint presentations. Amanda's comment gets at one of my major concerns regarding Wysocki's definition: Powerpoint was specifically designed for multimodal presentations, and its broad availability and various contexts of use would recommend it as a shining example of new media. However, most Pp presentations do not fit Wysocki's criteria.
ReplyDeleteAdditionally, I think that Matthew's concern about evaluation is a valid one, though I'm not sure that evaluating a new media composition is all that different from evaluating any other genre that we haven't taught before. Perhaps, then (to touch on Ashley's point), our immediate concern as teachers should be familiarizing ourselves with a new media genre. If we know the conventions, then we can teach them to our students and base part of their grade on how well they navigate or negotiate those conventions.