Using Structure and Form As a Rhetorical Frame for Multimodal Composing Paul Dan Martin, University of Central Florida

Fall 2018 (2:2) 135 Using Structure and Form as a Rhetorical Frame for Multimodal Composing Paul Dan Martin, University of Central Florida Introduction messages may widen their purview of the There is a lack of research on multimodal composing process. The terms pedagogical approaches for teaching “structure” and “form” from Roderick students how to rhetorically design Hart and Suzanne Daughton’s (2005) multimodal messages. Writing instructors chapter on “Analyzing Form” in Modern teaching multimodal composition tend to Rhetorical Criticism provide a rhetorical concentrate on analysis more than framework and metalanguage for composing and need more examples, contemplating how to construct frames, models, and heuristics for multimodal forms. I argue that teaching multimodal composing that are using structure and form as a rhetorical grounded in design and rhetorical theory, framework to design multimodal messages and students need more practice using with semiotic materials may improve how rhetorical frames and design theory to students construct those forms. These generate multimodal messages. Rhetorical terms can challenge the privileging of any frames can extend the application of one type of mode, form, or medium and design theory in to multimodal reposition a rhetorical design process as a composition. A rhetorical heuristic for composing process that effectively multimodal writing that keeps objective, encompasses both print and digital forms. context, and audience at the forefront of “Message design, message emphasis, the message design may better prepare message density, and message pacing” (p. students for the various rhetorical 107) are four elements of structure situations they may encounter in and out instructors can use to teach students how of the classroom that are both digital and to develop composing heuristics for non-digital, enhancing how they negotiate multimodal message design. Instructors audiences, objectives, and constraints. can also adapt Hart and Daughton’s chart This webtext argues that using the for “Common Structural Techniques in language of rhetorical criticism to teach Persuasion” to develop pedagogies for students how to design multimodal teaching multimodal composing. Students 136 Journal of Multimodal Rhetorics can practice employing a structural type help us extend our understanding of the for a rhetorical function, examine the multimodal nature of meaning making and advantages and disadvantages of that strengthen our development of critical structural type, and then generate a pedagogy and multimodal literacy” (p. critical probe for implementing it. 146). The next section explores some of Using rhetorical theory to enhance the existing scholarly engagement with multimodal composing processes can multimodality and rhetoric. potentially lead to increased multi- and rhetorical literacies. Structure and form can represent the semiotic activity and Literature Review rhetorical decision-making processes Writing and rhetoric scholarship on needed to design effective multimodal multimodality has convincingly argued messages. Tarez Samra Graban et al. that implementing multimodal (2013) insist that “we cannot say students assignments into curriculums is paramount are ‘creating’” multimodal forms unless for teaching students the multiliteracies “they have figured out and deliberately necessary to communicate in the digital applied a methodology that guides the why age (Ball, 2004; Shipka, 2005; Selfe, and how of their choices” (p. 254). 2009; Yancey, 2004), but we need more Rhetorical methods for composing methodologies and heuristics for designing multimodal forms ask rhetors to account and making multimodal messages. for the ways in which language, modes, Students are familiar with developing and mediums spin around in a semiotic multimodal forms that are both digital and and dialectical kaleidoscope that non-digital (NCTE, 2005) but not constantly resituates how modes necessarily adept, and many instructors (re)connect and how audiences make from across disciplines are interjecting meaning from those reconnections. multimodal assignments into their Rhetorical design strategies also emphasize courses, asking students to assemble a the synergistic connections that exist wide variety of semiotic materials without between semiotic and rhetorical activity giving them clear composing methods. that is so common to multimodal writing. Several multimodal and design theorists Foss et al. (2014) contend that rhetoric is have experimented with pedagogical the act of humans constructing reality approaches for teaching multimodal through symbols, so using rhetorical composing and made a call to implement theories to generate heuristics for more design theory into the pedagogies multimodal writing capitalizes on the for multimodal writing (Sirc, 2002; symbiotic relationship between rhetoric Bezemer & Kress, 2005; NCTE, 2005), and semiotics. Cordova (2013) reiterates but there is very little research on how to how this relationship between rhetoric use rhetorical theories, criticism, and and semiotics functions when he professes devices to create heuristics for multimodal that “a reengagement with rhetoric can composing. Most of the existing research Fall 2018 (2:2) 137 on rhetoric and multimodality tends to built on design theory and rhetorical focus on improving how students interpret concepts can teach students to see or analyze multimodal forms as opposed audiences as fluctuating and multiple and to making them. that structure and form are dependent on The New London Group (NLG) the characteristics of an audiences’ lived affirms that all semiotic activity is broken experiences. Rhetorical frames can down into three types of designing: account for the ways rhetors negotiate “Available Designs, Designing, [and] structural decisions for their audience. Redesigned” (p. 61). They outline and One major rhetorical adjustment Ellis define important metalanguage for (2012) made to her pedagogy for teaching multimodal writing, but they do not multimodal writing was “paying greater provide rhetorical heuristics for attention to multimodal rhetoric” (p. 65). multimodal writing that draw out design She invited guest speakers to discuss the theory or pedagogies for teaching rhetoric of film and sound production, composing strategies. Taking this a step alloted more time to student drafting and further, Jeff Bezemer and Gunther Kress feedback on multimodal work, and (2005) argue for the use of design theory provided more access to the media labs as a methodological frame for multimodal and tools students required to complete composing because “Design is the practice multimodal projects—although she admits where modes, media, frames, and sites of access to these media tools was display, on the one hand, and rhetorical problematic and out of her control. The purposes, the designer’s interests, and the only drawback is that Ellis does not characteristics of the audience on the provide any rhetorical guidelines students other are brought into coherence with can use to design multimedia. each other” (p. 240). They contend that Brian Ray (2013) uses “uptake” as a multimodal writing combines rhetorical pedagogical lens for teaching how to approaches with design theory and call for design new media forms (p. 183). He more instructors to teach multimodal maintains that uptake is a "rhetorical tool" composing through design theory, but that can enhance student and teacher they do not present any specific methods "awareness of genre and multimodality” or heuristics for multimodal composing. (p. 183). He argues that employing terms George Sirc (2002) also supports design like uptake as a multimodal metalanguage theory for multimodal writing but as a is highly beneficial for composing. frame for interpreting these forms and not “Adding uptake to the repertoire of making them. He is more interested in multimodal terminology pushes teachers defining what multimodal composition can and students to examine what such and cannot be, arguing against the use of remixes say about the larger rules heuristics because heuristics treat governing the relations between genres” audiences as constructed instead of lived; (p. 186). Ray presents uptake as a however, multimodal design heuristics rhetorical frame for interpreting 138 Journal of Multimodal Rhetorics multimodal messages and genres, but he facilitate multimodal composing, but these does not carve out space to discuss using questions are more suited for the uptake to compose multimedia or discuss interpretation and analysis of multimodal how rhetors can employ uptake to forms than composing them. structure modal content. He concentrates on teaching uptake to increase genre awareness and to improve student The Pedagogical Value of interpretation of multimodal Structure and Form environments. Hart and Daughton (2005) note that Christopher Basiger (2011) relies on structure is “the apportionment and Foucault’s author-function and Bawarshi’s sequencing of message elements. genre-function as a method for analyzing Structural decisions are decisions about multimodal forms. He declares that using which ideas should be given what amount genre theory for interpreting multimodal of attention and how ideas should be composing allows for a more rhetorical arranged for maximum impact” (p. 103). understanding of multimedia, but he does Form focuses on “the patterns of meaning not offer a method for composing audiences generate when they take in a multimodal messages. Carpenter (2009) message. Form

Load more