Visual Literacy: Need I Say More?

In doing this visual argument, I am trying to convey the poor choices we sometimes make as Americans. While there will always be disparity in the world, I am not trying to blame one group for having more than another; however, I am judging what we choose to do with our freedoms and privileges.

This was a really fun project for me. I love having the opportunity to combine imagery and text; the merger of the two often results in faster comprehension and more impactful arguments than either words or images alone can produce.

In regard to the four criteria a visual project should include (according to Selfe), I think this project succeeds quite well. It gets the most visual impact from the juxtaposition of children in desperate need—for the basics of food, clothing and shelter—with the absolute gluttony of a wedding cake eating contest. In regard to visual coherence, I think the piece holds together through the consistency of the images. For example, the top row are all focused on facial features and meant to have an emotional appeal. The faces are all about the same size, lending to their commonalities, but cropped slightly differently to give the piece interest and flow from photo to photo. The bottom photo is a wider angle shot, showing the nine different brides stuffing their faces. It is important for the meaning of the photo and the project to see all of the surrounding elements: the wedding dresses; the cakes; the stuffed mouths; the women’s styled hair; the banner behind them; the whiteness of the entire scene; even the whiteness of the tables. Heirarchy, or visual salience, is accomplished through the differences in the image of the brides and the children. The bride photo is meant to take over because it’s larger, but the images of the children, with their sad eyes (mostly) looking right at you, are meant to continually pull your attention back to them. I included images, symbols and language to create a structured and organized whole. The flag of each child’s country is displayed small, showing that it doesn’t really matter where they live because this poverty exists worldwide, but the repetition of the American flags on the bottom reflect the gluttony in the photo: multiple identical flags, multiple identical cakes, multiple identical brides. The text at the bottom, meant to appear as a caption on a snapshot, is directly from the American national anthem and further drives home the idea that we, as Americans, are free to make our own choices, but we are not always brave enough to make the right ones.

More Than One Alphabet, More Than One Literacy

artwork by Jennifer Hibbard

As a graphic designer for the last fifteen years, I really loved reading this week's article, Toward New Media Texts, by Cynthia Selfe. I have always been a person who could connect visual language with written language. After all, they are both forms of communication and therefore tend to enhance each other. The link between visuals and words is like the link between a reading and a written work: the added elements of speech and presentation make for a richer experience when an author reads her own work. Likewise, I find text to be enriched by the added elements of visuals, or vice versa.

Selfe is impressive in her ability to make visual literacy accessible to all levels of teachers. Even with my experience in graphic design, I tend to think of visual elements in the English classroom as secondary and worry about devoting too much time to a visual literacy project. I am hesitant because I did not grow up in the current visual/media age and have studied visual literacy and alphabetic literacy (I love that term!) separately—in separate classes, in separate schools, even in separate cities. One life as a literature major seemingly had nothing to do with another life as a graphic designer. My clients were always shocked that I could not only create the visual design for a project, but also write the copy. To me, the two are inextricably linked: good design comes from good copy and good copy comes from good design. In other words, the communication to the audience is the key and it doesn't matter whether there is one word with multiple images or one image with multiple words. Or, for that matter, images with no words or words with no images. The message, the content, the idea—these are what matter. The form of the message—whether visual, alphabetic, or a combination of both—should fit the audience and the message itself.

Furthermore, I agree with Selfe's assertion that the landscape of our communication is changing. Kress' quote in the article, "that written language is being displaced from its hitherto unchallenged central position in the semiotic landscape, and that the visual is taking over many of the functions of written language" (70) is exactly right. With the advancement of such programs as You Tube, for example, media literacy has more power than ever. It has always been important for members of our democratic society to understand the rhetorical meanings of advertising and manipulated messages, but now we must also give our students the ability to produce their own messages in the current means available.

Just to be clear, I don't at all think that alphabetic literacy is to be subordinated to visual literacy. There is much to be learned from reading and writing in traditional mediums. But I do think we are shortchanging our students if we don't embrace the changing world we live in and the evolving role of visual literacy.

For my link this week, I have chosen the Minnesota Center for Book Arts. Not only do they feature amazing exhibitions, they offer all types of workshops for adults and children, as well as a teen program for high school kids. They even has separate workshops just for teachers.

A quick additional link, that will change over time, is to the Minneapolis/Hennepin County Public Library "Arts at the Library." They have an exhibit going on right now called Altered Books and it's definitely worth checking out. An interesting combination of visual literacy and alphabetic literacy by some great artists.

Collecting, Collaborating, Coordinating

The most interesting aspect of our reading this week was the idea of accessing collective intelligence discussed in both Jenkins' and Beach's articles. Having participated in Dr. Beach's media studies course, I can attest to the fact that "importing images and video clips from the media into [our] blogs…enhanced the quality of [our] critical analysis of the media" (Beach, p. 5). Our use of these digital literacies to understand and further explain them now seems obvious, but it was not something I had even considered at the time. Likewise, with our own students, we often forget to make use of the vast array of worldwide knowledge—or even the local knowledge available within our own classrooms—to help formulate understandings of our reading or writing practices.

I especially appreciated Jenkins' ideas regarding appropriation in light of accessing collaborative knowledge. As he discusses, our current society's focus on autonomy and ownership often ignores the process of collaboration that goes into a great creative work (p. 32). Jenkins says that "the digital remixing of media content makes visible the degree to which all cultural expression builds on what has come before" (p. 32), which I find fascinatingly similar to Bakhtin's view that all speech or dialog is built on what precedes it and influenced by what follows (Nystrand, p. 8). These similar ideas perfectly express our need as human beings to embrace our collective knowledge and understand that we are influenced by those around us. The more we can work together in our learning process and pull from our many different knowledge sources, the richer our own work and our society's work can be.

I can't resist including one more quote—these authors say it so much better than I. Levy's (2000) definition of "collective intelligence" states "…everyone knows something, nobody knows everything, and what any one person knows can be tapped by the group as a whole" (Jenkins, p. 39). What an awesome picture of a classroom!

My link this week is for a website called Students Speak Out. From what I know, it started out as a way for Minneapolis Public Schools students to share what they think about their schools and influence adults in their decision making regarding those schools. They also encourage adults to ask questions and develop forums to answer those questions. It looks like they might have branched out to more students than just MPS, but I'm not positive who participates. I think it's pretty open and the discussions are great. The forums range from photos to blogs to videos, so very appropriate to our new digital literacy age of information and collaboration.

TLK2UL8R P911

I definitely appreciated our readings of Adger and Dornan this week, and agreed with both of their approaches to holding off on assessments until after first drafts are written, or later. I think kids need to get their ideas out in a safe environment, much like the safe environment of learning your first language, as we discussed in our ELL class. Once the ideas are out and the student is comfortable writing and sharing his ideas, we can focus on editing without such a fear of failure. Dornan sums it up perfectly with her analysis of typical grade-giving, stating that "[grades] probably [do] more harm by stifling creativity in those who are afraid to jeopardize the high grades they need to please parents or get into college, while instilling hopelessness in struggling writers whose efforts result in a low grade" (p. 181). We often talk about the struggling student, but I think it is equally important to understand how grades can limit even the over-achieving student.





















But, what really caught my attention in this week's reading was Adger's link between nonstandard vernaculars and the developing language of instant messaging. As Adger points out, there is a "tradition of using vernacular features to indicate distance from the mainstream" (p.117). As with any teen rebellion, the more we push the mainstream on our kids, the more they will push back. I believe this is true of people in general, especially those in disenfranchised cultures.

When I was in high school, we used our commute time to change into shorter skirts, put in multiple earrings, and apply heavy eyeliner. And we cussed. A lot. I'm surprised my middle fingers still work with all the times my mother tried to break them after hearing the f-word come out of my mouth. Today, as always, we see kids express themselves through their physical appearance (see photos above) and their language. It's interesting to see that dialects typically associated with inner city youth are making their way into IM in the same way that baggy pants have moved from the city to the suburbs.

As we watch the times change, I have to wonder if some—not all—of our reaction is to our students' embracing and protecting vernacular features in their speech as a way to rebel against their teachers, against the establishment. My grandparents hated rock and roll; my parents hated the word "like;" and I am already cringing when my eight-year-old wants to buy bigger pants than he needs. What would happen if we embraced their language and gave them a sense of pride and ownership—whether it's the dialect they grew up with, the IM language they excel at, or the tough talk they use in casual conversation? What if we gave them credit for the words they create rather than limit them to the words that are already accepted by the very establishment they are trying to reject?

I know, standardized tests. I get it.

But in our constantly more diverse, more technologically savvy society, I wonder if we can stop changes to our language. Or, maybe the direct language of the inner cities will take over because it's easier to IM.

For my link this week, I have chosen to highlight Urban Dictionary so we can keep track of our changing language. I like that it's a wiki, so anyone can add to it and the definitions are all from random people. From what I can tell, all the words are made up. It's especially fun to see how viewers rank the words, with a thumbs up or thumbs down, and give a communal acceptance or rejection.

An apology to Nathan: Sorry for ending so many phrases with prepositions above (oops, did it again!). I know you hate that. Try to read for content.

It Ain't Up to Nobody But Me

I really enjoyed Dornan's chapter this week on grammar, which is funny to me since I wasn't planning to enjoy it.

I particularly appreciated her attention, in the beginning of the chapter, to the idea that "Standard English" is simply one dialect among many and that it is only society who determines which dialect is to be accepted at any given time. I am a firm believer in the idea that our human social systems are built to exclude—to set up system after system that creates a hierarchy and excludes others. For me, this applies to religion, race, material possessions, and language, just to name a few. It seems that regardless of the issue, we humans feel the need to always believe things/have things/do things the "right" way and accomplish some sort of superiority by pronouncing others "wrong."

But back to Dornan.

Her main point about distinguishing between dialects seems to focus on the fact that all dialects are valid, but each may not always be appropriate. This brings to mind the concept of appreciating the experiences and gifts that all of our students will bring to our classroom, yet teaching them when, where and how to use these gifts in the most effective ways possible. Language is such a rich, diverse, and ever-changing tool, it seems we should embrace all aspects of it rather than forcing only one interpretation and validating only one group at a time. And, yes, I realize passing standardized tests in standardized English is necessary.

I also really agreed with her point that complex sentence structures are created in a safe environment through continued practice in the same way that oral language is developed. I had not really thought of this before, but it makes perfect sense. I don't really remember being taught how to create a complex sentence, nor do I remember being taught how to form oral language. I listened and created; I got feedback and kept reading. That might seem simple, but I'm guessing that many kids are not given the freedom to experiment and the time to develop without being turned off by the entire process with a bunch of red marks all over their papers.

For my link this week, I have chosen a sort of obvious site but one that I return to constantly--amazon.com. Here is a link to an interesting book on African American English as well as a bunch of other books on the subject listed below it. You know, "customers who bought this book also bought…" I love reading professional reviews of books on amazon as well as the general public reviews -- I find them all very telling and informative and I get a lot out of it even if I don't buy the books.

http://www.amazon.com/Black-English-J-L-Dillard/dp/0394718720

Lost & Found Creativity

After reading this week's texts, I am feeling very empowered to challenge current writing sytems and push kids to discover their own meanings through their own creativities. I think the main hindrances to this process are adults—teachers, parents, administrators, test developers, etc. I truly believe kids are inherently creative and that that creativity is slowly chipped away in our school system and our society as we push kids to produce and think in more literal, more standard, and more accepted ways.

Chapter 5 of Doran's text certainly made me understand the variations of essay writing in a way that I hadn't really thought about it before. I was taught to write with the familiar five-paragraph essay genre and, although I write more creatively than that now, I hadn't given much thought to the difference between assigning such restrictive writing and letting kids develop their writing through more expressive or discovery-oriented approaches. I appreciated the way Doran was able to show examples of many different approaches to many different styles while remaining true to the idea of the essay as "a write-to-learn assignment" (p. 147) and a committment to "turn students from passive learners in their education to active agents" (p. 144).

Both Doran's text and Gillespie's inspiring example of a multigenre project led me to my link this week, which reflects my belief that adults need to relearn and embrace their own creativity while encouraging children to be true to theirs. Once we are able to let go of our own mental restrictions, I think we will see our students thrive and we will better promote their interest in reading and writing, not to mention retaining our own interest in teaching.


Yeondoo Jung is a South Korean artist focused on photography. His most recent exhibit, "Wonderland," includes work with kindergartners' drawings which he then interprets through photography. His website states that "[c]hildren's fantasies spring from flexible interpretations of adult conventions" (http://www.yeondoojung.com/press.html), which perfectly sums up my contention that teachers must allow for varying interpretations of societal and educational norms in order to truly get our children thinking in imaginative and productive ways.

Furthermore, Jung's ability to tap into the fantasy of children's imagination and find inspiration to create his own project is exactly the type of interaction I would like to encourage in my classroom. I hope to foster projects that prove there is no right or wrong interpretation to any piece of work and I feel Jung's project exemplifies this perfectly.

Work It Together

Much of our reading this week made me think back to the beginning of our literate culture from the oral culture of ancient Greece. In oral cultures, stories are told to communicate important information or to record historical events; they are told in an entertaining way to make the story more memorable for both the teller and the audience. A new orator learns his craft from an experienced orator and is dependent on his audience to understand his message. The concept of a group effort is definitely present. Additionally, the group and the orator changed over time and the message changed accordingly.

In our current society, however, the group mentality related to work of any kind seems to be all but lost. Much of our reading this week emphasized the importance of collaboration during the writing process and the inherently social process of writing as well as the lack of this type of instruction in our current classrooms.

I must admit that I have always thought of writing as a fairly individual process, but after these readings I went back and thought about my most influential writing experiences. These came down to two very memorable events, both occurring in my undergraduate program as an English literature major: a creative fiction writing class set up as a workshop and an English literature class set up in a more traditional format. My creative writing class collaborated on each student's work of fiction and resulted in richer, more thought-provoking writing. The end result was a short story I published in a local literary journal. It was a rewarding and interesting experience. On the other hand, the writing I did for my literature class was analysis of the literature we studied and each paper was written expressively for the professor and read by no one else. After turning in my first paper, I received the following comment on the title page: "Run, do not walk, to the nearest course in essay writing!" Not only did I find this comment incredibly hurtful (at the tender age of 19), but I found no constructive value in it. There were no comments as to why I should be running to enroll in an essay writing class, nor was there any feedback that helped me understand how to make the paper better. In direct opposition to the creative writing class, the results of this experience were feelings of fear, drudgery and solitude every time I attended class.

Another result of the classes I mentioned above was that I began to consider creative writing to be interesting and fun and nonfiction writing of any kind to be boring and difficult. As an adult, I have changed my mind about this, but I think it is a common misconception in our society and in our classrooms. I found an interesting website through the University of Iowa, renowned for its creative writing program. Surprisingly, to me, they also offer many courses and theories on "creative nonfiction," a term I have never even heard before. I'm sure most of our students would say this is an oxymoron. The site is full of interesting information and references, including a "literary nonfiction essential reading list" that is quite extensive. Here is the link: http://www.english.uiowa.edu/nonfiction/index.html.

Overall, I would like to encourage my students to work collaboratively, even though I know it is often difficult for writers to share their work, especially teenagers. While I realize the importance of group work and larger audiences, I worry that the students won't be willing to share and won't understand how to give criticism that is helpful rather than hurtful. I suppose this is where I come in and establish a trusting classroom environment. I feel fairly confident in this area, but have to admit that I worry about the students I cannot get on board.