The following articles and webtexts are meant to serve as theoretical foundations and of multimodal composition. Some of those involved with FYW’s WAT initiative have highlighted certain articles as useful places to start.
Yancey, Kathleen Blake. “Made Not Only in Words: Composition in a New Key.” College Composition and Communication, vol. 56, no. 2, 2004, pp. 297–328. (2003 Chair’s Address at the Conference on College Composition and Communication, San Antonio, TX)
Yancey, Kathleen Blake. “Writing in the 21st Century: A Report from the National Council of Teachers of English.” Urbana: NCTE, 2009.
Brenda Jo Brueggemann
I’d suggest either one of these two pieces by K. B. Yancey. The first is her 2003 Chair’s Address at the Conference on College Composition and Communication; the second is her report to the National Council of Teachers of English, after ending her term as President there as well. They are grounded in pedagogy and also meaningful manifestos.
Selfe, Cynthia. “The Movement of Air, the Breath of Meaning: Aurality and Multimodal Composing.” College Composition and Communication, vol. 60, no. 4, 2009, pp. 616-63.
This piece was monumental in shaping the scholar of rhetoric and composition I am today. Part history, part manifesto, Selfe carefully articulates the stakes of multimodal composition for instructors and for students through a series of case studies and argues that, as instructors, we are responsible for teaching students about “all available means of communication,” (a la Aristotle), not just the few means available using traditional, text-based composition.
Shipka, Jody. “This Was (NOT) an Easy Assignment: Negotiating an Activity-Based Framework for Composing.” Computers and Composition Online, 2007, http://cconlinejournal.org/not_easy/.
Shipka compellingly complicates assignments, conceptions of writing, and technologies for writing as she advocates for an experimental and multimodal model of writing instruction. She presents her argument with detailed case studies that provide examples for what multimodal writing assignments could look like and how students meet them. Importantly, the article is a web text that is as messy, eclectic, and experimental as the works Shipka hopes students might produce.
Expanded Bibliography by Topic
Brueggemann, Brenda Jo. “Articulating Betweenity: Literacy, Language, Identity, and Technology in the Deaf/Hard-of-Hearing Collection.” Stories That Speak to Us: Exhibits from the Digital Archive of Literacy Narratives. Ed. H. Lewis Ulman, Scott Lloyd DeWitt, & Cynthia L. Selfe. Logan, UT: Computers and Composition Digital Press, 2013, http://ccdigitalpress.org/stories/brueggemann.html
Hunter, Leeann. “The Embodied Classroom: Deaf Gain in Multimodal Composition and Digital Studies.” The Journal of Interactive Technology & Pedagogy, vol. 8, 2015, https://jitp.commons.gc.cuny.edu/the-embodied-classroom-deaf-gain-in-multimodal-composition-and-digital-studies/
Yergeau, Melanie, et al. “Multimodality in Motion: Disability and Kairotic Spaces.” Kairos, vol. 18, no. 1, 2013, http://kairos.technorhetoric.net/18.1/coverweb/yergeau-et-al/
Dixon, Dwayne. “Imagining the Essay as Digital Assemblage: Collaborative Student Experiments with Writing in Scalar.” Prompt: A Journal of Academic Writing Assignments, vol. 1, no. 1, 2017, http://thepromptjournal.com/index.php/prompt/article/view/13
Drucker, Johanna, and Patrick BO Svensson. “The Why and How of Middleware.” Digital Humanities Quarterly, vol. 10, no. 2, 2016, http://www.digitalhumanities.org/dhq/vol/10/2/000248/000248.html
Hayles, Katherine. “The Digital Humanities: Digital Media and Contemporary Technogenesis.” University of Chicago Press, 2012.
—. “How We Read: Close, Hyper, Machine.” ADE Bulletin, vol. 150, 2010, https://ade.mla.org/content/download/7915/225678/ade.150.62.pdf
Ball, Cheryl E. “Assessing Scholarly Multimedia: A Rhetorical Genre Studies Approach.” Technical Communication Quarterly, vol. 21, no. 1, 2012, pp. 61–77.
McKee, Heidi A., and Dànielle Nicole DeVoss, editors. Digital Writing Assessment & Evaluation. Logan, UT: Computers and Composition Digital Press/Utah State University Press, 2013, http://ccdigitalpress.org/dwae/
Shipka, Jody. “Negotiating Rhetorical, Material, Methodological, and Technological Difference: Evaluating Multimodal Designs.” College Composition and Communication, vol. 61, no. 1, 2009, pp. W343-66.
Sorapure, Madeleine. “Between Modes: Assessing Student New Media Compositions.” Kairos, vol. 10, no. 2, 2006, http://kairos.technorhetoric.net/10.2/coverweb/sorapure/
Cedillo, Christina V. “Diversity, Technology, and Composition: Honoring Student’s Multimodal Home Places.” Present Tense: A Journal of Rhetoric in Society, vol 6, no. 2, 2017, http://www.presenttensejournal.org/volume-6/diversity-technology-and-composition-honoring-students-multimodal-home-places/
Lauer, Claire. “What’s in a Name?: The Anatomy of Defining New/Multi/Modal/Digital/Media/Texts.” Kairos, vol. 17, no. 1, 2009, http://kairos.technorhetoric.net/17.1/inventio/lauer/
“Position Statement on Multimodal Literacies.” NCTE, 2005, http://www.ncte.org/positions/statements/multimodalliteracies
Reid, Gwendolynne, Robin Snead, Keon Pettiway, and Brent Simoneaux. “Multimodal Communication in the University: Surveying Faculty Across Disciplines.” Across the Disciplines, vol. 13, no. 1, 2016, https://wac.colostate.edu/atd/articles/reidetal2016.cfm
Selber, Stuart. “Reimagining Computer Literacies.” Multiliteracies for a Digital Age. Southern Illinois University Press, 2004.
New London Group. “A Pedagogy of Multiliteracies: Designing Social Futures.” Multiliteracies: Literacy Learning and the Design of Social Futures, edited by Bill Kope and Mary Kalantzis, Routledge, 2000, 9-37.
Shipka, Jody. Toward a Composition Made Whole. University of Pittsburgh Press, 2011.
Voss, Julia. “To Teach, Critique, and Compose: Representing Computers and Composition through the CIWIC/DMAC Institute.” Computers and Composition, vol. 36, no. ,2015, pp. 16-31.