Representing Linguistic and Cultural Knowledge in Text and Film – A Comparative Multimodal Analysis

Representing Linguistic and Cultural Knowledge in text and Film - A Comparative Multimodal Analysis

 

Presentation at the Kaleidoscope Conference, Cambridge 1-2 june 2017


Abstract
Digital technology offers tools for expressing knowledge and learning in new ways and for promoting cultural understanding in education. This is a single case comparative analysis of one student’s dual representation of the same content knowledge, Civil Rights in the English Speaking World, in the form of an essay and a film. The empirical example has been chosen from an extensive empirical material (part of an ongoing Masters study), produced by approximately 50 ESL students in a digital learning environment, in the regular scope of their studies of English as a foreign language in Swedish upper secondary school, during August 2013 – June 2016. The aim of this single case empirical study is to identify and study how different modes enable the representation of knowledge in different ways. How do different modes enable the representation of (linguistic and cultural) knowledge in a multimodal text (film), compared to monomodal text (essay)? What affordances and constraints do the modes used in the two different representations of knowledge entail?The method used is a detailed multimodal analysis. The multimodal theoretical platform (Kress 2010; Kress & van Leeuwen, 2006) makes it possible to analyse different modes, focusing on the affordances of modes, making visible power relations and cultural understanding. Knowledge and learning are here seen as interdependent concepts in a process of making meaning, and modes as culturally situated. The tentative result of this single case analysis indicates significant disparity, as to what knowledge becomes visible in the monomodal and multimodal texts respectively, depending on the modes of representation used. This raises several questions for future study and analysis. How do national practices in education affect students’ learning and representations of knowledge? How is knowledge evaluated, and how is it culturally encoded?

Keywords: education, cultural understanding, multimodality, embodied mode

Advertisements

Kaleidoscope Conference 2017

Cambridge University 1-2 June 2017, Department of Education.

Interesting conference, particularly useful was the

Panel Discussion with Academics from the Cambridge Faculty of Education.

How can we produce research of international impact and what steps should we make to facilitate international collaborations between researchers?

Dr Olena Fimyar, Prof Pauline Rose, Prof Jan Vermunt

and then the workshop  “Who is my research for? Positioning ourselves as researchers” with James Underwood from Northhampton University.

I will look more closely at JURE

JURE is the network of Junior Researchers of EARLI. JURE is dedicated to the interests of all junior researchers in  the field of learning and instruction. Primary aim of JURE is to represent and support research students on matters that are of interest to them. Furthermore, learning and interaction among junior and senior researchers are significant goals for JURE

And PhD Cora Xu’s blog Transnational Education

Journals …

 


Historical Encounters is a peer-reviewed, open access, interdsiciplinary journal dedicated to the empirical and theoretical study of:

  • historical consciousness (how we experience the past as something alien to the present; how we understand and relate, both cognitively and affectively, to the past; and how our historically-constituted consciousness shapes our understanding and interpretation of historical representations in the present and influences how we orient ourselves to possible futures);
  • historical cultures (the English equivalent of the German term Geschichtskultur which literally translates “history culture”, and thus refers to the effective and affective relationship that a human group has with its own past; the agents who create and transform it; the oral, print, visual, dramatic, and interactive media representations through which it is lived, and by which it is disseminated; the personal, social, commercial, and political uses to which it is put; and the processes of reception that shape encounters with it);
  • history education (how we know, teach, and learn history through: schools, universities, museums, public commemorations, tourist venues, heritage sites, local history societies, and other formal and informal settings).

Submissions from across the fields of public history, history didactics, curriculum & pedagogy studies, cultural studies, narrative theory, and historical theory fields are all welcome.

The journal editors are particularly interested in presenting a variety of voices from scholars at various career stages, and therefore encourages early career researchers to submit their work for review.

Author Guidelines


Journal of Pragmatics

Since 1977, the Journal of Pragmatics has addressed a number of questions that are essential to our understanding of how language works in communicative and social interaction, and continues to welcome innovative pragmatic scholarship from all perspectives.

Guide for Authors

Tools for Working with Audiovisual Data

Preparing Audiovisual Data for use with CAQDAS packages

For  “help in preparing and using different types of multimedia data with various CAQDAS packages.  The material discusses:

  1. using multimedia data in CAQDAS packages (codecs, streaming, synchronizing)
  2. preparing different file formats for the use in CAQDAS packages (images, audio files, video files)
  3. work-arounds for potential problems, when working with multimedia files in CAQDAS packages”

(http://www.surrey.ac.uk/sociology/research/researchcentres/caqdas/support/analysingvisual/preparing_audiovisual_data_for_use_with_caqdas_packages.htm)

 

multimodal-analysis.com (http://multimodal-analysis.com/index.html)

Transana (https://www.transana.com/)

Visual research literature (and learning)

This is a to-read list, which means this is a working document subject to continuous change.


Adami, E. (2009) ‘We/YouTube’: Exploring sign-making in video-interaction’. Visual Communication, 8 (4): 379-400.

Angelillo, C., Rogoff, B., and Chavajay, P. (2009) Examining shared endeavors by abstracting video coding schemes, in Goldman, R., Pea,R, Barron and Derry Video Research in the learning sciences Routledge: New York: 189-206

Banks, M. (2001) Visual Methods in Social Research. London: Sage. (available at HDB)

Barron, B. and ENGLE, R. (2007) Analyzing Data Derived From Video Records in Derry, S. (ed) Guidelines For Video Research In Education: Recommendations From An Expert Panel, Data Research and Development Center (NORC at the University of Chicago) http://drdc.uchicago.edu/what/video-research.html: 28-37

Bezemer, J. and Mavers, D. (2011) ‘Multimodal transcription as academic practice: a social semiotic perspective’, International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 14: 3, 191 — 206

Birdwhistell, R. (1970) Kinesics and Context: Essays on Body Motion Communication. London: Allen.

Buckingham, D. and Willet, R. (2009) Video Cultures: Media Technology and Everyday Creativity. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Cope, B., & Kalantzis, M. (2015). The things you do to know: An introduction to the pedagogy of multiliteracies. In A Pedagogy of Multiliteracies (pp. 1-36). Palgrave Macmillan UK.

Derry, S. (ed) (2007) Guidelines For Video Research In Education: Recommendations From An Expert Panel, Data Research and Development Center (NORC at the University of Chicago) http://drdc.uchicago.edu/what/video-research.html.

Erickson, F. (2009) Ways of seeing video: Toward a phenomenology of viewing minimally edited footage, in Goldman, R., Pea,R, Barron and Derry Video Research in the learning sciences Routledge: New York: 145-158.

Flewitt, R. (2006) Using video to investigate preschool classroom interaction: education research assumptions and methodological practices, Visual Communication February vol. 5 no. 1 25-50.

Gilje, O. (2009) Mode, Mediation and Moving Images: An Inquiry of Digital Editing Practices in Media Education, Published PhD. Faculty of Education, University of Oslo, Norway.

Gjedde, L. and Ingemann, B. (2008) Researching Experiences; Exploring Processual and experimental Methods in Cultural Analsysis. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

Goldman, R. (2009) Video representations and the perspectivity framework, in Goldman, R., Pea,R, Barron and Derry Video Research in the learning sciences Routledge: New York: 3-38.

Goldman, R., Erickson, F., Lemke, J. and Derry, S. (2007) Selection in video, in Derry, S. (ed) (2007) Guidelines For Video Research In Education: Recommendations From An Expert Panel, Data Research and Development Center (NORC at the University of Chicago) http://drdc.uchicago.edu/what/video-research.html: 19 – 27

Goldman, S. and McDermott, R. (2009) Staying the course with video analysis, in Goldman, R., Pea,R, Barron and Derry Video Research in the learning sciences Routledge: New York: 101-114.

Goodwin, C. (2000) Action and embodiment within situated human interaction, Journal of Pragmatics, 32: 1489 – 1522

Goodwin, C. and Goodwin,M. (1996) ‘Seeing as situated activity’. In Y.Engerstrom and D.Middleton (eds.) Cognition and Communication at Work (pp.61-95). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hall, R. (2007) Strategies For Video Recording: in Derry, S. (ed) (2007) Guidelines For Video Research In Education: Recommendations From An Expert Panel, Data Research and Development Center (NORC at the University of Chicago) http://drdc.uchicago.edu/what/video-research.html: 8-18

Han, C. (2015). How to do critical discourse analysis: A multimodal introduction.

Roth, W.M, (2009) Epistemic mediation: Video data as filters for the objectification of teaching by teachers, in Goldman, R., Pea,R, Barron and Derry (2006) Video Research in the learning sciences Routledge: New York: 367-382.

Hughes, J. (Ed.). (2012). SAGE visual methods. SAGE. (eBook available at SUB)

Jewitt, C., Bezemer, J., Jones, K. and Kress, G. (2009)Changing English? The impact of technology and policy on a school subject in the 21st century. English Teaching: Practice and critique 8(3): 21-40.

Jewitt, C. (2008) Technology, Literacy and Learning: A Multimodal Perspective. London:Routledge.

Jewitt, C (2012) An Introduction to Using Video for Research. NCRM Working Paper. NCRM E-prints.

Jewitt, C. (2011) (Guest editor) Video Based Social Research. Special issue of the International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 14, 3.

Kalantzis, M., & Cope, B. (2015). Learning and new media. The Sage handbook of learning, 373-387.

Kissmann, U. (ed.) (2009) Video Interaction Analysis, Frankfurt: Peter Lang.

Knoblauch, H., Schnettler, B., Raab, J., and Soeffner, H. (eds.) (2006) Video analysis– Methodology and Methods: Qualitative Audiovisual Data Analysis in Sociology. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.

Kress. G., Jewitt, C., Ogborn, J., and Tsatsarelis, C. (2001) Multimodal teaching and learning: The rhetorics of the science classroom. London, UK: Continuum.

Kress. G., Jewitt, Jones, K, Bourne, J., Franks, A and Hardcastle, J. (2005) English in Urban Classrooms. London, UK: Routledge.

Lahlou, S. (2011) How can we capture the subject’s perspective?: an evidence-based approach for the social scientist. Social science information, 50 (4). pp. 607-655.

Lemke, J. (2009) Video epistemology in and outside the box, in Goldman, R., Pea,R, Barron and Derry Video Research in the learning sciences Routledge: New York: 39 – 52.

Lomax, H. and Casey, N. (1998) ‘Recording Social Life: Reflexivity and Video Methodology’. Sociological Research Online, vol. 3, no. 2. http://www.socresonline.org.uk/3/2/1.html (Accessed: 28.01.11)

Mavrikis, M. and Geraniou, E. (2011) ‘Using Qualitative Data Analysis Software to analyse students’ computer-mediated interactions: the case of MiGen and Transana’, International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 14: 3, 245 — 252

Tochon, F. (2009) From video cases to video pedagogy, in Goldman, R., Pea,R, Barron and Derry (2006) Video Research in the learning sciences Routledge: New York: 53-66.

Ruby, J. (ed) (1992) A Crack in the mirror, University of Pennsylvania Press.

Scollon, R. and Wong-Scollon, S. (2010) ‘Multimodality and language: a retrospective and prospective view’ in C.Jewitt (ed.) Routledge Handbook of Multimodal Analysis (pp. 170- 180). London: Routledge.

Schubert (2006) Video analysis as practice and the practice of video analysis in Knoblauch, H., Schnettler, B., Raab, J., and Soeffner, H. (eds.) Video analysis: Methodology and Methods: Qualitative Audiovisual Data Analysis in Sociology. Frankfurt: Peter Lang:115-126.

Julia Snell (2011) ‘Interrogating video data: systematic quantitative analysis versus micro- ethnographic analysis’ International Journal Of Social Research Methodology,
14 (3), pp. 253-258.

Tobin, J. and Hsueh, Y (2009) The poetics and pleasures of video ethnography of education, in Goldman, R., Pea,R, Barron and Derry (2006) Video Research in the learning sciences Routledge: New York: 77-92.

White, S.A. (2003) Participatory Video: Images that Transform and Empower. Dehli, India: Sage.

Zhao, S., Djonov, E., & van Leeuwen, T. (2014). Semiotic technology and practice: a multimodal social semiotic approach to PowerPoint. Text & Talk, 34(3), 349-375.