Richard Andrews, Institute of Education, London

The range of writing that occurs now Existing models What is needed if we are to account for

writing in the digital and/or multimodal age, as well as for development

What else is being done? Toward(s) a new model

‘A notable exception is the work of Kress (e.g., 1997) who, in Before Writing: Rethinking the Paths to Literacy, sets out the challenge: “Now, in a thoroughly multimodal context, where in many domains of public communication [verbal] language is no longer central, the purposes, benefits and limitations of writing…can and must be newly examined” (pp. 98-99).’

Linguistic Design•Delivery•Vocabulary and

metaphor•Modality•Transitivity•Nominalization of

processes•Information structure•Local coherence

relations•Global coherence

relations

Writing development Development: Maturational (without direct

tutoring) and/or capability changes over time Writing Development: Observable

transformational improvement in the capacity to write, manifesting itself at any level of writing

Social semiotics Theories of writing development situated in

socio-historical and cultural spaces Contemporary rhetoric

‘Arts of discourse’ with a political edge

Framing and re-framing

Review of existing theories of writing development and visual models How has writing development been

conceived and visually modeled? How can these models inform a

conceptualization of writing in a multimodal and/or digital world?

How can they inform our own representations of writing development?

Gaps What we have missed out?

Recent work on trajectories of linguistic development for 11-16 year olds (Myhill) etc.

What is missing from what we have covered? An integrated theory of development that

includes linguistic, moral, emotional, cognitive, multimodal, rhetorical aspects/dimensions, and which forms the basis for a national assessment scheme

PatternsPatterns ImplicationsImplications

Based on a body of single research studies (e.g., Bereiter & Scardamalia, 1987) or a main, large-scale study (e.g., Hunt, 1970)

Age-based design Dominance of product

measures Increasingly varied

methods

Linguistic sources of data are insufficient

Designs that predetermine physical age as the site of transformation confound development as “naturally” occurring with that which is taught.

Multiple methods and data sources seem most apt to understanding development in the light of contextual and cultural influences, and writing as a component of multimodal and/or digital literacies.

PatternsPatterns ImplicationsImplications

From straight linear lines, to flow charts, to spirals

Adult competence the marker of maturity

Recursive lost Idiosyncratic lost in

trends

New notions of development itself are needed if changes over time in writing—as have been noted in the theories and foundational research studies—are indeed idiosyncratic, unpredictable and intricately tied to context.

PatternsPatterns ImplicationsImplications

From straight linear lines, to flow charts, to spirals

Adult competence the marker of maturity

Recursive lost Idiosyncratic lost in

trends

New notions of development itself are needed if changes over time in writing—as have been noted in the theories and foundational research studies—are indeed idiosyncratic, unpredictable and intricately tied to context.

Newell, G., Rish, R. and Bloome, D. (2009), ‘Digital Multimodal Composition as a Social Practice: a conceptual review of studies in and out of schooling’ – Ohio State University Based on websites, powerpoint presentations,

advertising campaigns etc Categories are ethnographic, historical, socio-

political and with regard to power relations All post-2000

Cf. Illeris (2007, 2009) How We Learn and Contemporary Theories of Learning

Suggests that learning and development are virtually synonymous, whereas Piaget saw development preceding learning, and Vygotsky the other way round

Instead, how about differentiating between learning, development and teaching, with all three running alongside each other?

Multiple methods and data sources Shifting boundaries of the mode of writing Re-imagine development as idiosyncratic and

recursive as well as linear Move away from two-dimensional modelling Somehow incorporate process as well as product Use state-of-the-art graphic representation, e.g.

Tufte (1997) Visual Explanations and http://www.edwardtufte.com/tufte/index

Toward an answer… Such a new model could be:

Multi-panelled (cf. ‘multiples’) Individualistic, yet with key common

elements or benchmarks Use framing theory both to conceptualize

writing in relation to other modes and to visually represent development in writing

Owned by the writer as well as by schools, exam boards, etc.

Readily updatable, and linked to an e-portfolio

1. Issues of compositionWhen writing takes place, is the presence of other modes

implied or are they actually there alongside the writing? What difference does presence or absence make to the written composition?

What are the particular affordances of writing in the verbal code; writing in different verbal languages; still images; moving images; sound; movement as modes of composition?

What particular tensions and/or complementarities are there in the juxtaposition of any two (or more) of these modes of communication?

Which medium is being used to write: pencil, some form of pen or brush, keyboard and screen, speech recognition technology etc? what difference does the medium make to the act of composition and to the message?

2. Issues of developmentWhat underlying theories of learning and development are

assumed to inform the act of writing?What role does transformation, as a manifestation of

learning, play in the development of writing? What transformations take place in the translation/transduction from one mode to another?

What implications for teaching? 3. Implications for assessmentComposition in writing within a multimodal framework looks

too complex for assessment by multiple-choice or simple paper-and pencil tests. Instead, portfolio (or e-portfolio) assessment of actual examples of writing seems the only approach that will do justice to the nature and range of writing.

Criteria for the assessment of portfolios of writing need to be developed.

As education systems in the UK and USA are moving to more frequent (yearly and more frequently) assessments of student progress, can a valid, robust yet administratively light mechanism be developed to gauge students’ development in writing in the multimodal and/or digital age?

At the heart of our new theory and model of writing development is the act of composition within framing. We emphasize framing rather than frames because we see the business of framing as an active, creative part of composition; frames have become static and too programmatic in the teaching and learning of writing. The notion of composition operates at every level of writing: putting together verbal and visual texts in order to create multimodal texts; morphological composition to create words; phrase, clause and sentence construction; text construction; etc. Development in writing will take into account ‘natural’ maturational development (itself framed by social situations) and school-based, taught development. Our theory and model will be laid out clearly, using a multi-panelled approach deriving from the work of Tufte in the visualization of evidence, with accompanying diagrams. We intend it to be complex enough to do justice to writing in the digital and multimodal age, but simple and elegant enough to be easily recognised and applied.

A cubic model in which the three axes are: Genres (in the sense of social action) Modes (visual, verbal etc.) Media (via mobile phone, computer interface, book,

film etc) All within an overarching theory of contemporary

rhetoric, which, of Gunther’s four ‘navigational aids’ could provide the higher level rationale for composition and interpretation, and subsume the other three (style, aesthetics, ethics)

Andrews, R. (forthcoming) Re-framing Literacy: teaching and learning in English and the language arts, New York: Routledge

• Arnold, R. (1991) Writing Development, Buckingham: Open University Press• Illeris, K. (2007) How We Learn: learning and non-learning in school and beyond

London: Routledge• Illeris, K. (ed.) (2009) Contemporary Theories of Learning London: Routledge Myhill, D. (in press) ‘Becoming a designer: trajectories of linguistic development’ in

Handbook of Writing Development (eds Beard, R., Myhill, D., Nystrand, M. And Riley, J.) London: Sage

New London Group (1996/2000) ‘A pedagogy of multiliteracies: designing social futures’ in Cope, B. And Kalantzis, M. (eds) (2000) Multiliteracies, London: Routledge

Newell, G., Rish, R. and Bloome, D. (2009), ‘Digital Multimodal Composition as a Social Practice: a conceptual review of studies in and out of schooling’, paper presented at AERA, San Diego, April 15, 2009

Smith, A. and Andrews, R. (2009) Towards a comprehensive, contemporary model: writing development’, paper presented at AERA, San Diego, April 15, 2009

Tufte, E. (1997) Visual Explanations: images and quantities, evidence and narrative, Cheshire, Connecticut: Graphics Press