Multimodal literacy in academic environments: PowerPoint as a motivational genre
Main Article Content
Abstract
Author/s
Stefania Consonni
Università degli Studi di Bergamo, Italy
ABSTRACT
This paper explores PowerPoint (PPT) as a leading genre in academic discourse, focussing on the implementation of student motivation boosting strategies. ICT nowadays plays an increasingly important role in pedagogy, by reinforcing the informative and persuasive impact of instructional materials through multimodal strategies including verbal and visual codes, as well as performative elements. A hybrid genre in academic oratory, PPT offers corporeality of knowledge, modularity and easily transmittable format, providing presentations with structure and facilitating ordering and summarizing operations. PPT can therefore be ranked among today’s epistemic machineries, whereby knowledge is construed by discourse. The paper analyses the semiotic and metadiscursive features of a corpus of presentations produced in various universities for both academic staff and students. Research questions explore how PPT can be used to motivate teachers and students, from both an ideational and interactional standpoint. An integrated analytical approach is employed, bridging multimodal and critical discourse analysis.
Downloads
Article Details
References
Alley, M. and Neeley, K.A. 2005. “Rethinking the design of presentation slides: A case for sentences headlines and visual evidence”. Technical Communication, 52 (4), 417-427.
Amare, N. 2006. “To slideware or not to slideware: Students’ experiences with Powerpoint vs. lecture”. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 36 (3), 297-308.
Bellés-Calvera, L. and Bellés-Fortuño, B. 2018. “Written Corrective Feedback with Online Tools in the Medicine Classroom: Bombay TV”. In López-García, C. and Manso, J. (Eds.), Transforming Education for a Changing World. Eindhoven, NL: Adaya Press, 106-199. 4 August 2018. http://www.adayapress.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/CTED11.pdf
Bellés-Fortuño, B. and Ollero, N. 2015. “Motivation: A key to success in the foreign language classroom? A case study on vocational training and higher education English courses”. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.4995/HEAd15.2015.431
Berkenkotter, C. and Huckin, T.N. 1995. Genre Knowledge in Disciplinary Communication. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Bertin, J. 1973. Semiologie graphique: Les diagrammes, les réseaux, les cartes. Engl. transl. Semiology of Graphics: Diagrams, Networks, Maps. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
— 2011. Graphics and Graphic Information Processing. Berlin: De Gruyter.
Bhatia, V.J. 2004. Worlds of Written Discourse: A Genre-Based View. London: Continuum.
Blalock, M.G. and Montgomery, R.D. 2005. “The effect of PowerPoint on student performance in principles of economics: An exploratory study”. Journal for Economics Educators, 5 (3), 1-7.
Bucchi, M. 1998. Science and the Media: Alternative Routes in Scientific Communication. New York: Routledge.
Burke, L.A. and James, K.E. 2008. “PowerPoint-based lectures in business education: An empirical investigation of student-perceived novelty and effectiveness”. Business Communication Quarterly, 71 (3), 277-296.
Busà, M.G. 2010. “Sounding natural: Improving oral presentation skills”. Language Value, 2 (1), 51-67.
Campagna, S. 2009. “Projecting Visual Reasoning in Research Conference Presentations”. In Gotti, M. (Ed.), Commonality and Individuality in Academic Discourse. Bern: Peter Lang, 371-392.
Charles, C. and Ventola, E. 2002. “A Multi-Semiotic Genre: The Conference Slide Show”. In Ventola, E., Shalom, C. and Thompson, S. (Eds.), The Language of Conferencing. Bern: Peter Lang, 169-209.
Clark, J. 2008. “PowerPoint and pedagogy: Maintaining student interest in university lectures”. College Teaching, 56 (1), 39-45.
Clark, R.E. 2003. “Fostering the work motivation of individuals and teams”. Performance Improvement, 42 (3), 21-29.
Corbeil, G. 2007. “Can PowerPoint presentations effectively replace text-books and blackboards for teaching grammar?”. CALICO Journal, 24 (3), 631-656.
Diani, G. 2015. “Visual Communication in Applied Linguistics Conference Presentations”. In Crawford Camiciottoli, B. and Fortanet-Gómez, I. (Eds.) 2015. Multimodal Analysis in Academic Settings: From Research to Teaching. London: Routledge, 83-107.
Dörnyei, Z. 2001. Motivational Strategies in the Language Classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dörnyei, Z. and Schmidt, R. (Eds.) 2001. Motivation and Second Language Acquisition. Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai’i, Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center.
Eccles, J.S. and Wigfield, A. 2002. “Motivational beliefs, values, and goals”. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 109-132.
Friendly, M. 2009. “Milestones in the history of thematic cartography, statistical graphics, and data visualization”. 2 February 2018. http://www.datavis.ca/papers/gfkl.pdf
Goffman, E. 1967. Interaction Ritual: Essays on Face-to-Face Behaviour. Chicago: Aldine.
Gotti, M. 2003. Specialized Discourse. Bern: Peter Lang.
Greenbaum, S. and Quirk, R. 1990/2008. A Student’s Grammar of the English Language. London: Pearson.
Halliday, M.A.K. 2002. On Grammar. London: Continuum.
— 2004. An Introduction to Functional Grammar. Third edition. London: Hodder Arnold.
Heino, A., Tervonen, E. and Tommola, J. 2002. “Metadiscourse in Academic Conference Presentations”. In Ventola, E., Shalom, C. and Thompson, S. (Eds.) 2002. The Language of Conferencing. Bern: Peter Lang, 127-146.
Holmes, S. 2013. “Key strategies for student success: Insider information from the academically dismissed”. 2 February 2018. https://cdn.dal.ca/content/dam/dalhousie/pdf/management/Faculty%20&%20Staff/Key%20Strategies%20for%20Student%20Success.pptx.lt_389309371cbf3e6e51b7890576be7761.res/Key%20Strategies%20for%20Student%20Success.pptx
Hyland K. 2005. Metadiscourse: Exploring Interaction in Writing. London: Continuum.
Iedema, R. 2001. Resemiotization. Semiotica, 137 (1-4), 23-39.
Ilter, B.G. 2009. “Effect of technology on motivation in EFL classrooms”. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education 10 (4). 10 December 2017. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED506782.pdf
Jakobson, R. 1959. “On Linguistic Aspects of Translation”. In Brower, R.A. (Ed.), On Translation. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 232-239.
Jurado, J.V. 2015. “A Multimodal Approach to Persuasion in Conference Presentations”. In Crawford Camiciottoli, B. and Fortanet-Gómez, I. (Ed.) 2015. Multimodal Analysis in Academic Settings: From Research to Teaching. London: Routledge, 108-130.
Kaplan, S. 2011. “Strategy and PowerPoint: An inquiry into the epistemic culture and machinery of strategy making”. Organization Science, 22 (2), 320-346.
Knoblauch, H. 2008. “The performance of knowledge: Pointing and knowledge in PowerPoint presentations”. Cultural Sociology, 2 (1), pp. 75-97.
Kosslyn, S.M., Kievit, R.A., Russell, A.G. and Shepard, J.M. 2012. “PowerPoint presentation flaws and failures: A psychological analysis”. Frontiers in Psychology, 3, 1-22.
Kostelnick, C. 1993. “Viewing Functional Pictures in Context”. In Blyler, N.R. and Thralls, C. (Eds.) 1993. Professional Communication: The Social Perspective. London: Sage, 243-256.
Kress, G. 2003. Literacy in the New Media Age. London: Routledge.
— 2010. Multimodality: A Social Semiotic Approach to Contemporary Communication. London: Routledge.
Kress, G. and Van Leeuwen, T. 2001. Multimodal Discourse: The Modes and Media of Contemporary Education. London: Hodder.
Landis, R.B. 2005. “Motivating students to succeed”. 2 February 2018. www.ecs.csun.edu/ecs/docs/motivate.ppt
Lari, F.S. 2014. “The impact of using PowerPoint presentations on students’ learning and motivation in secondary schools”. Procedia, 98, 1672-1677.
Mertz, B. 2013. “Motivating and developing others”. 2 February 2018. https://accelerate.ucsf.edu/files/MDP_MertzMotivatingDevelopingOthers2015.ppt
Muir-Herzig, R.G. 2004. “Technology and its impact in the classroom”. Computers & Education, 42, 111-131.
Oommen, A. 2012. “Teaching English as a global language in smart classrooms with PowerPoint presentations”. English Language Teaching, 5 (12). 10 December 2017. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1080100.pdf
Paoletti, G., Bortolotti, E. and Zanon, F. 2012. “Effects of redundancy and paraphrasing in university lessons: Multitasking and cognitive load in written-spoken PowerPoint presentation”. International Journal of Digital Literacy and Digital Competence, 3 (3), 1-11.
Raffo, M. 2016. “Translation and popularization: Medical research in the communicative continuum”. Meta, 61, 163-175.
Rowley-Jolivet, E. 2000. “Image as text: Aspects of the shared visual language of scientific conference participants”. Asp, 27-30, 133-154.
— 2002. “Visual discourse in scientific conference papers: A genre-based study”. English for Specific Purposes, 21 (1), 19-40.
— 2004. “Different visions, different visuals: A social-semiotic analysis of field-specific visual composition in scientific conference presentations”. Visual Communication, 3 (2), 145-175.
Sala, M. 2008. Persuasion and Politeness in Academic Texts: An Introduction. Bergamo: Celsb.
Salama, R. 2014. “Motivation towards teamwork”. 2 February 2018. www.pitt.edu/~super4/36011-37001/36041.ppt
Soler, V. 2007. “Writing titles in science: An exploratory study”. English for Specific Purposes, 26, 90-102.
Stark, D.and Paravel, V. 2008. “PowerPoint in public: Digital technologies and the new morphology of demonstration”. Theory, Culture & Society, 25 (5), 30-55.
Susskind, J.E. 2005. “PowerPoint’s power in the classroom: enhancing students’ self-efficacy and attitudes”. Computers & Education, 45, 203-215.
Tardy, C.M. 2005. “Expressions of disciplinarity and individuality in a multimodal genre”. Computers and Composition, 22 (3), 319-336.
Tufte, E.R. 2001. The Visual Display of Quantitative Information. Cheshire, CT: Graphics Press.
— 2003. The Cognitive Style of PowerPoint. Cheshire, CT: Graphics Press.
Van Leeuwen, T. 2004. “Ten Reasons Why Linguists Should Pay Attention to Visual Communication”. In LeVine, P. and Scollon, R. (Eds.) 2004. Discourse and Technology: Multimodal Discourse Analysis. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, 7-19.
— 2005. Introducing Social Semiotics. London: Routledge.
Vassileva, I. 2002. “Speaker-Audience Interaction: The Case of Bulgarians Presenting in English”. In Ventola, E., Shalom, C. and Thompson, S. (Eds.) 2002. The Language of Conferencing. Bern: Peter Lang, 255-276.
Virbel, J. et al. 1999. “A linguistic approach to some parameters of layout: A study of enumerations”. AAAI Technical Report, 4, 35-43.
Wang, M.J. 2011. “Using multimodal presentation software and peer group discussion in learning English as a second language”. Journal of Educational Technology, 27 (6), 907-923.
Webber, P. 2002. “The Paper is Now Open for Discussion”. In Ventola, E., Shalom, C. and Thompson, S. (Eds.) 2002. The Language of Conferencing. Bern: Peter Lang, 227-254.
— 2005. “Interactive features in medical conference monologue”. English for Specific Purposes, 24 (2), 157-181.
Williams, G. 2013. “Self-Determination Theory in Practice”. 2 February 2018. http://chcr.umich.edu/materials/2013-05-13-williams.pptx
Williams, K.C. and Williams, C.C. 2011. “Five key ingredients for improving student motivation”. Research in Higher Education Journal, 11, 1-23.
Wood, R. 2017. “The influence of teacher-student relationships and teacher feedback upon students’ engagement with learning”. 2 February 2018. https://slideplayer.com/slide/12303558/
Wysocki, A.F. 2003. “The Multiple Media of Texts: How Onscreen and Paper Texts Incorporate Words, Images, and Other Media”. In Bazerman, C. and Prior, P. (Eds.). What Writing Does and How It Does It: An Introduction to Analysis of Text and Textual Practices. Mahwah: Erlbaum and Associates, 123-163.
— 2007. “Seeing the Screen: Research into Visual and Digital Writing Practices”. In Bazerman, C. (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Writing. London: Routledge. 8 October 2017. https://www.routledgehandbooks.com/doi/10.4324/9781410616470.ch37#ref37_1