Archive for Articles, Peer-Reviewed

"Designerly ≠ Readerly"

citation
Ball, Cheryl E. (2006, November). Designerly ≠ readerly: Re-assessing multimodal and new media rubrics for writing studies. Convergence: The International Journal for Research into New Media Technologies, 12, 393–412. Special issue on re-assessing new media.

abstract
In this article, I draw on Gunther Kress and Theo van Leeuwen’s (2001) Multimodal Discourse: The Modes and Media of Contemporary Communication and Lev Manovich’s (2001) The Language of New Media, which have become prevalent texts in US writing studies fields—a place where multimodal and new media theories have made inroads in the last five years. I briefly describe each of the rubrics the authors used and show how they help readers determine the materialities of multimodal or new media texts. I also argue, however, that writing studies scholars should not rely solely on these rubrics because they function in descriptive ways rather than in interpretive ways for new media texts. In other words, I will show that while a reader could use these rubrics to describe some of the design elements in new media texts, readers cannot use the rubrics to interpret those design elements in ways that would allow them to form a reading of the text. I apply the rubrics to a new media text, “While Chopping Red Peppers” (Ankerson, 2000), to show their limited use and to suggest that while these multimodal and new media theories have a place in writing studies, we need better methods and/or reading heuristics in order to interpret (and teach) such works.

accompanying materials

"Reading the Text: A Rhetoric of Wow"

citation
Ball, Cheryl E., & Rice, Rich. (2006). Reading the text: Remediating the text. Kairos: Rhetoric, Technology, Pedagogy, 10(2). http://kairos.technorhetoric.net/10.2/binder2.html?coverweb/riceball

abstractriceball
This webtext, presented as a DVD interface, discusses the situational contexts of teachers’ assessment practices in student-produced new media texts. Ball discusses a “rhetoric of wow” in approaching the reading of student texts from technorhetorical and poetic lenses while Rice discusses using that rhetorical knowledge to avoid “schmoozery” (i.e., being bamboozled by students’ flashy, but arhetorical, technological prowess). The central discussion of this text focuses on a student-produced video for one of Ball’s classes, with the authors’ arguments about this text (and its rhetorical and pedagogical situating in the field) presented as DVD “extras” in the interface.

accompanying materials

"Show, Not Tell: The Value of New Media Scholarship"

citation
Ball, Cheryl E. (2004). Show, not tell: The value of new media scholarship. Computers & Composition, 21(4). 403–425.

abstract
In this article, I consider the changing nature of publications in relation to technology and tenure, presenting a taxonomy of scholarly publications: online scholarship, scholarship about new media, and new media scholarship. I offer a focused definition of new media texts as ones that juxtapose semiotic modes in new and aesthetically pleasing ways and, in doing so, break away from print traditions so that written text is not the primary rhetorical means. By applying this definition to scholarly online publications, readers can be better prepared to recognize and interpret the meaning-making potential of aesthetic modes used in new media scholarly texts. I conclude by offering an analysis of a scholarly new media text, “Digital Multiliteracies.”

accompanying materials