Response 2: A Picture Says A Thousand Words and Has A Thousand Meanings

Module 3: Multiliteracies

When I read this module’s overview I connected with the idea that copious amounts of new information is embedded in the way we do things, and the way we communicate with one another, and that it changes the way we think and do things everyday. However, it made me pause and wonder how much have I changed my literacy practice in the last decade? I know have personally changed the way I communicate (from phone to primarily text and email). I have also changed the way I access information but I wonder if have I changed the way I teach reading and writing. I understand the power of image in how I receive information but am I using explicit strategies to reach all of my students and having them critically process the power of image? I have enriched my practice and embedded new approaches but I am not sure I have changed my approach as much as the task of reading has changed for children.

It was refreshing to read the article Reading the painting: exploring visual literacy in the primary grades (Williams, 2007). This article details one teacher’s journey of introducing visual literacy to his grade 2 class by having students “read” paintings instead of traditional text. He found that after employing several creative thinking strategies and comprehension reading strategies children were able to construct their own meaning and better understand the multiple layers and meanings in a painting. “A concrete definition of visual literacy is elusive, [however] at its core is an emphasis on the personal construction of meaning from any type of visual image” (Williams, 2007,p. 636).

I appreciated the teacher’s deep reflective notes about the activities he employed in his classroom. “In this approach, each child’s reading was unique, not influenced by situational or historical details about the artist or subject matter, nor evaluated against the privileged interpretation of others … [and] in contrast to the strictly literal experiences associated with decoding written text, the students enjoyed the more personal and interpretive reading of a painting’s meaning” (Williams, 2007, p. 640). Visual literacy activities that promote critical thinking lead to a deeper understanding of the world around us. Engaging in activities that have powerful questions engage the mind and require active learning environments.

It excites me that this is happening globally. Williams (2007) also experienced success because he reflected carefully on his lesson planning and adapted it when he was not getting the results he thought the students were capable of. His “question the painter” activity had social interaction build in and  “when social interaction is built into lesson planning the process work that students do is modeled to readers of all levels in the class.  Classroom talk-both the teachers’ and the students’- is the means by which students learn and define the goals of instruction. In that talk, publicly shared use of strategies, concepts, and ways of thinking allow less informed readers to learn what one does as a reader and ways in which skilled readers interact with text to create meaning” (School District No. 44 North Vancouver, p.217).  His think aloud strategies also were part of the reading instruction.

       Throughout the article Williams (2007) does reference several studies that indicate that traditional reading programs are being used at the elementary level that do not include this multi literacy approach. At the end of the article Williams (2007) poses the question, “Are we doing a disservice to our youngest readers by perpetuating this paradigm, limiting their view of literacy to only print-based experiences?” (p. 641).  My response is, yes we are doing a disservice to our youngest readers if we are only providing print based experiences on many levels. Students are not creating visual literacy neuron pathways to build on, for their own learning experiences.

        As I mentioned in a previous post the two reading programs I use (Reading 44 and Reading Power) incorporate visual imagery strategies into their approach, each in different ways.  In Reading 44 there are 12 strategies called the daily dozen and they are intermingled into activities.  Story Drama, Paper Bag Surprises, Reciprocal questioning are al activities that are favorites of mine and non-print resource based. However, I read over them today as I was planning my lessons and I realized they all start with text. 

Reading is not just decoding text, which I believe the author understands, but rather it requires a holistic approach and embodies many senses. In the previous module Hassett, & Schieble (2007)  “expand our understanding of how readers extend three cueing systems—graphophonic, semantic, and syntactic—to negotiate multiple levels of meaning in visual text” (p.62) and also emphasized the importance of visual literacy.

The same argument of looking at literacy through a broad lens not defined by text could be made for other multimodal resources that teachers may not be using as a main resource but that are just as prevalent. I think about the power of a field trip; building the background knowledge.  In conclusion, we must begin with the "end in mind" and support visual literacy instruction through thoughtful careful planning. 

References

Hassett, D.W. & Schieble, M. (2007). Finding space and time for the visual in K-12 literacy instruction. English Journal 97, 1, 62-68.

School District No. 44 North Vancouver, Intermediate. (Ed.). (1999). Reading 44 a core reading framework. North Vancouver: c/o Leo Marshall Curriculum Centre.

Williams, T. L. (2007). Reading the painting: exploring visual literacy in the primary grades. The Reading Teacher, 60, 7, 636-642.