Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Technology and Multimodality in Teaching Pre-service Teachers: Fulfilling Diverse Learners’ Needs

  • Original research
  • Published:
Technology, Knowledge and Learning Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to explore the impact of the use of multimodality during college level instruction. Using quantitative and qualitative methods, data were analyzed to determine the effectiveness of incorporating multimodality in teaching pre-service teachers. Results indicated the use of multimodality increased participants’ knowledge and awareness of Special Education concepts and strategies for teaching students with disabilities. Results also indicated there was a significant difference in knowledge gained by the experimental group when compared to the control group.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adams Becker, S., Cummins, M., Davis, A., Freeman, A., Glesinger Hall, C., & Ananthanarayanan, V. (2017). NMC horizon report: 2017 higher education. The New Media Consortium.

    Google Scholar 

  • Albusaidi, S. (2019). Using activity theory to explain how a student learns in an internationalized classroom from a sociocultural perspective. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 10(6), 1142–1149. https://doi.org/10.17507/jltr.1006.02

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alvermann, D. (2001). Effective literacy instruction for adolescents. Executive summary and paper commissioned by the National Reading Conference. National Reading Conference.

  • Baldry, A., & Thibault, P. (2006). Multimodal transcription and text analysis. Equinox.

    Google Scholar 

  • Batchelor, K. (2018). “My story came to life!”: How multimodality can inspire revision in writing. Gifted Child Today, 41(3), 136–148. https://doi.org/10.1177/1076217518768850

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beetham, H., & Sharpe, R. (2013). Rethinking pedagogy for a digital age: Designing for 21st century learning. Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bruce, D., Di Cesare, D., Kaczorowski, T., Hashey, A., Boyd, E., Mixon, T., & Sullivan, M. (2013). Multimodal composing in special education: A review of the literature. Journal of Special Education Technology, 28(2), 25–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Camiciottoli, C., & Campoy-Cubillo, M. (2018). Introduction: The nexus of multimodality, multimodal literacy, and English language teaching in research and practice in higher education settings. System, 77, 1–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cloonan, A. (2008). Multimodality pedagogies: A multiliteracies approach. The International Journal of Learning, 15(9), 159–168.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coiro, J., & Dobler, E. (2007). Exploring the online reading comprehension strategies used by sixth grade skilled readers to search for and locate information on the internet. Reading Research Quarterly, 42, 214–257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cummins, J. (2006). Identity texts: The imaginative construction of self through multiliteracies pedagogy. In O. Garcia, T. Skutnabb-Kangas, & M. Torres-Guzman (Eds.), Imagining multilingual schools: Languages in education and glocalization (pp. 51–68). Multilingual Matters.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Damico, J., & Riddle, R. (2006). Exploring freedom and leaving a legacy: Enacting new literacies with digital texts in the elementary classroom. Language Arts, 84, 34–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisner, E. (1997). Cognition and representation: A way to pursue the American dream? Phi Delta Kappan, 78, 349–353.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferrara, F. (2013). How multimodality works in mathematical activity: Young children graphing motion. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 12, 917–939.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gee, J. (2017). Teaching, learning, literacy in our high-risk, high-tech world: A framework for becoming human. Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenhow, C., Robelia, B., & Hughes, J. (2009). Learning, teaching and scholarship in a digital age Web 2.0 and classroom research: What path should we take now? Educational Researcher, 38(4), 246–259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harste, J. (2014). The art of learning to be critically literate. Language Arts, 92(2), 90–102.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howell, E. (2017). Expanding argument instruction: Incorporating multimodality and digital tools. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 61(5), 533–542. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaal.716

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huck, S. (2012). Reading statistics and research. Pearson Education Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • International Reading Association [IRA]. (2018). Integrating literacy and technology in the curriculum: A position statement. Retrieved from https://www.literacyworldwide.org/404?404;https://www.literacyworldwide.org:80/resources/issues/positions_technology.html

  • Jetnikoff, A. (2015). A case study of teaching English and multimodality with ICTs: Constraints and possibilities. English in Australia, 50(2), 41–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jewitt, C. (2008). Multimodality and literacy in school classrooms. Review of Research in Education, 32(1), 241–267. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X07310586

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jewitt, C., Kress, G., & Mavers, D. (2009). The Routledge handbook of multimodal analysis. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jiang, Y. (2016). Validity of multimodality in autonomous learning of listening and speaking. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 7(2), 352–357. https://doi.org/10.17507/jltr.0702.14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jonassen, D., Peck, K., & Wilson, B. (1999). Learning with technology: A constructivist perspective. Merrill Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karchmer-Klein, R., Mouza, C., Shinas, V., & Park, S. (2017). Patterns in teachers’ instructional design when integrating apps in middle school content-area teaching. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 33(3), 91–102. https://doi.org/10.1080/21532974.2017.1305305

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karchmer-Klein, R., Soslau, E., & Sutton, J. (2019). Examining the instructional design of interactive and collaborative learning opportunities. Journal of Teacher Action Research, 6(1), 4–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kazdin, A. (2011). Single-case research designs: Methods for clinical and applied settings. Oxford University Press Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kist, W. (2005). New literacies in action: Teaching and learning in multiple media. Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kress, G. (2001). Multimodal teaching and learning: The rhetorics of the science classroom. Continuum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kress, G. (2010). Multimodality. A semiotic approach to contemporary communication. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kress, G., & van Leeuwen, T. (1996). Reading images: The grammar of visual design. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Law No. 8 of 2010 of Individuals with Disabilities Affairs—State of Kuwait, No 8, (2010). Retrieved from https://www.e.gov.kw/sites/kgoarabic/Forms/GODPLAW.pdf

  • Lewkowich, D. (2016). Teacher education in memory’s light and shadow: Autobiographical reflection and multimodalities of remembering and forgetting. Educational Studies, 52(6), 573–591. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131946.2016.1231682

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maheady, L., Mallette, B., & Harper, G. (2006). Four classwide peer tutoring models: Similarities, differences, and implications for research and practice. Reading and Writing Quarterly: Overcoming Learning Difficulties, 22(1), 65–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. (2005). Cognitive theory of multimedia learning. In R. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 31–48). Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • McGinnis, T. (2020). Transmediation as a powerful tool to promote a sociopolitical process in a digital writing workshop for central American immigrant students. Talking Points, 32(1), 2–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Michaud, M. (2013). “The things they carry”: Literacy in the lives of adult students pursuing bachelor’s degrees. Open Worlds, 7(1), 72–95.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, K. J., Koury, K. A., Fitzgerald, G. E., Hollingsead, C., Mitchem, K. J., Hui-Hsien, T., & Park, M. K. (2009). Concept mapping as a research tool to evaluate conceptual change related to instructional methods. Teacher Education and Special Education, 32(4), 365–378. https://doi.org/10.1177/0888406409346149

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, S., & McVee, M. (2012). Multimodal composing: The essential 21st century literacy. In S. Miller & M. McVee (Eds.), Multimodal composing in classrooms: Learning and teaching in the digital world (pp. 1–12). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mills, K. (2010). A review of the “digital turn” in the new literacy studies. Review of Educational Research, 80, 246–271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mills, K. (2016). Literacy theories for the digital age: Social, critical, multimodal, spatial, material, and sensory lenses. Multilingual Matters.

    Google Scholar 

  • Monty, R. (2015). Everyday borders of transitional students: Composing place and space with mobile technology, social media and multimodality. Computers and Composition, 38, 126–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Commission on Writing [NCW]. (2006). Writing and school reform. College Board.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Council of Teachers of English [NCTE]. (2003). NCTE position statement: On composing with nonprint media. Retrieved from https://ncte.org

  • Nemirovsky, R., Tierney, C., & Wright, T. (1998). Body motion and graphing. Cognition and Instruction, 16(2), 119–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • New London Group. (1996). A pedagogy of multiliteracies: Designing social futures. Harvard Educational Review, 66(1), 60–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Next Generation Science Standards [NGSS]: For states, by states. (2017). Topic arrangements of the next generation science standards. Retrieved from https://www.nextgenscience.org/sites/default/files/AllTopic.pdf

  • O’Halloran, K., Tan, S., & Smith, B. (2016). Multimodal approaches to English for academic purposes. In K. Hyland & P. Shaw (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of English for academic purposes (pp. 256–269). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Papageorgiou, V., & Lameras, P. (2017). Multimodal teaching and learning with the use of technology: Meanings, practices and discourses. International Conference on Cognition and Exploratory Learning in Digital Age, 5, 133–140.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pierangelo, R., & Giuliani, G. (2012). Assessment in special education: A practical approach. Pearson Education Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roozen, K. (2008). Journalism, poetry, stand-up comedy, and academic literacy: Mapping the interplay of curricular and extracurricular literate activities. Journal of Basic Writing, 27(1), 5–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roozen, K. (2009). “Fan fic-ing” English studies: A case study exploring the interplay of vernacular literacies and disciplinary engagement. Research in the Teaching of English, 44(2), 136–169.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roozen, K. (2012). Comedy stages, poets projects, sports columns and kinesiology 341: Illuminating the importance of basic writers’ self-sponsored literacies. Journal of Basic Writing, 31, 99–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roth, W. (1994). Thinking with hands, eyes, and signs: Multimodal science talk in grade 6/7 unit on simple machines. Interactive Learning Environments, 4, 170–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rubin, H., & Rubin, I. (1994). Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data. SAGE Publication Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seidman, I. (2013). Interviewing as qualitative research: A guide for researchers in education and the social sciences. Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharples, M., et al. (2016). Innovating pedagogy 2016: Open University Innovation Report 5. Open University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shepherd, R. (2015). FB in FYC: Facebook use among first-year composition students. Computers and Composition, 35, 86–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shepherd, R. (2018). Digital writing, multimodality, and learning transfer: Crafting connections between composition and online composing. Computers and Composition, 48, 103–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siegel, M. (1995). More than words: The generative power of transmediation for learning. Canadian Journal of Education, 20(4), 455–475.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siegel, M., & Borasi, R. (1994). Demystifying mathematics education through inquiry. In P. Ernest (Ed.), Constructing mathematical knowledge: Epistemology and mathematics education (pp. 201–214). Falmer Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Song, J. (2012). Teaching multiliteracies: A research based on multimodality in a PPT presentation. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 2(1), 113–117. https://doi.org/10.4304/tpls.2.1.113-117

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Street, B., Pahl, K., & Rowsell, J. (2011). Multimodality and new literacy studies. In C. Jewitt (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of multimodal analysis (pp. 191–200). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Leeuwen, T. (2005). Introducing social semiotics. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walsh, M. (2010). Multimodal literacy: What does it mean for classroom practice? Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, 3, 211–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walters, S. (2010). Toward an accessible pedagogy: Disability, multimodality, and universal design in the technical communication classroom. Technical Communication Quarterly, 19(4), 427–454. https://doi.org/10.1080/105722522010502090

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Special thanks are delivered to Dr. Sharon Raimondi, Director, Joint Doctoral Program in Special Education, University at Buffalo, for editing and proofreading this research article.

Funding

The author did not receive any funds for conducting, authoring and/or publishing this research article.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. College of Education, Kuwait University, Kuwait, Kuwait

    Huda Almumen

Authors
  1. Huda Almumen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

This research article was prepared for publication in Technology, Knowledge and Learning journal. The iPad, including the Notability application used to record the participants’ responses belongs to the researcher. She purchased these tools prior the commencement of the study for the goal of this research. The researcher received no funds to purchase and/or obtain the iPad.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Huda Almumen.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

No conflict of interest to disclose.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendices

Appendix A

1.1 Samples of Experimental Group Participants’ Pre and Post Concept Maps

Participant 1

Pre-Concept Map

figure a

Post-Concept Map

figure b

Participant 2

Pre-Concept Map

figure c

Post-Concept Map 

figure d

Appendix B

2.1 Interview Questions

  1. 1.

    How was the course: in its classroom routines, participations, activities, projects and the use of multimodality along with technology (Blackboard, Instagram, technological tools)?

  2. 2.

    What are the most prominent takeaways you gleaned from this course? How did the course change your beliefs, ideas and connotations in educating and teaching individuals with disabilities?

  3. 3.

    How was your learning experience with the use of multimodality in accessing and representing your learning outcomes/accomplishments?

  4. 4.

    How would you evaluate the course content, activities and generally the instructor?

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Almumen, H. Technology and Multimodality in Teaching Pre-service Teachers: Fulfilling Diverse Learners’ Needs. Tech Know Learn 28, 745–767 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-021-09550-1

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-021-09550-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation