Encyclopedia of Educational Philosophy and Theory

2017 Edition
| Editors: Michael A. Peters

Multimodal Literacies

  • Dane Marco Di Cesare
  • Jennifer Rowsell
Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-588-4_114



While literacy in its most narrow sense has always meant learning to make sense of language, there is so much more to literacy than simply an acquisition of language skills. With many diverse ways of communicating, literacy researchers have expanded their definitions and interpretative frameworks for literacy work by applying a multimodal literacies perspective to literacy teaching and learning. Multimodality maintains that communication is a combination of modes of representation and expression within text designs (with the term textreferring to communicative acts beyond but including print or writing). Modes can be oral through talk or public speaking; modes can be dramatic through role-playing and improvisations; modes can visualize content in drawings, paintings, and film; and of course modes can exist in print in books, newspapers, and magazines. Modes serve a variety of...

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


  1. Barad, K. (2007). Meeting the Universe Halfway: Quantum Physics and the Entanglement of Matter and Meaning. Durham: University of Duke Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1980). A Thousand Plateaus. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  3. Gee, J. P. (2006). Why game studies now? Video games: A new art form. Games and Culture, 1(1), 58–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Halliday, M. (1979). Language as social semiotic. Victoria: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
  5. Howes, D. (2006). Scent, sound and synaesthesia: Intersensoriality and material culture theory. In C. Tilley, W. Keane, S. Küchler, M. Rowlands, & P. Spyer (Eds.), Handbook of material culture (pp. 161–173). London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Kress, G. (1997). Before writing: Rethinking the pathways to literacy. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  7. Kress, G. (2010). Multimodality: A social semiotic approach to contemporary communication. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  8. Kuby, C. (2013). Critical Literacy in the Early Childhood Classroom. New York: Teachers College.Google Scholar
  9. Leander, K., & Boldt, G. (2013). Rereading “A pedagogy of multiliteracies”: Bodies, texts, and emergence. Journal of Literacy Research, 45(1), 22–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Lemke, J. L. (2000). Opening up closure: Semiotics across scales. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 901(1), 100–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Lemke, J. L. (2002). Travels in hypermodality. Visual Communication, 1(3), 299–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Lewis, C., & Tierney, J. D. (2013). Mobilizing emotion in an urban classroom: Producing identities and transforming signs in a race-related discussion. Linguistics and Education, 24(3), 289–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Norris, S. (2009). Modal density and modal configurations: Multimodal actions. In C. Jewitt (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of multimodal analysis (pp. 78–90). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  14. Pahl, K. (2004). Narratives, artifacts and cultural identities: an ethnographic study of communicative practices in homes. Linguistics and Education 15(4):339–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Pahl, K., & Rowsell, J. (2010). Artifactual literacies: Every object tells a story. New York: Teacher’s College Press.Google Scholar
  16. Siegel, M. (1995). More than words: The generative power of transmediation for learning. Canadian Journal of Education, 20(4), 455–475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Singapore 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Brock UniversitySt. CatharinesCanada