Response to Jody Shipka

In, “Negotiating Rhetorical, Material, Methodological, and Technological Difference: Evaluating Multimodal Designs,” Jody Shipka discusses the effects of multimodal designs, the act of composing, and the effects of students understanding their own purpose/problem of their text. Shipka begins by using some examples from students of multimodal designs versus linear designs. One example was a project in which the student was required to compose something that illustrated restrictions and shaping in learning. A student placed slips inside of a wine bottle to represent the effects of having an alcoholic parent. The reader was then required to commit an act of violence- to break the bottle in order to read the slips. Shipka discusses the positive effects of, “…requiring students to assume responsibility for describing and evaluating the purposes and potentials of their work. I argue that students who are required to produce “precisely defined goal statements” for their work become increasingly cognizant of how texts are composed of a series of rhetorical, material, and methodological “moves” that, taken together, simultaneously afford and constrain potentials for engaging with those texts…” I found this introduction to be extremely relevant to composition today. Composing any text does not have the be done in a linear fashion. In fact, designs such as this produce more rhetorical value than a formal essay ever could, as it requires the audience to interact with the information in non-conventional ways. By requiring students to produce “defined goals statements”, the student can delve deeper into the rhetorical value they want their piece to have. Instead of teachers telling you your problem and how to solve it, this requires students (or any composer) to look both ways- understanding the designer concept as well as the audience effect. It is a deeper understanding of texts, and it is helpful to understand that composing can be done in these “multimodal” ways. It is creative, transformative, and moving. Shipka then goes on to discuss how we are living in a intertexual world- layering literacies to produce new texts. Composition is where we find the value and methods for composing new texts. "My concern is that the tendency to use terms like “multi-modal” as synonyms for digitized products and processes will mean that they will be limited by the text, tools, and processes associated with digitalization.” She stresses that if we want to begin to create and think in new and different ways, we cannot limit ourselves to any particular texts or tools. Shipka makes an outline for a statement of goals and choices to use when creating a text. I believe looking at texts in this way can broaden our methods for composition. Understanding the project value and goals inside and out will help deepen the rhetorical value your text can have for an audience. By identifying strengths and weaknesses of a text, articulating feelings and audience reaction, we can better clarify our conscious choices that end up interacting with the audience. As composers, we must consciously become aware of the effects and limitations of our piece. I believe this to be an opening door into more creative, multimodal, and transformative pieces.