I am continuing to undertake research into Game-based Learning, and single-gender teaching in particular. I’m reading a PhD on the classification of audio within digital games and their contributions to immersion.
I have been reading the following paper:
Rowsell, Jennifer; Kendrick, Maureen. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy.Apr2013, Vol. 56 Issue 7, p587-599.
It discusses the benefits of visual cues – student- generated or chosen from a third-party source – in assisting students producing richer narratives. (This accords with an other recent paper on Dyslexia, which accompanies a specially-designed font, and also notes the need for the use of visual cues.)
Of course, the subjects of the papers are young males.
Three modalities and three sites of meaning are defined.
Modalities are: technological, compositional & social. The three sites of meaning are: site of production, the bonded unit of the image, and the site of viewing. The theory of ‘site’ takes account of the social practices of the context in which the image was produced, what it ‘contains’ and where and when it is viewed: from one to three different locations. And henceforth, this has effects on the production and reception of the resulting narrative.
All of which accords with Cultural Historical Activity Theory (CHAT), Cole, Engstrom, et al., the socio-cultural analysis tool which I have been using as part of my observations of group work, formally and informally. Kendrick and Rowsell go on to suggest:
“An ecological approach to language learning emphasizes emergent language development; “learning and cognition as explained not only in terms of processes inside the head, but also in terms of interaction with the environment; and learners’ perceptual and social activity as, in a fundamental way, their learning” (vanLier, 2000, cited in Hornberger, 2002, p. 35). An ecological approach allows us to look more closely at the performance of multimodal text construction and to consider students’ experience across time and within a variety of contexts” (Roswell & Kendrick, p.590, 2013).
So we English teachers should acknowledge the power of the visual image to support narrative production, tapping “into students’ motivations, interests and convictions” – especially boys – and ‘recruit’ what “students bring to learning” (The New London Group, 1996 in Roswell & Kendrick, 2013).