by Liew Pei Li, Management and Leadership in Schools Programme, July 2023
In order to move beyond default ways of thinking and open our eyes to potential blindspots, we can employ models to bring about systematic thought about the changes we plan to make. The following models are especially helpful in shedding light on how to identify and bring about needful change:
- Four Quadrants of Curriculum Decision-Making (Lim-Ratnam and Fulmer, 2014)
- Four Boxes of Assessment Literacy (Tan, 2022)
- Technical, Tactical, and Ethical Assessment Leadership (Tay et al., 2020)
- Hybrid Framework of Assessment Reform Group Model (Gardner et al., 2008) with Elements of Logic Model (Kellogg, 1998)
Needful Change: Why Multiliteracies?
As language teachers, we need to recognise that traditional language skills are no longer sufficient in preparing our students for life beyond school. Indeed, literacy goes beyond language learning. With the revised English Language syllabus (Curriculum Planning and Development Division, 2020a and 2020b), literacy now includes viewing and representing with multimodal texts. When we consider this syllabus change using Lim-Ratnam and Fulmer’s (2014) Four Quadrants of Curriculum Decision-Making, we are prompted to consider the general and long-term motivations and impacts (Quadrant 1) of this shift.
Technological changes in the digital age have directly impacted our day-to-day communication. Full home-based learning prompted by the COVID-19 pandemic has jolted educators to embrace the fact that our teaching and learning, as well as students’ lifeworld, are inextricably linked to the digital context.
Husserl’s (1970) Lifeworld Contexts of Learning (in the figure below) highlights that learning by design is integral to shaping and supporting students’ informal learning by immersion.
Viewing and representing skills, developed by appreciating different semiotic modes, “should not be neglected as part of literacy development but should be part and parcel of everyday effective communication” (Lim et al., 2022a). In tandem with the changes happening around us, we need to evolve our assessments—to bring about corresponding changes in the curriculum and pedagogy—to equip our students with multimodal literacy.
Four Boxes of Assessment Literacy & Technical, Tactical, and Ethical Assessment Leadership
Four Boxes of Assessment Literacy
To avoid falling into the trap of becoming those who “choose to use assessment to drive reform [instead of using] assessment to reflect reform” (Mabry, 1999, p. 679), we can adopt Tan’s (2022) design of the Four Boxes of Assessment Literacy to guide our change process:
In fact, the Four Boxes of Assessment Literacy can be better facilitated with the application of Technical, Tactical, and Ethical (TTE) Assessment Leadership (Tay et al., 2020). Ethical Leadership helps us to appreciate the Learning Outcomes [Box 4], giving us purpose and direction for the changes we are enacting. With the help of Tactical Leadership, we can better scope and sequence—while taking into consideration staff- and student-readiness—the Student Practices [Box 3] and Assessment Practices [Box 2]. Finally, Technical Leadership is, at its core, tied to the Assessment Literacy [Box 1] we seek to imbue in our teachers to prepare them for the journey of change. The relationship between the two models is captured below:
Ethical Leadership
Multiliteracies will help our students to flourish as effective, creative, and empathetic communicators in the real-world, long after they step out of our gates. Despite the common perception that students are digital natives, the ability to navigate the digital world critically and ethically is not intuitive, but one that requires intentional teaching and guiding. These include equipping students with the skills and dispositions to become “active designers–makers–of social futures” (New London Group, 1996).
Another moral imperative for incorporating Multiliteracies into our curriculum and assessment is to engender education justice (Suwalska 2021) and mitigate inequities. Some of these concerns include differential access and participation using digital technologies (Lim et al., 2021a) and how epistemic capital may be lacking in those with less access (Lim et al., 2022b).
Tactical Leadership
In order to engender buy-in from the teachers, it is crucial to also think through the possible sources and types of resistance, and how best to overcome them. Teacher perceptions matter and contribute significantly to the actions teachers take (or do not take) (Pajares, 1992). Rather than seeing the shift as a singular event in and of itself, teachers should be helped to recognise these changes as part of a continuum in improving teaching and learning (Ratnam-Lim, 2017).
This can be managed in two ways. Firstly, by situating Multiliteracies assessment against the backdrop of traditional literacy. While the semiotic modes are new, teachers are not starting from scratch. They could consider how the affective and embodied learning tied to Multiliteracies can complement the cognitive focus on learning thus far (Lim et al., 2022b). Secondly, by explicitly presenting Multiliteracies assessment (and thereby teaching and learning) as a layer on the original curriculum, so that the teachers can better appreciate the change as connected, relevant, and feasible.
Despite the best of our intentions, teachers may still lack the will and/or ability to manage new knowledge that seems too technical or challenging to appropriate and apply (Albright & Kramer-Dahl, 2009). Rightsizing and pacing the teaching and learning for both staff and students is thus one way of managing this resistance. This could look like ensuring that the pedagogic metalanguage on Multiliteracies “does not overwhelm the teachers and students with too much technical jargon and complexities” (Lim & Tan, 2017, p. 181)
In any change, the adoption distribution will apply (Rogers & Shoemaker, 1971). We can work with the innovators and early adopters to engender horizontal percolation of innovation. This can be done through building up teacher leaders who will be change agents. By adopting a design-based research approach to create resources for teaching and learning Multiliteracies (Lim & Nguyen, 2021), those with a greater sense of venturesomeness can become peer leaders, who in turn model this approach for the rest of the Department.
Technical Leadership
Given that we need to be intentional designers of learning so that students can better navigate their (digital) lifeworld, it is vital for teachers to first have semiotic awareness to choreograph embodied, thoughtful, and thought-provoking semiotic resources (Miller, 2013).
To ensure clarity in a new undertaking, this shared resource can also aid in thinking and talking about multimodal meaning-making (Unsworth, 2014). The knowledge required to provide this frame is as follows:
- Pedagogic metalanguage of Multiliteracies [Viewing] (Cope & Kalantzis, 2020; Kalantzis and Cope, 2022; Lim & Tan-Chia, 2023)
- Digital multimodal composing skills [Representing] (Liang & Lim, 2020)
- Up-to-date knowledge of platforms and tools, which can aid in the creation with, as well as detection of, the use of Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI)
Action Plan for Change
Hybrid Framework of Assessment Reform Group Model with Elements of Logic Model
In order to create a roadmap for the changes, I have married the Logic Model (Kellogg, 1998) with the Assessment Reform Group Model (Gardner et al., 2008). The elements of the change process have been mapped onto the infusion of Multiliteracies into our curriculum, pedagogy, and assessments in the figure below:
Each of the elements of the change process has been further elucidated below:
Innovation
- Incorporating Multiliteracies into our English curriculum, pedagogy, and assessment
Warrant
- Articulated through Ethical Leadership
- Bring to life the application and process orientation conveyed in the principles and processes of English Language Syllabus 2020 (Curriculum Planning and Development Division, 2020a and 2020).
Agency
- Appeal to teachers’ sense of purpose in helping all students to better navigate their lifeworld—in school and beyond—so that they are motivated to equip themselves for the changes
- Open teachers up to the possibility of imagining things differently, so as to bring about “learning as transformation … [with] profound epistemic or ontic changes in how we make sense of the world” (Molloy & Bearman, 2019, p. 34).
Resources / Input
- Pedagogic metalanguage of Multiliteracies
- [Teachers] Shared vocabulary among teachers to describe and discuss the meanings made in multimodal discourse (Lim & Tan, 2017)
- [Students] Grow students’ semiotic awareness (Towndrow et al., 2013) and “provide conceptual tools for students for the analysis and interpretation of multimodal texts” (Lim et al., 2015, p. 916)
- Teachers collectively analyse existing lesson packages and assessments on teaching and testing Multiliteracies (Lim et al., 2022a) to draw out the design principles and best practices
Dissemination (Top-Down)
- Department Head can facilitate co-construction of knowledge through collaborative and inductive learning activities, using relatable learning materials, drawing on schema, and connecting what they teach in school with students’ lifeworld (Lim et al., 2022b)
- Lead the team to adopt the encountering, exploring, evaluating, and expressing learning processes (Lim & Tan-Chia, 2023) to inform classroom practices—on interpreting and composing multimodal texts—which emphasise authenticity, student agency, collaboration and use of educational technology (Cope & Kalantzis, 2015)
Professional learning (Side-to-Side / Bottom-Up)
- Teachers can form a Professional Learning Team with teachers who have had exposure to semiotics (e.g. through their Literature training) to champion the changes within the Department. Their professional learning is central to empowering them as designers of learning and effecting curricular changes (Kress & Selander, 2012)
- Develop communities of practice to share resources and experiences amongst schools (Sharari et al., 2018)
⇒ Need for BOTH Dissemination and Professional Learning
- The combination of dissemination with professional learning embodies “reflexive pedagogy” (Cope & Kalantzis 2015). To best equip teachers to design for students’ Multiliteracies learning, didactic teaching (dissemination) and inquiry-based learning (professional learning) have to be conducted simultaneously
- This approach draws inspiration from Beaumont et al’s (2011) dialogic feedback model, where teachers are given (i) preparatory guidance in terms of gaining the pedagogic metalanguage of Multiliteracies, before they receive (ii) in-task guidance through collaborative and inductive learning activities done as part of Professional Learning Teams, and finally (iii) the performance feedback which can come in the form of output (i.e. individual/ level/ department reflections, students’ work, as well as students’ feedback/ survey responses)
Output
- Lesson packages
- Updated Assessments (both formative and summative) – sections/ performative tasks/ papers with checklists and rubrics to help students gain metacognitive awareness of how to decode, review, and create multimodal texts in real life
- Teaching and Learning repository feedback (e.g. Google classrooms/ SLS)
- Individual/ level/ department-level reflections on curriculum, pedagogy, and assessment of Multiliteracies learning
- Tracking of students’ progress through their submissions over the course of the year (or even across their years in school) to see if they have grown in their capacities to interpret and compose multimodal works
- Student feedback/ survey on their confidence as navigators and producers of content in the digital sphere
⇒ The output can become input for iterative dissemination and engagement of staff
Impact [Teachers]
- Proficient teachers and assessors of Multiliteracies
- Engaged in iterative improvements made to curriculum, pedagogy, and assessment of Multiliteracies learning based on reflective practice
Impact [Students]
- Effective, creative, and empathetic interpreters and composers of Multiliteracies
- Consummate and discerning navigators of the digital context
- Co-creators of knowledge and learning in Multiliteracies through Inquiry-based learning approach and Interdisciplinary integration
⇒ The impacts (from both students and teachers) can in turn inform the thinking and design undertaken as part of professional learning
Sustainable development (Beyond individual to system-wide support and change)
- Review of spiral progression of the scope and sequence as well as syllabus aims on Multiliteracies learning with next curriculum review by the CPDD
- Education researchers could work with teachers to develop theoretically-grounded and evidence-based instructional strategies for Multiliteracies teaching (Lim & Tan, 2018)
- Instead of asking how we can assess these skills per se, we need to ask how students can access these skills to bring about authentic learning that will serve them well beyond their time in school
Timeline for Roll-Out
First Year –
Learn the pedagogic metalanguage of Multiliteracies; principles and pitfalls behind designing Mulitliteracies learning packages and assessments; as well as some best practices in Singapore schools
Second Year –
Incorporate Multiliteracies into our curriculum
Use Weekly Department Professional Sharing for designing lesson packages and formative tasks to familiarise our students–as well as ourselves–to this new mode of interpretation and composition
Conduct surveys and/or Focus Group Discussions with our students to gain a more grounded sense of the possibilities of our designs, as well as a clearer understanding of students’ interests and experiences
Third Year –
Introduce Multiliteracies components into our assessments: either as part of formative Alternative Assessment or even summative pen-and-paper examinations
Closing Thoughts
Through applying the models to the change that I sought to make, I gained insights not just for this undertaking, but also the mental model that I have habituated. Instead of staying on the conceptual level of change, I need to be more ready to think about how I plan to work with my colleagues to operationalise what we have in mind, as well as to include students more consciously (to give voice to them) as co-creators in the innovations which are meant to benefit their learning in the first place. Clearly, theoretical frames can serve practical purposes.
References
Albright, J., & Kramer-Dahl, A. (2009). The legacy of instrumentality in policy and pedagogy in the teaching of English: The case of Singapore. Research Papers in Education, 24(2), 201–222. https://doi.org/10.1080/02671520902867200.
Beaumont, C., O’Doherty, M., & Shannon, L. (2011). Reconceptualising assessment feedback: A key to improving student learning?. Studies in Higher Education, 36(6), 671-687.
Cope, B., & Kalantzis, M. (2015). An introduction to the pedagogy of multiliteracies. In B. Cope & M. Kalantzis (Eds.), A Pedagogy of Multiliteracies: Learning by Design (pp. 1–36). Palgrave Macmillan.
Cope, B., & Kalantzis, M. (Eds.). (2000). Multiliteracies: Literacy Learning and the Design of Social Futures. Routledge.
Curriculum Planning and Development Division (CPDD) (2020a). English language teaching and learning syllabus 2020 – Primary. Ministry of Education, Singapore.
Curriculum Planning and Development Division (CPDD) (2020b). English language teaching and learning syllabus 2020 – Secondary [Express Course & Normal (Academic) Course]. Ministry of Education, Singapore.
Gardner, J., Harlen, W., Hayward, L., & Stobart, G. (2008). Changing assessment practice: Process, principles and standards. Assessment Reform Group.
Husserl, E. (1970). The Crisis of the European Sciences. Evanston: North Western University.
Kalantzis, M., and Cope, B. (2022). “After Language: A Grammar of Multimodal Transposition,” in Foreign Language Learning in the Digital Age: Theory and Pedagogy for Developing Literacies, 34–64. Routledge.
Kellogg, W. K. (1998). Foundation evaluation handbook.
Kress, G., & Selander, S. (2012). Multimodal design, learning and cultures of recognition. The Internet and Higher Education, 15(4), 265-268.
Liang, W.J., & Lim, F.V (2020). A pedagogical framework for digital multimodal composing in the English Language classroom. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/343339568_A_pedagogical_framework_for_digital_multimodal_composing_in_the_English_Language_classroom_Access_Pre-Print_athttphdlhandlenet1049722440.
Lim, F. V., Chia, A. T. Y., Weninger, C., Tan-Chia, L., Nguyen, T. T. H., Tan, J. M., … & Unsworth, L. (2022a). Multiliteracies in the Singapore English Language Classroom: Designing Learning. National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University (NIE NTU), Singapore.
Lim, F.V., Cope, B., & Kalantzis, M. (2022b). A metalanguage for learning: Rebalancing the cognitive with the socio-material. Frontiers in Communication. 7:830613. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2022.830613.
Lim, F.V., & Nguyen, T.T.H. (2021). Design-based research approach for teacher learning: A case study from Singapore. ELT Journal. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccab035.
Lim, F. V., O’Halloran, K. L., Tan, S., & E, M. K. L. (2015). Teaching visual texts with multimodal analysis software. Educational Technology Research and Development, 63(6), 916–935. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11423-015-9395-4.
Lim, F. V., & Tan, S. K. Y. (2017). Multimodal translational research: Teaching visual texts. In O. Seizov & J. Wildfeuer (Eds.), New Studies in Multimodality: Conceptual and Methodological Elaborations (pp. 175-200). Bloomsbury.
Lim, F. V., & Tan, S. K. Y. (2018). Developing Multimodal Literacy through Teaching the Critical Viewing of Films in Singapore. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 62(3), 291-300. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaal.882.
Lim, F.V. & Tan-Chia, L. (2023). Designing learning for multimodal literacy: Teaching viewing and representing. Routledge.
Lim-Ratnam, C., & Fulmer,G. W. (2014). What part does assessment play in curriculum design? In W. S. Leong, Y. S. Cheng & K. Tan (Eds), Assessment and Learning in Schools (pp. 27-36). Singapore: Pearson Education South Asia.
Mabry, L. (1999). Writing to the rubric: Lingering effects of traditional standardised testing on direct writing assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 80(9), 673–79.
Miller, S. M. (2013). A research metasynthesis on digital video composing in classrooms: An evidence-based framework toward a pedagogy for embodied learning. Journal of Literacy Research, 45(4), 386-430.
Molloy, E, & Bearman, M. (2019). Embracing the tension between vulnerability and credibility: ‘intellectual candour’ in health professions education. Medical Education 53, 32-41.
New London Group. (1996). A pedagogy of multiliteracies: Designing social futures. Harvard Educational Review, 66(1), 60–92.
Pajares, M. F. (1992). Teachers’ beliefs and educational research: Cleaning up a messy construct. Review of educational research, 62(3), 307-332.
Ratnam-Lim, C. (2017). Decision-making in curriculum leadership. In Curriculum Leadership by Middle Leaders (pp. 42-57). Routledge.
Rogers, E. M. & Shoemaker, F. F. (1971). Communication of Innovation.The Free Press.
Sharari, B.H.I., Lim, F.V., Hung, D., & Kwan, Y.M. (2018). Cultivating sustained professional learning within a centralised education system. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 29, 22-42.
Suwalska, A. (2021). The Last Educational Change in Finland–its Dimensions and Multiliteracy Teaching. Studia Edukacyjne, (60), 199-211.
Tan, K. H. K. (2022). The Four Boxes of Assessment Literacy Feedback. Assessment For All Learners. https://assessmentforall.blogspot.com/2022/07/the-four-boxes-of-assessment-feedback.html
Tay, H. Y., Tan, K. H. K., Deneen, C. C., Leong, W. S., Fulmer, G. W., & Brown, G. T. (2020). Middle leaders’ perceptions and actions on assessment: the technical, tactical and ethical. School Leadership & Management, 40(1), 45-63.
Towndrow, P.A., Nelson, M.E., & Yusuf, W.F.B.M. (2013). Squaring literacy assessment with multimodal design: An analytic case for semiotic awareness. Journal of Literacy Research, 45(4), 327-355.
Unsworth, L. (2014). Point of view in picture books and animated film adaptations: Informing critical multimodal comprehension and composition pedagogy. In E. Djonov & S. Zhao (Eds.), Critical Multimodal Studies of Popular Discourse (pp. 202-216). Routledge.