I met up with Michael and Jeremy last night to run a couple of ideas past them. I'll blog about that later however I've had some clarity this morning on a significant change I might make to the dissertation. 

Bearing in mind the difficulty (technology, conceptually, time required) to include aural components within my dissemination, I feel inclined to drop that area. As I've acknowledged elsewhere, this was always going to be a bit ambitious, particularly in terms of the need to create an aural 'channel' that is representative, integrated or complementary to the text and visuals on the page. Basically, how do I create a piece of music that is significant to or representative of 'Data collection'? Or 'Methodology'? Or Lit review? This would be hard to realise. It might also be difficult to justify within the rationale i.e. how can I show that music actually contributes to the communication of (my) meaning in the same way that image or text would. I don't think I can. It would be easier to drop the sound element of dissemination, then. 

Dropping the aural element of dissemination also impacts upon the wider dissertation: I'll also need to drop the 'sound' from my title. But then, when I come to think of it, the content is actually attending to text and visuality much more than aural anyway (in fact, it only gets a couple of token mentions). So the dissertation title becomes: A constellation of image and text: tutor experiences of multimodal assessment in the digital classroom.

What does this actually mean in terms of the dissertation:

• I need to include in the introduction/lit review that multimodality tends to be dominated by textuality and visuality and that maybe this will be reflected in discussion - hmm, not sure about this - does it offer and implied shift in focus in what I'm setting out to do - my focus is on multimodal assessment, not just abut image and text
  
• within data analysis and discussion I need to spend more time attending the the textual and visual themes than might otherwise have been the case
  
• in terms of dissemination I need to spend more time interweaving image and text
• also in terms of dissemination, my front cover constellation image needs to have a balance between image and text and to drop the pictured sound components

Of course, I'll also need to get Sian's take on this: on dropping sound and changing the title.

1. Architecture observation
I spent today observing architecture tutors assessing student work (this was the final submission that followed the crit review I attended earlier in term). It was really useful and satisfied my intention of observing how tutors consider multimodal assessment artefacts. I think this will make for an interesting and valuable study, in the context of my work.

This all sounds very good - I'm glad the architecture observation went well.

2. Art and design observation
This has been a bit slower to get going, however I've done a bit of nuisance doorstepping and am assured it will still go ahead. To be honest, I'm not sure what I'll learn over and above what I've seen in architecture but will proceed nevertheless. To an extent though this is beyond my control - is it a problem if it doesn't happen, having included it in my proposal?

On art and design, I think you are taking the right approach in pursuing it - however if it turns out not to be a go-er I don't think that's a problem - it sounds like you have enough and I'd have thought at this point the main gain here is keeing good links with those folk for future projects. It's certainly not a problem re the proposal.

3. Referring to examples of edc multimodal work in my lit review
Is it appropriate to make reference to specific examples of multimodal work on the EDC gallery, within my lit review. Would this count as 'the literature'? Is it a but unconventional to talk about specific examples of student work in a lit review? It would be helpful if I could (and would also help to satisfy your suggestion from last meeting that I need to relate the review more closely to my own research).

Yes - reference specific examples - great. It's not like these are the *only* literature you're using, and it's important to cite/credit people properly for this work. If you publish from this (and I think you probably will want to) you'll need their permission.

4. Referring to course handbooks/assessment frameworks/learning outcomes in lit review
As per question 3. I have assessment documentation for architecture and art and design (and of course our own MSc). I think it would be useful to (briefly) acknowledge how multimodality is encouraged within this documentation. Is this appropriate?

Yes - that's fine - again, if you publish you'd probably want to just get the OK from eca.

5.  Using photographs of student work in dissemination
With the permission of Head of Department and tutors present on the day, I took photos of student work during my architecture visit. It's conceivable that I might want to include some of these images in my dissemination as examples of multimodal artefacts. I took a note of the names of students whose work I photographed with a view to seeking their permission to include in dissemination. As it was, there was actually quite a lot of photographing of work, by tutors and students - it seems an accepted part of what takes place. Nevertheless, it feels like I should seek permission to use images - what do you think?

As above - I think you'd need permission if you publish or present on it (so it's worth keeping a record of whose work it is etc) but I don't think you really need that now to use it (dissertations aren't public documents in the way theses are).

I can't remember if I told you I am going into hospital on 7 June for an operation on my knee, so will be out of action for a couple of weeks. I'll be a bit restricted in mobility for much of June/July but we can still have a meeting over that period if you're willing to have it at my place in Marchmont Cresent - let me know when might be useful for a 
catch-up - I can't quite recall what we agreed on this?

On the way back from Moray House Library earlier today (having returned The Psychology of Everyday Things by Donald Norman) I stopped for a coffee in Caffe Nero and jotted down some ideas for the front cover image. With Michael visiting this weekend and willing to spend some time talking multimodality, it would helpful to have a mock up in place to get his thoughts on. Here then are some thoughts on the possible artefact components that could make up the front cover image for dissemination:

Hmmm. Lacking imagination here. Very repetitive. Maybe I need to take a different approach, focusing on the artefact rather than the component of the website that's being represented.

This is beginning to take shape. It's not perfect, but it's not bad. I'll need to think carefully how I arrange the different items for photographing - I need each component to be clear and for the image to be authentic but not overly cluttered. Maybe I can add some authenticity by including some of the following items into the scene:

That'll do for now. Maybe tomorrow night I'll have a quick go at mocking this up (with some dummy components) before I spend much more time thinking about this.

Struggling to stay away, but throwing this thought down otherwise I might forget it.

My front page on the dissemination: should the constellation be of artefacts that represent sound, word and image, rather than trying to find artefacts that link to particular parts of the dissertation?

Or to put it another way, should the image/constellation be reflective specifically of the title (which overlays it) rather than trying to represent all the components of the assignment?

Or can it do both?

If I decide to go for both (or just focusing on assignment components) then I can justifiably use thinglink. However its a case of simply a case of depicting image, word and sound then there's no point in having hyperlinks.

I'd like to stick with the idea (at least) of using the image as a map of the assignment. My challenge then will be to come up with a series of artefacts in the image that simultaneously represent different components of the dissertation whilst in themselves depicting image, word and sound. So the image will have components that could a double meaning e.g. a book might simultaneously depcict the 'words' part of the title, whilst also representing and linking to the literature review. 

This is going to be tricky.

Just adding these as they come to. I don't have a meeting in place yet - no need at the moment - but will record the questions anyway as a record.

Other questions to follow, as they come to me.

Is this the thirds post I've made about the idea to develop or discuss a multimodal university crest within dissemination. This one came to me late last night. I was quite excited about it then, however not sure about it now. I wish I'd taken time to get up and write a few notes about it at the time: I did reflect that a truly committed scholar would have done so. Anyway, a day later, here's the idea, as much as I can remember it.

As per earlier posts I make the point that, in the multimodal university, the university crest is reimagined to have books alongside other modes or other digital resources.  But then in a truly digital multimodal university, perhaps the crest itself would exploit the potential of multimodality itself. It might not be static by animated and accompanied by sound. 

Actually, that raises a useful point. I could pick up on land's idea and say that the visual depiction of the book within medieval university crests reflects the privileging of the bound text, but actually the crests themselves are multimodal: they have a combination of words, image, design. Learning at the time was multimodal: oral, textual and visual - therefore its fitting that the crests do likewise.

Actually, maybe that's the approach I take. I could talk about the multimodal nature of the logos, but point out that of course the oral element is reflected in the crests themselves. This is something however in the digital multimodal university that could be realised. The multimodal university crest would include text* as well as images depicting a number of key modes of communication - but it needn't be static. It could use other modes - sound, animation. 

*reflecting some of the discussion within multimodal discourse (in particular Kress), perhaps the logo could be entirely visual. Maybe the visual image attains sufficient status in the academy that the logo is entirely visual.

Come to think of it, most of this wasn't what I thought of last night, but has been the product of some freewriting just now. Even if the original ideas wasn't that great in the cold light of day, I think I've come up with perhaps a couple of interesting points here.

In my last blog entry (where I explored the use visual exploration of the university crest) I made what felt like an important observation about the wider use of image within the dissertation dissemination:

Now that I stop to reflect on my use of image within dissemination, it feels like I've fallen in the trap of ignoring the meaning-sharing value of image, and instead have focused more on it as an aesthetic device. This really feels at odds with the nature of multimodality as described in the literature. In fact, there's a strong argument that my work would look less impressive if I ignore or underestimate the potential of visual images (just as I want to avoid doing the same with music). So then, how can I use image in a way that extends beyond attaching digital wallpaper to the screen background? [A nice phrase that last one - maybe I should include it within my dissemination rationale.] 

I could have relevant images alongside or embedded within the text. This would be instead of just long sections of text. They could be used periodically to visually represent what's included in the text. Off the top of my head this could include books, cds of music, videos, art stuff, lap top, written text on the page, writing devices, keyboard, ipad scree with touch keys, Second Life or other digital spaces on a screen. I would photograph all these images, fitting in with the idea that all of this is my own work. Even when referring to someone else's essay on screen (assuming I choose to do this  - see earlier blog post) it would be my photograph of what's on screen. I could have a bit of fun with this by being imaginative, humorous and including secondary subtle or subliminal messages into the image, for instance in the choice of books, CDs or DVDs, or through the selection of artefacts in the background.

Would I need to caption them underneath the image? Maybe. Maybe I could use the hover over text. 

Would I need to offer a citation under or alongside the image? Maybe this wouldn't be necessary if it's all my own work and such is explained within an introductory section. Or again, maybe when when the cursor hovers over the image a title and my name appears.

Another approach - and this might be edging more towards the visual aesthetic side of thing - but I could use 'talking' icons alongside sections of quoted text in my data analysis. Hmm, need to think more about this one. Could be interesting, could be sh*t.

What I've proposed above represents using images that support and help to explain what's being said in accompanying text. But how can I use image to really offer greater meaning in it's own right? Perhaps that's where I create/compose/picture something specifically for the purpose of exploring an idea rather than supporting the text. An example would be the university crest. I'm not sure I can think of any others at this stage and it doesn't make sense to try and generate images before I've actually analysed the data and drawn my own conclusions. Instead, once the text is drafted for the dissemination I should read through it and see where image might be relevant or useful or enhance what it written down.

A not particularly convincing thought that I had on the way home this evening:

How about including a visual of the multimodal university crest within the lit review, rather than just talking about it.

After all, this is intended to be a multimodal artefact, therefore when proposing that the digital university in the future might need to rethink its crest, why should I stop at text? Certainly, this isn't conventional. But then the dissemination itself is following a non-traditional route therefore why not? 

It needn't be a significant focus of discussion, however maybe when proposing such a crest, maybe I have the image embedded into the section of text. It would be pretty obvious what I'm talking about therefore I wouldn't need to really explain in any great detail what's going on within the graphic.

In fact this raises a wider and interesting point: how much use should I be making of images within my text? Thus far my thinking has simply been along the lines of 'signifier' images at the top or bottom of pages. But surely I'm missing something here. Should I not have images punctuating the text through the document (or at least, certain sections where it lends itself to that kind of thing)?  This feels like a significant issue therefore I going to explore it within a dedicated blog post to follow. Meanwhile however, back to the multimodal university crest.

The multimodal university crest could be a combination of books alongside other modes, representing the fact that ideas are now represented across a range of modes within the academy. In fact maybe I could include a few different options. Maybe there's almost a case for coming up with a visual exploration of how the university crest might look in the future/or how it might look at the current time according to the literature. Perhaps this could become a dedicated section of the dissertation: perhaps I could even offer a few different versions, based upon different themes within the literature of different viewpoints e.g. 'here's a crest built around multimodality as defined by Kress and van Leewen which replaces the book instead with a canvas, upon which a range of artefacts have been painted (and this could include some painted letter and other modes).' Maybe this is getting a bit ambitious? Probably. Maybe I'm overplaying it a bit. Nevertheless, I think there's something here. 

Contrary to what I said above about almost introducing the image in an understated way, perhaps on the contrary I should do this is in more detail, and make a case for doing so. I could say that we, consistent with the significant role of image within multimodality, when exploring how the university crest might be reimagined it is vital to do so with the use of image, rather than relying solely on text. And thereafter I have a mixture of text discussion alongside the image.

And here's a good idea - once I've created the crest, I could use it in an explicit or subtle way (or ways) within the cover image on the website. For instance perhaps the crest would be on screen as part of a mock up of a university website? Or maybe the logo would be on some form of stationery (an academic diary?) or a piece of tat to which university crests are typically attached. Maybe some form of paper weight or something like that. Or maybe - and this is perhaps a bit better - on the front cover of an official-looking assessment handbook.

There are some interesting ideas here, not least that I'm now reappraising the role that image might play within dissemination.