Matthew Andrew Zayed University, Abu Dhabi, UAE Using Multimodality and Mobile Learning for Prewriting Composition Tasks Matthew Andrew Zayed University, Abu Dhabi, UAE

Context Arabic-speaking students at an English-medium instruction university in Abu Dhabi Sequence of 3 Composition Courses Students mostly comfortable with technology

Prewriting Process for Essays Brainstorming Researching + Note Taking Outlining Drafts of the Essay

Word or Paper vs Multimodal

iPad or Macbook Choice of apps Prezi and iBooks Author most popular

The Literature Prewriting strategies can help learners with writing proficiency (Mahnam & Nejadansari, 2012; Akinwamide, 2012; Alhaisoni, 2012)

“Multiliteracies” (New London Group, 1996) Move from written word to image; textbook to screen (Kress, 2003)

Provides a “leveling effect” for L2 writers and can increase authorial voice (Nelson, 2006).

The Problem Students don’t do prewriting, (or don’t do it well), and prefer to just write their essay. This may cause problems later with disorganization and lack of content.

The Gap Previous studies done with multi-modality in the composition classroom, but nothing with multimodal prewriting.

Methods

Research Questions Do students enjoy doing prewriting tasks and find them useful? Will enjoyment and perceived usefulness increase if they produce prewriting assignments using multimodal composition? Are there any other benefits—understanding new vocabulary, awareness of audience, sharing ideas?

Participants 73 out of 90 students participated 2 cohorts of participants Spring 2014: n=46 Fall 2014: n=27

Research Design Students do traditional prewriting activities on Word or paper

Research Design Step 1: Pre-intervention: questionnaires + interviews after these traditional prewriting tasks

Step 2: Intervention Students do multimodal prewriting tasks using apps on Macbook or iPad

Prewriting Task 1 Brainstorming + Research Notes Prezi Keynote iMovie 7.5% of grade Prewriting Task 2 Outlining iBooks Author Creative Book Builder

Prezi for Brainstorming + Note Taking http://prezi.com/pur6tuasxzck/?utm_campaign=share&utm_medium=copy&rc=ex0share 

Prezi for Brainstorming

iBooks Author for Outlining

Step 3: Post-intervention questionnaires + interviews following multimodal prewriting tasks

Results

Comparison of Traditional vs. Multimodal: Spring 2014 (n=46) Agree Disagree I enjoyed them 56% 44% 69% 31% They helped me understand the content 96% 4% 76% 24%

Traditional Multimodal Agree Disagree Organize big parts of my essay 90% 10% 78% 22% Organize parts within my paragraph 63% 37% Necessary to write a good essay 81% 19% 85% 15%

Fall 2014: (n=27) Traditional Neither Multimodal Agree Disagree I enjoyed them 48% 24% 60% 11% They helped me understand the content 76% 12% 82% 0% They made writing my essay easier 80%

Fall 2014 (n=27) Traditional Neither Multimodal Agree Disagree Organize big parts of my essay 80% 12% 74% 4% Organize parts within my paragraph 64% 71% 8% Necessary to write a good essay 60% 20% 70% 7%

What type of prewriting do you prefer?   Multimodal Traditional No Preference Spring 2014 (n=46) 54% 39% 7%

What type of prewriting do you prefer?   Multimodal Traditional No Preference Fall 2014 (n=24) 63% 26% (option not available)

Why? Multimodal Traditional Interesting/Motivating/Enjoya ble 19 Less time 7 Understanding content better 8 Easier/less work 6 Easier for writing Straight forward/ clear 5

…. “with Microsoft Word the student isn’t involved in the topics …. “with Microsoft Word the student isn’t involved in the topics. They can’t feel it...but, with the pictures, with the voice, with the colour, he can like, feel what the situation, how it speak.”

“Last semester for brainstorming I used MS Word…it was boring because I like using other apps…using the video kept me inspired….I kept looking at other videos and ideas…it helped me with extra research…”

Participants who liked the traditional prewriting tasks said:

“I didn’t like [the multimodal]…I focused more on visuals, and I put more effort into how it would look, how it would sound—all of the unnecessary details instead of focusing on the actual information. I thought it was too distracting.”

“I made a multi-model outline for class, but I did another Microsoft word outline back home.”

One student who thought it depended on the learner:

“I believe that there's not a big difference between both prewriting structures. It mainly depends on the student, some people would prefer pictures and audio to understand their ideas better while other students might benefit otherwise.”

iPad vs Laptop

Device Preference Laptop Tablet (iPad) Other   Laptop Tablet (iPad) Other What device did you prefer to use when you made your project? 86% 2% 11%

Did you use a phone or tablet   Yes NO Did you use a smart phone or tablet to do any part of your project? 64% 36%

What did you use it for? Themes that came up Recording voice 10 Recording video 5 Brainstorming 3

What did they use for their next English Composition Class?

Comparison of same group after English Composition III essay   Multimodal Traditional No Preference Fall 2014 (n=31) English Comp III 50% 30% 20% Multimodal 54% Traditional 39% No preference 7%

Using apps and mobile devices Yes No Did you use apps to brainstorm or do outlines 39% 61%

Outlines Yes No Do you think outlines should be marked 58% 42% If there weren’t any marks, would you still do an outline? 80% 20%

Conclusion Students value prewriting activities, even if they don’t enjoy them.  Multimodal was more enjoyable, while traditional was more useful for understanding content and organizing information. Traditional was more direct and less time-consuming. Multimodal vs. Traditional comes down to learner preferences.  Do students who are not as advanced in writing and reading benefit more from multimodal prewriting tasks? Is technology really enhancing learning or is it creating extra, unnecessary work?

References Akinwamide, T. (2012). The Influence of Process Approach on English as a Second Language Students’ Performances in Essay Writing. English Language Teaching, 5(3), 16-29. Alhaisoni, E. (2012). The Effect of Writing Proficiency on Writing Planning Strategy Use: A Case Study of Saudi Learners of English. International Journal of Linguistics, 4(3), 78-100. Apple. (2015). Retrieved from http://www.apple.com/ibooks-author/ Daniel, M., Shin, D. S., Harrison, C., and Aoki, E. (2014). Examining Paths to Digital Literacies for English Language Learners. Illinois Reading Council Journal, 42(4), 35-42. Kress, G. (2003). Literacy in the New Media Age. Abingdon, Oxon: Rutledge. Mahnam, L., & Nejadansari, D. (2012). The Effects of Different Pre-Writing Strategies on Iranian EFL Writing Achievement. International Education Studies, 5(1), 154-160. National Council of Teachers of English. (2005). NCTE Position Statement on Multimodal Literacies. Retrieved from http://www.ncte.org/governance/MultimodalLiteracies. Nelson, M. (2006). Mode, meaning, and synaesthesia in Multimedia L2 Writing. Language Learning & Teaching, 10(2), 56-76. New London Group. (1996). A Pedagogy of Multiliteracies. Harvard Educational Review, 66 (1). Prezi (2015). Retrieved from http://prezi.com/about/ Shin, D., and Cimasko, T. (2008). Multimodal Composition in a College ESL Class: New Tools, Traditional Norms. Computers and Composition, 25, 376-395. Stevens, V. (2012). Web 2.0 Toolkit for Teaching and Learning EFL Presentation Skill. Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language: The Electronic Journal for English as a Second Language, (16)2, 1-7.