Teaching the visual generation: Teachers' responses to art, media and the visual literacy challenge

Paper presented to the AARE Conference

University of Queensland, Australia

1-5 December 2002

Teaching the visual generation: Teachers' responses to art, media and the visual literacy challenge

As new technologies dramatically alter communication practices, there is a growing sense that traditional literacies alone may not be enough for the individual to be considered truly 'literate'. In western capitalist societies at least, we are absorbing more and more information from different types of texts and it is becoming increasingly difficult to describe what being literate means . In recognition of the impact of the new technologies on communication practices and the changing nature of the text, educators have explored the concept of 'multiliteracies' . This transformation recognises that literacies are always evolving; as technologies change, so too do the ways we practise literacy and perceive its social role . Thus, we are alerted to the need for a range of new kinds of literacies: 'information literacy', 'digital literacy', 'critical literacy', 'media literacy', 'visual literacy' and so on. A sense of urgency often characterises the discussion of any one of these 'new' literacies.

The particular form of literacy that I would like to explore further is 'visual literacy'. Because young people, who have been described as the 'visual generation' , tend to be particularly immersed in visually-dependent, multi-media environments, the concept of visual literacy has been promoted as an important aspect of learning today. Educators stress the need to provide students with opportunities not only for creating visual texts, but also for critically analysing their individual responses to the imagery that surrounds them in their everyday lives.

The new arts syllabus in Queensland takes up this concern with the visual and the concept of the multi-modal aspects of literacy practices. Literacy is defined in this document as "reading and writing, speaking and listening, viewing and shaping, often in combination in multimodal texts, within a range of contexts" . References to visual literacy and associated concepts like critical and media literacy are made throughout:

One major focus of visual literacy is the understanding of how texts are constructed in terms of the visual elements used and the communicative functions of these various components. The emphasis in this mindset is on analysing the codes and conventions associated with design and production. In some contexts the visual mode is commonly described as a 'language' that represents a form of communication distinct from written languages and attempts are made to dissect this visual language to see how it 'works'.

One way of analysing the visual structure is to describe the associated components in terms of the elements and principles of design . Theorists point to design elements such as line, shape, colour, form, texture and space, and principles such as unity, variety, proportion, balance and movement, as the building blocks of the visual language. Sometimes discussions draw upon communication principles in conjunction with design concepts . In this context, the interactions among the author of the text, the viewer of the text, and the text itself are highlighted. The effectiveness of an image is generally judged according to how well the intended message is communicated to the viewer (or receiver).

Another important aspect of visual structure is the recognition of the technical aspects involved . Being able to construct visual texts generally requires the mastery of certain technical skills. The production of multi-media texts, for example, has become heavily reliant on digital technology. An understanding of the production techniques used will not only assist in the creation of visual texts, but will also give insights into the way in which meanings are conveyed.

Closely related to structural aspects of visual structure are aesthetic considerations . An aesthetic approach is not so much interested in the communicative aspects of design and technical features, but rather in how effective visual texts are in terms of more artistic qualities such as beauty, originality and imagination. While these aspects may traditionally be placed within the realm of 'fine art', such judgements undeniably affect the impact of the communication process in all forms of visual representations. It should be acknowledged that the study of 'aesthetics' encompasses a broad range of artistic experiences, but in this context refers more specifically to the way in which the artistic qualities affect the potency of the communication process and even the nature of the message itself. For example, a slickly produced PowerPoint presentation can make even 'ordinary' information appear 'extraordinary' because of its artistic and technical sophistication.

Another important dimension of visual literacy is understanding the ideology behind imagery. If the structural and aesthetic aspects focus on the 'how' of imagery, the ideological aspects may be said to concentrate on the 'why?' (or the 'why not?').

Many writers today stress the need to draw out critical responses to the visual by acknowledging the social, economic and political agendas implied . A structural response to a scene in a film, for example, might mean there is recognition that a low camera angle has been used to give a sense of authority and power to a subject. An aesthetic judgement might be made in terms of how visually effective this technique is. On the other hand, a critical response to that same imagery would demand that questions are asked about why this particular subject has been given this position of power and the values that are implied. A critical approach also highlights the cultural aspects of imagery by acknowledging that the visual 'language' is produced, read and negotiated in terms of specific cultural contexts . It is therefore encouraged that a wide range of visual texts be studied, including popular texts, as a means to understanding that all meaning is socially constructed .

Some theorists would maintain that the younger generation is not as vulnerable to the impact of the mass media as is often assumed by well-meaning adults . However, the arts syllabus is based upon the assumption that students need assistance in developing critical literacy "by questioning the cultural, social and political practices embedded in spoken, written, visual, auditory, kinaesthetic and multimodal texts" . The visual and multimodal texts referred to here are of particular relevance to visual literacy. The cultural aspects of understanding imagery are also emphasised when the document alludes to "the cultural, social and historical contexts in which art works are created and presented" (p. 9).

The new Queensland Arts syllabus also touches on the design and aesthetic aspects of visual literacy when it refers to "developing understandings of elements and forms to recognise, interpret and express the human condition and experience in imaginative ways" . Similarly, in the media section, mention is made of the structural aspects, for example, "elements of media languages" such as "still and moving images" , as well as the technical aspects of image-making, for example, "Students utilise techniques associated with audio/visual presentation and particular media forms . . ." (p. 33). Thus, the new syllabus incorporates discourses pertaining to the structural, aesthetic and ideological aspects of visual literacy.

While it is clear that visual literacy has captured the imaginations of theorists and policy makers, what is less certain is how teachers are responding to these concerns. The research project I am presently working on is one that aims to determine the likelihood of primary teachers in Queensland taking visual literacy (in any capacity) on board. Using a broadly post-structural framework to guide my methods, I have conducted independent, semi-structured interviews with 26 primary teachers from a number of government schools in my local area during 2002. My interest lies not so much in uncovering essential 'truths', as in identifying common discourses in these discussions as a means of highlighting the obstacles relating to visual literacy, always keeping in mind the broader socio-political contexts at hand. To assist me in my analysis I will draw on the work of a number of theorists, including Gunther Kress and Ivor Goodson. While Kress and Goodson are not identified specifically as 'post-structuralists', their theories are compatible with my research because of the ways in which they emphasise the constructed nature of educational processes; in particular, they challenge naturalised views of curriculum change and the positioning of knowledge. Obviously, there are many aspects to understanding the obstacles that will affect the advancement of visual literacy. What follows is a summary of some of my early findings and the four major obstacles that I will briefly discuss are:

• the drive for conventional literacies
• lack of awareness (what new literacies?)
• unrealistic expectations
• alienation from curriculum change.

It is evident that accountability is a pressing issue in schools today and teaching students basic literacy and numeracy is a big component of that. Researchers such as Campbell and Neill (1994) have found that primary teachers in the UK who are trying to cope with nationally imposed standards have become hugely stressed in their efforts to try to meet these demands and similar trends are observable in the local context.

Consequently, the importance that teachers place on such activities as art and media studies is perhaps not likely to be very high. Like music, the visual mode is traditionally regarded more as a form of creative expression and not valued as a "form of expression for articulate, reasoned communication" . Teachers find it hard enough to fit in subjects like Studies of Society and the Environment (SOSE) and science, let alone video production or a lesson on design. Similarly, in terms of curriculum development, the arts syllabus is not high on their list of priorities:

This is probably a realistic summation of present curriculum priorities. Despite all the well-intentioned discussions surrounding the need for new literacies, teachers are very much consumed with getting students up to speed with conventional literacies.

While this preoccupation with traditional literacies could be read as a conscious rejection of literacy reform, it is important to realise that many teachers are genuinely unaware of the 'push' for different kinds of literacy in the first place. Having transformative pedagogies outlined in policy documents is one thing, but having teachers know about these educational movements, and act upon these changes, is quite another.

Goodson would maintain that, like all curriculum statements, comments pertaining to visual literacy in the new arts syllabus have been established in part for the public evaluation of schooling, and are therefore subject to a number of competing agendas.

However, in the case of the new arts syllabus, perhaps the inclusion of visual literacy statements is more for the benefit of curriculum specialists than for the general public. The inclusion of direct and indirect references to visual literacy suggests that our educational practices are accommodating the changing needs of students today and such statements are very much in tune with a lot of the academic dialogue concerning the imperative for 'multi-literacies' and 'new' literacies. While these priorities are taken as 'given' in many forums, it is doubtful that there is the same groundswell of support for such reforms amongst the general public. The aim of making students 'visually literate' seems unlikely to be one of particular interest to the community at large, but does have significance for policy makers and some areas of the academic community.

Early on in my research I ascertained that it was somewhat pointless asking primary teachers what they understood by 'visual literacy' since most teachers had not heard of it at all. Literacy in primary schools is very much tied to 'genre' and teachers tend to relate 'visual literacy' and 'multi-literacies' to different types of genre. When I asked one teacher about whether she had heard of the discussions around "new literacies", she immediately replied, "Genre? That's been around for about 15 years!"

Some teachers associate the 'visual' with styles of learning and types of intelligences:

Typically, those teachers who have heard of 'multi-literacies' will admit to having only a very vague idea of what this means:

It is evident that, at this stage at least, teachers seem to have only hazy notions, if any, of what is meant by the concept of 'visual literacy' or that of 'multi-literacies'.

Furthermore, some teachers do not even know that there is a new arts syllabus in existence, while others are convinced that it is still in draft form. It was rumoured that the new syllabus would become officially adopted in 2003, but the timeline has now been extended until 2006. Bearing in mind this new, considerably extended timeframe, it is unlikely that the new arts syllabus, or the concepts within it, will become a major focus for many teachers in the near future.

Putting the arts syllabus well and truly on the 'back-burner' may not be such a surprising move, however. Apart from the traditionally low status of the arts, there has been a flurry of major curriculum change implemented by Education Queensland in the last few years. The department is in the process of changing all its curriculum documents for primary and lower secondary schooling to accommodate outcome based reporting strategies. The new arts syllabus, then, comes at the end of a long line of curriculum changes and teachers are feeling overwhelmed. Even teachers who seem dedicated and enthusiastic are feeling the pressure. (Such descriptions are obviously highly subjective, but help to convey a sense that some teachers appear more willing than others to try out new ideas and will devote more of their own time to such ends.) Rob is one such teacher:

Many of the teachers I interviewed remain somewhat sceptical when it comes to curriculum change and the driving forces behind it. It is interesting to note that Rob here acknowledges that the changes are 'politically driven' and obviously feels a certain sense of powerlessness and frustration as a result. When a multitude of reforms is imposed upon teachers without their involvement, teachers can feel that their professional status and judgement are undermined . There is a strong sense of 'them' and 'us' when talking to teachers about curriculum change : 'them' being the policy makers who are perceived as being hopelessly out of touch, and 'us' being the teachers who are out there dealing with the day-to-day reality of schooling.

Therefore, curriculum changes are perceived as being very much subject to bureaucratic whim, and there is a strong presentiment that the piles of paperwork taking up hours of time today will become fodder for recycling a few years down the track. More than one teacher had a story to tell of how they were asked to be involved in major curriculum change, only to have it not come to fruition or for it to be quickly superseded:

Apart from doubts concerning the lasting value of curriculum change, most teachers prefer to devote themselves to the more grassroots aspects of teaching. Teachers feel they are too caught up in the day-to-day challenges of managing a classroom to have the time or energy to take new policy documents or theories on board . Rosalind, a very experienced teacher, observes that the intricacies of long-term curriculum planning do not hold much appeal for teachers:

Therefore, teachers may start to feel resentful when curriculum development starts to cut into the time they could be using to prepare for the day to day aspects of teaching. According to Goodson , it can be argued that:

Teachers often appear to reject, even scorn, the theoretical in preference for the more practical aspects of teaching. They acknowledge that wading through curriculum documents and other forms of professional reading is hard work that does not offer a great deal of appeal in the context of a busy working life. Often the way in which such documents are written becomes an obstacle in itself:

Certainly, the way in which the new arts syllabus is written may be described as 'dense' in places. For example, 'cross-curricular literacy' is said to be promoted when students:

While more specific examples of 'languages' and 'symbol systems' are offered later in the syllabus under 'Learning Outcomes', and elsewhere in supporting documents, teachers could be forgiven for being somewhat daunted by these vague and wordy preambles.

Is it, therefore, simply too big an 'ask' to expect teachers to show an interest in another new curriculum document and in the new pedagogical challenges contained within it? Are the obstacles simply insurmountable? While it is beyond the scope of this paper to discuss the ways in which each of these various problems may be worked through, I believe the outlook is certainly not all grim. I have talked to teachers who are already taking up some of the challenges of the new arts syllabus, particularly in the area of multi-media, though they may not be conversant with the concept of visual literacy per se. Some teachers, especially those who are committed to using new technologies, are enthusiastic when it comes to the idea of approaching literacy in different ways. They are finding that tasks can be structured so that conventional literacies are enhanced, rather than compromised, using visual means of expression. Further research is required to identify some of the defining characteristics of these teachers and to explore ways of helping teachers engage with curriculum documents more fully so that they can see the opportunities as well as the challenges. It seems unlikely that teachers will pay much attention to theories surrounding visual literacy unless they can see that there are workable applications for classroom learning. It may therefore be necessary to look more closely at the ways in which curriculum documents are written in the first place, and even the usefulness of the term 'visual literacy' may need to be critiqued.

It would appear that an interest in visual literacy represents one of education's responses to meeting the needs of young people in a rapidly changing world and the inclusion of such a concept in the new Queensland arts syllabus undeniably represents a challenge to teachers. However, the reality is that many teachers do not have much interest in the new arts syllabus or awareness of the discussions around 'multi-literacies', and there is a deafening silence in response to the concept of 'visual literacy'. There are many other agendas operating in primary schools, not the least of which are pressures to improve standards in conventional literacies. Furthermore, teachers feel a sense of alienation from the process of curriculum change and retain a 'healthy scepticism' when it comes to the value of new theories and policies. These are early days for the visual literacy movement and it is likely to take many years before such concerns become mainstream (if ever!). In the bigger picture, what is really being asked for is a change of mindset regarding literacy practices, and this is no easy task, especially in light of the escalating pressures on teachers today. However, even small steps towards this end may be significant and worthwhile. The way I see it, we are very much at the 'seed planting' stage at this time, and it is only with patience and perseverance that any version of visual literacy is ever likely to become a 'classroom reality'.