Rhetoric is Useful: Exhibits as Interfaces

Johnson, Robert R., Michael J. Salvo, Meredith W. Zoetewey. "User-Centered Technology in Participatory Culture: Two Decades “Byond a Narrow Conception of Usability Testing." IEEE Transaction on Professional Communication.  Dec. 50.4 (2007): 27-47. http://ehis.ebscohost.com.proxy.lib.odu.edu/ehost/resultsadvanced?sid=dc51e853-ea56-4dea-ae89-728e57a72341%40sessionmgr15&vid=2&hid=23&bquery=(AU+(Zoetewey))&bdata=JmRiPWE5aCZ0eXBlPTEmc2l0ZT1laG9zdC1saXZl

Johnson, Salvo and Zoetewey review Patricia Sullivan’s contribution to the connections between rhetoric and usability while asserting that “usability relies on multiple epistemologies to triangulate knowledge making.”  Criticizing trends in usability studies that put the issue of useability and user-interface at the end of the design-stage of computer programs and products, the authors come to the conclusion that usability studies should be integrated and analyzed through a rhetorical lens before and throughout the design process.  Positioning themselves along side Whitehouse who wrote the “Uniqueness of Individual Perception” and referencing Latour’s concept that challenges science as a privileged topic, the authors assert that previous efforts to subjugate mainstream culture and rhetoric to hard science and engineering has resulted in missed opportunities, lost understanding of user cultures, and poor design of programs and products. The authors illustrate that rhetoricians, working in branches of technical communication and new media design, act as a bridge between “culture” which they define as the “non-science” community and the science community, essentially saying that culture and science are equally important, but need rhetoric or rhetoricians to act as a “translator” or “interface” between the two groups—especially when it comes to usability and user-interface design.  The authors reiterate that the rhetorical concept of relativity, rather than the scientific concept of rigidity, applies to the interdisciplinary field of usability and that taking relative issues, such as audience, purpose, desired outcomes, and pedagogical methods, into account throughout the design process a better user interfaces and improved design and usability will be the outcomes.

In terms of composition pedagogy, three things come to mind. One of the concerns is that software designers and not composition instructors have more influence over student interfaces such as Blackboard, MyCompLab, and distance learning programs such as WebEx and Adobe Connect.  While instructors may be mindful of student experience with these technologies, poor usability and poor user interfaces can have a negative impact on the teaching and learning experience.   Second, the article stresses the need to teach students in technical writing and technical communication courses, that usability studies must include rhetorical concepts to create better process and products.  Third, the article suggests that teaching more students to understand the issues surrounding usability as a facet of communication/rhetoric will result in deeper understanding of the scientific community by "culture" and deeper undersanding of "culture" by scientists.  This article seeks to show that rhetoricians must be involved in throughout the design process to improve both teaching and learning when using technology.

Where Am I? What Can I Do About It?

Gruenwald, David A.. "The Best of Both Worlds: A Critical Pedagogy of Place." Educational Researcher  May 32.4  (2003): 3-12 EBSCOhost. Web. 23 Sept. 2011.

David Gruenwald, referencing McLaren and Giroux who maintain that critical pedagogy has been focused on urban places, asserts that place-based education and critical pedagogy, while not mutually exclusive, are like two ships passing in the night.  Using Haymes article, Race, Culture and the City: A Pedagogy for Black Urban Struggle as an example of place-based pedagogy, Gruenwald asserts that place-based pedagogy allows oppressed cultures to understand and to identify place in order to “decolonize” the space into which they have been forced.   He then points out that Haymes “is silent about the connections between cities and ecological concerns” reinforcing, rather than transforming, cultural beliefs about place, in particular the ecology of said place or situation. Using Bowers theoretical framework of ecological literacy, “reinhabitation” and eco-justice coupled with Friere’s critical liberatory pedagogy, Gruenwald synthesizes those pedagogies into an ecologically-focused pedagogical theory, a critical rhetoric of ecological place if you will, that is founded on a curriculum that engages and encourages people to critically analyze their personal situationality as it relates to cultures of consumption, resource depletion and renewal, conservation, and transformation.

Grunewald cautions that his theory is not just another methodology integrating the same old curriculum into a different setting.  His critical pedagogical theory of place must engage students in social change. This critical analysis of “ecology of place” has broad implications in the field of interpretation and museum studies.  His theory shakes the foundations of environmental education and field interpretation by politicizing, through analysis, how we value artifacts and resources and how artifacts and resources should be valued and by whom and to what extent resources and artifacts should be valued. Museum studies is certainly ripe for some “decolonization” and “reinhabitation.”  In an educational setting, his theory places learning in terms of an individual’s ecological impetus.   I can imagine a student engaged in learning through an ecological lens asking, “Why must I write a five paragraph analysis about a dead man’s story when nature calls and I can help write the story?”

Blog 1: Multiliteracy and Museum-based Pedagogy

Sch       Schwartz, John Pedro. "Object Lessons: Teaching Multiliteracies through the Museum." College English Sept. 71.1 (2008): 27-47. EBSCOhost. Web. 8 Sept. 2011. <http://http://ehis.ebscohost.com.proxy.lib.odu.edu/ehost/folder?sid=2dc14e3b-1047-44f7-8328-0f04eb7d8869%40sessionmgr11&vid=4&hid=1>.

 Connecting Exhibit A with Classroom B

John Schwartz looks for connections between the rhetorical strategies in museum-based“new museology” pedagogy and the New London Group’s manifesto calling for a “pedagogy of multiliteracies.”  He discusses museum-based pedagogy and its move from object-based rhetoric to a rhetoric based on context that uses multi-modal venues as means to put forth narratives through the composition of exhibits. He posits that “new museology” with is recognition that museum visitors embrace a learning experience that is affected by a variety of social and cultural experiences can continue to be an influence “post-visit” because it uses specific rhetorical and narrative strategies to persuade the visitor to understand and assimilate particular viewpoints using both objects and “simulcre” in a variety of real and virtual environments.  He suggests that “new museology” is a pedagogical method that has always embraced multi-modality and that composition instructors can turn to museum-based pedagogy to teach multiliteracy.   He indirectly compares museum visitors with composition students in so far as students’ learning experiences are similar the learning experiences of a museum visitor.  He says because “new museology’s” rhetorical and narrative strategies are holistic in nature, they can be used in the composition classroom as means for students to achieve multiliteracy.  

"Pick me, Pick me...I'm over here. I know how to do it," says the overzealous docent.

Schwartz argues that the persuasive nature of the museum exhibits can be a basis for learning rhetorical analysis and theory in the composition classroom.   He explains that museums use a rhetorical strategy that is non-linear, relies on visual and spatial relationship, takes into account cultural and social contexts, integrates new media, and is designed to appeal to a specific and/or diverse audience.  He states that the persuasive rhetorical strategies used by museum exhibit designers are the same persuasive rhetorical strategies that should be taught in the modern composition classroom.   He goes on to suggest that students would benefit from analyzing museum exhibits using rhetorical theories as means to learn both theory and practice.  Ultimately, it seems that Schwartz agrees the New London Group’s manifesto calling for multiliteracy in the classroom, but dismisses the need for “radical change and re-invention” in the classroom as such pedagogical theory and practice is already codified in museum-based pedagogy.

Students can deconstruct the exhibit, but can they create one?

This article is important as it begins to make connections between the field o f interpretation—the rhetorical strategies used by museums to turn an object, place, moment, and placement into a specific learning experience—and the composition classroom.  However, I think that Schwartz stops short because he suggests that students be taught these particular rhetorical strategies and theories as a means to evaluate rather than means to create.  Schwartz relies on pedagogy of evaluation rather than pedagogy of creative persuasion that uses museum-studies already codified methods.  Museum interpretation relies on specific, codified rhetorical “moves” to connect visitors with universal concepts and tangibles such place, object or time.  Museum interpretation does not expect the visitor to “arrive” at a particular conclusion to “produce” a particular set of actions or evaluation as a result of interaction with the exhibit whereas composition pedagogy expects students to produce a particular type of work after learning how to follow a particular type of process.  While at times a museum visitor may be able to on demand reproduce a particular concept or idea, museum interpretation recognizes that visitor experience is indeed a lifetime experience and the actions, opinions, or ideas that result from viewing an exhibit are layered within past, current, and future experience that are not necessarily apparent at the precise moment when the interactions with the exhibit end. 

Not Ready to Walk the Talk

Trying to connect the composition classroom with museum pedagogy is noteworthy because museum-based pedagogy is based on a variety of rhetorical theories that touch on psychology, gender studies, spatial studies, culture studies, and technology.  I don’t think Schwartz’s assertion that museum-based pedagogy should replace traditional composition pedagogy is a clear cut as he would lead us to believe.  In terms of a pedagogical process, I wonder if the composition classroom that is focused on teaching multiliteracy would fare well with a hybrid pedagogy that combines museum-based rhetoric with traditional composition pedagogy. Museum administrators recognize that exhibits are “moments” or “vignettes” in a much broader experience of lifetime learning as are essays considered "moments" or "vignettes" in a student's broader learning experience. In my personal and professional experience I have found that the college English course is the foundation for lifetime learning for all students.  I believe that museum pedagogy warrants further inquiry as it relates to the composition classroom and rhetorical theory. I think that Schwartz has identified a starting point by pointing out the connections with the New London Group's call for multiliteracy, but more theoretical and practical connections with the field of museum studies needs to be made.

Test Post

test post