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.
