A March 2009 article entitled “Visual Literacy and Message Design" by Rune Pettersson points out that Visual literacy may be applied in almost all areas such as advertising, anatomy, art, biology, business, presentations, communication, education, and engineering. In spite of this according to the article visual literacy has struggled to attract a strong level of interest from society and those responsible for school curricula. Pettersson believes that the concept of visual literacy has not been widely accepted because of a lack of focus. In the authors view combined visual and verbal messages need to be considered and not just text and not only visuals.
Do you agree or disagree with Pettersson? What thoughts do you have on the subject of why visual literacy has yet to attract interest in society and those responsible for school curricula?
I think it's always difficult for a new concept to "catch on" for teachers expecially a technology based concept. In the K12 setting, so much is expected of teachers as it is that the thought of going back through your powerpoints and support documents to make things more "visually literate" sounds a bit like busy work.
ReplyDeleteIn the collegiate setting we still have professors who aren't comfortable with the use of powerpoint and all the functions it provides. Asking them to make powerpoints more visually literate means many hours of work for some people who arent adept at the use of technology.
I think it's a difficult time we live in here...our generational gaps continually widen when it comes to the classroom, learning and technology. Ultimately for visual literacy to "catch on" it will take educated workers (like us!) out in these settings providing rationale for visual literacy and its uses. Maybe then it will start to catch on...
Gillian, if you are going to ask for your peers to comment on Pettersson's article, you really need to provide it. I don't know how they can agree or disagree with an article they haven't read...
ReplyDeleteI think that teachers are aware of the need to make instruction more appealing and interesting to students. Technology does offer many tools to facilitate instruction but at the same time it could make it harder for some to create instruction. Many teachers are comfortable using technology and incorporating it in their instruction, but those teachers who are not can spend a lot of time creating a lecture. Therefore, making instruction interesting to the learner might take a little extra time and most teachers do not have that extra time. There might be a resistance to change from veteran teachers. Usually veteran teachers do not want to try a new method because they are used to the way they teach.
ReplyDeleteI think visual literacy should be considered in all aspects of instruction because if used well, teachers could even save time in the long run. When instruction has the concepts of visual literacy it helps all the different types of learners (auditory, kinesthetic, and visual) to better understand what is been taught.
I can see where visual literacy has not been accepted. In the k12 setting there are many teachers who use the basics when creating lessons for students. Powerpoint slides are basic and dull offering no stimulation. I think in order for visual literacy concepts to catch on in k12 setting, teachers need a reason for why it is so important. Often times teachers are told what to do but are not given the reasoning behin these decisions. If it can be proven that incorporating visual literacy concepts into instruction made a different on test scores, then you might have a few more teachers wake up and accept the ideas!
ReplyDeleteI think that a degree of snobbery exists when it comes to visual literacy. When we're very young, we are taught visually. I remember scads of workbooks and coloring books chock-full of representative, organizational, and interpretive imagery. Childrens' television was tremendously visual: (http://www.sesamestreet.org/video_player/-/pgpv/classicplayer/0/040ab0a7-154-c-11dd-8ea8-a3d2ac25b65/6_dots) It almost seems to me that, culturally, we assume that visual learning is suitable only for simple, child-appropriate learning, and that "serious" learning must be approached analytically rather than visually.
ReplyDeleteFor those of you who would like to read the article, I did find it on the Library's database subscription at EBSCOhost in a PDF version. I will be happy to send it to Dr. Wilcox to post on BlackBoard.
ReplyDeleteDr. Pettersson's article was very clear in that he does not believe the concept of "Visual Literacy" has been very widely accepted. This statement is based on a query put forth at a 1976 Media Leadership conference asking attendees to define "Visual Literacy." They came back with over 62 definitions. I have a strong inclination to believe that therein lies the problem today. There still is not a widely accepted or agreed upon definition.
The majority of Pettersson's article speaks to visual literacy in the context of message design. I found some parts of his article to be confusing and was not able to make the connections.
Pettersson finished the article with these statements, "The concepts visual literacy and message design partly overlap one another. In many situations it is, however, not enough to study visuals only. We need to consider and study combined messages, not only text and not only visuals, when we study communication and communication situations." I agree.
I tend to agree with the other Bloggers as to why it has yet to be accepted socially and academically. It will; in time.
interesting article and comments thus far.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with Jen as how difficult it can be to spend time and energy on something that is not a strong suit. It can be difficult to "catch on" to something you yourself do not understand.
Most people teach the way they learn, or have been taught how. Not by assessing the different kinds of learners we have in the classroom or any where for that matter (well not in our department, but we arent the norm).
I like how Pettersson ended the article, emphasizing the need for combined messages.
I think that is going to be extremely important as we seek to teach life-long learners and be them ourselves. Things change, people change, we have to constantly be learning to stay up on the times so to speak.
I even think some of the best lecturers should consider combined messges. While their expertise is beneficial, is it the most effective if the listener doesnt only learn with their ears?
I most definitely agree that text needs to be accompanied by visuals. I agree, mainly, because I'm a visual learner. If someone were to describe the skeletal system with just words, I would be lost. But if there was a figure of a skeleton with the names beside each bone, I can better grasp what was being taught to me.
ReplyDeleteI believe that visuals allow learners to be engaged into the learning. I consider visuals to be attention grabbers that make create an opportunity to teach. I have found that when learners interact with visuals it lessens the occurrence of learning fatigue.
Dr. Thall has introduced us to concept of "death by PowerPoint". It's a simple concept for teachers to be aware of the overloading learners with text in PowerPoint, without any relief. It was told to us that visuals are often a way to limit "death by PowerPoint".