The Multiliteracy Center as Collaboration Tool

Abstract

In the past decade, writing centers have grappled with the increased attention to multimodality in the composition classroom. John Trimbur (Multiliteracies, social futures, and writing centers, 2000) first forecast the redevelopment of the writing center as a multiliteracy center to respond to this trend—a reference to the New London Group’s (Harvard Educational Review, 1, 60–93, 1996) call to expand education beyond word-based definitions of literacy. Using data gathered from an online survey of writing center professionals and interviews with current and former multiliteracy center administrators, Roe demonstrates a growing need for writing centers to support multimodal composing, and argues that multiliteracy centers can lead their institutions on this issue through using writing center resources and collaborating with writing programs and other partners across disciplines.

Appendices

Postscript from the Editors

Complex Collaboration—One of the hallmarks of successful collaborations is commitment to shared values. In this chapter, the writing program administrators Roe interviewed, whether directing programs, centers, or both, spoke about the opportunity and need they saw to forge collaboration between program and center in order to support students who engage in multimodal composition. They brought shared values and respect for all constituencies to their initiatives, recognizing that successful collaboration would only be as strong as the shared values each side of the collaboration would bring to the venture, whether that was a two- or multi-sided collaboration. Additionally, this chapter highlights an outstanding opportunity for writing programs and centers to proactively design, or craft, collaborative ventures that support society’s increasing use and awareness of multiliteracies—welcoming diverse voices to such ventures, which is what those interviewed in this chapter advocate.

Practical Implications—Contributors to this collection repeatedly stress that collaborations among writing programs lead to benefits outside traditional spheres of influence. In this chapter, Roe illustrates ways multimodal writing centers can address the needs of twenty-first century students, become centers for faculty instruction, and take the lead in institutional-wide curriculum reform. Based on detailed research of six multiliteracy centers, Roe illustrates ways in which centers focused on the production of multimodal texts can bridge historical divides between writing centers and writing programs by, in essence, redefining the mission of both initiatives. Multiliteracy writing centers are poised to take advantage of institutional liminal spaces in terms of garnering technology support, revisiting who tutors and how tutors are trained, and carrying out institutional mission statements and strategic initiatives for preparing students for twenty-first century communicative needs. Roe offers a plan for envisioning writing centers as activist spaces, ones that both redefine composing processes and network across campuses.

Notes

• 1. From November 2013–February 2014, I interviewed current and former administrators of multiliteracy centers at Texas A&M University, Salt Lake Community College, University of Michigan, Michigan Technological University, Ball State University, and Stanford University.

• 2. The survey window was from September 23, 2013, until November 24, 2013. Using Qualtrics survey software, I circulated the survey link through the Wcenter and WPA listservs. I ultimately received 106 responses, with 69 respondents completing the full survey.

• 3. David Sheridan (2010) also cited this quotation in the Introduction to Multiliteracy Centers: Writing Center Work, New Media, and Multimodal Rhetoric.