You are here:

Reframing Multimodal Composing for Student Learning: Lessons on Purpose from the Buffalo DV Project

, University at Buffalo (SUNY), United States

CITE Journal Volume 10, Number 2, ISSN 1528-5804 Publisher: Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education, Waynesville, NC USA


In a study of urban secondary teachers moving out of professional development and into their classrooms, the research team documented the learning processes of teachers and student groups during their digital video composing to make sense of the curriculum. Taken together, these ethnographic case studies provide evidence that digital video composing can be a potent literacy tool that leads to increased student engagement and learning. Important to English educators is this finding: Learning to use and to teach digital composing can induce changes in teachers’ epistemology and social practices that promote changes in their teaching and student learning. In this article, a framework for a multimodal literacy pedagogy is elaborated, generated from these analyses of teachers changing over time. Teachers who have transformed themselves and their classrooms to enact student multimodal composing on curricular concepts have these transacting principles in common: They (a) design social spaces for mediating students’ multimodal composing activities; (b) co-construct with students authentic purposes for these composing activities about curricular concepts; (c) focus explicit attention to multimodal design and critique of multimodal texts; and (d) persistently open opportunities for students to draw on their identities and “lifeworlds” (Holland, Lachicotte, Skinner, & Cain, 2001).


Miller, S. (2010). Reframing Multimodal Composing for Student Learning: Lessons on Purpose from the Buffalo DV Project. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 10(2), 197-219. Waynesville, NC USA: Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education. Retrieved March 27, 2019 from .


View References & Citations Map


  1. Alsup, J., Emig, J., Pradl, G., Tremmel, R., & Yagelski, R. (2006). The state of English education and a vision for its future: A call to arms. English Education, 38(4), 278-294.
  2. Arora, P. (2009, March). Invisible students/multiple identities: “Low-level learners” design their first DV. Paper presented at the 16th annual Graduate School of Education Student Research Symposium. University at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY.
  3. Bachman, J.G., Johnston, L.D., & O'Malley, P.M. (2008). Monitoring the future: Questionnaire responses from the nation's high school seniors, 2006. Ann Arbor, MI: Institute for Social Research.
  4. Blondell, M. (2009). An English teacher’s design of digital video composing in an urban high school: Impacts on student engagement and learning. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University at Buffalo, State University of New York.
  5. Borowicz, S. (2005). Embracing lives through the video lens: An exploration of literacy teaching and learning with digital video technology in an urban secondary English
  6. Conference on English Education. (2005). Beliefs about technology and the preparation of English teachers. Retrieved from
  7. Cercone, J. (2009, November). Negotiating teacher growth: Adapting digital video composing in an urban classroom. Paper presented at the National Conference of Teachers of English, Philadelphia, PA.
  8. Coiro, J. (2005). Every teacher a Miss Rumphius: Empowering teachers with effective professional development. In R.A. Karchmer, M.H. Mallette, J. Kara-Soteriou, & D.J. Leu. (Eds.), Integrating approaches to literacy education: Using the internet to support new literacies (pp. 199-219). Newark, DE: International Reading Association. Also
  9. Costello, A. (2006). Digital video and drama production as literacy learning tools in English classrooms. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University at Buffalo, State University of New York.
  10. Csikzentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experiences. New York, NY: Harper& Row.
  11. DiSessa, A.A. (2000). Changing minds: Computers, learning, and literacy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  12. Gee, J.P. (2004). Situated language and learning: A critique of traditional schooling. New York, NY: Routledge.
  13. Goodman, S. (2003). Teaching youth media: A critical guide to literacy, video production. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
  14. Goss, S. (2009). (2009, November). Between theory and practice: Teacher stance and multimodal literacies in the classroom. Paper presented at the National Conference of Teachers of English, Philadelphia, PA.
  15. Heath, S.B. (2004). Learning language and strategic thinking through the arts. Reading Research Quarterly, 39(3), 338–342.
  16. Hinton, S.E. (1967). The outsiders. New York, NY: Penguin Group.
  17. Holland, D., Lachicotte, W., Skinner, D., & Cain, C. (2001). Identity and agency in cultural worlds. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  18. The Horizon Report. (2008). Austin, TX: The New Media Consortium.
  19. Hughes, K. (2008). Confessions of a multimodal “teacher.” (Unpublished master’s project). University at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY.
  20. Hurston, N.Z. (2006). Their eyes were watching God. New York, NY: Harper Perennial Modern Classics.
  21. Kalantzis, M., & Cope, B. (2008). New learning: Elements of a science of education. London, England: Cambridge University Press.
  22. Knips, M. (2008, March). Master of design: An urban U.S. History teacher as adaptive expert. Paper presented at the annual conference of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA.
  23. Kress, G. (1999). “English” at the crossroads: Rethinking curricula of communication in the context of the turn to the visual. In G.E. Hawisher& C.L. Selfe (Eds.), Passions, pedagogies and 21st-century technologies. Urbana-Champaign, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.
  24. Kress, G. (2003). Literacy in the new media age. New York, NY: Routledge Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 10(2)
  25. Lankshear, C., & Knobel, M. (2003). New literacies: Changing knowledge and classroom learning. Philadelphia, PA: Open University Press.
  26. Lauricella, A.M. (2006). Digital video production as a tool for learning: Exploring multiple text documents in an urban social studies classroom. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University at Buffalo, State University of New York.
  27. Lipsman, A. (2008, February 8). U.S. Internet users viewed 10 billion videos online in record-breaking month of December, according to comScore Video Metrix (press release). Retrieved from
  28. Meeropool, A. (1937). Strange fruit (music and lyrics). Performed by Billie Holiday.
  29. Miller, S.M. (2007). English teacher learning for new times: Digital video composing as multimodal literacy practice. English Education, 40(1), 64-83.
  30. Miller, S.M., & Borowicz, S. (2005). City Voices, City Visions: Digital video as literacy/learning supertool in urban classrooms. In L. Johnson, M. Finn, & R. Lewis (Eds.), Urban education with an attitude (pp. 87-105). Albany, NY: State University of
  31. Miller, S.M., & Borowicz, S. (2007). New literacies with an attitude: Transformative teacher education through digital video learning tools. In M. Finn & P. Finn (Eds.), Teacher education with an attitude (pp. 111-126). Albany, NY: State University of New
  32. National Council of Teachers of English. (2008). NCTE position statement: Definition of 21st-century literacies. Retrieved from
  33. New London Group. (1996). A pedagogy of multiliteracies: Designing social futures. Harvard Educational Review, 66, 60–92.
  34. Rosenblatt, L. (1994). Reader, text, poem: The transactional theory of the literary work. Carbondale, IL: Illinois University Press.
  35. Swenson, J., Rozema, R., Young, C.A., McGrail, E., & Whitin, P. (2006). Extending the conversation: New technologies, new literacies, and English education. English Education, 38(4), 351-369.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake in the references above, please contact