1887
Volume 13, Issue 2
  • ISSN 1878-9714
  • E-ISSN: 1878-9722
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This article is dedicated to the analysis of visual multimodality and agency in a school unit situated in Southwestern Finland. The school unit is approached as a node of intersecting discourses and its visible features are investigated as materialized discourses. The results indicate that writing is the preferred mode of visual expression in this learning environment and that there is a shift in modes from image to writing as students progress in the school system, which reflects the existing de jure educational discourses. Moreover, while teachers and school staff are the most active agents in the school unit, the assessment of multimodality indicates that students appear more passive than they are if research focuses only on writing. Moreover, not taking images into account risks reinforcing the traditional notion of writing as the only proper form of expression.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/ps.19063.sav
2022-06-23
2022-08-12
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Amara, Muhammad M.
    2018 “Palestinian schoolscapes in Israel.” Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education3 (7): 1–18. 10.1186/s40862‑018‑0047‑1
    https://doi.org/10.1186/s40862-018-0047-1 [Google Scholar]
  2. Basic Education Act. 628
    Basic Education Act. 628/1998.
  3. Bellinzona, Martina
    2018 “Linguistic landscape e contesti educativi. Uno studio all’interno di alcune scuole italiane [Linguistic landscape and educational contexts: A study in some Italian schools].” Lingue e Linguaggi25: 297–321.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Blommaert, Jan
    2013Ethnography, Superdiversity and Linguistic Landscapes Chronicles of Complexity. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. 10.21832/9781783090419
    https://doi.org/10.21832/9781783090419 [Google Scholar]
  5. Blommaert, Jan, and April Huang
    2013 “Semiotics and Spatial Scope: Towards a Materialist Semiotics.” InMultimodality and Social Semiosis: Communication, Meaning-Making, and Learning in the Work of Gunther Kress, ed. byMargit Böck and Norbert Pachler, 31–42. New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Bourdieu, Pierre
    1977Outline of a Theory of Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511812507
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511812507 [Google Scholar]
  7. Brown, Kara D.
    2018 “Shifts and stability in schoolscapes: Diachronic considerations of southeastern Estonian schools.” Linguistics and Education44: 12–19. 10.1016/j.linged.2017.10.007
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2017.10.007 [Google Scholar]
  8. Cohen, Yehudi A.
    1971 “The Shaping of Men’s Minds: Adaptations to Imperatives of Culture.” InAnthropological Perspectives on Education, ed. byMurray L. Wax, Stanley Diamond, and Fred Gearing, 19–50. New York: Basic Books.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Cosgrove, Denis E.
    1985 “Prospect, Perspective and the Evolution of the Landscape Idea.” Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers10 (1): 45–62. 10.2307/622249
    https://doi.org/10.2307/622249 [Google Scholar]
  10. Derrida, Jacques
    1987The Post Card: From Socrates to Freud and Beyond. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 10.7208/chicago/9780226807867.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226807867.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  11. 1988Limited Inc. Evanston, Ill.: Northwestern University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Dressler, Roswita
    2015 “Signgeist: Promoting bilingualism through the linguistic landscape of school signage.” International Journal of Multilingualism12 (1): 128–145. 10.1080/14790718.2014.912282
    https://doi.org/10.1080/14790718.2014.912282 [Google Scholar]
  13. Duncan, James S.
    1989 “The power of place in Kandy, Sri Lanka: 1780–1980.” InThe Power of Place: Bringing together geographical and sociological imaginations, ed. byJohn A. Agnew and James S. Duncan, 185–201. Boston: Unwin Hyman.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Finnish Advisory Board on Research Integrity
    Finnish Advisory Board on Research Integrity 2009Ethical principles of research in the humanities and social and behavioural sciences and proposals for ethical review. Helsinki: Finnish Advisory Board on Research Integrity.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. FNBE
    FNBE 2003Lukion opetussuunnitelman perusteet 2003 [National core curriculum for general upper secondary schools 2003]. Helsinki: Finnish National Board of Education.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. FNBE
    FNBE 2004Perusopetuksen opetussuunnitelman perusteet 2004 [National core curriculum for basic education 2004]. Helsinki: Finnish National Board of Education.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Foucault, Michel
    1972The Archaeology of Knowledge and the Discourse on Language. New York: Pantheon Books.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. From, Tuuli, and Gunilla Holm
    2019 “Language crashes and shifting orientations: the construction and negotiation of linguistic value in bilingual school spaces in Finland and Sweden.” Language and Education33 (3): 195–210. 10.1080/09500782.2018.1514045
    https://doi.org/10.1080/09500782.2018.1514045 [Google Scholar]
  19. From, Tuuli, and Fritjof Sahlström
    2017 “Shared places, separate spaces: Constructing cultural spaces through two national languages in Finland.” Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research61 (4): 465–478. 10.1080/00313831.2016.1147074
    https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2016.1147074 [Google Scholar]
  20. Garvin, Rebecca T., and Kristina Eisenhower
    2016 “A Comparative Study of Linguistic Landscapes in Middle Schools in Korea and Texas: Contrasting Signs of Learning and Identity Construction.” InNegotiating and Contesting Identities in Linguistic Landscapes, ed. byRobert J. Blackwood, Elizabeth Lanza, and Hirut Woldemariam, 215–232. London: Bloomsbury Publishing.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Gorter, Durk, and Jasone Cenoz
    2015 “Linguistic Landscapes inside Multilingual Schools.” InChallenges for Language Education and Policy: Making Space for People, ed. byBernard Spolsky, Ofra Inbar-Lourie, and Michal Tannenbaum, 151–169. New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Government Decree. 986
    Government Decree. 986/1998.
  23. Government Decree. 1435
    Government Decree. 1435/2001.
  24. Government Decree. 955
    Government Decree. 955/2002.
  25. Guattari, Félix
    2011The Machinic Unconscious: Essays in Schizoanalysis. Los Angeles: Semiotext(e).
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Guattari, Félix, and Suely Rolnik
    2007Molecular Revolution in Brazil. Los Angeles: Semiotext(e).
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Johnson, Norris B.
    1980 “The Material Culture of Public School Classrooms: The Symbolic Integration of Local Schools and National Culture.” Anthropology & Education Quarterly11 (3): 173–190. 10.1525/aeq.1980.11.3.05
    https://doi.org/10.1525/aeq.1980.11.3.05 [Google Scholar]
  28. Kailuweit, Rolf
    2019 “Linguistic landscape and regional languages in Southern France – a neo-semiotic approach to placemaking conflicts.” InLinguistic Landscape Studies: The French Connection, ed. byMónica Castillo Lluch, Rolf Kailuweit and Claus D. Pusch, 131–162. Freiburg: Rombach Verlag.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Kress, Gunther, and Theo van Leeuwen
    2006Reading Images: The Grammar of Visual Design (2nd edition). London: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203619728
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203619728 [Google Scholar]
  30. Kress, Gunther, and Staffan Selander
    2012 “Multimodal design, learning and cultures of recognition.” Internet and Higher Education15 (4): 265–268. 10.1016/j.iheduc.2011.12.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2011.12.003 [Google Scholar]
  31. Kress, Gunther, Carey Jewitt, Jill Bourne, Anton Franks, John Hardcastle, Ken Jones, and Euan Reid
    2004English in Urban Classrooms: A Multimodal Perspective on Teaching and Learning. London: Routledge-Falmer.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Krippendorff, Klaus
    2018Content analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology (4th edition). Thousand Oaks, Calif.: SAGE.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Laihonen, Petteri, and Erika-Mária Tódor
    2017 “The changing schoolscape in a Szekler village in Romania: Signs of diversity in rehungarization.” International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism20 (3): 362–379. 10.1080/13670050.2015.1051943
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2015.1051943 [Google Scholar]
  34. Laihonen, Petteri, and Tamás P. Szabó
    2016 “Investigating visual practices in educational settings: Schoolscapes, language ideologies and organizational cultures.” InResearching Multilingualism Critical and ethnographic perspectives, ed. byMarilyn Martin-Jones, and Deirdre Martin, 121–138. Abingdon: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Lefebvre, Henri
    1991The Production of Space. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Lehtonen, Mikko
    2002 “Surmaako kuva sanan? Multimodaalisuuden haasteet tekstintutkimukselle [Does image slay the word? The challenges of multimodality to texts studies].” AFinLA Yearbook60: 45–60.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Lewis, Peirce. F.
    1979 “Axioms for Reading the Landscape: Some Guides to the American Scene.” InThe Interpretation of Ordinary Landscapes: Geographical Essays, ed. byDonald W. Meinig, 11–32. New York: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Malinowski, David
    2015 “Opening spaces of learning in the linguistic landscape.” Linguistic Landscape1 (1/2): 95–113. 10.1075/ll.1.1‑2.06mal
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ll.1.1-2.06mal [Google Scholar]
  39. Matless, David
    2016Landscape and Englishness (2nd edition). London: Reaktion Books.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Menken, Kate, Vanessa Pérez Rosario, and Luis. A. Guzmán Valerio
    2018 “Increasing multilingualism in schoolscapes: New scenery and language education policies.” Linguistic Landscape4 (2): 101–127. 10.1075/ll.17024.men
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ll.17024.men [Google Scholar]
  41. Mitchell, William J. T.
    2002a “Imperial Landscape.” InLandscape and Power (2nd edition), ed. byWilliam J. T. Mitchell, 5–34. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. 2002b “Preface to the Second Edition of Landscape and Power: Space Place and Landscape.” InLandscape and Power (2nd edition), ed. byWilliam J. T. Mitchell, vii–xiv. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Norris, Sigrid
    2004Analyzing Multimodal Interaction: A methodological framework. New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203379493
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203379493 [Google Scholar]
  44. Pakarinen, Sanna, and Siv Björklund
    2018 “Multiple language signage in linguistic landscapes and students’ language practices: A case study from a language immersion setting.” Linguistics and Education44: 4–11. 10.1016/j.linged.2017.10.005
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2017.10.005 [Google Scholar]
  45. Personal Data Act. 523
    Personal Data Act. 523/1999.
  46. Pietikäinen, Sari
    2015 “Multilingual dynamics in Sámiland: Rhizomatic discourses on changing language.” International Journal of Bilingualism19 (2): 206–225. 10.1177/1367006913489199
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1367006913489199 [Google Scholar]
  47. Pietikäinen, Sari, Pia Lane, Hanni Salo, and Sirkka Laihiala-Kankainen
    2011 “Frozen actions in the Arctic linguistic landscape: a nexus analysis of language processes in visual space.” International Journal of Multilingualism8 (4): 277–298. 10.1080/14790718.2011.555553
    https://doi.org/10.1080/14790718.2011.555553 [Google Scholar]
  48. Pöllänen, Sinikka H.
    2011 “Beyond craft and art: A pedagogical model for craft as self-expression.” International Journal of Education through Art7 (2): 111–125. 10.1386/eta.7.2.111_1
    https://doi.org/10.1386/eta.7.2.111_1 [Google Scholar]
  49. Räsänen, Marjo
    2008 “Multiculturalism and arts-based research: Themes in Finnish studies 1995–2006.” Nordic Visual Arts Education in Transition, ed. byLars Lindström, 95–112. Stockholm: Swedish Research Council.
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Savela, Timo
    2018 “The advantages and disadvantages of quantitative methods in schoolscape research.” Linguistics and Education44: 31–44. 10.1016/j.linged.2017.09.004
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2017.09.004 [Google Scholar]
  51. 2019 “They appear missing – An examination of the apparition of language, discourse and agency in a Finnish landscape of education.” Language, Discourse & Society7 (1): 85–107.
    [Google Scholar]
  52. 2021 “One, two or more? – an examination of the apparition of language and discourse in a Finnish landscape of primary education.” International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 1–15.
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Schein, Richard. H.
    1997 “The Place of Landscape: A Conceptual Framework for Interpreting an American Scene.” Annals of the Association of American Geographers84 (4): 660–680. 10.1111/1467‑8306.00072
    https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8306.00072 [Google Scholar]
  54. 2010 “Cultural Landscapes.” InResearch Methods in Geography: A Critical Introduction, ed. byBasil Gomez, and John P. Jones III, 222–240. Malden, Mass.: Wiley-Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  55. Scollon, Ron
    2001 “Action and Text: Towards an Integrated Understanding of the Place of Text in Social (Inter)Action, Mediated Discourse Analysis and the Problem of Social Action.” InMethods in Critical Discourse Analysis, ed. byRuth Wodak and Michael Meyer, 139–183. London: SAGE.
    [Google Scholar]
  56. 2008 “Discourse itineraries: Nine processes of resemiotization.” InAdvances in Discourse Studies, ed. byVijay K. Bhatia, John Flowerdew and Rodney H. Jones, 233–244. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  57. Scollon, Ron, and Suzanne Wong Scollon
    2003Discourses in Place: Language in the Material World. London: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203422724
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203422724 [Google Scholar]
  58. Szabó, Tamás. P.
    2015 “The management of diversity in schoolscapes: An analysis of Hungarian practices.” Apples – Journal of Applied Language Studies9 (1): 23–51. 10.17011/apples/2015090102
    https://doi.org/10.17011/apples/2015090102 [Google Scholar]
  59. 2018 “Reflections on the Schoolscape: Teachers on Linguistic Diversity in Hungary and Finland.” InOn the Border of Language and Dialect, ed. byMarjatta Palander, Helka Riionheimo, and Vesa Koivisto, 156–190. Helsinki: Finnish Literature Society.
    [Google Scholar]
  60. Szabó, Tamás. P., and Robert A. Troyer
    2020 “Parents Interpreting Their Children’s Schoolscapes: Building an Insider’s Perspective.” InReterritorializing Linguistic Landscapes: Questioning Boundaries and Opening Spaces, ed. byDavid Malinowski and Stefania Tufi, 387–412. London: Bloomsbury. 10.5040/9781350077997.0029
    https://doi.org/10.5040/9781350077997.0029 [Google Scholar]
  61. Upper Secondary Schools Act. 629
    Upper Secondary Schools Act. 629/1998.
  62. Upper Secondary School Decree. 810
    Upper Secondary School Decree. 810/1998.
  63. Thurlow, Crispin
    2019 “Semiotic creativities in and with space: binaries and boundaries, beware!” International Journal of Multilingualism16 (1): 94–104. 10.1080/14790718.2018.1500264
    https://doi.org/10.1080/14790718.2018.1500264 [Google Scholar]
  64. Voloshinov, Valentin N.
    1973Marxism and the Philosophy of Language. New York: Seminar Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  65. Wilson, Rick T., Daniel W. Baack, and Brian D. Till
    2015 “Creativity, attention and the memory for brands: an outdoor advertising field study.” International Journal of Advertising: The Review of Marketing Communications34 (2): 232–261. 10.1080/02650487.2014.996117
    https://doi.org/10.1080/02650487.2014.996117 [Google Scholar]
  66. Årman, Henning
    2018 “Speaking ‘the Other?’: Youths’ regimentation and policing of contemporary urban vernacular.” Language & Communication58: 47–61. 10.1016/j.langcom.2017.08.005
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langcom.2017.08.005 [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/ps.19063.sav
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/ps.19063.sav
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): discourse; education; identity; landscape; materialization; multimodality; ‘schoolscape’
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error