Visual Literacy
Because
the centuries old domination of written language texts is being challenged by
the rise in importance of the visual image, a focus on visual literacy has come
to the fore in literacy research and instruction. Mitchell (1994) has described
a pictorial turn, a complexly related
transformation occurring across fields of inquiry, asserting visual images are
not fully explicable based on linguistic models of written language. His
pictorial turn established the fields of visual culture and visual studies as
legitimate academic disciplines concerned with multimodality and other hybrid
forms of communication.
Avgerinou
(2009) labels the pervasiveness of visual images in the mass media as the Bain d’Images Era, or era of the image bath, referring to the inundation
of visual images in contemporary environments. She warns, however, that
constantly being confronted by visual images does not necessarily lead to a,
“conscious recognition of this phenomenon” (Avgerinou, 2009, p. 28). The proliferation
of visual images does not guarantee that students are paying any more attention
to their visual environments, nor does it suggest that their ability to
navigate, interpret or analyze images are increasing to meet the demands of contemporary
society.
As an additional
caveat, Avgerinou (2009) warns about, “living by the erroneous assumption that
what has long been known as ‘print culture’ still rules the domains of human
thought, attitude, and emotion, and still dictates the form of their
expression” (p. 28). Continuing to view the world through linguistic and
print-based sensibilities limits one’s experiences and narrows the forms of
expression and interpretation available in today’s expanding visual culture. Visual
literacy is complex, multidimensional, and defined across a range of cognitive and
aesthetic dimensions.
Although theorists
and educators working in the fields of visual studies have found it difficult
and problematic to find consensus in defining visual literacy, it is important
to present a brief history of the term visual
literacy posited thus far, in order to elucidate the tensions in this ongoing
endeavor. John Debes, who worked for Eastman Kodak and published a newsletter
entitled Visuals are a Language, coined
the term visual literacy, referring
to the strategies and skills one needs to make sense of visual images (Debes,
1968). Fransecky and Debes (1972), in their initial attempts to define visual
literacy state visual literacy is, “the group of vision competencies a human being can
develop by seeing and at the same time having and integrating other sensory
experiences. The development of these competencies is fundamental to normal
human learning” (p. 7). These vision
competencies were seen as individually developed, cognitive abilities that
were used for understanding visual images regardless of the contexts of
production, reception, and dissemination. These early definitions of visual
literacy included
the ability to decode, interpret, create, question, challenge,
and evaluate texts that communicate with visual images as well as words, and the
ability to use images in a creative and appropriate form to express particular meanings.
Theorists working
to expand the definition of visual literacy beyond cognitive
perspectives, combined psychological theories of perception with the
socio-cultural aspects of visual design and social semiotics (Chauvin, 2003). More contemporary
definitions have suggested visual literacy should be reconceptualized as a set
of acquired competencies for producing, designing and interpreting visual images
and messages addressing the various contexts in which images are viewed and the
production and distribution of images. Selected definitions of visual literacy from
recent decades are presented in Figure 2.1.
Figure 2.1: Definitions of Visual Literacy
Figure 2.1: Definitions of Visual Literacy
·
Visual literacy includes a group of skills
enabling an individual to understand and use visual images for intentionally
communicating with others (Ausburn & Ausburn, 1978).
·
Visual literacy is the gaining of knowledge and
experience about the workings of the visual media coupled with a heightened
conscious awareness of those workings (Messaris, 1994).
· Visual literacy
refers to a group of largely acquired abilities, that is, the abilities to
understand (read), and to use (write) images, as well as to think and learn in
terms of images. (Avgerinou, 2009)
·
Visual literacy involves developing the
set of skills needed to be able to interpret the content of visual images,
examine social impact of those images and to discuss purpose, audience and
ownership. It includes the ability to visualize internally, communicate
visually, and read and interpret visual images. Visual literacy also involves
making judgments of the accuracy, validity and worth of images. A visually
literate person is able to discriminate and make sense of visual objects and
images; create visuals; comprehend and appreciate the visuals created by
others; and visualize objects in their mind’s eye. To be an effective
communicator in today’s world, a person needs to be able to interpret, create and
select images to convey a range of meanings (Adobe Systems White Paper, 2003).
Avgerinou and
Pettersson (2011), through a review of relevant research and theorizing towards
a consensus definition of visual literacy, suggest a composite theory of visual
literacy needs to be comprised of the following five conceptual components: 1)
visual perception, 2) visual language, 3) visual learning, 4) visual thinking,
and 5) visual communication. In addition, Avgerinou (2009) identified points of convergence among theorists
attempting to define visual literacy (p.29). An abbreviated version of these
characteristics are presented in Figure 2.2
Figure 2.2: Defining Visual Literacy - Points of Convergence
·
Visual literacy is a cognitive ability, but also
draws on the affective domain
·
Visual literacy is described as an ability,
skill and competency
·
Visual literacy includes the ability to write
(encode) and read (decode) visual communication
·
Visual literacy skills are learnable and
teachable
·
Visual literacy skills are not isolated from
other sensory skills
·
Visual literacy incorporates theories from a
variety of fields of inquiry
Although early definitions
of visual literacy often focus on individual cognitive abilities, visual
literacy is being reconceptualized as a social practice as much as an
individual, cognitively-based ability or set of competences. Sturken and
Cartwright (2001) assert, “meanings are produced not in the heads of the
viewers so much as through a process of negotiation among individuals within a
particular culture, and between individuals and the artifacts, images, and
texts created by themselves and others” (p.4). Definitions of visual literacy,
therefore, should focus not only on an individual’s perceptual and cognitive
abilities, they should include how visual images function in broader
sociocultural contexts, and how practices
of looking inform our lives and identities (Sturken & Cartwright,
2001).
As we begin to
incorporate written language, design features and visual images into multimodal
ensembles, our working definition of visual literacy needs to expand to accommodate
new social and cognitive practices for making sense of these ensembles. In
attempting to bridge this theoretical terrain, my working definition of visual
literacy is as follows: Visual literacy is the process of generating
meanings in transaction with multimodal ensembles, including written text,
visual images and design elements, from a variety of perspectives to meet the
requirements of particular social contexts.
I know that is
quite a bit to consider. However, a couple of terms and concepts require
further explanation before we proceed. First, being visually literate is a social
and cognitive process, not simply a
discrete set of skills that are accumulated by individuals to apply as needed.
The ability to act in a visually literate manner changes over time and context,
and requires people to be able to flexibly enact a set of social practices to
make sense of the images and multimodal ensembles they encounter. Second, visual
literacy is about the process of
generating interpretations from the meaning potentials available when
transacting with visual images and multimodal ensembles. It is an on-going
process, not a static set of discrete skills. Third, being visually literate
requires the ability to work across a variety
of modes, including photography, painting, sculpture, diagrams, and film,
not just written language. In addition, my definition suggests readers need to consider
multimodal ensembles and visual images from a variety of theoretical
perspectives, for example feminist, critical, socio-cultural, political,
historical, and aesthetic perspectives. Finally, it assumes that the immediate
sociocultural contexts in which images are produced and disseminated play a
central role in the meanings constructed and shared. In other words, being
visually literate is about being able to make sense of the images and
multimodal ensembles encountered in various settings using a variety of lenses
to interpret and analyze their meaning potentials.
In
a further attempt to expand the definition of visual literacy, Rose (2001)
proposed a critical visual methodology,
informed by critical theories and cultural studies that is founded on, “an
approach that thinks about the visual in terms of the cultural significance,
social practices and power relations in which it is embedded; and that means
thinking about the power relations that produce, are articulated through, and
can be challenged by, ways of seeing and imaging” (p. 3). In moving towards a
critical visual methodology, Rose (2001) suggests we take images seriously,
think about the social conditions and effects of visual objects, and consider
our own way of looking at images.
Visual
discourse analysis, proposed by Albers (2007) combines aspects of discourse
analysis (Fairclough, 1995), social semiotics (Hodge & Kress, 1988), and the
grammar of visual design (Kress & van Leeuwen, 1996) to analyze the
structures and conventions within visual texts, and how social identities get
played out in their production. This approach conceptualizes the visual text as
a communicative event that acts as a force on viewers to encourage particular
actions or beliefs (Albers 2007).
These visual methodologies bring social
contexts, producers and viewers’ identities, and critical perspectives to bear
on multimodal texts and visual images. In later chapters, I will bring together
various visual methodologies and theoretical perspectives when presenting an
analytical framework that blends cognitive perspectives with structural, social,
and ideological dimensions for interpreting visual images and multimodal ensembles
(Serafini, 2011). It is my tripartite analytical framework that will serve as
the basis for the curricular and pedagogical applications offered in later
sections of this book.