In modern course books that are used in classrooms around the world, we expect there to be text and visuals (Rea, et al., 2013, p. 30; Donaghy & Xerri, 2017, p. 3; Ajayi, 2012, p. 16) and even a cursory glance at what appears in course books would give us indicators that not all images and visuals are integral to the language learning process. Those that are integrated into the language learning can be referent or be springboards to greater language output and investigation of the image and the author of said image. This is one side of the visual literacy coin where learners will inevitably produce visuals themselves.

Bowl of ramen

I am not quite sure why I feel so strongly about this image, it could be how it is used which is ultimately the most important factor (Tomlinson & Masuhara, 2018, p. 327). Hill (2015) would categorise the bowl of ramen as “purely for decoration” (p. 160) and after discussing this with other students, we cannot ascertain an alternative function for this image. Before we continue, we should define what we mean by decoration. Hill (2015, p. 159) juxtaposes decoration with visuals that are specifically used in the book and qualifies this with a disclaimer that the teacher’s book may have additional information regarding how an image may be used but discounted it as unlikely. Although I feel that this dichotomy of image use is simplistic and does not necessarily cover all the types of visuals found in course books, it is a suitable starting point from which to analyse and evaluate their use. Duchastel’s taxonomy offers another  way to categorise illustrations in instructional texts:

1. affective: provided to enhance interest and motivation;
2. attentive: intended to attract and direct attention;
3. didactic: intended to facilitate learning by showing something difficult to convey in words;
4. supportive: provided for less able learners
5. retentional: provided to facilitate memorisation.

It can be noted that there are no other images on this page (although the image is truncated, I assure you, there are no further visuals on that page) so it serves the purpose of “breaking up an otherwise relentless black and white type on the page” (Dellar, 2015), so could be considered affective in nature. Although not utilised directly for learning, the lexis and accompanying visual act as a resource that teachers can draw upon should they wish.

Dellar (2015) notes in his presentation that this is a limitation of visuals where it has little-to-no potential to generate language output from learners. In many ways, this is reducing learners to a passive viewing of visuals (Whitcher, 2018, p. 17) which is not how we interact with images, especially in the social media space. We engage much more with visuals such as memes and gifs which are intricately linked with our communication online. However, this does not necessarily fit with Dellar’s view that images should have “the potential to bring into being a thousand words” (2015), as we know from our own experience of memes and gifs, their message is complete with no additions possible.

An infographic is not necessarily a visual but a vessel which more language and ideas can be extracted than is necessarily contained within. As preparation for the seminar, I created a crude mock-up infographic about loot boxes in video games.

figure 1

It only took about 5 minutes to create and contains a lot of text but conveys much more than equivalent text or visuals only. Previously, infographics would have taken more time and effort to create but websites and apps such as diagrams.net, which I used to create this, can revolutionise the way we create and use infographics in learning.

Loot boxes are virtual rewards exchanged by games for some virtual currency exclusive to that game. This currency is usually by accrued either by playing or can be purchased for fiat money. The loot box will give random rewards of varying quality based on a probability table with higher quality rewards less frequent than those of lesser quality. I chose loot boxes because it is something that any person that has played free-to-play/freemium games will have experienced and highlighted some of the issues that people may not be aware of when partaking in loot box culture. This is, in my opinion, a possible catalyst for discussing one’s own relationship with loot boxes and one’s own feelings about the issues raised.

Even though infographics are excellent for portraying a lot of information in an accessible way, they are not commonly found in materials. There are myriad reasons why they may not feature as prominently in published materials but creating them then dissecting them is one way we can meet Dellar’s criteria for using visuals in materials.

figure 2

This is where the notion of pure and impure offers from visuals can offer us some insight into what they can achieve (Liu & Qu, 2014, p. 142). Unlike referent alphanumeric text, visuals and images are not pure. 木/樹/tree/arbre/شجرة/दरख्‍़त can be considered pure, there is no ambiguity but the tree in figure 2 is impure and is open to interpretation and is less fixed than the words. To Brits that follow politics, it is clearly the logo for a political party, to arborists it is an oak tree. Each viewer takes away something different. In a perverse twist of language teaching, the visual needs to be rescued by text, whereas we often deploy images and visuals to help understand written text.  To some, figure 2 is meaningless and that is why visual literacy is becoming a distinct part of curricula around the world (Donaghy & Xerri, 2017, p. 6).

The Canadian common curriculum framework breaks down visual literacy into two parts: viewing and representing (Begoray, 2001, p. 202). These are loosely congruent to receptive and productive respectively. We can apply Bloom’s Taxonomy to visual literacy and the use of visuals. Lower order thinking merely require a description of the visual and as we move into higher order thinking, we explore how the visual was created and what is included and what is left out. At the highest order of thinking, we are delving into the motivation behind the visual and the relative success of it. The Canadian common curriculum framework gives a fuller breakdown:

Questions for learners in visual literacy

These questions can also be applied to visuals that learners create in their language output, and in the modern communication landscape, use of visuals and text are becoming the normal mode of communication. To be able to understand Roll Safe, Picard facepalm and myriad other image memes and to utilise these in one’s own communication requires an increased visual literacy.

References

Ajayi, L., 2012. How Teachers Deploy Multimodal Textbooks to Enhance Language Learning. TESOL Journal, Volume 6, pp. 16-35.

Begoray, D., 2001. Through a class darkly: Visual literacy in the classroom. Canada Journal of Education, 26(2), pp. 201-217.

Dellar, H., 2015. Can a Picture Tell a Thousand Words?. [Online]
Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Py2R0CLvLIo&list=PLgLV1FQPwNRc2Y9Re7Rlzq8qx-bS9gL4I&index=4&t=41s
[Accessed 17 March 2021].

Donaghy, K. & Xerri, D., 2017. The Image in English Language Teaching. Malta: ELT Council.

Hill, D. A., 2015. The Visual Elements in EFL Coursebooks. In: B. Tomlinson, ed. Developing Materials for Language Teaching. s.l.:Bloomsbury, pp. 157-166.

Liu, X. & Qu, D., 2014. Exploring the Multimodality of EFL Textbooks for Chinese College Students: A Comparative Study. RELC Journal, 45(2), pp. 135-150.

Rea, D. et al., 2013. English Unlimited B1+. s.l.:Cambridge University Press.

Tomlinson, B. & Masuhara, H., 2018. The Complete Guide to the Theory and Practice of Materials Development for Language Learning. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.

Whitcher, A., 2018. Image makers: the new language learners of the 21st century. In: K. Donaghy & D. Xerri, eds. The Image in English Language Teaching. Floriana, Malta: ELT Council, pp. 13-22.