Rethinking the essay: student perceptions of collaborative digital multimodal composition in the college classroom

ABSTRACT

This article urges reconsideration of the traditional essay in undergraduate education. Despite renewed critiques of its efficacy as a pedagogical tool, the essay stubbornly retains primacy. As studies confirm the learning benefits of collaboration and highlight the potential of multimodal composition to challenge and expand forms of knowledge production, the collaborative digital multimodal essay offers an alternative to the traditional essay. This study focuses on 35 students in two advanced undergraduate literary studies courses who were assigned a collaborative digital multimodal composition project in the online publishing platform Scalar. Thematic analysis of student reflections following the project indicate that students perceive collaborative digital multimodal writing to offer opportunities for more creativity and autonomy and to challenge conceptions of academic writing forms, conventions and practices. Collaborating to develop complex and coherent arguments remained a significant challenge as did the technical demands of the digital writing platform.

KEYWORDS:

• Digital writing
• multimodal composition
• collaborative writing
• essay

Introduction

Since the 1850s, generations of college students have churned out essay after essay (Calder & Williams, 2021). Though it may take different forms and labels in different disciplines, the print-based argumentative essay remains the ‘default genre’ for all student writing (Womack, 1993, p. 43). Despite the growing awareness and application of learner-centered pedagogies, the written essay remains a sacrosanct and ‘privileged’ pedagogical tool in undergraduate education (Dixon, 2017; Womack, 1993).

Ideally, the essay’s learning potential lies in the flexibility of the ideas it can explore and the structure its argument might take. Indeed, as an alternative to the exam, the essay can more effectively encourage original thought and intellectual autonomy in student learning, an important form of deep learning (Gibson, 2017). The essay, however, can also suffer from similar problems as the exam: it prioritizes content recall; it is written for an audience of one; it reinforces competition in the classroom; it devalues personal identity and experience; and its end purpose is the final grade (Folk, 2018; Isuster, 2020; Lynam & Cachia, 2018; Sample & Schrum, 2013). Termed ‘disposable assignments’ by Wiley (2013, para 4), the essay is submitted, perhaps commented on, certainly graded, then returned and immediately forgotten. Further, despite the essay’s potential value in supporting intellectual independence, the reality of higher education today, including large class sizes, under-resourced writing centers, and short-term grading periods, work against the ability to teach the necessary skills to develop this independence (Gibson, 2017). The results are essay assignments that impose formal and intellectual conformity and rigidity, precisely the problems the essay was supposed to ameliorate. This issue of the essay and its role in university education has not gone unnoticed. Calder and Williams (2021), for instance, recently urged ‘a reexamination of the taken-for-granted history essay from top to bottom instead of the continuation of business as usual’ (941).

Considering the limitations of the essay and taking seriously its intended values of originality and intellectual agency, this study examines the efficacy and student perceptions of implementing collaborative digital multimodal composition as an alternative to the traditional print-based essay. The digital collaborative essay was selected as the specific study focus for its positive relationship to creativity, intellectual autonomy, and liberatory knowledge structures. While there are pedagogical advantages to each of these aspects of writing – the digital, collaborative, and multimodal – each also comes with challenges, not only for the instructor in terms of design, planning, and execution, but also for the student, who is being asked to shift from a role as knowledge consumer to knowledge producer. Although students may complain about written essays, it is also a form with which they are familiar and comfortable, if not always satisfied (Struyven, Dochy, & Janssens, 2005). New instructional methods and assessments mean new anxiety for students, which can negatively impact performance (Lynam & Cachia, 2018; Rust, 2002). While students can perceive multimodal texts to be more creative and persuasive than print essays, their familiarity with traditional written essays may lead them to prefer the known to the new (Alexander, Powell, & Green, 2012; Stowe, 2012).

Following a review of research on digital multimodal composition and collaborative writing, this article examines undergraduate student perceptions of the value and experiences of collaborative digital multimodal writing through a case study in which a collaborative digital multimodal essay was assigned in two advanced undergraduate literature courses in place of the traditional essay. The results section develops a thematic analysis of anonymous student reflection feedback and identifies several emergent themes related to creativity and analytical skill development, student understanding of the forms of academic writing, practices and challenges of collaboration, and perceptions of the role of technology in the classroom. The discussion and conclusion highlight students’ broadly positive experiences of collaborative digital multimodal writing, especially in its potential for supporting increased creativity, personal voice in writing, enhanced relationships with peers, and confidence in writing and analysis skills, while also highlighting concerns with technological learning curves of digital writing platforms and uncertainty over the forms and conventions of different modes of academic writing.

Literature review

Digital multimodal composition

Digital writing is a broad category defined as ‘compositions created with, and oftentimes for, a computer or other device that is connected to the Internet’ (Aadahl, and Troy Hicks, 2010, p. 7). One of the key affordances of digital writing is the ability to compose multimodal texts. Referring to forms of texts and writing that ‘exceed the alphabetic and may include still and moving images, animations, color, words, music, and sound,’ digital multimodal writing can represent a variety of informational forms and modes, and multiple modes can be composed and interact in a single site (Takayoshi & Selfe, 2007). Unlike the medium of the print book or written essay, the digital, multimodal text can be ‘non-linear, hypertextual, continuously revisable, and interactive’ (Lauer, 2009, p. 227).

Multimodal writing demands that students think beyond the page; they must think more creatively and critically about form, ideas, and representation. With new modes, the forms, structures, and purposes of essay writing change: ‘With digital writing, we need to think with words, of course; yet we also need to begin thinking like artists, web designers, recording engineers, photographers, and filmmakers’ (Hicks, 2013, pp. 18–19). These interpretive skills are urgent and transferrable, as Takayoshi and Selfe (2007, p. 3) explain. Kim, Kang, Nam, and Skalicky (2022) explored peer interaction and the quality of digital multimodal composition in the context of Korean high schools to find that this mode can yield a positive learning experience for language learners even before they enter university-level education. Similarly, Jiang, Yu, and Zhao (2021) show how teachers can benefit from incorporating multimodal composition in university-level classes in China. Consuming and producing multimodal texts not only enriches scholarly practices of interpretation and analysis, but also encourages critical engagement with the communication networks that will organize students’ lives outside of university.

In addition, multimodal writing has been shown to challenge elite hierarchies of knowledge by emphasizing liberatory and antiracist pedagogies. By making academic use of diverse communicative forms, including memes, videos, and contemporary popular media, alongside scholarly analysis and critique, multimodal composition reveals and endorses alternative modes of expressing ideas and information. As Ohito (2020) has noted, this blending of epistemological and communication modes constitutes a ‘fugitive literary practice’ that works to engage and dismantle epistemological and textual forms of whiteness and antiblackness. Mills and Unsworth (2018) also argue that multimodality, in its layered forms of narration and diverse epistemological modes of the textual, visual, aural, and spatial, can be used as a means for critiquing and countering essentialism and for acknowledging multi-layered identities and diverse ways of knowing. In the international university and among culturally diverse student bodies, this work of inclusion and challenging forms of cultural hegemony is essential work.

Amid the pedagogical advantages of multimodal writing, diverse concerns can negatively impact students’ perceptions of digital projects and writing, including concerns over access to relevant technologies or internet connection, as well as anxiety over digital competence (Dahlström, 2019). As noted by DePalma and Alexander (2015), although students’ extensive exposure to new media technologies has allowed them to develop particular capacities for navigating new technologies, the extent to which these literacies have prepared students to produce rhetorically sophisticated texts is a different question altogether (184, emphasis in the original). Having students actually compose in multimedia environments, and not simply consume these texts, is an essential first step to developing these capacities (Skains, 2017).

Collaborative writing

Digital and multimodal writing also invites ‘distributed and collaborative forms of knowledge work’ that challenge the single-author model of the traditional print essay (Riva, 2017, p. 65). Studies have long vaunted the benefits of collaborative learning and writing. Students engaged in collaborative writing build social relationships, develop new norms for writing, participate in the social construction of knowledge, critically engage with new media, and inculcate diverse ideas and understanding (Bruffee, 1993; Kasper, 2000; Yim & Warschauer, 2017). Collaborative learning in general provides more positive learning outcomes than competitive learning in studies across diverse cultural, institutional, and disciplinary contexts (Liang, Mohan, & Early, 1998; Nunan, 1992; Sun & Yuan, 2017). As web-based applications and software developments have expanded both the tools and forms of digital collaborative writing and its role in instruction, studies focusing specifically on technology-enhanced collaborative writing also find increased benefits to print-based collaboration, including improved engagement in recursive writing, synchronous writing, and content selection and organization, as well a stronger sense of community (Kessler, Bikowski, & Boggs, 2012; Mannion, Siegel, Li, Pham, & Alshaikhi, 2019; Storch, 2015).

Studies focusing on student perceptions of collaborative learning and collaborative writing highlight a number of perceived advantages and disadvantages depending on experience level, academic discipline, and learning goals. Positive emphasis highlights the social benefits of collaborative learning, including building relationships, enhancing communication, and exchanging knowledge (Weinberger & Shonfeld, 2018). Studies of university students in L2 contexts demonstrate that students perceive collaborative writing to be enjoyable, to positively impact their writing, technology, and critical thinking skills, and to help them reconceptualise the purpose, focus, and nature of writing (Chen & Yu, 2019; Shehadeh, 2011). In a study of Emirati university students, Deveci (2018) found that the students not only perceived collaborative writing projects as beneficial for English language and teamwork skills, but also an important support for active learning and innovation. However, students also highlight concerns with collaborative learning and writing. Le, Janssen, and Wubbels (2018) have found that students identify four common obstacles to effective collaboration, including a lack of collaborative skills, unequal participant effort, difference in competence status among group members, and interpersonal relationship challenges. Other concerns include perceived limited learning in collaborative writing tasks, difficulty in negotiating diverse viewpoints, and negative impressions of the student’s own competency (Chen & Yu, 2019).

This study builds on research of student perceptions of collaborative and multimodal writing by examining undergraduate student perceptions of the value and experiences of collaborative digital multimodal writing specifically and its contrast with traditional print-based essays. By better understanding student perceptions, instructors can more effectively design and implement these projects in the classroom. This study seeks to address the following research questions:

• How do students perceive the design and composition of collaborative multimodal texts?

• How do students experience the practices of collaborative writing?

• What perceptions do students have of the forms and function of ‘academic writing’ (associated with traditional essays) in relation to multimodal writing?

• In what ways do students articulate the learning goals and challenges of collaborative digital multimodal writing?

Methods and materials

Case study: collaborative digital multimodal writing in undergraduate literary studies

This case study examines student experience in two advanced undergraduate literature courses in which a collaborative digital multimodal writing project was used in place of the traditional written essay. The study received ethical consent from the institution (AUS IRB-18-437, Approved: Exempt − 45 CFR 46.101(b)(1)) and participants indicated informed written consent through a signed form allowing anonymous inclusion of their feedback data and project writing. The 35 student participants were all English Language and Literature majors at a four-year liberal arts American-style university in the United Arab Emirates and enrolled in one of two advanced undergraduate literature courses: American Novel or Twentieth-Century American Literature. Twenty-one (60%) students were in their 4^th year and fourteen students (40%) in their 3^rd year. All students in the study possessed advanced English language and writing skills, in part due to university English-language enrolment requirements as well as several years of English-language university writing and literary education. As is true in the UAE as a whole, the participants possessed a range of language backgrounds, including Arabic, English, Farsi, French, Hindi, Malayalam, and Urdu, though all instruction and course work is conducted in English. Literary Studies offers a valuable disciplinary focus for this study as its students are not only advanced English-language speakers and writers, they are also experienced and confident in writing print-based essays and reflecting on writing processes, and are thus well-prepared to examine the experience of writing an argument using different forms and methods.

For the final essay in the course, students are traditionally asked to develop an argument about a prominent theme in the course using evidence from course texts and relevant secondary sources and submit an independently-written 6–8 page essay. This open-ended prompt supports specific learning outcomes (CLO) in each course (Table 1). For this study, students were given the same open-ended prompt that supports the CLOs, but instead were asked to work collaboratively to develop and write their arguments in a digital multimodal essay incorporating multi-media sources such as video, image, and music in addition to course texts and scholarly secondary sources. General guidelines for individual and group components were provided and structured group meeting times during class were built into the project in order to support collaboration and alleviate initial challenges of collaboration structure and logistics.

Table 1. Course learning outcomes relevant to the final essay.

American Novel	Twentieth-Century American Literature
Analyze the political, cultural and social conditions to which particular novels were responding.	Demonstrate understanding of development of character, plot, conflict, and theme in texts.
Demonstrate ability to use methods of literary and cultural analysis in the field of Literary Studies.	Apply theoretical and critical approaches to literary texts.
Develop critical analysis skills to support a written argument on course texts.	Produce critical analyses of literary texts.

This study used Scalar as the digital multimodal writing platform due to its explicit connection to academic and scholarly writing and publishing modes (Alliance for Networking Visual Culture, 2020). Scalar allows for diverse ways of organizing information, including the ability to incorporate image, sound, and video texts, the use of paths and tags to diversify content relationships beyond the linear narrative, and the ability to allow for media annotations as well as social annotation on content. Conducted over multiple weeks, students worked in small groups of three to four students to design and write one digital ‘path’ (similar to a chapter) in a class Scalar book. The overall collaborative structure of the project included both group and individual tasks that allowed for flexibility for groups to navigate collaborative responsibilities (see Appendix).

Data on student experiences was collected through an open-ended and anonymous written reflection (written in English) following the project and analysed using thematic analysis. The narrative reflection on their process and product develops an interpretive paradigm through which students make meaning of their own learning (O’Donoghue, 2007). This reflective and metacognitive act encourages students to articulate their own learning journeys, which provides valuable data for assessing the perceptions of a given task or assignment. The reflection was designed to elicit students’ perceptions of the purposes, processes, and value of the digital project in relation to a traditional essay. Students were provided open-ended questions aligned with the study’s primary research questions, including:

• What was the purpose of the project in your own words? Do you think the project fulfilled its purpose?

• What was for you the most challenging aspect of the project?

• What was the most enjoyable aspect of the project/the least enjoyable?

• What was your most powerful learning moment?

• What did you learn about yourself as a writer or thinker through this project?

• What was challenging about group writing? What opportunities did it allow?

• Is digital writing different from the writing you do in essays? How so or how not?

• How did the project help you think about the texts and evidence in the course?

Students were not required to address any or all of the prompts; rather, they were encouraged to develop a narrative reflection that was true to their experience with the project.

To identify and understand student perceptions and experiences and to ascertain patterns in the qualitative data of the written reflections, the study used thematic analysis as outlined by Braun and Clarke (2006). A random data sampling was initially coded separately by each researcher, using an inductive approach that allowed for the data to suggest code labels. The resulting codes were discussed and refined by the researchers, who established definitions for each code to ensure uniformity in application. An iterative coding and analysis process emphasised inclusion of all relevant data. Sample data, codes, and definitions are listed in Tables 2 and 3. Anonymous reflections cited below are labelled alphanumerically according to course membership. Thus, A1, for example, stands for the first student response in the first course, while B2 represents the comments from the second student in the second course. Following data coding, the resulting codes were grouped according to developing patterns and relationships among codes and mapped to facilitate the development of broader themes and related subthemes. These themes and subthemes were reviewed and revised to build coherence within and among themes. A sample thematic map depicting the organisation of codes and theme and subthemes development is depicted in Figure 1.

Figure 1. Developing themes. A sample thematic map moving from codes to theme and subthemes.

Table 2. Sample coding.

Reflection Extract	Initial Codes
I found it very challenging to keep my writing tone appropriate. Over the past 4 years I’ve been taught to write in an academic, non-personalized voice, so adjusting that for the project was hard. (B13)	Writing challenges: tone Writing challenges: voice Academic style Difficulty in adjusting
A moment of discovery I definitely had in the project was through the use of media in our works, where it led to learning that older books that seemingly talk about outdated issues actually ended having connections with the contemporary problems we know today, such as a woman’s default role in society. (A8)	Creative and analytical connections Incorporation of media Reflecting on evidence Societal critique
I am usually the person that opts out of working in a group because I prefer to work alone, but the group I was in had a very open line of communication that made it easy to do so. We used Google docs, which meant that we can all access and edit the documents and PowerPoint. I found that because we were all working on the same document and putting our comments on it, it made it easier to work together and take everyone’s ideas. We were also continuously communicating and updating each other on where we are in the work, which meant that everything was done in a timely manner. (A5)	Resistance to group work Group communication Collaborative methods Overcoming collaboration challenges

Table 3. Sample codes and coding definitions.

Code	Definition
Resistance to group work	Indications of hesitancy or distrust of group work, related to past material experiences or perceptions of group work
Overcoming collaboration challenges	Means or strategies for addressing problems in group collaboration (later subdivided into specific code categories for challenges of time/practicalities, communication, and idea generation)
Reflecting on evidence	Insights on how understanding of evidentiary forms for supporting ideas shifted or changed
Creative and analytical connections	Explicit references to new connections made between course materials and ideas, evidence, and/or media forms.
Creative Freedom	Language that highlighted freedom, liberation, and individuality in the conceptualization and/or completion of the project

Results

This study set out to examine how students perceive the value and experience of collaborative digital multimodal composition in place of the traditional print-based essay. Data analysis highlighted six specific themes (Table 4):

Table 4. Themes identified in data analysis.

	List of Resulting Themes
1.	The flexible forms and diverse media of multimodal writing offered students an atypical and welcome degree of freedom and creativity and allowed them to expand the analytical reach of their ideas.
2.	As the conventions of a written essay are familiar and often internalised, multimodal writing challenged participants’ conceptions of academic writing, especially with regards to conventions of voice and style.
3.	Collaborating to draft a coherent argument/thesis was challenging intellectually, but also provided an opportunity to build confidence in the competencies of both peers and self and to strengthen social relationships.
4.	As resistance to group work can be a hindrance to initial investment in collaboration, open communication and parity in engagement were necessary to overcome this resistance.
5.	Student perception of the specific digital writing platform, Scalar, was integral to their experience of digital multimodal writing.
6.	Digital multimodal composition offered an occasion to integrate technology into more traditional analogue or text-based academic disciplines as a way to relate the classroom to the broader world.

Theme 1: the flexible forms and diverse media of multimodal writing offered students an atypical and welcome degree of freedom and creativity and allowed them to expand the analytical reach of their ideas

Of 35 reflections, 20 (57.1%) specifically identified creativity as an enjoyable and generative aspect of the project. Some were general reflections, such as ‘The best part is having creative freedom’ (A11), ‘I enjoyed … letting go of my reins’ (B16), and being able to ‘think outside of the box’ (A8). Within these discussions, students highlighted how this freedom and creativity allowed them to exert more ownership over their ideas and facilitate a more personal relationship with their work.

‘I felt that the project allowed room for individual creativity, we were able to express ourselves in ways that would not be possible in a regular essay. I really enjoyed using media as a way to express myself.’ (B3)

I especially enjoyed the freedom and flexibility this project entailed. I was able to incorporate one of my all-time favorite philosophers.’ (A6)

‘We got to write an essay and also create our vision on a page.’ (B2)

The project ‘allowed us to freely express our ideas.’ (B7)

Projects ‘such as the Scalar one,’ one student explained, are ‘a very welcome change’ and encourage ‘critical thinking, collaboration, and freedom’ (B4).

In addition to the enjoyment and sense of personal connection made possible with the creativity of multimodal writing, participants also cited its impact on their ability to make new analytical connections between texts and ideas. Twenty respondents (40%) specifically highlighted expanded analytical insights due to the diversity of media forms. One student noted that the project ‘made me see these texts in other ways and connect them to other things in the world that might not have happened if it was a normal essay. The visual part helped rethink & emphasize new points’ (B1). On analytical connections and new ways of expressing ideas, one student noted that the project made them realize ‘older books […] have connections with contemporary problems’ and ‘found the way [that] modern media can be related to these texts very eye opening and made me want to find more connections’ (A8). Another highlighted how ‘the project helped in understanding how media [like] images/videos etc can depict [ideas] in ways better that texts sometimes’ (A10).

In addition, seven respondents (20%) indicated that multimodal writing, and specifically, the use of popular media sources, helped them think about evidence and relevance in a broader way. For one student who ‘absolutely LOVED the freedom’ to connect the course texts to outside media, it allowed them to ‘make connections’ with popular culture productions about race and gender roles (A2). Additional responses stressing expanded analytical insights include:

‘I learned that I could make use of non-scholarly sources and media to create an argument and work on its analysis.’ (A3)

‘It allowed us to explore ideas and thoughts beyond the text and to make connections with popular culture.’ (A5)

‘I had to look at the texts in a modern approach and it helped me criticize topics like gender more easily and thoroughly.’ (B6)

‘This project truly made me aware of the cultural impact of texts and how I always need to think of it. This task also helped me improve my analytical skills.’ (A11)

Theme 2: as the conventions of a written essay are familiar and often internalised, multimodal writing challenged participants’ conceptions of academic writing, especially with regards to conventions of voice and style

Another theme that developed out of the data focused on the ways that students perceived multimodal writing as distinct from their perception of academic writing, both in terms of form and style. Just over one-third of respondents (34%) highlighted some degree of discomfort, doubt, or anxiety with working outside of the traditional essay format.

‘The most challenging aspect of the project was getting used to writing not-the-essay format. Being someone who usually takes time to adapt to new situations of any kind, I had a hard time in thinking outside the structured format of the essays we usually write.’ (A10)

‘The most challenging aspects of the project were: first, getting over my narrow mindset and accepting the fact that I would have to leave my comfort zone of research papers.’ (A6)

‘It’s hard for me to break out of very formal academic writing because I’ve gotten so used to it.’ (B7)

‘I realized that I was boxed in by the constraints of traditional writing methods, and at first it gave me a lot of trouble to free my mind from those restrictions.’ (A7)

‘Seemed harder – less rigid and academic but was way more enjoyable!!!’ (B7).  In particular, reflections identified aspects of voice and style as being the key differentiating factors between multimodal writing and their experience of academic writing. Students perceived digital multimodal writing and the broader audience of a web-based publication (as opposed to the audience-of-one of a traditional essay) to require different conventions of writing, including more accessible language and an emphasis on concision. In addition, students specifically identified increased awareness of audience, voice, and authorship:

‘Over the past 4 years I’ve been taught to write in an academic, non-personalized voice, so adjusting that for the project was hard.’ (B13)

‘Working on this project, I realized I tend to think and write in really long sentences. Hence, it was important to learn to keep it short and concise.’ (A10)

‘I learned that I can combine something serious like literary analysis with something personal, like my own character and sense of humor.’ (B1)

‘I learned that literary analysis does not need to be in the strict format of a research paper full of big, flowery words. [. . .] My moments of discovery all stemmed from this realization that I had flexibility and freedom that I wouldn’t have had if I were writing a standard paper.’ (A6)

‘The most challenging aspect was finding the right tone to use for these pages. Like what was too colloquial and what was too academic.’ (B6)

‘Just like developing a style of writing,’ one student explained, ‘I use a lot of memes and gifs when texting and have developed a sort of pattern and style in using them. Actually using this newfound talent in an academic project was really exciting.’ (A3)

Theme 3: collaborating to draft a coherent argument/thesis was challenging intellectually, but also provided an opportunity to build confidence in the competencies of both peers and self and to strengthen social relationships

The most-often cited challenge of collaborative work was coordinating ideas; seven out of 12 responses that indicated challenges with collaboration highlighted this specific intellectual work (A3, A10, A13, B1, B5, B11, B15). As one student noted, ‘Writing our paths separately was not hard, however combining these paths and making them related to each other was a bit challenging’ (A13). Another echoed the difficulty of ‘correlating’ disparate and diverse ideas (B1). One student noted that working in groups was difficult due to the ways they ‘could or could not relate to each other’s ways of thinking’ (A10). The ‘narrowing down and pinpointing one idea was the challenge’ another student highlighted (A3).

Collaborating on idea generation and argument also provided an occasion for respondents to highlight a growing awareness and/or appreciation of the ideas and skills of their peers as well as develop confidence in their own work. The process of collaboration instilled a ‘newfound sense of appreciation for my classmates,’ one student noted (A7). Another praised the ‘effort and determination’ of their group members; ‘Group work really allowed us to showcase our talents.’ (A4). Finally, one student asserted that the ‘best part’ about group authoring was in teaching the student to be ‘less insecure’ in their thinking and writing and to ‘not only be open to criticism, but also [to] crave it’ (A12). In addition, students perceived that this intellectual collaboration expanded and deepened the analysis of texts. Collaborating became ‘an interesting learning experience’ whereby ‘as different members thought differently, it allowed different perspectives on the same subject which ensured better analysis of the subjects’ (A10). Nine other respondents also credited collaboration with increased range and depth of analysis:

‘Working in a group allows us to interpret certain ideas in a variety of ways.’ (A4)

Collaborative work ‘served to add to my knowledge of the topic and opened up new paths of interpretation and perception.’ (A1)

For others, collaborative work ‘facilitate[d] more ideas’ (A8) and allowed them to ‘learn a lot more than expected’ (A9) due to the work of their group members.

Beyond the intellectual benefits of collaboration, comments also pointed to perceived social benefits in terms of support and relationship-building. ‘I got close to my group members over the span of a couple of months and we had fun working together,’ one student explained (B18). Another credited their group members for ‘motivat[ing] and encourag[ing] each other’ (A1). The discussions over ideas ‘allowed us to really value compromises and cooperation’ (B12). ‘It felt like a nurturing process’ (A9).

Theme 4: as resistance to group work can be a hindrance to initial investment in collaboration, open communication and parity in engagement were necessary to overcome this resistance

Seven respondents (20%) articulated a general resistance to or anxiety around group work when reflecting on first impressions of the project. At times no reasons were given: ‘I absolutely dislike group work’ (A4); ‘I don’t really like group projects’ (B6). Another noted lack of experience in group work by discipline: ‘I was also apprehensive about this project at first because of the “group” aspect. I haven’t necessarily had bad experiences working in groups in the past but had never worked with a group on a literature project’ (A6). One respondent mentioned preferring to work alone as the reason for resistance to group work (A5).

In addition to an ambivalent perception towards group work, students also cited the practical task of coordinating schedules for meeting outside of class as an issue with group work. After coordinating ideas, the second-most cited challenge of collaborative work was this concern with setting meeting times. Five students (A2, A7, A8, B1, B11) identified this concern, highlighting heightened time demands in the final weeks of the semester, coordinating the schedules of four different people, as well as one response that noted that the student had ‘pretty strict limitations on how long I can be out, which didn’t help us with scheduling meetings out of work hours’ (A7).

In order to overcome these challenges, respondents most often credited open communication and equal engagement. ‘The group I was in had a very open line of communication that made it easy’ to work together (A5). This student also highlighted the collaborative writing affordances of GoogleDocs with facilitating this communication. Other respondents noted:

‘I don’t really like group projects, but in this case, my group really helped with the whole thing and with our objectives for the project.’ (B6)

After ‘trusting my group members to do their part, I can now safely call this experience one of my favorite group work experiences.’ (A6)

One respondent highlighted ‘equal passion and excitement about the themes and texts’ (A6) as the key to overcoming their hesitation towards group work. Another associated collaborative writing with managing the group and fostering a sense of connection: ‘we all co-authored each other’s pages so that we can connect in a broader sense’ (A4).

Theme 5: student perception of the specific digital writing platform, scalar, was integral to their experience of digital multimodal writing

The most common sentiment associated with the use of Scalar was initial frustration with learning how to navigate the platform (9/35 respondents; 25.7%). Critiques focused primarily on the platform feeling ‘awkward’ (B13, B16), inefficient (A5), and ‘difficult’ to use (B14, B18). ‘The most challenging aspect of the project’, one respondent notes, was ‘not getting frustrated by’ Scalar (A6). ‘Exhausting,’ one student lamented (B8); ‘too complicated’ (B15). Another respondent stressed that ‘there was definitely a learning curve’ (B5) for the digital platform. Eleven percent of respondents were positive about using Scalar, calling it ‘the most enjoyable form of technology that we experienced’ (B12). Two respondents who had some experience with HTML and CSS found that Scalar allowed for more ‘freedom’ (A2) and flexibility, which increased their enjoyment of the project and helped them refresh their coding skills (A2, A8).

Frustration, however, did not correlate specifically with a negative perception of the project as a whole. Thirty-four percent of total respondents associated a sense of pride or accomplishment in overcoming technical challenges and learning how to use the platform for multimodal composition. Of those nine respondents who noted a negative initial impression of the platform, one-third of them also articulated a sense of pride with pushing through these challenges to create a satisfactory page or path. Though ‘at first technically challenging,’ the project helped one respondent develop a ‘new understanding of literature and reading’ (A6). Other responses noting a sense of accomplishment related to the digital platform and composition included:

‘The satisfaction of seeing the pages come together, and the clarity and fluidity of the product, was extremely pleasing.’ (A1)

‘Scalar kind of drives me insane, but I am proud of the book.’ (B14)

‘Although it took me a large amount of time to make the pages look the way I wanted it to, I think that it was definitely enjoyable and fulfilling to do.’ (A8)

‘Although there had been some confusing moments when I really wished we did a regular essay form […], I really enjoyed the overall experience of working on an online platform and wish we did everything in that format.’ (A10)

Theme 6: digital multimodal composition offers an occasion to integrate technology into more traditional analogue or text-based academic disciplines as a way to relate the classroom to the broader world

Student response data revealed a desire for greater integration of digital technologies in undergraduate education and specifically in the study’s discipline of literary studies. Eleven student responses (31.4%) commented positively on the value of incorporating more technology in a variety of ways into education. Student study rationales for increased digital engagement included introduction of new communication tools as well as preparation for careers and lives outside of academia:

I like that this class included a lot of technology. Technology is the future and the use of blackboard, social media, digital readings and now Scalar has prepared me more for the future. Most of my classes don’t utilize technology at all so I like that this class did, it made it more interactive. (B2)

‘Technology has become an integral part of academic life, which was inevitable considering how important it has become in our daily lives. I think this is a good thing because it makes most processes more comfortable.’ (B5)

‘Technology should have a larger role in literature classes, especially in our day and age. Most people nowadays use media to express themselves and connect with one another so I feel it’s appropriate to adapt to these changes in our society and modernize the classroom environment just as we did in this class.’ (B3)

‘Incorporating a different technological dynamic in the course was a good break from typical essay writing as it [. . .] helped me create a better bond with technology.’ (A11)

‘I really liked doing the digital project more than doing essays […] I think it does stress different skills but will prepare us more for the real world.’ (B2)

In addition, one-sixth of student respondents indicated that digital multimodal composition helped them connect the classroom to the larger world, including ‘mak[ing] new connections outside the realm of the ‘literary’ (B1), and to see ‘how literary criticism exists out in the world, as well’ (A9).

Limitations and positionality

There are several limitations to the study, including its small sample size, limited disciplinary focus, and specific institutional contexts. Due to the limited size and scope of the study, we caution against generalizing student perceptions across undergraduate fields and levels. In addition, while the expectations and learning environments in Literary Studies is similar to other humanities fields such as history and the arts, different disciplines will have different expectations for teaching, writing, collaboration and the production of knowledge. Finally, this study included students in small seminar classes, which emphasise intimate dialogue and personal relationships in a way that is different than in a large lecture context. This context, as well as other aspects specific to institutions, will impact the generalizability of the results. Finally, as instructors in these classes, the researchers were not external observers; we were there as guides through the project process. Bias was mitigated in several ways: 1) by making the reflection entirely anonymous, in writing and submission, 2) completing the reflection before projects were assessed so as not to impact or influence student perception of the ‘success’ of their project, and 3) masking labelling conventions to eliminate course distinctions in data analysis.

Discussion

This study set out to examine university student perceptions associated with completing a collaborative digital multimedia essay in place of a traditional text-based essay, including specific perceptions associated with writing multimodal texts, collaboration, and academic writing. Thirty-five advanced undergraduates in two literary studies courses participated in the study, which identified six specific themes rendered from student narrative reflections. These emergent themes variously support, extend, and/or challenge existing research on student perceptions of multimodal writing and collaboration. The study adds to existing literature on higher education pedagogy, digital and collaborative writing, and multimodal composition in higher education as it allows us to better understand how students perceive the value of collaborative digital multimodal writing, how they define forms and practices of academic writing, as well as identify practical concerns and challenges students face when asked to move from the traditional essay to more collaborative forms of knowledge production and the multiliteracies of multimodal composition. Due to the limited size and scope of the study, we caution against generalizing student perceptions across undergraduate fields and levels. However, there are important implications for reconsidering the role and form of the traditional essay in undergraduate education.

The students in this study echoed several established scholarly critiques of the traditional essay, including its emphasis on conformity, rigid form, and depersonalization (Folk, 2018; Sample & Schrum, 2013). As highlighted in the first theme, study participants viewed the multimodal collaborative project as ‘freeing’ and overwhelmingly emphasised and welcomed creativity (in ideas and composition practices) as the distinguishing factor between this project and the traditional written essay. Several studies have highlighted student perceptions of enhanced creativity in multimodal writing (Alexander, Powell, & Green, 2012; Hafner, 2014; Yang, 2012); student participants identified this characteristic as one of the most important and valuable attributes over the traditional essay. In line with Kim and Belcher (2020) study of Korean L2 students’ perception of digital multimodal composing, participants found the multimodal writing project more interesting to conduct and felt it resulted in more engaging products than traditional academic writing. Extending the findings of Saklofske, Clements, and Cunningham (2012), this creativity and blending of epistemological and communication modes highlighted diverse ways for students to contribute and construct knowledge. Students indicated the ability to include their own personalities, modes of communication, and non-academic knowledges as a significant learning opportunity. Participants noted how the ability to include multiple media forms expanded their understanding of what constitutes evidence in scholarly study, as well as allowed them to explore and understand connections between course texts and larger cultural issues. Findings on this theme support the development of ‘multiliteracies,’ in which multiple modal affordances allow students a deeper engagement in the construction of meaning and reinforce traditional goals of student learning, such as analysis and application (Howell, Reinking, & Kaminski, 2015; New London Group & New London Group, 1996). Study findings suggest that students perceive multimodal writing to wholly support the intended goals of traditional essays: originality and intellectual agency.

Despite students’ positive perceptions of the creative and empowering possibilities of digital multimodal composition as a way to move beyond the restrictions of the traditional essay, students in this study also expressed comfort with the conventions of the traditional written essay and found it difficult and disorienting to let go even when they wanted to (Theme 2). In a testament to the ubiquity and privileged status of the traditional essay, students often equated ‘academic writing’ and the essay; they did not always perceive multimodal writing as ‘academic,’ even when building arguments through using evidence and analysis. This equivalency should be addressed. In DePalma and Alexander (2015), university students perceived an opposition between multimodal composition as a ‘public’ practice and the academic practice of engaging with experts to provide information or advance knowledge. Students in this study did not voice an opposition between multimodal and traditional academic writing in terms of content or purpose; many, in fact, highlighted how multimodal writing allows them to enhance their engagement with ideas and analysis. But they associated academic writing with the essay form in particular. The digital multimodal project existed outside of their limited boundaries of academic writing. Our study suggests that students would benefit from a larger discussion of academic writing as a set of skills and rhetorical strategies, rather than as a specific genre of writing. Through multimodal composition, instructors can emphasize academic writing as a conscious and purposeful selection of diverse rhetorical and writing modes to facilitate deep engagement with and the clear articulation of ideas and analysis.

Although some students voiced concern over the initial unfamiliarity with writing outside of the traditional essay format, students described adaptive writing strategies, including thinking through (and expanding) valid sources of evidence and considering the different exigencies of voice, tone, and style. These findings extend the insights of other studies that highlight the language and writing benefits of digital and multimodal composition in an L2 context (Hafner, 2014; Jiang & Luk, 2016). In this context of an advanced (though still L2) writing course, students identified increased awareness of audience, voice, and authorship. Students’ ability to adapt these writing strategies differs from the results of DePalma and Alexander (2015), whose study participants voiced more difficulty adapting written essay conventions to multimodal composition. Perhaps this disparity is due to the different academic levels of students in each study. The advanced (3^rd and 4^th year) English literature major undergrads in this study were highly experienced with writing traditional essays and confident in their writing abilities. In addition, unlike the first-year writers studied by Alexander, Powell, and Green (2012), students did not report problems developing a clear thesis, instead only focusing on the challenges of collaborating on that thesis. Project design, in which a clear thesis was a foundational requirement of the multimodal essay, likely helped avoid that particular challenge. This study suggests that to aid all students in making a transition from the written essay to the multimodal essay, clear pedagogical models are necessary for explaining how core aspects of the traditional essay are refigured in digital multimodal writing, including formulating and expressing a thesis or argument, identifying and integrating appropriate forms of evidence, and organizing a cohesive text. In addition, expectations should be specific to year and experience levels.

Despite a highlighted enthusiasm for and willingness to experiment with multimodal composition, the results of this study reveal that collaborative essay writing is a new, though not unwelcome, competency for students, particularly in literary studies. The third and fourth themes focused on student perceptions of collaborative writing. Additional studies specifically examining collaborative digital multimodal writing are needed. This project included both collaborative and individual composition elements. Reinforcing earlier studies on collaborative writing, students perceived the benefits of collaborative writing in terms of increased learning and building social relationships (Deveci, 2018; Storch, 2015; Sun & Yuan, 2017). Although students in this study specifically highlighted the difficulty of bringing disparate ideas from group members together into a cohesive argument, they also noted that this was a productive challenge of collaboration, teaching them to recognise the diverse ideas and approaches that others bring to the same topic as well as expanding their own ideas and analyses of texts. Unlike Chen and Yu (2019) , which found that students can perceive group work as undermining one’s own competency, the students in our study reported increased confidence in skills and receiving feedback. Student responses repeatedly highlighted how working together improved positive perceptions of their own contributions and made them more comfortable not only receiving but also soliciting feedback on their work from group members. The collaborative nature of the project also prompted students to reflect on and compliment the efforts and talents of their classmates.

In terms of digital affordances, the fifth theme in student responses, students voiced both positive and negative perceptions of Scalar as a multimodal composition platform, supplementing previous research on the use of Scalar in tertiary classrooms (Tracy & Hoiem, 2017; Tracy, 2016). Some study participants, especially those with prior computer programming or digital writing experience, enjoyed the platform’s diverse functionality. More were frustrated by the perceived complexity of the platform, including its learning curve and processes for uploading and incorporating media files. Several students highlighted the professional and visually-pleasing product as a positive outcome of their extra efforts. Students did not indicate that the specific digital platform’s affordances or their own capability unduly shaped or limited the final product, unlike in DePalma and Alexander (2015). Rather, their frustration focused on time and practical demands. While we were aware of the importance of devoting ample class time to technology instruction and exploration, this instruction did not fully allay student frustration. Certainly, frustration and failure are part of the learning process, especially in digital work (Harris, 2013). However, it remains important for instructors to provide sufficient time, flexibility, and support in the project so that frustration serves a productive and motivating purpose, rather than transforming into anxiety and resentment. Viewing the finished product and recognizing the potentially larger audience of a web-based publication helped mitigate this process frustration for most students, resulting in feelings of pride and accomplishment at the end of the project.

Even as specific digital tools used in the classroom can be a source of frustration, digital literacies and competencies are essential 21^st-century knowledge forms. Those respondents in the study who mentioned technology in the classroom all voiced a desire for increased exposure to and experience with digital technologies in their education, whether to connect different aspects of their present lives or to benefit their futures (Theme 6). Specific proponents of digital multimodal writing argue for its relevance in a digitally mediated world (Hafner, 2015). In their examination of multimodality in Composition instruction, Takayoshi and Selfe (2007) note that effective twenty-first century communication will require digital multimodal literacies – the ability to read and write in images, animations, video, and audio. Likewise, the number of digital applications and platforms that support collaborative writing continues to grow, emphasising the relevance and applicability of these skills outside of the classroom. Study findings of student perceptions suggest that digital writing and the ability to incorporate diverse media, both contemporary and historical, can help enliven the content and enhance the relevancy of students’ classes. In addition, digital writing more closely aligns with their own personal communicative practices, allowing a clearer connection and exchange between learning and living. Students also perceive the value of digital competencies as helping them prepare for careers and the ‘real world.’

Conclusion

As writing moves from page to screen, the language we use and the structures in which we write also change, shifting not only the forms of writing, but also the concept of ‘author’ (Lauer, 2009, p. 227). Collaborative and multimodal practices of composition are made possible, which emphasize social processes of writing and diverse ways of knowing and modes of expression. Amid the emergence of digital technologies that have transformed communication and education – and accelerated amid a global pandemic – the traditional essay should also be reconsidered. The traditional essay is an international form; it is the foundation of required introductory writing and composition courses and is found in classrooms ranging from literary studies to psychology to engineering to business. It may take different forms across these disciplines, but whether it is an essay exam, a report, a term paper, a research paper, or an analytical essay, it retains basic properties: an individual solitary author, the singular instructor-as-audience, and a restrictive and formulaic form. Digital collaborative writing and multimodal composition have the potential to transform the staid essay into a creative, collaborative, and ethical mode of teaching and learning. In light of today’s digital and global networks of communication, we need more expansive and diverse pedagogical tools and methods that embrace collaboration, utilise and critique relevant technologies, and teach students to express ideas in different modes.

But change, especially to a form so historically entwined with higher education, is neither quick nor easy. In moving from writing traditional essays to collaborative digital multimodal composition, students also have to contend with new models of collaborative authorship and knowledge practices, incorporating media with text in their writing, and expanding their conception of the forms and functions of academic writing. This study examined the perceptions of undergraduate students of collaborative digital multimodal composition as an alternative to the traditional single-authored research essay. Study participants held widely positive perceptions of collaborative multimodal writing, highlighting its increased opportunity for creativity, how it empowered them to incorporate aspects of their own informational and communication practices, increased their appreciation of writing in a digital context, enhanced their relationships with peers, and helped them build writing confidence. Students also recognized the value of the project beyond the classroom, acknowledging their investment in digital communication networks and the necessity of developing digital literacies and competencies in their future careers and personal lives. Specific challenges remain in expanding perceptions of the category of ‘academic writing’ into forms of writing other than the traditional essay, building facility in adapting writing conventions and style across different forms of writing, as well as learning new digital tools for collaborative and multimodal composition.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).