Mapping undergraduates’ engagement through multimodal composing

References

• Anderson, K. T., Stewart, O., & Kachorsky, D. (2017). Seeing academically marginalised students’ multimodal designs from a position of strength. Written Communication, 34(2), 104–134. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088317699897
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Appleton, J. J., Christenson, S. L., & Furlong, M. J. (2008). Student engagement with school: Critical conceptual and methodological issues of the construct. Psychology in the Schools, 45(5), 369–386. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.20303
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117(3), 497–529. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.117.3.497
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Belcher, D. (2017). On becoming facilitators of multimodal composing and digital design. Journal of Second Language Writing, 38, 80–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2017.10.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benson, P. (2001). Teaching and researching autonomy in language learning. Pearson Education.
   Google Scholar
• Bezemer, J., & Kress, G. (2016). Multimodality, learning, and communication: A social semiotic frame. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Christenson, S. L., & Reschly, A. L. (2012). In C. Wylie(Ed.), Handbook of research on students engagement. Springer Science + Business Media.
   Google Scholar
• Cimasko, T., & Shin, D. (2017). Multimodal resemiotization and authorial agency in an L2 writing classroom. Written Communication, 34(4), 387–413. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088317727246
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Darvin, R., & Norton, B. (2017). Language, identity, and investment in the 21st century. In T. McCarty & S. May (Eds.), Language policy and political issues in education. Encyclopedia of language and education (pp. 227–240). Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (Eds.). (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination research. University of Rochester Press.
   Google Scholar
• Dörnyei, Z. (2007). Research methods in applied linguistics. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fredrick, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59–109. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074001059
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hafner, C. A. (2015). Remix culture and English language teaching: The expression of learner voice in digital multimodal compositions. TESOL Quarterly, 49(3), 486–509. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.238
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hafner, C. A. (2020). DigitaL multimodal composing: How to address multimodal communication forms in ELT. English Teaching, 75(3), 133–146. https://doi.org/10.15858/engtea.75.3.202009.133
   Google Scholar
• Hafner, C. A., & Miller, L. (2011). Fostering learner autonomy in English for science: A collaborative digital video project in a technological learning environment. Language Learning & Technology, 15(3), 68–86. https://doi.org/10.125/44263
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Helme, S., & Clarke, D. (2001). Identifying cognitive engagement in the mathematics classroom. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 13(2), 133 153. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03217103
   Google Scholar
• Hiver, P., Al-Hoorie, A. H., & Mercer, S. (2020). Student engagement in the language classroom. Multilingual Matters.
   Google Scholar
• Hull, G., & Nelson, M. E. (2005). Locating the semiotic power of multimodality. Written Communication, 22(2), 224–261. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088304274170
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ito, M., Baumer, S., Bittanti, M., Boyd, D., Cody, R., & Herr, B. (2010). Hanging out, messing around, geeking out: Kids living and learning with new media. MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jewitt, C. (2006). Technology, literacy, learning: A multimodal approach. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Jiang, L. (2018). Digital multimodal composing and investment change in learners’ writing in English as a foreign language. Journal of Second Language Writing, 40, 60–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2018.03.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jiang, L., & Luk, J. (2016). Multimodal composing as a learning activity in English classrooms: Inquiring into the sources of its motivational capacity. System, 59, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2016.04.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kendrick, M., Early, M., & Chemjor, W. (2013). New literacies in a rural Kenyan girls’ secondary school journalism club. Research in the Teaching of English, 47(4), 391–419.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kitalong, K. S., & Miner, R. L. (2017). Multimodal composition pedagogy designed to enhance authors’ personal agency: Lessons from non-academic and academic composing environments. Computers and Composition, 46(1), 39–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2017.09.007
   Google Scholar
• Knobel, M. (2017). Remix, literacy and creativity: An analytic review of the research literature. Eesti Haridusteaduste Ajakiri/Estonian Journal of Education, 5(2), 31–53. https://doi.org/10.12697/eha.2017.5.2.02b
   Google Scholar
• Kress, G. (2003). Literacy in the new media age. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Kress, G. (2010). Multimodality: A social semiotic approach to contemporary communication. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Kress, G., & van Leeuwen, T. (1996). Reading images: The grammar of visual design. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Ledin, P., & Machin, D. (2020). Introduction to multimodal analysis (2nd ed.). Bloomsbury Academic.
   Google Scholar
• Liang, W. J., & Lim, F. V. (2020). A pedagogical framework for digital multimodal composing in the English Language classroom. Innovation in Language learning and teaching. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Lim, F. V., & Tan-Chia, L. (2023). Designing learning for multimodal literacy: Teaching viewing and representing. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Lim, F. V., & Toh, W. (2020). How to teach digital reading? Journal of Information Literacy, 14(2), 24–43. https://doi.org/10.11645/14.2.2701
   Google Scholar
• Loewen, S., Shaofeng, L., Thompson, A., Nakatsukasa, K., Seongmee, A., & Xiaoqing, C., CHEN, X. (2009). Second language learners’ beliefs about grammar instruction and error correction. The Modern Language Journal, 93, 91–104. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2009.00830.x 1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Malone, T. W., & Lepper, M. R. (1987). Making learning fun: A taxonomy of intrinsic motivations for learning. In R. E. Snow & M. J. Farr (Eds.), Aptitude, Learning, and Instruction Volume 3: Conative and Affective Process Analyses (pp. 223–253). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Mercer, S., & Dörnyei, Z. (2020). Engaging language learners in contemporary classrooms. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Norton, B. (2000). Identity and language learning: Gender, ethnicity and educational change. Pearson Education.
   Google Scholar
• Patall, E. A., Pituch, K. A., Steingut, R. R., Vasquez, A. C., Yates, N., & Kennedy, A. A. U. (2019). Agency and high school science students’ motivation, engagement, and classroom support experiences. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 62, 77–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2019.01.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (2nd ed.). Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Philp, J., & Duchesne, S. (2016). Exploring engagement in tasks in the language classroom. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 36, 50–72. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0267190515000094
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reeve, J. (2012). A self-determination theory perspective on student engagement. In S. L. Christenson, A. L. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 149–172). Springer Science + Business Media.
   Google Scholar
• Sang, Y., & Hiver, P. (2021). Engagement and companion constructs in language learning: Concepualizing learners’ involvement in the L2 classroom. In P. Hiver, A. H. Al-Hoorie, & S. Mercer (Eds.), Student engagement in the language classroom (pp. 17–37). Multilingual Matters.
   Google Scholar
• Shetzer, H., & Warschauer, M. (2000). An electronic literacy approach to network-based language teaching. In M. Warschauer & R. Kern (Eds.), Network-based language teaching: Concepts and practice (pp. 171–185). Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sinatra, G. M., Heddy, B. C., & Lombardi, D. (2015). The challenges of defining and measuring student engagement in science. Educational Psychologist, 50(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2014.1002924
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stetsenko, A. (2019). Radical-transformative agency: Continuities and contrasts with relational agency and implications for education. Frontiers in Education, 4. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2019.00148
   Google Scholar
• Towndrow, P. A., Nelson, M. E., & Yusuf, W. F. B. M. (2013). Squaring literacy assessment with multimodal design: An analytic case for semiotic awareness. Journal of Literacy Research, 45(4), 327–355. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086296X13504155
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Unsworth, L. (2008). Multiliteracies and Metalanguage: Describing image/text relations as a resource for negotiatingmultimodal texts. In J. Coiro, M. Knobel, C. Lankshear, & D. J. Leu (Eds.), Handbook of research of new literacies (pp. 377–405). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Ushioda, E. (2008). Motivation and good language learners. In I. I. A. I. Griffiths (Ed.), Lessons from good language learners (pp. 19–34). Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• van Leeuwen, T. (2017). Multimodal literacy. Knowledge About Reading, 21, 4–11.
   Google Scholar
• van Lier, L. (2000). From input to affordance: Social-interactive learning from an ecological perspective. In J. P. Lantolf (Ed.), Sociocultural theory and second language learning (pp. 245–259). Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• van Lier, L. (2007). Action-based teaching, autonomy, and identity. International Journal of Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 1(1), 46–65. https://doi.org/10.2167/illt42.0
   Google Scholar
• Vasudevan, L., Schultz, K., & Bateman, J. (2010). Rethinking composing in a digital age: Authoring literate identities through multimodal storytelling. Written Communication, 27(4), 442–268. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088310378217
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yang, Y., & Wu, W. (2012). Digital storytelling for enhancing student academic achievement, critical thinking, and learning motivation: A year-long experimental study. Computers & Education, 59(2), 339–352. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.12.012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yarosh, S., Bonsignore, E., McRoberts, S., & Peyton, T. (2016). Youth tube: Youth video authorship on YouTube and Vine. Proceedings of the 19th ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing-CSCW (Vol. 16, pp. 1421–1435). https://doi.org/10.1145/2818048.2819961
   Google Scholar