[Skip to content]

100 YEARS OF NEW MEDIA PEDAGOGY

Jason Palmeri / Ben McCorkle

Visualizing the Archive

Introduction

In this chapter, we present and discuss numerous interactive visualizations of trends we have noticed unfolding over time in our corpus of 766 articles about new media in English Journal. We begin by presenting visualizations of the corpus as a whole, and then we turn to presenting comparative visualizations of similarities and differences in the trends we observed in the four most common forms of media we found in our corpus: radio, film/video, television, and computer. Our visualizations elucidate patterns in how the articles conceptualized new media as tools for student composing and/or as objects of analysis. We also track numerous recurring, ideological topoi that have been associated with media pedagogies over time (e.g., the claim that new media are engaging for students, or the claim that the new media are harming alphabetic literacy, to name just a couple).

Zooming into the level of individual words, we then present word clouds and interactive line graphs that highlight some of the most prominent words in our corpus in each decade. These word frequency data were generated through machine reading, although we then made very human rhetorical choices about how to visualize them. In many ways, our word frequency visualizations confirm trends in media lifespans that we’d already begun to see in earlier graphs, but they also call our attention to some aspects of how new media pedagogies have been (re)conceptualized over time that only became apparent through machine reading rather than through human coding. The video below offers a brief overview of the various interactive visualizations featured in this chapter, how to manipulate them, and the types of questions such interactions might prompt.

As we present these visualizations, we speculate about the trends we’ve observed—demonstrating how data visualization can enable us to ask new questions and to challenge common assumptions about the field’s history. We start questioning, for example, why film and radio production pedagogies spiked when these media were new and then dwindled over time, or why the field never really saw the television as a medium for production. In the end, we find that our graphs helped us ask new questions about our field’s history, but the use of thin description methods alone did not enable us to offer nuanced contextual answers to these questions. As a result, we see these graphs as springboards that have inspired the more detailed case studies of particular new media moments that we offer in chapters 4 through 7.