Bibliography (2/26)

Bowen, T. (2017). Assessing visual literacy: a case study of developing a rubric for identifying and applying criteria to undergraduate student learning. Teaching in Higher Education, 1-15.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2017.1289507

I found this article by searching Google Scholar for texts citing Graphesis. Bowen’s piece focuses on multi-modal literacy assessments in higher education. Bowen claims that assessments from this perspective “have not moved much beyond the traditional written texts outside art and design disciplines.” Bowen proposes a Visual Literacy Competency (VLC) rubric and offers suggestions for assignment assessment in two undergraduate communications courses. [JS]

Lorber-Kasunic, J., & Sweetapple, K. (2015). Visualising texts: a design practice approach to humanities data. In Digital Research in the Humanities and Arts Conference. DRHA.

I found this article by searching Google Scholar for texts citing Graphesis. Lorber-Kasunic and Sweetapple’s piece addresses the fact that many forms of visual representation do not reflect core concerns of humanities research because they operate using the conceptual and visual language of scientific positivism. The authors argue that metaphorical and analogical approaches to textual visualization may better serve the cause from a humanities focus. [JS]

Danesi, M. (2016). The Semiotics of Emoji: The Rise of Visual Language in the Age of the Internet. Bloomsbury Publishing.

I found this article by searching Google Scholar for texts citing Graphesis. Danesi’s book elaborates on the use of emojis from a meaning-making, or semiotic, perspective. The book avoids the use of technical lexicon and some notions of theoretical semiotics so that a lay audience more easily understands it. Danesi posits that the use of emoji code may indicate how writing and literacy are evolving. [JS]

Gorichanaz, T. & Latham, K.F. (2016). Document phenomenology: a framework for holistic analysis. Journal of Documentation, Vol. 72 (6), 1114 – 1133.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.108/JD-01-2016-0007

I found this article by searching Google Scholar for texts citing Graphesis. In this piece, Gorichanaz and Latham propose a phenomenological framework for document analysis. Key concepts of this framework include “intrinsic information, extrinsic information, abtrinsic information, and adtrinsic information,” where information and meaning are distinguished. The authors look at individual documents, but also parts of documents and documents as systems. [JS]

Brown, S. (2015). Remediating the Editor.Interdisciplinary Science Reviews40(1), 78-94.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1179/0308018814Z.000000000106

I found this article by searching Google Scholar for texts citing Graphesis. In this article, Brown purposes that various interfaces for writing and editing influence the interface users – and by extension, the conditions of digital scholarly knowledge production. Brown believes that cultural inflections of these interfaces create “tensions endemic to socialized and networked scholarship [which] is increasingly crucial as reading and consumption merge with writing and production.” [JS]