weave across texts, and these offer an analytical tool to explore multimodal meaning
of a text. Here the focus is not on modes, or meta-functions but on larger scale
principles such as design, production, frame etc (Kress and van Leeuwen, 2001).
I use these three approaches to multimodality in combination as each offers a
different scale and perspective for the analysis of meaning. Moving from the semiotic
resource and individual modes, to semiotic principles at the level of text opens up
different ways to think about meaning.
I bring together the multimodal resources of the two levels of screen, and ofclassroom
interaction to explore the semiotic resources made available for meaning making in
technology mediated learning. The range of modes made available by computer
applications and their use is analysed in the thesis including image, colour, sound-
effect, voice, movement and gesture, and gaze. I also analyse students’ use of modes
in their multimodal interaction with the computer and one another. This includes
movement, gesture, and gaze with the computer (the screen, mouse, keys, etc.), and
talk.
The concept of ‘modal affordance’ and ‘logic’ contribute to understanding the
specific functions of modes in a computer text and student interaction with these. I
use these concepts to explore when and how modes are used to mean in instances of
technology mediated learning. These concepts also suggest that the transduction of
information across modes is one key to learning. The concept of ‘materiality’ is
applied to examine how the texture and material provenance of elements as they
appear on screen enter into meaning. For instance, in Chapter Five, I discuss how the
materiality of Toontalk tools changes when the user selects a tool. I show that the
different material realisation of the tools, from the materiality of hard plastic blocks
to soft pliable organic forms when they are selected, signifies their changed
‘usability’ of the tools and the control of the user.
66