Print-based multimodal texts: Using illustrated poems for generating ideas and writing narratives

Thusha Devi Rajendra, Surinderpal Kaur


The article provides insights on how print-based multimodal texts can be utilized to generate ideas and help students to write narrative texts. A qualitative approach in research design was employed with a pre-test and a writing assignment. NAPLAN’s (2010) Writing-Narrative Marking Guide was adapted to evaluate the respondents’ narrative essays. Moreover, diary notes were used as instruments to gather data. The respondents were five Year 10 students from a suburban secondary school in Selangor, Malaysia. The findings indicated that the illustrated poem ‘Pond’ enabled the respondents to generate ideas for their writing. The narratives also fulfilled the criteria of text structure, ideas, character and setting, and vocabulary as stated in the Analytical Rubric for Narrative Marking. Therefore, the respondents were able to write narratives. However, the utilisation of picture stimulus only helped to generate ideas to a certain extent. The quality of narrative writing was also further improved through feedback provided during the teaching and learning sessions. The findings also revealed that the respondents were able to achieve the ‘can do’ statement as stated in the CEFR Assessment Format. Furthermore, the use of print-based multimodal texts encouraged multimodal and visual literacy as the respondents exploited semiotic resources within the texts. This study suggested that print-based multimodal texts could be used as instructional materials in narrative writing; thus, teachers should consider them to promote effective learning.


multimodal texts; narrative writing; print-based; semiotic resources

Full Text:



Alvarez Valencia, J. A. (2016). Meaning making and communication in the multimodal age: Ideas for language teachers. Colombian Applied Linguistics Journal, 18(1), 98-115.

Azman, H. (2016). Implementation and challenges of English language education reform in Malaysian primary schools. 3L: The Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies, 22(3), 65-78.

Bateman, J. A. (2008). Multimodality and genre: A foundation for the systematic analysis of multimodal documents. Palgrave Macmillan.

Bentahar, O., & Cameron, R. (2015). Design and implementation of a mixed method research study in project management. Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 13(1), 2-15.

Blake, J. (2009). Using the poetry archive in the English classroom. English Drama Media, 13, 24-28.

Brandt, S. (2004). [Review of the book Multimodal discourse: The modes and media of contemporary communication by G. Kress & T. van Leeuwen]. Language in Society, 33(1), 115-118.

Chan, S. H., Abdullah, A. N., & Tan, H. (2003). Malaysian ESL academic writing skills: Establishing knowledge bases, attitudes and processes. Studies in Foreign Language Education, 18(10), 143-156.

Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. Pearson Education, Inc.

Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage Publications Ltd.

Crossley, S. A., Muldner, K., & McNamara, D. S. (2016). Idea generation in student writing: Computational assessments and links to successful writing. Written Communication, 33(3), 328-354.

Darus, S., & Subramaniam, K. (2009). Error analysis of the written English essays of Secondary school students in Malaysia: A case study. European Journal of Social Sciences, 8(3), 483-495.

Droga, L., & Humprey, S. (2003). Grammar and meaning: An introduction for primary teachers. Target Text.

Fhonna, R. (2014). The difficulties faced by students in producing free-writing: A study at STKIP Bina Bangsa Getsempena. Studies in English Language and Education, 1(1), 13-28.

Foo, T. C. V. (2007). The effects of the process-genre approach to writing instructions on the expository essays of ESL students in a Malaysian secondary school. [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Universiti Sains Malaysia.

Ganapathy, M., & Seetharam, S. (2016). The effects of using multimodal approaches in meaning making of 21st century literacy texts among ESL students in a private school in Malaysia. Advances in Language and Literary Studies, 7(2), 143-155.

Gibbons, A. (2012). Multimodality, cognition and experimental literature. Routledge.

Goldstein, B. (2016). Visual literacy in English language teaching: Part of the Cambridge papers in ELT series [pdf]. Cambridge University Press.

Graham, J. B., & Scott, S. (illustrator). (1994). Splish splash. Houghton Mifflin Company.

Guijarro, J. M., & Sanz, M. J. (2009). On interaction of image and verbal text in a picture book: A multimodal and systemic functional study. In E. Ventola & J. M Guijarro (Eds.), The world told and the world shown: Multisemiotic issues (pp. 107-123). Palgrave MacMillan.

Husarova, Z. (2012). A method of teaching multimodal creative writing. Studies in Foreign Language Education, 4(1).

Hutchison, A., & Reinking, D. (2011). Teachers’ perceptions of integrating information and communication technologies into literacy instruction: A national survey in the United States. Reading Research Quarterly, 46(4), 312-333.

Jalaluddin, I., Md Yunus, M., & Yamat, H. (2011). Improving Malaysian rural learners’ writing skill: A case study. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15, 1845-1851.

Kaur, S., & Sidhu, G. (2007). Using the multiliteracies approach to promote English literature in higher education. Asian Journal of University Education, 3(1), 111-132.

Lewis, D. (2001). Reading contemporary picture books: Picturing text. Routledge Falmer.

Ler, E. C. (2012). Cultural factors influencing English proficiency in rural areas. Advances in Language and Literary Studies, 3(1), 1-23.

Lim, S. P., & Wong, M. M. R. (2015). Selfie: Engaging life experiences into writing. Malaysian Journal of Distance Education, 17(2), 51-66.

Madarina, A., Rahman, A., Nazri, M., Azmi, L., & Hassan, I. (2020). Improvement of English writing skills through Blended Learning among university students in Malaysia. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 8(12), 7694-7701.

Malaysian Education Blueprint (MEB) 2013-2025. (2013).

Maros, M., Tan, K.H., & Salehuddin. K. (2007). Interference in learning English: Grammatical errors in English essay writing among rural Malay secondary students in Malaysia. Journal e-Bangi, 2(2), 1-15.

Mathison, S., & Freeman, M. (1997, March 24-28). The logic of interdisciplinary studies [Paper presentation]. Annual Meeting of the American

Educational Research Association, Chicago, US.

Ministry of Education Malaysia (2013). Malaysia education blueprint 2013-2025 (Preschool to post-secondary education). Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia.

Nallaya, S. (2010). The impact of multimodal texts on the development of English language proficiency [Doctoral dissertation, The University of Adelaide]. Adelaide Research and Scholarship.

National Assessment Program, Literacy and Numeracy. (2010). 2016 writing marking guide [Guidebook]. Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority.

Pillai, S., & Vengadasamy, R. (2010). Developing understanding and appreciation of literature & critical reading concepts through multimodal approaches. Malaysian Journal of ELT Research, 6, 133-166.

Pond Maintenance. (2018). How to reduce algae in a pond.

Purba, R. (2018). Improving the achievement of writing narrative text through discussion starter story technique. Advances in Language and Literary Studies, 9(1), 27-30.

Puteh-Behak, F., & Ismail, I. R. (2018). Multiliteracies project approach: Dated or a worthy learning tool? GEMA Online® Journal of Language Studies, 18(2), 312-334.

Rajendra, T. R. (2015). Multimodality in Malaysian classrooms: The case for graphic novel. The Malaysian Online Journal of Educational Science, 3(2), 11-20.

Richards, J. C., & Renandya, W. A. (2006). Methodology in language teaching. Cambridge University Press.

Serafini, F. (2014). Reading the visual: An introduction to teaching multimodal literacy. Teachers College Press.

Serafini, F. (2015). Multimodal literacy: From theories to practices. Language Arts, 92(6), 412-423.

Sovakandan, H., Jaganathan, P., & Husain, F.M. (2018). Investigating low proficiency ESL students’ perception of the use of i-Think Maps in writing practices. Malaysian Journal of ELT Research, 14(2), 1-13.

Waters, M., & Waters, A. (1995). Study tasks in English. Cambridge University Press.

Wiggins, G. (2012). Seven keys to effective feedback. Educational Leadership, 70(1), 10-16.

Xerri, D. (2012). Poetry teaching and multimodality: Theory into practice. Creative Education, 3(4), 507-512.

Yamaç, A., & Öztürk, E. (2018). An evaluation of Turkish primary school teachers’ practices and perceptions of teaching writing: A mixed method study. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 33(4), 846-867.



  • There are currently no refbacks.

Print ISSN: 2355-2794, Online ISSN: 2461-0275

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.