I chose to redesign my Task 1 into an interactive artifact as part of a hypermedia environment. The primary inspiration for this decision was reading Dobson and Willinsky (2009), where I first encountered Apple’s HyperCard. I was surprised by how this 1987 software utilized a stack of cards linked both sequentially and associatively, which closely resembles the non-linear platforms we use today. To bridge this concept with modern medium, I utilized Genially to transform my static blog post into an interactive, non-linear artifact.
My goal was to redesign the way the audience interacts with my belongings. While a picture and its accompanying text are something to be watched and read, an interactive slide is something to be “participated in.” By using Genially, I transformed my bag from a static spatial collection into a hypermedia landscape where each item functions as a node. In Task 1, the narrative was linear and the reader followed my pre-set order. In this redesign, information is hidden until the user actively clicked on an item, fostering curiosity and the joy of exploration. This shift in medium affords the reader agency, allowing them to prioritize what they find interesting and navigate the space according to their own logic.
Intentional Multimodality and Author as Designer
To enhance the multimodal experience, I added background music and sound effects (typing, paper rustling, pen scratching) to establish a specific “feel” for the artifact. I chose to keep the audio player UI visible on the screen to make my intentional use of multimodality explicit even though this might be less visually clean. While I allowed readers the option to mute the background track, I designed sound effects to play automatically upon clicking an item, balancing user control with my authorial intent to create a cohesive sensory experience.
This mode-bending process transformed the audience from passive consumers into “Designers” of their own meaning (The New London Group, 1996). According to Dobson and Willinsky (2009), digital visual objects possess a unique quality through compositing. Unlike my original Task 1 photo, where all items were captured through a single lens in a fixed arrangement, this remediated artifact treats each object as an individual digital component. This affordance allowed me to manipulate the visual hierarchy; for instance, I shrunk the size of my AirPods to de-emphasize them, a level of authorial control that was difficult in the original photograph.
This redesigning was not without its difficulties. I struggled with the visual quality when removing backgrounds from my personal photos, leading me to use high-quality web images for standard items (like my MacBook) while retaining original photos for my unique personal items. Furthermore, the shift from linguistic prose to slide-based text forced me to condense my original writing. As Kress (2005) notes every mode shift involves gains and losses, in this process of reconfiguration, the neat, ordered feeling of the original linguistic design was lost, replaced by a more fragmented and dynamic structure that gained interactivity.
Final Reflection: Agency and Education
Reflecting on my previous Twine assignment, I began to question the true nature of agency. Is it genuine choice if the reader is picking from a pre-designed system? However, as The New London Group (1996) suggests, meaning-making is an active process of transforming and redesigning available resources even for readers. The reader’s agency comes with a stronger responsibility to select and interpret information critically. This reinforces why fostering critical thinking and an analytical attitude is paramount in modern education. In an era of information fluidity, teaching students how to navigate and redesign their own paths critically is more vital than ever.
Gemini (Google, 2026) was used to refine the grammar, spelling, and overall clarity of this post.
References
Dobson, T., & Willinsky, J. (2009). Digital literacy Download Digital literacy. In D. R. Olson & N. Torrance (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of literacy (pp. 286-312). Cambridge University Press.
Kress, G. (2005), Gains and losses: New forms of texts, knowledge, and learning. Computers and Composition, 2(1), 5-22.
The New London Group. (1996). A pedagogy of multiliteracies: Designing social futures. Harvard Educational Review 66(1), 60-92.
