Tracing Ecologies of Code Literacy and Constraint in Emojis: A Critical Response

In their article "Tracing Ecologies of Code Literacy and Constraint in Emojis as Multimodal Public Pedagogy," Kellie Gray and Steve Holmes bring forth intriguing ideas about the discrepancies between the code and glyph of emojis and the nuances of constraints. However, as I delved deeper into their discussion, I found myself overall disappointed with the article's practical applicability.

One of the main issues I encountered was the lack of solid suggestions for application within a classroom setting. While the article touches on significant concepts, it falls short of offering concrete teaching practices. The two pedagogical case studies presented in the article seemed to focus more on the results of teacher research rather than the teaching practices themselves. This approach left me wanting more actionable insights that I could directly implement in my high school classrooms.

The key takeaway for me from the article is that emojis are more complex than they appear, and there are inherent biases written into coding languages, including the number of characters different emojis use. While there are certainly places to teach about code and reading it, I don't think the extremely nuanced examination of code is necessarily useful in an English classroom. Typically, we do not deal with computer languages. Teaching rhetoric and writing in public forms is important, but the focus in a high school classroom is to prepare students for college-level writing. An extensive lesson on emojis and the nuances of their coding is neither appropriate nor feasible given the other material we need to cover. It could be good to incorporate into a lesson about rhetoric and visual mediums, but not to the extent suggested in the article.

The biggest challenge is time. If I wanted to have a lesson about emoji rhetoric, it would most likely be in my AP classroom, as I don't see such a lesson fitting thematically into my ninth-grade course. Additionally, my 14 and 15-year-old students may not yet have the cognitive development to see and understand these nuances and their implications. Yet, my AP classroom has the explicit purpose of teaching students about rhetoric and writing while also preparing them for a very specific exam. I already have a condensed schedule compared to public schools, so there simply is not time to do everything.

Another challenge is knowledge and understanding. While the writers claim they are not arguing for teachers to be proficient in code, there is still a certain level of knowledge and understanding about computer languages and coding that one would need to teach this concept. How and when am I supposed to gain this knowledge? And just for a single lesson? It's impractical. There is already a massive burden on teachers to suddenly be experts in various subjects and literacies. It is simply not possible.

In conclusion, while Gray and Holmes provide a thought-provoking exploration of code literacy and constraint in emojis, the article's lack of practical teaching applications and the demanding nature of the suggested activities limit its usefulness in a high school setting. Educators need more support and resources to effectively translate these theoretical concepts into meaningful classroom practices. For now, the complexities of emojis and their coding may remain an interesting topic for theoretical discussion rather than practical classroom application.