Distributing the Modal Load: the Oral Presentation Ensemble and Professional Identity Formation

Scenario Learning and Pedagogy (SLP) involves immersing an entire university professional communication course within a selected sustainable business practice scenario. This article focuses on the draft and final oral presentations of two teams who chose recycling and sustainable building practices as their institutional “workplace” scenarios respectively. A semiotic and metafunctional approach combined with authorial identity markers produced a sound theoretical frame and methodology against which a multi-layered analysis and comparison of their presentations could be instantiated. Video recordings of both their rehearsal and final presentations allowed for fine-grained scrutiny of selected video clips to focus a lens on various verbal and non-verbal elements of communication such as speech, vocal intonation and projection, dress (appearance), posture, gesture and movement, eye contact and gaze behaviour, and facial expression. The emergence of confidence as a proxy of growing professional identity to a greater or lesser extent could be determined within each team. How each team member leveraged their linguistic and cultural backgrounds, age, gender and scenario knowledge provided individual as well as collective insights into the team dynamic. Although some team members fared better than others, their collective support worked to suppress weaknesses and disjunctures to the benefit of the team effort.

The affordances and constraints of modes add nuanced complexity to meaning making as teams grapple with choices and combinations (Kress & Van Leeuwen, 2006). As students have a rehearsal before the final presentation, changes are negotiated with facilitator and peers for teams to ask questions and interrogate assumptions, resolve disjunctures and inconsistencies, transform their presentational practices and strengthen coherence and confidence in a simulated professional setting.
Although participants are not professionals in the workplace, but students cast in a role-play scenario within an affinity space (Gee, 2003), these presentational practices allow them to explore emerging professional identity in order to narrow the gap between the classroom and the workplace. The inclusion of real professionals in the guise of consultants and audience members aims to contribute to their development as future professionals. This too becomes a collaborative ensemble as partners and audience members dialogically explore, negotiate and shape ideas towards transformed practice.

Modal Choices to Instantiate Professional Communication Practice and Identity
It is generally accepted that communicative aspects involving the body, territory and space are culturally embedded rather than universally determined (Grant & Borcherds, 2020;Davis, 2002;Kaschula & Antonissen, 1995;Trompenaars & Hampden-Turner, 1998). According to Kress (2010) modal reach is also culturally bound, not inherently "fixed". He (2010, p.11) argues that there is "no reason to assume that the 'modal division of labour' will be the same across societies". These differences may be quite profound. What too may be considered "professional" practice in one society may be frowned upon or taboo in another. Even within the same country so-called normative behaviours and practices may differ from community to community. Contradictions and differences in terms of gestural articulations, direct versus indirect eye contact, conventions of dress, gender and power relations and use of space and territory abound and may cause anxiety and confusion in diverse professional contexts. Being aware and accepting of difference and hybridity in dress codes is but one example which seems requisite in a multicultural global economy (Grant & Nodoba, 2009). Awareness of shifting global practices which are arguably more fluid and flexible than in the past increases the likelihood of divergence and convergence as equally salient (Rogers & Kincaid, 1981;Grant & Borcherds, 2020). What may have been seen as a disjuncture or "un-Western" in a hegemonic past, may today be contested and prove more acceptable in a landscape of change, provisionalism, innovation and shifting power relations. www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/csm Communication, Society and Media Vol. 3, No. 4, 2020 30 Published by SCHOLINK INC.
Despite other "voices" and ways of being, the pressure to conform to the dictates of a professional business presentation in contrast, say, to African oral traditions of story-telling, is strong and widely endorsed in boardrooms at the cost of anything "other". These contestations may cause a tension in assessment as pressures mount to privilege other voices and transform practice on a very different scale.
So, although shifting global imperatives and power relations may accelerate hybridity and contestation-and assessment practices may need to take stock of these changes-what is validated and privileged in business and industry falls subject to this hegemonic worldview. With so much cultural capital still invested in the West, corporate hegemony persists particularly in the world of corporate finance and management. English as the official language of government, business and education prescribes a certain bias which renders visibly (rules) and invisibly (norms) "how things are done around here". In other words, students get the message very early in their curricula as future accountants, auditors or financiers that their chances of success will improve if they "buy in" to the system and toe the corporate line. The stakes are high in terms of assessment too so students (and staff) are reluctant to take risks that may backfire. Already, in creating computer-mediated draft products at the planning stages, students confirm the need to appear "professional" according to a particular norm; this need is even more evident in presentations of their oral reports although there are a few instances where students have attempted to push the boundaries and this has become a growing trend in later presentations (Note 1).
Contrary to other ways of doing things, the so-called received wisdom in terms of presentational "graduateness" is set out in the table below.
In the analysis below, the discussion is initiated by looking at video as pedagogical tool before focusing on authorial stance and modality as instantiated through the dimensions of embodied speech. Two sets of frames as multimodal ensemble are then analysed, focusing on the orchestration of speech, gesture and facial expression including eye contact. How these modes may index matches and mismatches is analysed in both sections.

Video as a Tool for Teaching and Learning
In the  The use of video as pedagogical tool allows students to view themselves for reasons of personal evaluation and feedback. Although, according to Jewitt (2002, p.177), "[t]he camera encodes a viewing position, both in terms of distance and in angle of representation" to instantiate involvement of subjects and viewers or lack thereof, this was not the facilitator's primary intention in this instance. She was not attempting to make a video with scripted camera movement, for example. She did not plan her camera angles or shots but aimed to ensure a balance for each team member to provide opportunities at playback for students to get a good overall impression of their delivery style, both visually and aurally.
The sound was kept constant across the session which allowed for student feedback and comparison on vocal clarity, intonation and projection. The variation of shots with accompanying soundtrack also allowed me, as researcher, to select key analytical moments.

Authorial Stance as an Element of Professional Identity
Characteristics of a professional business stance are endorsement and cited authority, particularly in what Hyland (1999) calls, the "soft disciplines" such as business studies and professional communication as opposed to the "hard sciences". As professional identity may seem more blurred in these so-called soft disciplines than in "'established' professions" (Beck & Young, 2005, p. 188) such as engineering or medicine, for example, students may be more inclined to resort to opinion leaders and external sources for confirmation and substantiation of findings. Ideationally, more "overt intertextuality" (Hyland, 1999, p. 111) is evident in these interdisciplinary fields to construct knowledge, engage support, strengthen arguments and enhance professional identity. Students used both verbal and visual semiotic resources to underpin and reinforce mutual meaning-making and understanding, bolster confidence in themselves and their material and encourage the audience's confidence and trust in their delivery and content.

Authorial Voice and Modality
During both talks, speakers drew on their sources to substantiate their findings and boost their arguments. Lindiwe and Vusi (R) used data from several sources to foreground their argument and reinforce their authority. These included the Green Campus Initiative (GCI), Wasteman, a waste disposal company, institutional comparisons (for example, two local universities) and findings from prior studies on recycling data, practices and measures (for example, the War on Waste [WOW] campaign). Jenny and Hussein (SB) used local architectural data and global comparisons of green building practices (for example, London's "Gherkin" building) to imbue their findings, conclusions and recommendations with "truth" value. These examples and comparisons made verbally through speech and visually through embodied delivery and PowerPoint, aimed to enhance modality in a professional domain. Speech assisted by technology allowed speakers to "set out a claim, comment on its truth, establish solidarity and represent their credibility" (Hyland, 1999, p. 105 authoritative stance. During the question and answer session, Lindiwe (R) amused the audience when, in a parody of this convention, she commandeered a late team arrival as the "planned" arrival of the very "experts" she was awaiting to answer a particularly tricky question.
But we do have a team who have just walked in who will be…who are going to be talking about student communication in respect of, you know, the sustainability plan and communicating to students…

Figure 1. Lindiwe "welcoming another team of 'experts'"
As this team just happened to arrive at this point, she cleverly used coincidence in her role-play situation and hastily added them to her "script". This adroit improvisation worked to simulate a professional practice that got her "off the hook". Instead of undermining her authority, she was seen to enhance it by taking command of the situation and (re)negotiating contextual meaning with, presumably, a more "expert" other.
Earlier, during the rehearsal session, Lindiwe introduced the team's name incorrectly substituting "global" for "green" in their fictitious company name, Green Planet Consulting. This slip of the tongue also caused amusement as it seemed to elevate the team, their subject and context to a global stage rather than the more mundane recycling practices of a local institution. Attempts to instantiate a global identity and international benchmarking also aimed to elevate presentation content within both local and international contexts to enhance credibility in a professional domain. By introducing the iconic "Gherkin" building, Jenny and Hussein also introduced international benchmarking into their oral report to elevate the status of the sustainable building design content and context. Lindiwe and Jenny took responsibility for a greater proportion of their respective presentations from a primacy, timing and positioning perspective, confirming both their cultural capital and positions of power within the team (Bourdieu, 1991;Fairclough, 1992Fairclough, , 1995. During the rehearsal, Lindiwe delivered a straightforward introduction of the topic and speakers and spoke for nearly two minutes before handing over to Vusi who set out the objectives of recycling before giving a narrative account of the university's two major recycling projects. Lindiwe then finished off the presentation by comparing the efforts of both local universities. Of the 12 minutes they took during rehearsal (two minutes over the recommended time), Lindiwe spoke for seven. Feedback centred on the lack of a hook (Note 2) to command attention in the introduction and overly detailed and descriptive findings which lacked emphasis and impetus. Although they cut their final presentation by just over three minutes, Lindiwe's time "on stage" was double that of her partner whose narrative had been criticised the week before. She also reframed her comparison as an argument to encourage her institution to greater efforts so as not to be "outdone" by the other university. In the SB presentation, Jenny not only spoke for longer but was responsible for the international comparison, the more sophisticated part of the presentation. The sections Lindiwe and Jenny handled seemed to draw more audience attention, in part due to their wider application and internationalism. The type of content they presented was regarded as more "interesting" and "global" than the shorter, local sections handled by Vusi and Hussein. Audience attentiveness could also be attributed to length of section and the confident delivery style of both women. They seemed to have exercised more say in division of labour and content choice. Peer feedback during the rehearsal session may also have contributed to decision-making as both women received more positive feedback than their male partners.
Vocally, both Vusi and Hussein were more subdued and softly spoken than their female counterparts. In giving feedback during the rehearsal, facilitator and students focussed on vocal tone, projection and diction, describing their presentations as being somewhat "monotonous" and lacking "oomph". In Vusi's case, audibility was noted specifically. A steady voice, appropriate vocal projection and clear diction may serve as proxies for confidence and certainty whereas the opposite may be true reflecting heightened nervousness, anxiety and uncertainty. During the rehearsal, Lindiwe had started the recycling presentation. Besides reshaping the content, the order of speakers was also changed. Perhaps in a bid to boost Vusi's confidence and not keep him waiting, Lindiwe persuaded him to open the final presentation. Attempting to include a hook and enhance rapport, Vusi asked the audience a direct question. However, this backfired somewhat when he fumbled the wording.
Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Did you know that, er, waste recycling is the simplest way of saving….? Did you know that, er, waste recycling is the safest, is the simplest way of saving carbon emissions? Ninety percent of the energy used to recycle one tin can be saved by recycling one tin. His hesitant opening which saw him "start again" and repeat his opening question lowered modality in a professional domain and weakened his overall credibility, despite it being an arresting fact and a good idea as such. This repetition is typical of a rote learning style where speakers tend to recite their words.
If they stumble or get lost, they seem unable to improvise and continue but feel compelled to start again and repeat their script as learnt. Lindiwe took over at this point and was responsible for the full introduction including the objectives which Vusi had previously handled. He then discussed the university's contribution in a more conceptual categorical framing than "story-telling" narrative which strengthened the argument and audience rapport. Focusing less on a chronological account, this section was shorter, yet seemed sharper and more to the point. Lindiwe once again compared both universities using argument rather than description to weigh up implications. Being responsible for drawing conclusions and making recommendations also put her in a powerful position as primary decision-maker. Her imperative style, persuading the university what they "should" and "must" do in future, served to reinforce professional modality. At the end of the presentation, Lindiwe confidently opened the floor to questions which she then answered, injecting the humour as previously mentioned when she commandeered the arrival of another team. The camera remained on her until the end. The fact that the audience's attention (and camera) stayed with her during the question session consolidated her leadership position and boosted her confidence as practitioner. Although Hussein listed their recommendations at the end of the SB presentation and called for questions, Jenny immediately took charge and answered them, once again highlighting her topic "ownership" and leadership credentials.
The firm notes of finality and friendly collegiality, coupled with the intelligent handling of questions, ensured an overall positive recency effect which left the audience satisfied with both presentations as a whole. Despite Vusi's hesitant start and Hussein's general nervousness, therefore, their joint presentations were regarded as textually more coherent, authoritative and professional than the earlier rehearsals.

Visual Modality and PowerPoint
As evident in Table 2, neither party used cue cards during their presentations nor was there any evidence of a written script. As can also be seen, each team used PowerPoint to augment their words and bodies. They used their slides on screen or the laptop as well as introductory turn-taking verbal links as mnemonic prompts and, having rehearsed the presentation the previous week, neither team relied too heavily on these discursive prompts nor did they merely read their bullet points. Despite the more reserved presentations of Vusi and Hussein, the teams' familiarity with their material, lack of notes, complementary verbal-visual slides and carefully negotiated division of labour enhanced their credibility as professional presenters.
The order of the slides followed and reflected the textual structure of the respective presentations, moving from the general to the particular. Lindiwe and Vusi designed eight slides comprising their title slide (see Table 2), an overview slide and three body slides on the Green Campus Initiative, Waste Management and university comparisons respectively. Their final slides comprised one each on

Conclusions, Recommendations and Questions. Jenny and Hussein created twelve slides comprising an
Introduction to Heating and Cooling Practices (two slides), one slide on the university's older buildings and five slides on the female residence they had selected to analyse, photographically depicting the building and its geographical location. These were followed by two slides on Sustainable Heating Measures, diagrammatically illustrated, two slides on Sustainable Cooling Plans with accompanying photographs and two more slides on other available methods, one of which displays a photograph entitled "London's Gherkin". The presentation ended with two final slides on Conclusions and Recommendations respectively. These slides represented the narrative and conceptual ordering frameworks that each speaker used to describe and explain past and current initiatives and recommend future action. Both teams also used classification (types of waste) and causal analysis (old versus new buildings) to provide evidence of their findings and further their recycling and sustainable business arguments.
The distribution of data across the slides varied as team members out of class negotiated what to depict on each. They had to consider the compositional relationship between visual and written text, areas of specialization of each and choices depending on what they were trying to achieve. A visual rather than verbal load was far greater in photographic, diagrammatic or graphic slides whereas the opposite was true of numbered lists of conclusions and recommendations. Others, like the recycling title slide in Table 2, juxtaposed the visual and verbal for shared emphasis. Using colour and providing a photographic display of the cooling features on the female residence and Gherkin building (SB report) and mounds of litter and colour-coded bins (R report) seems more apt and fit for purpose than describing them verbally. The modal logic and reach inherent in visual design is greater for audience interpretation, irrespective of linguistic competence. Besides representational accuracy and clarity, the affective impact of colour and image makes a lasting impression which persuasively reinforces the necessity of introducing cost-effective measures of building design and recycling. A verbal argument in the conclusions, followed by a list of implementation steps in the recommendations, contributes to enhanced cognition. The ideational, interpersonal and textual metafunctions are realised in speech, words, image and delivery style which together create an orchestrated ensemble of negotiated meaning making.
As speakers determined the pace of the presentation and when to change slides, the use of slide handouts served to compensate not only for pace, unloading rate and lack of persistence, but also for the partiality inherent in each slide. Acknowledging perhaps the fleeting nature of speech compared to writing, Jenny and Hussein also included their report executive summary on their handout to add value to their oral presentation. As these were distributed in advance, audiences could read ahead and move Jenny and Hussein physically took their own photographs and used diagrams provided by the architects.
The only picture they downloaded off the internet was of London's "Gherkin". The internet, acting as a conveyor and distributor of previously organised knowledge, provides opportunities (as do other sources) for transferring "ready-made" semiotic resources from one context to another to serve a different purpose. Lindiwe and Vusi used existing photographs made available by their sources at the university and Wasteman. Possibly reflecting the more fleeting nature of the oral genre, the fact that teams were "given" visual material or that they didn't see the need to "duplicate" their citation practices, saw very little acknowledgement of sources on slides. Lindiwe and Vusi also designed their own graphics in Word which they then imported into their PowerPoint presentation, displaying their familiarity with this specific software practice and numeracy in general.
The similar look of each slide created a unity of style which reinforced the impression that these were jointly authored presentations. They also used colour, spacing and bullets (at two levels) with indentation and font size variation to represent the various sub-levels. Each set of slides functioned as a summary to the oral presentation in similar fashion to the summary of the written report but, taken on its own, the slide presentation as genre seldom functions as a "standalone" product as it requires spoken verbiage to co-instantiate the slides. Although PowerPoint is often criticised for its reductionist and synoptic tendencies (Tufte, 2001;Grant & Borcherds, 2020;Martin, 2010), too much writing and continuous prose is contrary to good slide design. Presenters must be extremely selective in their verbal and visual choices and to view their slide presentation as a complementary product. Although this may pose numerous threats to accuracy, completeness and validity, the ensemble of speech, writing and image coupled with viewing and listening simultaneously work to enhance unity, coherence and emphasis. Each mode may have its affordances and constraints, but the combination of modes and media allows for the distribution of meaning across them. Despite this combination of spoken text and visual display, choices must be made and much more material omitted than the written document, for example. The audience, for the most part, focuses on what is said and displayed rather than what is absent. Although they may address gaps during the question session, the bias and distortion that may arise during a so-called informative oral report may go unnoticed or be considered inconsequential. The onus on presenters to honour the data seems greater during the oral than the written report and, with so little time, choosing what to privilege, becomes a real test of professional practice. As evident in the handouts combined with their embodied presentations, both teams managed to coherently convey the gist of their written reports and to appropriately spread the verbal and visual load in terms of logic and specialization.
A downside of software packages such as PowerPoint and, to a lesser extent, Prezi, is that slides are pre-set and cannot be changed during the presentation. Although some students, particularly during the last few years, have used sophisticated animation of procedures, film clips and other web links, given time constraints and advice to keep it simple, many stick to the basics, as was the case here. Despite attempts at multimedia approaches, students still must decide in advance what to include and how to order their presentation. They do not change this on the day, during the actual presentation or question session although they may re-show a specific slide or even "extra" slides, not included in their original, if warranted by questions. Unlike an interactive whiteboard, for example, PowerPoint does not allow for interaction nor is frequent interruption encouraged during a more formal presentation when time is of the essence. The informal draft products used earlier were far more conversational and interactive, although the product (e.g., mind map) was "fixed". Nevertheless, additions and changes could be made during discussion (and were). Inserting one's own identity into this "template" genre becomes more possible with practice, know-how and on-going changes to presentation software and technology as these mature and expand into more interactive and customisable products. One of the few unplanned interactive asides during the final PowerPoint presentation was Lindiwe's impromptu deviation and this did entail comments and laughter from the group as mentioned.
Despite the generally static and pre-ordered nature of PowerPoint and, according to Tufte (2001), the often lamentable and mechanistic "powerpointlessness" inherent in its ubiquity, it is, like many other presentation applications, common in professional practice and its explicit instruction is necessary for workplace applications. Combining this practice with all the other exercises in which students participate as well as the use of video playback for students to view their presentations allows the embodied reflection so necessary in multimodal meaning making within SLP.

Dress, Authorial Stance and Power
Dress and grooming can also be viewed as manifestations of authorial stance and heightened power and credibility if they work to realise a sense of professionalism in both the team as senders and the audience as recipients. How presenters appear to self, each other and audience and the impression created may reflect their level of confidence, both cognitively and affectively. Tan and Yuet See (2009, p. 369), using a Hallidayan framework, argue "that any kind of semiotic system (clothing included) functions to make "…'experiential'…,'interpersonal'…and…'textual or compositional meaning'" (their italics). Communicators seek to promote an air of knowledge, professionalism, authority and rapport and to impress their audience before they have spoken a word. They are hopeful that appearances will count in their favour to realise all three metafunctions.
In terms of dress, differences in interpretation seem evident from video footage. In both the rehearsal and final presentation, Lindiwe's dress is similar irrespective of the nature of the session, as can be seen in screenshots of the rehearsal below and final presentation, shown in Table 2 above.

Figure 2. Lindiwe during Rehearsal
Although no comment was made, it is interesting that she removed her glasses for the final presentation in contrast to her rehearsal. Whether out of vanity or realising that the reflection may hamper eye contact, she decided to present without them when audience members, other than her peers, were present. This was the only change, however. Rather than the more dramatic shift of jeans to suits of some of her peers, Lindiwe wore smart skirts and slacks throughout the semester. As can be seen in Figure 4, Jenny's appearance changed more radically moving from a student "classroom" appearance of grey top and tied back hair to a more corporate impression and neat styling. Despite wearing her hair down during the final presentation, she appeared more neatly groomed and professional than at her rehearsal.
Both Vusi and Hussein transformed their appearance from normal student wear throughout the semester (jeans, open-necked shirts or T-shirts with windbreakers/hoodies) to formal wear. They aimed for a boardroom appearance.

Figure 3. Vusi during His Rehearsal and Final Presentation
The ubiquitous "suit and tie", epitomising a Western professional identity, was adopted by both males during the final presentation. In fact, all but two males over the period in question, irrespective of background, purpose or audience, wore a suit and tie during this session even when the occasion did not warrant it. Some talks were targeted at internal audiences such as the GCI which comprises staff and students. Although these speakers undoubtedly looked smart, one could argue that a clash of discourses may result by blindly following a particular convention; formal dress may not be appropriate for this type of audience (Note 3). The decision to "dress up" may have resulted from the feedback they had received the previous week to make more of an impression. As it is easier to change clothing than state of mind or demeanour, both men elected to appear as formal as possible in the hope, perhaps, that they would exude greater professionalism. Some research has found that employees, particularly males, are reversing earlier trends of casual dress in the workplace believing "that they were not being taken seriously because of their casual dress" (Kiddie, 2009). The tie, in particular, has been associated with the male corporate image for centuries in American and European society (Kiddie, 2009) and as a social emblem of belonging, a "bonding icon" according to Stenglin (2010). Besides interpersonal meaning, the tie also carries substantial ideational meaning to convey a uniformity and level of homogeneity which aims to assure the audience of masculine business expertise and acumen, thus conflating appearance with knowledge, credibility and respect (Kiddie, 2009;Grant & Nodoba, 2009). If equated with a corporate "business" persona and community of practice in the making, then someone who "looks the part" may be seen to "fit in" professionally.
In Vusi and Hussein's case, however, the quality of their appearance seemed inconsistent with their demeanour for the most part. This lack of congruency may have hindered more than enhanced audience receptivity in places. Vusi removed his jacket as he "got down to business" and his presentation did improve after a slow, practically inaudible start and fumbled opening. Despite his language difficulties, his smart appearance and more interactive delivery style seemed to enhance his confidence during his second stint as speaker. Devoting most of his attention to his slides rather than the audience and they, in turn, redirecting their attention away from him to his slides, allowed Vusi to adopt a more relaxed demeanour. He seemed more comfortable "out of the limelight". Despite his formal jacketed appearance throughout, Hussein seemed the most ill at ease of all four speakers. His seemingly unfamiliar clothing proved restrictive and he fidgeted with his cuffs, suit buttons and tie in a distracted and distracting fashion. Watching the video, there seems a mismatch in his appearance and demeanour.
Despite the professional look and the no nonsense formality of the corporate "dark suit", his awkwardness inhabiting it belies the authority that he may have wished his clothes might bestow. The mismatch of clothing and delivery may also be regarded as a clash of discourses. Given Hussein's background, a cultural mismatch may also have underlined his awkwardness.
Colour as a semiotic mode also featured prominently, not only in slide design but also in dress (Kress & Van Leeuwen, 2002). Although all presenters settled for darker and more muted and conservative clothing during their final presentations, Lindiwe's clothing appeared more striking in terms of colour contrasts during the course and she seemed unafraid to draw attention to herself. Both she and Jenny (as with many other women) wore long trousers and could be described as smart and business-like rather than formal. They appeared more comfortable in their outfits than the men in their suits and this may have been true, literally so, given the softer, more yielding fabric and styling of their clothing.
Lindiwe and Jenny's calm attitude, aligning with their confident styles of delivery, resulted in greater congruence between appearance and content. Another point worth mentioning is that their appearance seemed at once modern yet quite "masculine". This may reflect shifting power relations (Fairclough, www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/csm Communication, Society and Media Vol. 3, No. 4, 2020 45 Published by SCHOLINK INC. 1995) and more feminist perspectives (Guy & Banim, 2000). Whereas in earlier corporate and institutional settings, women were expected to wear dresses, skirts and stockings, now the question of "who wears the pants" is blurred with more women in the workplace overtly signalling a more androgynous stance in selection, style and colour. Lindiwe and Jenny's choice of trousers is clearly salient yet also clearly Western, as their dress may not be acceptable in many African, Middle Eastern and Asian contexts (Grant & Borcherds, 2020;Grant & Nodoba, 2009). Both women may also have been signalling their ongoing leadership credentials by "wearing the pants" at their video presentations.
Their greater cultural capital, by way of age, experience, scenario background and topic choice, allowed them to assume command from the outset and maintain it throughout the course.

Movement, Territorial Distance and "Ownership"
In both presentations, Lindiwe and Jenny were physically closer to the screen and the laptop than their male counterparts and this management role was very evident in long shot as can be seen in Table 2 above

Figure 4. Jenny and Hussein's Rehearsal and Final Presentation
Her position, like Lindiwe's, seemed more powerful in terms of content, quantity and delivery style. Of interest is that during the rehearsal, Jenny and Hussein stood alongside the laptop and both reached for it during slide changeovers, sometimes simultaneously as can be seen below. This happened on several occasions. This issue was resolved for the final presentation when they reached an understanding on their division of labour. Jenny did all her own slide changeovers and although Hussein did most of his, Jenny took over while he engaged with his slides during the air-conditioning and window shutter explanations. She did not invite him to return the favour while she was demonstrating the opening and closing of the window shutters on the London Gherkin building, however. Although she had her hands full, gesturally speaking, she was quick to control the laptop while Hussein moved sideways out of her way as can be seen in figure 6 below. This too may relate to power relations in the team as Jenny seemed to want to manage every aspect of her own section as well as overall control. Although some teams changed their slides remotely, merely swapping the device when it was their turn, neither of these teams elected to do so. Not using the equipment fully or being able to freely move away from the laptop may render a more static delivery style and hinder credibility in a professional domain. This seemed to confirm their status as novice equipment users.

Figure 5. Hussein and Jenny in Rehearsal
Of all the modes critical to effective presentations and embodied delivery, gesture is arguably one, if not the most, significant metafunctionally to enhance understanding, credibility, rapport, coherence and emphasis. According to Varela and Shear (1999), in their research on first-person consciousness, motor neurons and the sensory areas in the brain are activated when an action is observed. These activations elicit empathy and engagement which may heighten rapport between speaker and audience and develop trust and credibility, particularly if motivated gesture autonomously or as co-speech mirrors, complements and/or supplements the speaker's words to enhance and speed up comprehension. Both Lindiwe and Jenny used gesture to mirror, complement or supplement verbal and intonational modes so that their speech and use of pausing aligned with content to enhance understanding. Their ratio of iconic, pointing and beat gestures (Norris, 2004) was higher than either male, particularly

Figure 6. Jenny Demonstrating Shutter Movements and Listing Conclusions
Hussein, adding an assertive quality to their delivery styles. In the above screenshots, Jenny uses an iconic gesture to demonstrate the shape of the "Gherkin" building while during the conclusions, she listed various implications using beat gestures. Further examples are analysed below.

Figure 7. Lindiwe Signifying Approval
Examples of supplementary gestures were evident at the end of Lindiwe's talk. During audience applause, she clapped and then gave Vusi a thumbs-up sign before tackling the question session.
Whereas most of her gestures, to generalise across the entire presentation, could be said to mirror or complement meaning, playing subordinate or equal roles to the spoken word, both the clapping and thumbs-up sign are examples of abstract supplementary gestures. These signs added value to understanding between speakers rather than with the audience. Not relying on speech at all, it could be said that they played super-ordinate positions (Norris, 2011). Clapping and the thumbs-up sign as signifiers of affirmation are globally understood. The fact that Lindiwe clapped while facing Vusi before ending with this sign, indicated her approval and reassurance. Taking space bodily also conveyed an assertive confidence which translated into feelings of relaxation, even fun. As observer of speakers and audience during both presentations, this sense of greater relaxation created a sense of rapport and enjoyment. In contrast, Hussein seemed relieved at the end of his recommendation section and made a move to sit down before the questions started. Jenny smiled at him reassuringly and www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/csm Communication, Society and Media Vol. 3, No. 4, 2020 49 Published by SCHOLINK INC.
signalled their continued attention. Her meaning, also silently conveyed, combined with eye contact and facial expression to halt further movement. Both Lindiwe and Jenny's actions and demeanour overall can be seen to construct a professional identity and a position of authority and power within their teams.

Eye contact, Expressiveness and Links to Confidence and Credibility
Gaze behaviours change depending on social and cultural situations and contexts. Purpose and audience will also influence eye contact norms within academic or corporate domains. In more casual settings, such as the mind map "exhibition" and presentation, gaze behaviour of all participants seemed more random than structured. According to Norris (2004, p. 38), "the more structured the interaction, the more structured the gaze will be". As the final oral report is a highly structured activity, the distribution of gaze also tends to be more structured. Speakers direct and re-direct their attention from laptop to screen to audience as they engage with their material and the audience tends to follow the speaker's lead in this regard, particularly if gaze, body positioning and gesture work as vectors to influence deictic directionality.
Lindiwe and Jenny used eye contact with the audience to full effect and ensured that their gaze behaviour included both sides of the audience. Eye contact was inclusive taking in various members of the audience on both sides of the room. Even when Jenny was demonstrating the opening and closing of the Gherkin building shutters, as shown in figure 6 above and the sequence to follow, she kept her eyes front, looking to left and right rather than at the picture on the screen. Her focus of attention is clearly observable in these screenshots so that although she is talking about a building, she foregrounds gaze and gesture rather than speech and image to convey the impact of the movement of the shutter cones. Movements of body and eye tracking were steady and unhurried for both women. Their square-on body posture and direct eye contact reinforced their sense of control and professionalism. As mentioned,

Figure 8. Hussein and Jenny during Final Presentation
Vusi's delivery style improved during his second stint. His eye contact, however, was quite restricted and often reserved for the screen as can be seen in Figure 3 above and the sequence below. Being turned away and seemingly reliant on his slides also broke the audience connection and undermined credibility and authorial stance in a professional domain. When he did glance at the audience, he only included those people directly in front of him (his left, audience right). He never looked at the audience seated in front of Lindiwe, almost as though they were her preserve and even when he did look up, his eye contact was fleeting and more oblique. This may have cultural implications for many black students for whom direct eye contact and lengthy gaze behaviours may be regarded as confrontational and disrespectful (Grant & Borcherds, 2020;Grant, 2012). The tension between Western conventions and traditional practices, particularly in black rural communities, may have caused him some discomfort in the classroom. This ambivalence and heightened levels of anxiety seemed to affect vocal tone and audibility as well. His much older and more experienced partner, Lindiwe, did not display any discomfort despite a similar background. She was the most animated in terms of facial expression, smiling at her audience when urging the university not to be "outdone" by its opposition and joining in the laughter, as can be seen in Figure 1 above, during the question session. Jenny too presented an open body posture, facial expression and steady gaze which seemed congruent with her delivery style overall.
Hussein appeared the most somber and deadpan of the four presenters and when he looked up, he was inclined to look more directly at the camera than the audience, as can be seen in Figure 8. Moving from camera to screen, he seemed to avoid his live audience. His limited eye contact and generally tense demeanour worked to distance the audience which may negatively impact rapport.
There seemed a definite relationship between heightened confidence, direct eye contact, assertive square-on body posture and strong, motivated movement and gesture. If modes, as ensemble, work together, meaning and credibility are enhanced. Ideational meaning is mostly realised through the spoken word, the data, as conceptually argued. Vusi, through comparison between months provides the evidence for "increasing" amounts at "less cost" (4 and 5). He uses causal analysis to offer the disclaimer "because" (6) which coupled with the attitude marker "unfortunately" provides a hedge to the factuality of the "evidence". As there is no "actual data" as "project" so "recent" (6), he claims that it is impossible to generalise or draw reliable conclusions about amount of recyclable dry waste (7 and 8). Although Vusi does have some "actual data", which is graphically displayed in PowerPoint, the audience realises that he means that there is too little data yet (only three months' worth) to discern a trend. Listening to the presentation it seems obvious that, as a second language speaker, Vusi grapples linguistically and struggles in places to articulate his argument.
The elliptical style and errors of expression and grammar make comprehension difficult in places. As the graph itself is clear, easy to follow and depicts what Vusi is trying to explain, the verbal-visual combination facilitates comprehension. Although usually associated with interpersonal meaning, clothing may also instantiate ideational meaning. The formality of Vusi's clothing carries ideational "weight" insofar as "professional characteristics" such as "authoritativeness and competence" may be associated with it (Cardon & Okoro, 1999, p. 357).
Vusi uses gesture, eye contact and colour in the main to instantiate interpersonal relations. The focus from the start is on "improvement" (1). Turning to his audience, he confides that "this is interesting" (2), a rhetorical aside which had members nodding in agreement. His pointing gestures and gaze behaviour direct the audience's attention to the bottom and top of the graph which aligns with the "less" and "increasing" claims and the monetary savings that can be made (4 and 5). The juxtaposition of the head from image to audience punctuates this aside and invests it with a salience which aims to enhance rapport as he engages with them directly. The open-handed gesture, which underscores the "unfortunately" (6), helps to plead his innocence in terms of this gap in the research. Turning away from the graph and facing the left section of the audience (his left), he uses his hands like scales to "weigh" up the recyclable amount and the up-down gestural opposition underscores the imbalance, the lack of certainty (7). This abstract, complementary gesture reinforces the argument as it goes beyond mere repetition of meaning.
His final gesture (8) before he literally "hands over" to Lindiwe in slide 9, echoes a rotating, washing movement which imitates the symbolic action of recycling as change, cleanliness, renewal and transformation. The use of colour in the graph and Vusi's tie may also invoke an interpersonal reaction and attract attention (Kress & Van Leeuwen, 2002). The red tie stands out visually in terms of salience.
The colour red as accessory in a corporate setting has been associated with status and power (Tan & Yuet See, 2009 contact (as fleeting as it was), all worked as ensemble to enhance unity, coherence and emphasis.
The next excerpt is from Jenny's presentation where she demonstrates the workings of the cooling mechanism in London's Gherkin building, introduced above.
The amount of spoken text is noticeable in that Jenny, as a first language speaker, gets through more data with little evidence of unmotivated pausing or hesitations. Her expository use of language is pitched at a consultative level, appropriate for purpose and audience within an oral genre. Her gestures frame her message in such a way that comprehension is assured. In the shutter movement section of her talk, Jenny's arms and hand movements emphasized and complemented her spoken language to portray how the shutters worked. By first steepling her fingers (Figures 1 and 6 above), she demonstrated the shape of the building, using an iconic gesture to represent an object. This gesture aligned with her words and, by "repeating" what she was saying, could be judged as subordinate to her spoken words.
She then rotated her hands inwardly and outwardly to imitate the opening and closing of the shutters which she likened to a pinecone (1). Her evocative use of metaphor and synchronisation of speech and gesture facilitated comprehension. The complementary gesture and metaphor added value to her explanation and, as a mode, this set of gestures could be said to have equal value.
The oppositional sliding gestures (3), imitating the motion of the shutters, reinforce the image of both sides of the building "closing up" for winter. Several thrusting and pointing gestures are used to indicate the downward motion of both air through the vents and sunshine on the building as well as to draw attention to the overall glass construction (2,(4)(5)(6). She indicates what is inside with two identical arm gestures astride "the building" (7) before clasping her hands into a single unit to represent the inner cavity (8). Her final gesture, palms downwards, signifies the satisfactory temperature balance and sustainability of this cooling and heating mechanism "throughout the year" (9). How load is distributed across various modes for seamless multi-layered meaning making is particularly evident here. The gesture/speech relation seems carefully divided, each performing different semiotic work yet mutually synergistic. Speech is fleeting and immaterial whereas gestures in space carry a materiality which sounds do not possess. The materiality of the image, visible throughout this sequence, underscores the discussion and holds it together. The speaker as designer, taking the affordances and constraints of different modes into account, determines how each mode fits together and partners one another interactively (Jewitt, 2011). It seemed clear that Jenny's eye contact did not follow her gestures, for the most part, but overwhelming held her audience, creating a powerful gaze engagement with them. When she did glance at her image ("as you can see, it's all made of glass"), the swinging head movement underlined meaning, the strength of which heightened ideational and interpersonal salience. Her assertive and confident posture adjacent to the screen adds to her professional identity within the arrangement of the venue.  Whereas the more conversational earlier iterations in class distributed power among all participants with dispersed eye contact and freedom to move, these formal presentations changed the power dynamic. In both sequences above, "room as boardroom" seems more feasible with the formally structured and orchestrated ensemble of these team presenters confirming their growing confidence as professional practitioners in a commerce domain.

Final Comments
Behaviours which may be more imitative and assisted at the outset of the course, particularly in earlier sessions, become progressively more expert with scaffolding and support (Tharpe & Gallimore, 1988;Lave & Wenger, 1991;Gee, 2003Gee, , 2004Grant, 2012). Vygotsky's Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) narrows as student teams become more empowered in their learning (Hay & Barab, 2001). As they develop the know-how and affinity within a professional domain, they also become more mindful of what is fit for purpose and audience in their own eyes as well as those of their audience. This shift may be greater for some students than others. As Vygotsky (1978) contended, although students may work and learn collaboratively and socially, each team member would have his or her own ZPD with some individuals needing more support than others. This is certainly the case in the sample teams discussed. Significantly, this support and know-how did not only come from the facilitator but also from student peers, partners and external experts. Both Lindiwe and Jenny managed the process and played dominant roles within their respective teams. In her partnership with Vusi, Lindiwe came across as a role model and mentor, an observation that was reinforced by audience appraisal and the facilitator's response to Lindiwe as team leader. Although one might question Vusi and Hussein's "growth" in terms of emerging professional identity and confidence, their transformed practice, collaboratively negotiated, saw crisper and shorter presentations with the stronger party in each team taking the vocal lead. This, as partnership, confirms a professional response where not everyone presenting in the workplace may require equal "air-time" (or to speak at all) but jointly succeed in realising a professional team identity and enhanced authorial stance as partners.
The use of video provided all student teams with the means to analyse their own performances and, by receiving copies, reflect on these at their leisure during multiple viewings. Course assessments annually point to these oral sessions, both rehearsal and final, as particular highlights of the course and a fitting culmination for both speakers and audience.