Literate, literacy,
illiterate, illiteracy
What first
comes to mind when thinking about what the divide between being literate and
illiterate is goes back to my work with the Red Cross… when you donate blood
you have to ‘give consent’ by signing your name or leaving your mark. When I thought of leaving a ‘mark’ in place
of a signature the artist formerly known as Prince, and his replacing his name
with a symbol came to mind. Of course
this is not why the consent form is worded this way, instead it is because some
people are unable to read and/or write, and that is the first definition that comes
to mind when I think of what divides the literate from the illiterate—a distinct
ability to read and write vs. a distinct inability to read and write. In reality literacy is not defined as clearly
black and white, but is more of a gray area.
Instead of thinking in absolute terms, literacy can be better explained
as a scale ranging from illiterate to literate; some people can read and write
but struggle through it, while others may struggle with reading but not
writing, and others are highly proficient in both areas.
Last year I
observed a teacher for 6 weeks who taught four ninth-grade English classes and
two classes called ‘credit-recovery.’
During my observations, the students in credit recovery displayed
literacy’s scale in very human terms. Some
of the students had learning disabilities, but many of them had simply slipped
through the cracks and skated-by passing from one grade to the next without
having ever really built a strong foundation in reading or writing. Not learning how to read and write—reading
especially—handicaps people in so many different classes and other areas of
life, and the students in credit recovery told countless stories to provide
evidence of this.
As for a
concrete definition, literacy has grown in its capacity to include more than
just reading and writing. The first
example I think of is computer-literacy.
With this in mind, literacy is synonymous with competency. And in many instances of pop culture, ‘illiterate’
is used as a kind of a catch-all put down.
You raise a good point about people being "computer literate". One could even be "pop culture literate" (I am not, but that's besides the point). It is, as you say, a level of understanding. Marking someone as illiterate because they don't perform up to a standard is dangerous and diminishes the competency the person may have.
ReplyDeleteRoss,
ReplyDeleteThanks for pointing out that literacy should be considered on a scale - literate, illiterate, and everything in between. This relates perfectly to your next point about the students you observed who had "slipped through the cracks." That happens all the time, we know, and it becomes an issue both inside and outside the classroom. Is part of this "slippage" the fact that we have proficiency standards, and some of these students "qualified" as literate (or adequate, or passable) from grade to grade in very black and white terms without anyone noticing their setbacks or struggles? I agree with you that considering the spectrum of literacy is valuable - and even necessary.
BTW, October is Information Literacy Awareness Month in the state of Montana. Perfect timing for this conversation and your final point of reflection!