I liked the definition that literacy is "a kind of reality that educators should be able to grasp and explain, or, expressed in more classical terms, that literacy has an "essence" that can be captured through some Aristotelian-like enterprise." It sounds so much nicer than simply "being able to read and write".
What probably surprised me most of the whole essay was about literacy not being individual. The essay argues that literacy is a social achievement because literacy abilities are acquired by individuals only in the course of participation in socially organized activties with written language. I have never thought of literacy as being as "group" activity, and I'm glad that I have now come to a broader definition of the word.
What qualifies as literacy? Writing one's name, ability to memorize sacred text, etc. What I wondered was how vocabulary has an affect on literacy. Suppose I'm reading a scholar's essay which contains enough big scary vocabulary that I can't understand what is being said. I'm not illiterate, but I don't quite fit into "literacy"'s definition. Does being able to read but not understand still count as literacy? What level of vocabulary is "literacy" level? "Functional literacy" states that literacy involves the "proficiencies required for participation in the actual life conditions of particular groups of communities", which makes sense.
"Today's standards for functional competency need to be considered in the light of tomorrow's requirements". Again, it makes sense. Do you agree with the prediction that "in coming decades literacy may be increased for some and reduced for others, accentuating the present uneven, primarily class-based distribution of literacy functions" ? What would need to change to disprove this hypothesis?
I was very confused regarding the questions about "Literacy's "social purpose" and "What activities are carried out with written symbols?". Why are these questions relevant?
What I learned in the Literacy as Power section of the essay is that I have no answers to the questions that are being asked in regards to literacy. "How are communities best mobilized for literacy-around local needs and small-scale activism? or as part of broader political and social movements? If literacy has not emerges as a priority demand, should government and private agencies undertake to mobilize communities around this goal? " I'm really not sure what the answers are to these questions! Do you?
Okay so then all of this Literacy as a State of Grace popped out of nowhere and threw me for a loop... My first reaction to this was "What! How does being able to read sacred texts affect literacy at all???"
I'm admittedly still a little confused, but this sentence helped me to understand a little bit better: "The power and functionality of literacy is not bounded by political or economic parameters but in a sense transcends them: the literate individual's life derived its meaning and significance from intellectual, aesthetic, and spiritual participation in the accumulated creations and knowledge of humankind, made available through the written word." This is so funny, I think! I think this is quite outdated. I'm interested to hear what you (yes, you) thought of the Literacy as a State of Grace section?
Do you think that you could live in the Vai society? Why or why not?
I was pleasantly surprised with this article, I thought it was going to be a bore, but it turned out to not be so bad. I never thought literacy could be so confusing!
OKAY NOW ON TO THE THOMPSON ONE.
okay the first thing that I thought when reading this article was" okay, if you're studying the reading habits of the students at Standford, you're not going to get accurate results for average American teenager literacy.
The second thing I thought was: Yaaaaaaayyyyy... so we're good at "kairos—assessing their audience and adapting their tone and technique to best get their point across". I'm so proud of myself.
I do agree that online media is pushing literacy into cool directions... sort of. And okay fine the last sentence did get me: "What today's young people know is that knowing who you're writing for and why you're writing might be the most crucial factor of all". Thanks to Thompson, I am now reminded of how awesome my writing skillz are.
The end.
PSYCH.
Okay, so what are our most pressing literary concerns?
I think ....
1. That literacy can be used as a source of power.
2. That literacy is not accessible to everyone.
3. That people think that our Internet writing is somehow better than writing styles of the past.
The end for real.
p.s. sorry this post is so long.
No comments:
Post a Comment