• Embed Doc
  • Copy Link
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • CommentGo Back
Download
 
Frances Tay McHugh (fran@321-connect.com) 1/20
Some writers regard literacy as a technology of the intellect, that it strengthens thepower of thought and contributes to the development of human consciousness, andself-understanding. Provide a critical evaluation of this statement.Keywords: Literacy, Language, Skill, Cognitive Processes, Education, Transmissionof Knowledge, Consciousness, Conscientisation, Freire
There is general acceptance that literacy brings about many benefits and empowers. Whatis less conclusive are the ways in which literacy does so. Some writers regard literacy asthe technology of the intellect, that it strengthens the power of thought, and contributes tothe development of human consciousness and self-understanding. One can imagine howthis hypothesis may raise contention. It opens a Pandora’s box of difficult questions,among them: Does being literate promote cognitive processes? If so, does this result inheightened awareness? Does heightened awareness necessarily imply greater self-understanding? How does literacy affect such changes; are these changes physiological,psychological or behavioural in nature? How ‘literate’ does one need to be to set inmotion such developments?To explore these various dimensions, we must first acknowledge that literacyoccupies multiple dimensions or spaces. As a functional skill, it has been equated withsocial status and the opportunity for better employment; as a transformative skill, it hasbeen seen to promote thinking and habits conducive to continuous learning, and as apolitical tool, it is seen to empower and liberate the learner from the oppression of imposed servitude (Bantock, 1967, Freire, 2004, Kelder, 1996, Oxenham, 2004). At the
 
Frances Tay McHugh (fran@321-connect.com) 2/20
heart of literacy debates remain the over-arching question of what constitutes literacy.Earlier definitions of literacy, such as “the ability to read and write” (Oxenham, 1980, p.15), put forward simplistic notions focused on the mastering of the alpha-numeric text.This promulgated a view of literacy as an autonomous model; a “general, uniform set of techniques and uses of language, with identifiable stages and clear consequences forculture and cognition” (Collins, 1995, p. 75). Mass literacy campaigns, like thosepromoted in the Third World under the auspices of organisations such as the World Bank and UNESCO, lent primacy to the acquisition of language as a development goal in itself.The promulgation of mass literacy was believed to “equate with overall development”(Pennycook, 1999).Mass literacy seemed to offer hope as an avenue in which to play catch-up withthe developed world. It was “expected to produce miracles among the poor – self-esteem,empowerment, citizenship-building, community organisation, labour skills, incomegeneration, and even poverty alleviation” (Torres, 2003, p. 141, cited in Oxenham, 2004).However, the promises of economic and social mobility associated with the acquisition of literacy did not always eventuate as expected. Benefits accrued were neither uniform noruniversal. As Giroux (1987) cautioned, “literacy neither automatically reveals norguarantees social, political, and economic freedom” (p. 11). Royer (1994) and Kelder(1996), in reviewing the experience of literate black slaves in North America and thehistorical evolution of literacy studies respectively, refer to Graff’s use of the term“literacy myth” (1987, p. 265); and reiterate that historically, how literacy has beendefined and linked to social, economic and political progress, as well as the development
 
Frances Tay McHugh (fran@321-connect.com) 3/20
of cognitive skills, is mired in ambiguity. Hence, its mythical reputation for predicatingalmost automatic or magical transformation has proven too narrow and simplistic tocapture the complexities of how literacy is actually acquired and practised.As such, our exploration of literacy necessitates a broader conception. Theuniversalist or autonomous model of literacy mentioned above has been eschewedsomewhat; various relativist or situational models have been discussed in its stead in anattempt to make sense of how literacy is embedded within diverse historical, cultural andsocial contexts (Collins, 1995). In effect, we can no longer speak simply about literacybut acknowledge that there are multiple literacies. The notion of multiple literacies hascome to the fore, fuelled in part by the dynamic changes brought about by globalisation.As the world grows closer in terms of communication, the complications brought aboutby the diversity of languages, the many ways in which people communicate and newmodes of communication have necessitated new literacy concepts. Literacy is no longerrestricted to mastery of the alphabet or numeracy; it “transcends the written word andother representational texts such as visual art, television, information technologies andphotography…” (Rassool, 1999, p. 50), it encompasses “other forms of culturalexpression which do not use the spoken language” (UNESCO, 1999, p. 2) and includeslocalised forms of literacy which reflect “the ‘applied’ nature of the skills” (Oxenham,2004, p. 1). Literacy is therefore not a decontextualised psychological skill that is static innature; instead, “people are continuously modifying established literacy practices,adapting them to new situations, and, at times, straightforwardly challenging andsabotaging established literary practices” (Sheridan, Street and Bloome, 2000, p. 5). As a
of 00

Leave a Comment

You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...
You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...