Literacy at work: Different Conceptualization of Literacy and their Implications for Vocational Education Trainers

INTRODUCTION The concept of literacy as covered in the course material is a paradigm that is difficult to define and intellectualize without the application of a number of different models of the concept. My rationalization of what literacy denoted prior to beginning this course was highly restricted and equally narrow minded. I like most others understood literacy to simple signify an individuals ability to read and write. While the concept of literacy according to Chrisomalis (2009, pp. 59 -74) is thought to have emerged with the development of computational devices and numeracy as early as 8000 BCE, the oxford online dictionary chronologizes the term as originating from the word literate that first came to use in the 19th century (Oxford Dictionaries, 2014). Since the introduction of reading and writing emerged in ancient civilizations, the concept of literacy has evolved to encompass complex sets of abilities to comprehend and apply dominant symbol systems of a culture for both personal and community development. While the principal conceptualization of literacy is still defined by the life-long intellectual practice of attainment and giving meaning through the decoding and encoding of printed or written text, notion of literacy and what it means to be literate has over the years developed to encompass a range of complex language and theoretical underpinnings which provide necessary platforms for the comprehensive comprehension of the concept (Kelly, 2014; Green & Dixon, 1996; Millican et al, 2007). This essay discusses the different conceptualizations of literacy from a multi- perspective angle and outlines their implications for vocational education teachers and trainers in the 21century. According to the United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO, p. 13) literacy is defined as the ability to recognize, understand, decode, produce, compute and communicate through the use of written and printed materials associated with different contexts. From UNESCOs definition, the term literacy can therefore be employed to signify a variety of learning practices and or processes that enable individuals to develop knowledge and potential, attain personal objectives and participate fully in respective communities and wider society. Based on the above definition and stated objectives of the paper this essay employs Belisles (2006) three fundamental perspectives on literacy to discuss of the conceptualization of literacy as assumed by scholars and educational/ learning institutions. According to Belisle (2006), the first and most simplistic concept of literacy is that of function. This idea of literacy as supported by Millican et al, (2007) conceptualizes literacy as a functional process wherein individuals apply the practice of reading and writing as means to facilitate or enable their everyday functions in life and sufficient management of their lives. The second, conceptualization of literacy by Belisle, which is slightly

more comprehensive than the first is the concept of literacy as a social and cultural practice. This idea of literacy as supported by Street (1996), conceptualization literacy as a social and cultural practice wherein the encoding and decoding of texts is dependent on patterns that are shaped and supported by contexts shaped by social and cultural influences. The third and most powerful concept of literacy as put forward by Belisle and supported by Martin (2008), conceptualizes literacy as powerful process that influences or entails the transformation of the manner in which individuals think and act. This perspective of literacy according to Freires (1972) and Millican et al, (2007) is generally referred to as the radical approach to literacy and encompasses the rationalization of literacy as the practice of critical reflection and tool used for social change. This essay outlines the different conceptualization of literacy by discussing the Autonomous (functional and contemporary dimensions), the ideological (social and cultural dimensions) and radical (critical reflection and social change dimensions) models of the discipline. In doing so the easy also makes The Autonomous Model The autonomous model of literacy is one of two models introduced by Street (1995) that functions from the assumption that literacy in itself is an autonomous practice undertaken on an individual level that will impact other cognitive and social practices. According to Street (2000, pp. 7-8), the autonomous model starts from the premise that literacy is simply a neutral and technical skill that is rooted in knowledge and cognitive capabilities and concerned with the manner in which individuals address reading and writing. The conceptualization of literacy in this sense is rooted in the constructs of knowledge, identity and being. While this model of literacy provides a key underpinning framework for literacy and learning in general it is limited in that it disguises some of the other dimensions that reinforce or support it. With the definition of the autonomous model of literacy provided by Street it is not farfetched for this paper to categories, the competency approaches of literacy conceptualized by scholars in the 1800s and 1900s under this model. The competency based approach to literacy also referred to as the literacy as a skill approach focuses primarily on the practice of reading and writing. This approach to literacy operates on the premise of literacy being a set of applicable skills related to the practices of encoding and decoding language and symbols. According to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, the competency based approach to literacy can be summed up as the ability to understand and employ printed information in daily activities at home, at work and in the community to achieve ones goals and develop ones knowledge and potential (OECD, 2000). This

conceptualization of literacy is what Luke and Freebody (2000) in the Four Resources Model refer to as code breaking and meaning making. At the very basic level, the competency approach literacy concerns itself with the ability to match symbols and sounds. The competency based approach to literacy according to Richards and Rogers (2001) lays emphasis on the outcomes of learning in that it address what learners are expected to do rather than what they are expected to lean about. This approach to literacy emerged in the United States in the 1970s as a means to refer to the educational movement that advocated for the description of leaning goals in terms precise quantifiable descriptions of skills, knowledge and behaviors that learns should possess at the conclusion of course of study (Savage, 1993). While this approach to literacy is crucial and clearly evident in compulsory education levels wherein children are taught the relationship between English alphabet letters and particular sounds, it is less clear in the higher and vocational education setting. Darvin (2006, pp. 10 - 18) helps make the relationship between the competency approach to literacy and vocational education training clear by illustrating through an empirical study that literacy practices in VET classrooms mirror the best documented strategies of teaching reading in content areas. The implications of literacy as a skill to vocational education training (VET) is that this approach advocates for an outcome based style to learning wherein the learners ability to apply basic and other skills in situations that are encountered in everyday life is the objective. While vocational education teachers according to Darvin (2006) employ the use of numerous texts much like university or higher education teachers do, the main difference between the two is that text in the two settings are employed differently. Most VET classrooms are filled with trade publications, complex technical manuals, diagrams, schematics, safety codes, legal documents and special interest magazines. Since the competency based approach to literacy focuses on the practice of reading and writing its implication for vocational education trainers and educators would primarily be focused on delicately interweaving social aspects of cognition with knowledge surrounding personal choices and motivation by promoting nonlinear disordered reading that allows learns to attain the specific set of skills or knowledge required for their needs. Skills attained from this approach of literacy are in essence independent and generic of the context within which they are used. This implies that skills attained in one situation can be applied to other situations and also measured through assessments. While there are no automatic one on one relationships between certain teaching methods and a particular theory of literacy it is important to point out that most approaches to education or

literacy in formal establishments of learning tend to associate themselves more closely with an autonomous model of literacy than ideological or radical model. This is illustrated from the essay discussions above wherein the autonomous model of literacy can be closely seen to be associated with skills based approach and more narrowly a transmissional approach to learning at both compulsory schooling and post compulsory education levels (Lillis, 2001; Sealey, 1999; Lea and Street, 1998; Willinsky 1994). The Ideological Model The ideological model of literacy as outlined by Street (1996), conceptualizes literacy as a social practices. This model of literacy is a relative new approach that adds to the traditional model by broadening its view to incorporate literacy as a practice. This perspective of literacy according to Millican et al. (2007) is shaped by the underpinning theory and research that forms the basis of the New Literacy Studies (NLS). According to Street (1996), this model of literacy proposes that the practices of reading and writing do not simply involve the skill of decoding and encoding symbols and text or conducting certain tasks in isolation but instead involves social relationships, values and attitudes. The main underlying principle behind this conceptualization of literacy is that different literacies or literacy practices are generally associated with varying domains of life i.e. school, home, family, workplace and communities. While some of these domains are dominated by female individuals such as the domestic and family domains, others are dominated by males such as the public domains. The above categorization of various domains of literacy according to Barton and Hamilton (1998, p. 7) are significant in that literacy practices are shaped by social rules that regulate the uses and distribution of texts prescribing who may produce and have access to them. Because the practices of reading and writing have varying functions and applications across cultures and history as illustrated by Kelly (2014, pp. 2-4) through the use of the London Beanie excerpts it is evidently inaccurate for scholars to adopt an exclusively autonomous view on literacy. The language in use module developed by Halliday (1978, 1985) is one such model that falls under Streets (1996) ideological model of literacy. Hallidays model focuses on the manner individuals use language in making meaning through drawing from the work of anthropologists to propose that language is a social situation product that occurs within a particular culture. Eggins (2005) functional interpretation of language use is observed as having a social perspective by describing literacy related purposeful and goal oriented actives as genres which take place within a

specific cultural context. According to Eggins, the language that individuals use whether written or spoken within a certain social setting is dependent on what he refers to as register. A register in this regard comprises of field, tenor and mode wherein the field refers to what is being spoken or written about (the topic), tenor refers to who is writing or speaking to whom and their situational dynamics (such as relationships and roles, formality or informality of language use etc.) and mode which refers to the manner in which individuals communicate (i.e. form or communication written/ spoken/ visual, channels of communication face to face/text book or manual/e learning). Eggins (2005), language in use model can also be framed up using Luke and Freebodys Four Resources Model which puts forward a list of four resources that stud ents need to develop in order to address the literacy demands of their lives. Luke and Freebodys text user and text analysts models are what encompass the social and cultural aspect of literacy. The text user resource proposed by Luke and Freebody focuses on outlining the importance of appreciating the manners in which texts shape or are shaped by certain cultural and social functions. The implications of this approach to literacy with regard to Vocational Education Training are that VET trainers and educators need to be mindful of the textually mediated social worlds that form the bridge between different discourses. Since VET settings are typically full of texts such as manuals, instructions handbooks and schematic diagrams among others, it is important that learners are taught to decode and encode such text with reference to particular social connotations the texts and symbols poses. This notion of literacy is further supported by Gee (1995, 2011) who puts forward the idea writing and reading within particular contexts or Discourses. Since VET learners are generally enter a new discourse when undertaking their course it is imperative that trainers and educators impart their socio-cultural experiences within the discourse to learners. Without an individuals familiarity of text within a particular discourse it becomes challenging for them to interact and function effectively within their social-cultural setting as pointed out in Papens (2009) health literacy study. The Radical Model The radical model of literacy is generally regarded as an empowerment tool by all those who engage in literacy practices or education. This perspective of literacy according to Freire and Macedo (1987) is shaped by the notion that the development of literacy skills alone does not necessarily lead to social change or empowerment but can be used as a means or tool towards attaining transformation at both a societal and individual level. The radical model of literacy, which is also referred to as the literacy as a critical reflection perspective is grounded in Freires (1972)

conceptualization that regards literacy to be an active process which encompasses aspects such as interpreting, reflecting, exploring, interrogating, engaging, probing and questioning activities that lead to the general transformation of the individual and the society. The radical approach to literacy therefore largely focuses in imparting critical thinking and reflection skills to learners which encourages inquisitiveness as opposed to loyalty the existing state of affairs or the status quo. Luke and Freebodys (2000) Four Resources Model to literacy can be viewed as encompassing a radical approach to literacy in that the text analysis resource engages learners in the practice of actively building literacy as a transformational tool through its analytical processes. This approach to literacy heavily influences the adult education and VET in that learners in these setting are concerned with better themselves through the acquisition of skill that would enable them to function more effectively both in their personal, professional and social settings. According to Freire (1972, p. 28) the central purpose of education is the role it plays in enabling individuals to reflect and act on the world in order to transform it. From this view, the role of education is not merely to assist individuals in fitting in and conforming or simply to attain employment and engage in economic activity but rather to help individuals in actively engaging in the development of their communities and the world they live. This view of literacy can be seen as being further supported by Ford (1994) who defines literacy as being an important practice due to the influence it provides individuals with regard to equipping them with the skills needed for political considerations such as power sharing and decision making. The implication for this approach to literacy in the VET setting is that it requires educators and teachers to fashion curriculum in a manner that provides learners with the skills and knowledge necessary to critically reflect on their environments and enact transformational changes that benefit not only themselves but also the society in large. Emphasis in VET instructional approaches should therefore, in this regard focus on assisting learners to critique texts. CONCLUSION This essay has provided a discussion on the various conceptualizations of literacy and attempted to outline their different implications to the vocational education and Training (VET) setting. In order to provide a structured and somewhat comprehensive discussion of literacy concepts, this essay focused on the autonomous, ideological and radical models of literacy. While the overall analysis of varying literacy concepts revealed that some in the literacy discipline tend to think that the differences in theoretical models of literacy are of little significance to educational practice, it was clear from the information reviewed that there is an urgent need for both policy

makers and educators to be mindful of theoretical literacy models since such models play a huge role in influencing learning polices and practice. One such illustration of the importance of theoretical models of literacy provided in the essay was the manner in which the autonomous view of literacy acts as the main underpinning structure for all forms of formal education. While the autonomous model of literacy is the most highly associated with most forms of formal education worldwide, this essay pointed out the importance and implications of ideological and radical approaches to literacy to peoples development and consequently role in society. This essay also highlighted the fact that different theoretical conceptualizations of literacy have differing implication to the teaching practice largely due to policy frameworks adopted by learning establishments. Having a strong understating of literacy theories not only helps educators to shape the curriculum taught in educational institutions but also helps in their development of teaching methods and practices that best address and suit the needs of learners in general.

REFERENCES Blisle, C. (2006). Literacy and the digital knowledge revolution. In A Martin & D. Madigan (Eds). Digital literacies for learning (51-670). London: Facet. Chrisomalis, S. (2009). The Origins and Coevolution of Literacy and Numeracy. In Olsen, D & Torrance, N (Eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Literacy (pp. 59-74). The Cambridge handbook of Literacy (pp. 59-74). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Darvin, J. (2006). On reading recipes ad racing forms: The literacy practices and perceptions of vocational educators. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy 50 (1): 10 18. Freire, P. (1972). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. Harmondsworth: Penguin Freire, P. and Macedo, D. (1987). Literacy: Reading the word and the world. South Hadley, MA: Bergin & Garvey. Ford, L. (1994). Rethinking Watpala Way in literacy education. In P. OConnor (Ed.), Thinking work (pp. 161-167). Sydney: Adult Literacy and Basic Skills Coalition. Gee, J. P. (1996). Social linguistics and literacies: Ideologies in discourses (2nd ed.). London: Taylor & Francis. Gee, J. P. (2011). An introduction to discourse analysis: Theory and method. (3rd ed.). New York: Routledge. Green, J. & Dixon, C. (1996). Language of literacy dialogues: Facing the future or reproducing the past. Journal of Literacy Research 28 (2): 290-301. Halliday, M. A. K. (1978). Language as social semiotic. London: Edward Arnold. Halliday, M. A. K. (1985). An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Edward Arnold. Kelly, A. (2000). Literacy at work 3015EDN/7141EDN Study guide. Griffith University Lea, M. and Street, B. (1998). Student writing in higher education: an academic literacies approach. Studies in Higher Education 11 (3): 18299. Lillis, T. (2001). Student Writing: access, regulation, desire. London: Routledge.

Luke, A., & Freebody, P. (2000). Critical literacy in Australia: A matter of context and standpoint. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 43 (5), 448-461. OECD (2000). Literacy in the information age. Final Report of the International Adult Literacy Survey. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. Martin, A. (2008) Digital literacy and the digital society. In C. Lankshear & M. Knobel (Eds.), Digital literacies: Concepts, politics and practices (pp. 151-176). New York: Peter Lang. Millican, J., McCaffrey, J., & Merrifield, J. (2007).What do we mean by literacy. In Millican, J, Merrifield, J & McCaffrey, J. (eds). Developing adult literacy: approaches to planning, implementing, and delivering literacy initiatives (pp. 32-42). London: Oxfam Publishing. Oxford Dictionaries (2014). Definition of Literacy in English. Retrieved from: Oxford Dictionaries <http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definitio/english/literacy>. Papen, U. (2009). Literacy learning and health: A social practices view of health literacy. Literacy & Numeracy Studies 17 (1): 19-34. Richards, J & Rodgers, T. (2001). Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Savage, L. (1993). Literacy through a Competency-Based Education Approach. In Approaches to Adult ESL Literacy Instruction. Washington DC: Center for Applied Linguistics. Sealey, A. (1999). Teaching primary school children about the English language: a critique of current policy documents. Language Awareness 8 (2): 84 97. Street, B. (2000) Introduction in Street, B. (ed.) Literacy and Development: ethnographic perspectives, London: Routledge. Street, B. (1996). Preface. In M. Prinsloo& M. Breier (Eds.), The social uses of literacy: Theory and practice in contemporary South Africa (pp. 1-9). Bertsham, South Africa: Sached Books. Willinsky, J. (1994). Introducing the New Literacy. In Stierer, B. and Maybin, J. (eds) Language Literacy and Learning in Educational Practice (pp. 1 14). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters/Open University Press.

UNESCO (2013). The Plurality of Literacy and its Implications for Polices and Programs. Retrieved from: UNESCO.org <http://www.unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0013/001362/136246e.pdf>