See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/47523879

Literacy: Its Importance and Changes in the Concept and Definition

Article in TEFLIN Journal - A publication on the teaching and learning of English · January 2009
Source: DOAJ

CITATIONS READS

187 60,882

1 author:

Ratna Rintaningrum
Institut Teknologi Sepuluh Nopember
69 PUBLICATIONS 1,142 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Ratna Rintaningrum on 23 January 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

TEFLIN Journal, Volume 20, Number 1, (2009)

1
 Rintaningrum, Changes Concept and Definition in Literacy

LITERACY: ITS IMPORTANCE AND CHANGES IN THE CONCEPT

AND DEFINITION

Ratna Rintaningrum
Institut Teknologi Sepuluh Nopember (ITS), Surabaya

Abstract: Literacy has come to be seen as important aspect in nation development

since being functionally literate is fundamental to all forms of both successes in
school and in life. In global market, being literate is highly demanded in order that
people are able to participate actively in larger society and in international
activities such as international conference, research exchange, join research, and
business and commerce. Being literate does not only contribute to personal
development or personal learning, but being literate also leads to success in school
and in life.

Key words: literacy, concept, definition

Concept and Definition of Reading Literacy

There are many definitions of literacy (Harris and Hodges, 1995). The Victorian Department
of School Education‟s joint project with the Catholic Education Office of Victoria, expressed
the dilemma of defining literacy as:
Definitions of literacy are notoriously difficult to compose. Literacy is a social construct, a
complex idea that means different things to different cultural group at different times. Therefore
literacy is a relative term and dynamic. While literacy is popularly understood to denote the ability
to read and write prose and other print texts, it is an integrated complex of language and thinking
processes and skills, incorporating a range of habits, attitudes, interests and knowledge, serving a
range of purposes in different contexts. (DSE/CEOV, 1994, p.329)

The definitions of reading literacy have changed over time in accordance with the needs of
the global society, the demands for economic development, and the advances in the research
and measurement of literacy itself. Much energy has been expended on efforts to reach a
categorical and conclusive definition of literacy. However, some scholars believe that “…
agreement on a definition and thus on a measurement of literacy will never be reached …”
(Wickert, 1992, p.30).

The range of literacy definitions is typically from skills-based conception of functional

literacy through to broad definitions and all definitions integrate social and political
empowerment (Lo Bianco & Freebody, 2001). Although there are a number of literacy
definitions, it is necessary to develop some coherent understanding of literacy that reflects the
many capabilities required to become a participating member of a literate society.
TEFLIN Journal, Volume 20, Number 1, (2009)

Psychologists, linguists, educators, sociologists and others have all been the contributors to
knowledge about literacy over the past 30 years. Definitions of literacy have differed on
various dimensions (Lo Bianco & Freebody, 2001, p.20):
Whether or not literacy refers to a set of varied capabilities or to a single capability that can be
quantified (e.g., into “level of ability”) in a straightforward and comprehensive way; whether or
not literacy refers to capabilities distinct from other language-related activities; and the extent to
which acquisition of certain basic literacy capabilities is an insurance against all possible literacy
problems.

It is widely accepted that literacy generally is simply defined as “the ability to read and
write”. Some attempts have been undertaken to classify people who are literate and people
who are illiterate based on this definition. Researchers, however, find it impossible (Elley,
1989) to do this task as “there is no precise dividing line between a person who is fully
literate and one who is not” (OECD, 2003, p.17).

In real life we can find people are able to read, but are not able to write. Some people can
read the symbols but they cannot interpret what they read. Some can cope with the more
difficult tasks involving words, but some cannot cope with even the easiest tasks that involve
numbers. Some can read and follow the complex maps, but some fall down on the simplest
form-filling task and we cannot argue that these people are functionally literate, because their
competence varies according to the context.

Changes Concept and Definition of Literacy

Diehl and Mikulecky (1980) and Mikulecky (1982) have highlighted the tremendous range
and diverse patterns of literacy skills in several surveys of adult literacy. The concept of
illiteracy in one context is not necessarily the same in another context. Different contexts
involve different concepts of what literacy and illiteracy mean. Misleading information
results if we force the same concept into different contexts. Thus the concepts of literacy and
illiteracy depend on both the definitions and the measuring procedures used. Consequently, in
any research study it is necessary to clarify terms and explain how literacy is to be viewed
and assessed.

Several research workers in the field of literacy (Resnick & Resnick, 1977; Levine, 1986)
have traced the changes in official concepts and definitions of literacy. Levine (1986)
provided tables of literacy rates in England that illustrated the definition of the ability to sign

3
 Rintaningrum, Changes Concept and Definition in Literacy

one‟s name as the mark of a literate person and interestingly differences between both the
sexes and successive generations were found. Later, the recitation of religious tracts and
fluency in oral reading became key indicators of literacy (Resnick & Resnick, 1977).
Additionally, literacy has been defined variously on a sliding scale of three or five or six or
eight years of schooling, regardless of quality, or student learning outcomes, or community
expectations (Scribner, 1984).

The main problem with linking the definition of literacy to years of schooling has been that
many children survive long periods of formal education without acquiring the skills of
reading and writing, while others learn to read and write outside the school system (Elley,
1989). Downing (1973) noted the inaccuracies in United States data that followed from
adopting such a definition. Furthermore, it was reported that fully 25 per cent of students who
had experienced six years of schooling in a Pacific Island country could not read a simple
passage, while others with only four years of schooling were fluent readers (Elley, 1989).

The concept of „literacy‟ has been examined from a sociological viewpoint (Guthrie &
Kirsch, 1984; Levine, 1986). They saw the concept involving a „social-interaction
perspective‟ such as what were the purposes of reading texts, how the readers interpret the
text, how the readers communicated with the writer and how the readers communicate what
they read with other people, since they might need to discuss the content of the text (Elley,
1989, p.5). Discussing the ideas and information acquired from the text with other people
allowed readers to construct text meaning in various contexts (Guice, 1995) and this social
interaction could be an instrument in helping students gain understanding and appreciation of
texts (Mullis, et al., 2006). Reading was a “social experience carried out for a variety of
purposes, with a variety of materials, text organizations and styles, to serve the needs of
teacher, writer, colleagues and supervisor” (Elley, 1989, p.2). This was consistent with
Guthrie and Kirsch‟s (1984, p.3) perspective that stated that “by choosing to read a text, a
person becomes part of the readership of the text, and future communication with other
readers becomes possible”.

From the confusion between concepts and definitions, it must be concluded that the need to
link literacy levels with current community conditions and needs rather than years of
schooling is widely accepted. This kind of definition is, however, too restrictive if we set
national standards and devise measurements with too much recognition of the needs of small
rural communities, or minority religious groups existing within a wider society that is
aspiring to raise its educational levels for greater national development (Elley, 1989).
TEFLIN Journal, Volume 20, Number 1, (2009)

However, some research workers in the field of literacy have reconceptualized the term
„literacy‟. Literacy can no longer be simply defined in terms of reading, writing or numeracy
nor can it be seen as an end in itself (UNESCO, 1997). The rapid changes in science and
technology suggest that “people must be able to adapt continually to developments in science,
technology and to the pressures of social integration, participation and democratisation”
(UNESCO, 1997, p.10). This indicates that the world is more visual than before so that
understanding images is just as important as understanding words, consequently more skills
are demanded. Moreover, in parallel with the needs of society, literacy has to be seen as a
tool of learning throughout life. If the criteria of being literate are raised according to this
definition, it cannot be imagined how many people in the world will be categorized as
„illiterate‟.

A recent study of literacy, conducted by the Progress in International Reading Literacy Study
(PIRLS), explained reading literacy as
the ability to understand and use those written language forms required by society and valued by
the individual. Young readers can construct meaning from a variety of texts. They read to learn, to
participate in communities of readers in school and everyday life, and for enjoyment. (Mullis et
al., 2006, p.3)

A study conducted by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development

(OECD) for the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) defined Reading
literacy as “the ability to understand, use, and reflect on written texts in order to achieve
one‟s goals, to develop one‟s knowledge and potential, and to participate effectively in
society” (OECD, 2001a, p.21). As is indicated by the definition of reading literacy measured
in PISA, literacy is a broader concept than the notion of “decoding written material and literal
comprehension” (OECD, 2003, p.19). Literacy involves the ability of individuals to use
written information to achieve their goals, and consequently they are able to use this
information to function effectively in modern societies.

These definitions of reading literacy reflect numerous theories of reading literacy as a

constructive and interactive process (Chall, 1983; Anderson & Pearson, 1984; Walter, 1994;
Ruddell & Unrau, 2004). Readers construct meaning actively and know reading strategies
and how to reflect on reading (Clay, 1991; Langer, 1995). Readers also construct meaning
through interaction with text in the context of a particular reading experience (Rosenblatt,
1978). The readers bring the skills and reading strategies that they have to acquire knowledge

5
 Rintaningrum, Changes Concept and Definition in Literacy

and obtain information from the text. Readers can learn various text types, acquire knowledge
and gain information from the text they read (Greaney & Neuman, 1990; Wagner, 1991;
OECD, 1999). Text types are presented both in written and electronic media. These include
books, magazines, newspapers, the internet, email, text messages, as well as text included as
part of various video, film and television media, and advertisements (Mullis et al., 2006).
These informational texts allow students to learn more about a topic that may help children
develop their motivation, engagement and interests and gain confidence in their reading
abilities.

REFERENCES
Anderson, R. C. & Pearson, P. D. (1984). A Schema-theoritic View of Basic Processes in
Reading Comprehension. In P.D.Pearson (Ed.), Handbook of Reading Research (pp.
255-291). White Plains, NY: Longman.
Chall, J. S. (1983). Literacy: Trends and Explanations. Educational Researcher, 12(9), 3-8.
Clay, M. (1991). Becoming Literate: The Construction of Inner Control. Auckland, New
Zealand: Heinemann.
Diehl, W. M., L (1980). The Nature of Literacy at Work. Journal of Reading, 24, 221-227.
Downing, J. (1973). Comparative Reading. New York: McMillan.
DSE/CEOV. (1994). Keys to Life, Professional Development Program for Secondary Subject
Teachers. Melbourne: Department of School Education/Catholic Education of
Victoria.
Elley, B. W. (1989). Review of Research on Reading Literacy. New Zealand: University of
Canterbury.
Greaney, V. N., S.B (1990). The Function of Reading: A cross-cultural Perspective. Reading
Research Quarterly, 25, 127-195.
Guice, S. L. (1995). Creating Communities of Readers: A Study of Children‟s Information
Networks as Multiple Contexts for Responding to Texts. Journal of Reading
Behaviour, 27, 379-397.
Guthrie, J. K., I (1987). Distinctions between Reading Comprehension and Locating
Information in Text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 79, 220-228.
Harris, T., & Hodges, R. (1995). the literacy dictionairy. Newark, Delaware: The
International Reading Association.
Langer, J. A. (1995). Envisioning Literature. Newark, DE: International Reading
Association.
Levine, K. (1986). The Social Context of Literacy. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Lo Bianco, J. a. F., P. (2001). Australian Literacies Informing National Policy on Literacy
Education: Language Australia Ltd.
Mikulecky, L. (1982). Job Literacy: The Relationship between School Preparation and
Workplace Actuality. Reading Research Quarterly, 13, 3-48.
Mullis, I. V. S., Kennedy, A. M., Martin, M. O., & Siansbury, M. (2006). PIRLS 2006
Assessment Framework and Specifications (2nd Edition) Progress in International
Reading Literacy Study.
Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2003). Literacy Skills for the
World of Tomorrow-Further Result from PISA 2000. Paris: OECD.
Resnick, D. & Resnick, I. B. (1977). The Nature of Literacy: An Historical Exploration.
Harvard Educational Review, 47, 370-385.
 TEFLIN Journal, Volume 20, Number 1, (2009)

Rosenblatt, L. M. (1978). The Reader, the Text, the Poem: The Transactional Theory of the
Literary Work. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.
Ruddel, R. B. & Unrau, N. J. (2004). Theoretical Models and Process of Reading (5th ed).
Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Schreiber, J. B. (2002). Institutional and student factors and their influence on advanced
mathematics achievement. Journal of Educational Research, 95(5), 274-286.
United Nations Educational-Scientific- and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). (1997).
Literacy in the world and its major regions. Paper presented at the Fifth International
Conference on Adult Education, Hamburg, Germany.
Wagner, D. A. (1991). Literacy in a Global Perspective. In I. Lundberg & T. Hoien (Eds.),
Literacy in a World of Change: Perspectives on Reading and Reading Disability.
Stavanger. Norway: Centre for Reading Research.
Walter, P. (1999). Defining Literacy and its Consequences in the Developing World.
International Journal of Lifelong Education, 18, 31-48.
Wickert, R. (1989). No single measure: A survey of Australian adult literacy. Canberra:
Commonwealth Department of Employment, Education and Training.

View publication stats