Literacy Myths
- PDF / 109,678 Bytes
- 12 Pages / 439.37 x 663.307 pts Page_size
- 46 Downloads / 208 Views
LITERACY MYTHS
INTRODUCTION
Literacy Myth refers to the belief, articulated in educational, civic, religious, and other settings, contemporary and historical, that the acquisition of literacy is a necessary precursor to and invariably results in economic development, democratic practice, cognitive enhancement, and upward social mobility (Graff, 1979, 1987). Despite many unsuccessful attempts to measure it (Inkeles and Smith, 1974), literacy in this formulation has been invested with immeasurable and indeed almost ineffable qualities, purportedly conferring on practitioners a predilection toward social order, an elevated moral sense, and a metaphorical “state of grace” (Scribner, 1984). Such presumptions have a venerable historical lineage and have been expressed, in different forms, from antiquity through the Renaissance and the Reformation, and again throughout the era of the Enlightenment, during which literacy was linked to progress, order, transformation, and control. Associated with these beliefs is the conviction that the benefits ascribed to literacy cannot be attained in other ways, nor can they be attributed to other factors, whether economic, political, cultural, or individual. Rather, literacy stands alone as the independent and critical variable. Taken together, these attitudes constitute what Graff (1979, 1987) has called “the Literacy Myth.” Many researchers and commentators have adopted this usage. Contemporary expressions of the Literacy Myth are evident in cities’ sponsorship of book reading, celebrity appeals on behalf of reading campaigns, and promotions by various organizations linking the acquisition of literacy to self-esteem, parenting skills, and social mobility, among others. Individuals are seen to be “at risk,” if they fail to master literacy skills presumed to be necessary, although functions and levels of requisite skills continue to shift (Resnick and Resnick, 1977; Brandt, 2001). In stark, indicting versions of the myth, failures to learn to read and write are individual failures. Those who learn to read and write well are considered successful, whereas those who do not develop these skills are seen as less intelligent, lazy, or in some other way deficient (St. Clair and Sadlin, 2004). These and other versions of the Literacy Myth shape public and expert opinions, including policy
B. V. Street and N. H. Hornberger (eds), Encyclopedia of Language and Education, 2nd Edition, Volume 2: Literacy, 41–52. #2008 Springer Science+Business Media LLC.
42
H A RV E Y J . G R A F F A N D J O H N D U F F Y
makers in elementary and adult education, and those working in development work internationally. Such attitudes about literacy represent a “myth” because they exist apart from and beyond empirical evidence that might clarify the actual functions, meanings, and effects of reading and writing. Like all myths, the Literacy Myth is not so much a falsehood but an expression of the ideology of those who sanction it and are invested in its outcomes (see, e.g., Goody, 1968, 1986, 1987; Goody and Wat
Data Loading...
