CHAPTER TWO: Theories and ethnographies of literacy 2.1 Introduction
2.3 An overview of literacy theories
and context, socio-cultural and contextual, autonomous and socio-cultural, and autonomous and mind.
Mind (internal) on the left of the horizontal continuum represents the theories that locate the meaning and value of literacy in human beings. These theories, according to Grabill (2001), focus on self-expression, emphasising the cognitive and intellectual processes involved in the development and use of written literacy on the individual, and the development of reading and writing skills by the individual. The social cultural theories on the right represent theories that locate the meaning and value of literacy outside of human beings and looks at literacy as an external social process and culture. Socio-
Quadrant ‘A’
Autonomous and Mind (internal)
McLaren 1993; 1994
Quadrant ‘B’
Autonomous and Socio-cultural
Socio- Cultural (External) Mind
(Internal)
Quadrant ‘C’
Mind (internal) and
Contextual Contextual
Olson 1977
Ong 1982
Expressive
Olson 85-95
Goody
& Watt 1968
Goody 1986
Havelock Technocratic
Hirsch;
Bloom
Freire
Giroux
Welch &
Freebody, Luke
Brandt;
Nystrand
Flower 1994 Peck et al.
1995
Scribner
& Cole 1981
Ecological 1994
Quadrant ‘D’
Socio-cultural and Contextual
Autonomous Formatted: Font: 10 pt
Formatted: Font: 12 pt Formatted: Font: 10 pt
cultural theorists see the meaning of literacy as residing within the social practices of institutions and communities where literacy is used (Grabill, 2001, p. 20).
The vertical continuum, according to Grabill (2001, p. 22), expresses the tensions between the autonomous concept of literacy at the top and the context-based concept of literacy at the other end of the continuum. The autonomous end of the continuum at the top of the line represents theories of literacy that claim positive cognitive consequences from the acquisition and use of literacy. The bottom end of the line represents the context- based theories of literacy that locate the meaning and value of literacy in specific contexts and practices. In other words, these theories contextualise literacy in its context of use.
Quadrant ‘B’ consists of autonomous and socio–cultural theories of literacy. Quadrant ‘C’
consists of mind and contextual theories. ‘A’ consists of autonomous and mind (internal) theories. Finally, Quadrant ‘D’ consists of socio-cultural and contextual theories of literacy. The last two theoretical categories, ‘A’ and ‘D’, are discussed in much detail in this chapter, because they are the focus of this review and the most common.
As noted by Grabill, Quadrant ‘B’ represents a unique combination of theories that bring together both the autonomous and the social-cultural aspects of literacy. Theorists in this quadrant focus on literacy as a struggle over cultural meaning. Hirsch (1987, p. 2, cited in Grabill, 2001, p. 26) is given as a good example of theorists who say, “to be literate is to be culturally literate, ‘to possess the basic information needed to thrive in a modern world’”. Being culturally literate is to have that knowledge which is necessary for greater economic prosperity, social justice, and democracy. To be culturally literate is concerned with the common good of the community at all levels. The theorists in this category also see literacy as a necessary condition for cultural and political struggle.
One of the most outstanding theories within this category is the radical theory of literacy.
According to this theory, all social institutions must be subjected to critical examination and change. The objective of this critical examination is to ensure that the process of teaching literacy does not perpetuate the dominant Discourse (for the use of the capital
‘D’, see Gee, 1990) in ways that undermine the existence of other groups in society. The teaching of literacy should therefore help to unmask the powers that are hidden in
dominant literacy Discourses8. In this way, both the learning and use of literacy could not perpetuate the dominant position of the privileged groups in society but liberate the underprivileged and oppressed people in ways that contribute to social justice in society.
Paulo Freire is cited as one of the theorists who pointed out very strongly and clearly how
8 See more detailed discussion of discourses on page 35, Section 2.5.3.
some methods of teaching literacy perpetuate the dominant discourse of those in power or of powerful institutions of society. He proposed a new radical method to overcome such problems, which he called conscientization (1992, 1995 cited in Grabill, 2001, p. 28).
Unfortunately, for those who advocate a struggle against the dominant discourse, Gee (1990) points out that the dominant discourse determines how the resources of a community are allocated. Therefore, contesting this dominant discourse excludes you from the mainstream resource distribution system in the community.
Quadrant ‘C’ consists of the mind (internal) and contextual theories of literacy. This quadrant brings together the socio-cognitive theories of literacy. For these theorists, there is no fundamental difference between oral and literate practices. According to Grabill (2001), Brandt is as a typical theorist in this category. As Grabill (2001, p. 29) explains, theorists in this category see literacy as involvement and seek to “understand how readers and writers do reading and writing together.” According to Brandt (1990, pp. 7, 38, cited in Grabill, 2001, p. 29), literacy as involvement is about “‘knowing what to do now’ in the process of making meaning through reading and writing”. In this process, the writers construct a mental picture of the expectation of the reader. This is the cognitive part of this theory. On the other hand, the process of constructing the reader is influenced by the rules that govern social communication between people in a particular relationship. That too constitutes the contextual aspect of the theories in this category. Therefore, an awareness of the discourse conventions of the community is necessary for effective communication to take place. This attention to the discourse practice of the community removes the emphasis from the text and places it in the practice of the community (context) within which the reading and writing is taking place. The awareness of the discourse practice of the group constitutes the social part of theories in this category.
In the above section, I only dealt briefly with Quadrants ‘B’ and ‘C’ because in my view they are not as relevant for this study. In the next section I turn to Quadrant ‘A’ the autonomous model and Quadrant ‘D’ the social cultural model. As I stated earlier, these are the most relevant for this study.