Literacy in Practice - the Autonomous Model of Literacy

Perhaps the disconnect between literacy in theory and literacy in practice is that while theorists usually agree with Brian Street’s ideological model, those personally and actively involved in the practice of literacy acquisition (students, teachers, tutors, etc.) follow something closer to Street’s autonomous model. In this post, I will briefly describe the autonomous model of literacy and then write about some Tolton Center students and teachers that unknowingly but wholeheartedly follow this model.

Although Street and other literacy scholars have been very critical of the autonomous model, my aim is not to criticize those who follow that model here. I have seen the effects of literacy in the self-esteem of Tolton Center students. I am not about to criticize a model that serves to increase the self-respect of adults who have been beaten down by the hegemonic system in which the live. I simply want to raise awareness of the difference between literacy in theory and literacy in practice.

According to Street, the autonomous model of literacy “assumes a single direction in which literacy development can be traced, and associates it with ‘progress’, ‘civilization’, individual literacy and social mobility… It isolates literacy as an independent variable and then claims to be able to study its consequences. These consequences are classically represented in terms of economic ‘take off’ or in terms of cognitive skills” (Street 2).

In other words, the autonomous model sees literacy as the key to upward social mobility and critical thinking. It emphasizes the idea of “the great divide” between those who are literate (who by this model can develop logical and abstract thinking skills) and those who are not (who by this model cannot). The autonomous model claims that literacy learning is politically neutral; that literacy is a technical skill devoid of sociopolitical implications. (Street 21) The model also emphasizes the inherent value of literacy.

Street writes that those who follow the autonomous model believe that “there are functions of language that are significantly affected by the mastery of a writing system, particularly logical functions. Written forms, they argue, enable the user to… maintain social or interpersonal relations between people” (Street 20).

I observed this kind of thinking about literacy when talking to two of the teachers at the Tolton Center. Again, let me stress that I do not disagree with how these teachers do their jobs. I admire their passion and dedication. What I want to do is ask what model of literacy could work better to satisfy the needs of urban minority communities.

[Brock]

Brock has been a math teacher at the Tolton Center for 7 years. He works with students who have not received any formal math instruction in many years, preparing them to pass the math portion of the GED test. Brock teaches algebra, geometry, fractions, decimals, percentages, conversions… the math skills that students are supposed to learn in four years of high school. Brock knows that some of these skills have practical uses in his students’ lives, while others are simply used to pass the GED test. Still, he is dedicated to his cause because he believes that literacy will improve the lives of the students.


“[These skills will] change the way they’ll communicate. They’ll be able to stay on topic… they’ll be able to have conversations about To Kill a Mockingbird… It’s going to open a new door to meeting new people… a door to the world. They’ll gain relevance in the world.”

Brock believes in cultural literacy; the idea that you need to know certain things to keep up with what is going on in your society. He believes that literacy helps makes you into a productive citizen.

[Janet]

Janet is the language arts teacher at Tolton. She also believes in cultural literacy and tries to incorporate some social skills into her teaching.

“We don’t expect to provide [students] with everything they should have. There are too many variables. We help them pass the GED and attach some social skills like the ability to work as a team, to have manners, to have etiquette. These are all parts of what it takes to succeed.”


She also believes that the literacy skills she is teaching will help her students adapt to the increasing competitiveness in today’s workforce.

“Literacy gives you the ability to be competitive in society…. in employment, in understanding what society needs… the expectations they must meet from employers. Are you able to think critically, not just to believe people’s words blindly?”

I think that Street would disagree with Janet and say that “faith in the power and qualities of literacy is itself socially learnt” (Street 1). He may say that literacy has no inherent value. However, I have seen that Janet’s approach works with her students. Her students see her as a teacher, mentor, and parent figure. With a heavy hand, she encourages them to learn the skills—to play the game—that will get them further up the socioeconomic ladder.

Works Cited

Works Cited
Baron, Dennis. “From Pencils to Pixels: The Stages of Literacy Technologies.”
Literacy: A Critical Sourcebook. Ed. Cushman, et al. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2001. 70-84. Print.

Goodman, Yetta. “The Development of Initial Literacy.” Literacy: A Critical
Sourcebook. Ed. Cushman, et al. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2001. 316-324.
Print.

Graff, Harvey. The Literacy Myth. New York: Academic Press, 1979.

Kozol, Jonathan. “The Myth of Impotence: What Should Be Done?” Illiterate America.
New York: Plume, 1985. 89-101. Print.

Lytle, Susan. "Living Literacy: Rethinking Development in Adulthood." Literacy: A Critical
Sourcebook. Ed. Cushman, et al. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2001. 376-401.
Print.

Ong, Walter J. "Writing is a Technology that Restructures Thought." Literacy: A Critical
Sourcebook. Ed. Cushman, et al. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2001. 19-31.
Print.

Prendergast, Catherine. Literacy and Racial Justice. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois UP, 2003.

What’s it worth to you?

"Increasingly, scholars have found literacy to be a resource with potential, but by no means guarantees for individuals at the mercy of larger economic and social forces." (Prendergast 5)

"… Moreover, there is surprisingly little agreement on or specific evidence for the benefits of literacy, whether socially or individually, economically or culturally." (Graff 3)

"Economists, sociologists, planners, and governments inform us that literacy rates correlate with scores of factors, ranging from individual attitudes to economic growth and industrialization, per-capita wealth and GNP, political stability and participatory democracy, urbanization and vital rates, communications and consumption—to list only a few of the correlations reported. There is a certain logic behind many of these correlations; however, no convincing or documented explanations or analyses correspond to them." (Graff 9)

“A lot of jobs I applied to and you needed a high school diploma. If you want a higher paying job, your GED helps you.” – Brenda, Tolton Center student


The quotes above illustrate the apparent disconnect between what scholars have found that literacy does and does not do and what the students at adult literacy sites believe that literacy will help them achieve.

So, whose side is right? What is literacy good for? And, as Prendergast asks, “who benefits from proposing literacy as the answer to all social malaise?” (Prendergast 5)

[Brenda]
Brenda took her GED test last week. She spent seven hours sitting in a classroom downtown on a Saturday with only a 45-minute break for lunch. She must believe in the power of literacy or else she would not have made such an investment. Brenda believes that literacy has direct social, individual, economic, and cultural benefits.

“Literacy is a great purpose in life. We need it in everyday life. We use it in everyday life. It’s not just reading and writing. It’s the way you present yourself by communicating with others. It helps you be a better communicator. Your sentences are better. You can write letters and represent yourself better in those letters… I think people kind of look down on [illiterates]… like they are not capable to learn.”

Adult literacy in action - The Tolton Center

The Tolton Center is an adult literacy center located in the West Garfield Park neighborhood of Chicago, a low-income neighborhood that, according to a Tolton Center brochure, was actually profiled by the Chicago Sun-Times as one of the deadliest in Chicago for adults and children. Driving through the neighborhood’s crowded streets, one can see the dilapidated buildings and boarded-up businesses that Tolton Center students see every day. According to many of the students at the Tolton Center, gang activity and violence are common occurrences in the neighborhood. Furthermore, West Garfield Park is a neighborhood that lacks opportunities for upward social mobility. It is plagued by underperforming schools and few job opportunities. According to the Cook Country Clerk’s Office, 35% of people in West Garfield Park live below the poverty line. In this neighborhood, literacy and education are not considered the status quo: close to 24% of residents of West Garfield Park do not have a high school diploma. The curriculum of the Center focuses primarily on GED preparation.

I interviewed some of the students that I tutored this quarter about their thoughts on literacy, its worth, and its uses. I’ll be sharing those interviews in the posts that follow. Along with the interviews, I will also interject relevant information from literacy scholars as well as my understanding of where literacy scholarship and adult literacy acquisition agree and clash.

Caveat: Although I attempted to transcribe the interviews staying as close to what the students said as possible, my transcriptions are not perfect.

The meaning of literacy

Although much of education policy focuses on the acquisition of this ambiguous quality, there is no consensus on a specific definition for the term. In fact, few of the prominent literacy scholars attempt to define the term concretely. Instead, they illustrate the complexity of the term and its uses.

“The meanings and uses of literacy are more complex and diverse than… typical questions or tests allow” (Graff 5).

“Literacy is imperious. It tends to arrogate to itself supreme power by taking itself as normative for human expression and thought” (Ong 19).

“Literacy has always functioned to divide haves from have-nots…” (Baron 83).

“… learning language is learning how to mean” (Goodman 317).

“From this point of view, being and becoming literate means using knowledge and experience to make sense of and act on the world” (Lytle 382) .

How do you define literacy?

About me

My name is Ana M. Ribero and I am a graduate student at DePaul University's Department of Writing, Rhetoric, and Discourse. Although this blog is a project for my Urban Literacies course, my interest in the sociopolitical implications of literacy education and college composition have influenced my research throughout my academic career. This blog is supposed to incite a conversation, so I welcome your comments, questions, and suggestions.

An introduction to this blog

This project seeks to shed light on the current discussion of the effects of literacy on social mobility despite of socioeconomic and racial marginalization. Since President Obama’s election, the media has claimed that we live in a “post-racial” society. They contend that race is no longer a force that creates privilege for the majority and disadvantage for the minority. They show Obama as an example that anyone with the chance of an education can pull themselves up by their bootstraps in spite of other oppressive factors. In a post-racial society, literacy is the great equalizer that eliminates environmental and societal factors to create a level playing field for upward social mobility. In my opinion, this is just the newest version of the literacy myth.

The concept of the literacy myth dates back to 1979 when Harvey J. Graff, in his book The Literacy Myth, challenged the assumption that literacy is they key to socioeconomic and political advancement of an individual and a society. This concept was problematized by Catherine Prendergast, who in Literacy and Racial Justice explains how literacy policies supposed to advance social justice (such as "No Child Left Behind") often fall short of their goals:

Current literacy policy tends... to be based now, as it has been for some time, on what literacy researchers call the “ideology” of literacy, the flawed but rhetorically seductive and seemingly deathless argument that literacy will guarantee equality of opportunity, moral growth, and financial security and ensure the democratic participation of all individuals in society, regardless of other factors. (4)

In this site, I plan to include interviews and information that analyze the role--both actual and perceived--of literacy in America. I hope to shed some light on how literacy acquisition actually affects adults who have lived their entire lives on the margins of society.