Brian Street and other scholars support the ideological model of literacy. Followers of the ideological model contend the following:
1. Literacy is a social and community activity--not simply an academic one.
2. "Literacy can only be known to use in forms which already have political and ideological significance" (Street 8). In other words, literacy is never neutral.
3. Literacy instruction--what is being taught to whom--depends on aspects of social structure such as stratification.
4. There are multiple literacies instead of one literacy.
5. They focus on the overlap between oral and literate cultures instead of perpetuating the myth of "the great divide."
6. They investigate the role of literacy teaching in social control and "the hegemony of the ruling class." (Street 8)
Literacy in theory takes a critical approach. Scholars who follow this model question the power structure inherent in the values and functions of literacy. Jonathan Kozol, for example, in Illiterate America, claims that our stratified economic system needs illiterates to perform the jobs that no one would want to perform given other opportunities. A high illiteracy rate serves the purposes of capitalism. The people at the top of the social hierarchy, according to Kozol, purposefully keep the poor and uneducated classes at the bottom so that the former may remain at the top.
Similarly, Catherine Prendergast questions “who benefits" from the current stratification of our society based on literacy levels. She claims that the current system keeps minorities--particularly African Americans--in the lowest rungs of society. Furthermore, she asks, "How do people use the literacy they have acquired to address the persistence of racial discrimination in the face of formal equal protection under the law?" (Prendergast 4)
The goals of followers of the ideological model do not correspond with the goals of the participants of literacy in practice. From my experience tutoring at the Tolton Center and what I have heard of the experiences of my classmates who tutor at similar adult literacy sites throughout Chicago, literacy in practice always tries to be neutral. Neither teachers nor students discuss how literacy acquisition perpetuates the stratification of our society. Literacy in practice also defines literacy as academic--not social. Literacy is part of the classroom and separate from daily activities. Is literacy in practice shortchanging the student by forgetting to examine the sociopolitical implications of the literacy system?
Showing posts with label Prendergast. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Prendergast. Show all posts
Sunday, June 7, 2009
Friday, June 5, 2009
Other factors - Community values
[Pat]
Pat stopped going to high school when she got pregnant her senior year of high school. Soon after giving birth she started working at a meatpacking plant and saw no use in returning to school to graduate.
Years later, the same meatpacking plant that kept her out of school shut its doors. “I started looking for jobs but they all needed a GED.” Her only choice was to go back to school. She now devotes her time to preparing for the GED test that she plans on taking this summer.
“When I get my GED people will see me different for sure. Without that piece of paper, I was at a stand still. Once I get my GED, I’ll be on top of the world.”
Prendergast writes, "How people experience literacy development becomes bound up with how they perceive their own identity, and the identity of others" (Prendergast 10).
Although Pat now sees the value of literacy in her life, when she was younger she didn't see the point of education. There wasn't someone in her community to push her to quit working to go back to school. Making money was of utmost importance. Thus, literacy acquisition for Pat was tied to her perceived identity within her community and its values. In her community, it was more valuable to make money right away than to postpone the paycheck and return to school. Furthermore, in her community, there wasn't someone who could support Pat and her newborn child while she finished school. As a member of her community, she had little choice but to quit school to work at the meatpacking plant. This choice made the most sense to her life in her community.
Pat stopped going to high school when she got pregnant her senior year of high school. Soon after giving birth she started working at a meatpacking plant and saw no use in returning to school to graduate.
Years later, the same meatpacking plant that kept her out of school shut its doors. “I started looking for jobs but they all needed a GED.” Her only choice was to go back to school. She now devotes her time to preparing for the GED test that she plans on taking this summer.
“When I get my GED people will see me different for sure. Without that piece of paper, I was at a stand still. Once I get my GED, I’ll be on top of the world.”
Prendergast writes, "How people experience literacy development becomes bound up with how they perceive their own identity, and the identity of others" (Prendergast 10).
Although Pat now sees the value of literacy in her life, when she was younger she didn't see the point of education. There wasn't someone in her community to push her to quit working to go back to school. Making money was of utmost importance. Thus, literacy acquisition for Pat was tied to her perceived identity within her community and its values. In her community, it was more valuable to make money right away than to postpone the paycheck and return to school. Furthermore, in her community, there wasn't someone who could support Pat and her newborn child while she finished school. As a member of her community, she had little choice but to quit school to work at the meatpacking plant. This choice made the most sense to her life in her community.
Monday, June 1, 2009
Lolita's story - Literacy as the Path to Equal Opportunity
Lolita is a thirty-something single African American woman who has been living in West Garfield Park for most of her life. She is a rarity at Tolton. She’s not there to get her GED. She actually graduated from one of the high schools in the neighborhood. However, when she went to city college she struggled with her college courses.
Although Lolita says she went to a “pretty good high school,” the classes that she placed into were not designed for college-bound students.
She says, “I should have the skills. I don’t have the skills.”
She said that the reason that she quit college was because she couldn’t pass English 100. She took it four times and could not pass; the first three times, she received federal aid to pay for the classes, but the fourth time she had to pay for herself because the government will not pay for the same class more than three times. After she failed ENG100 a fourth time, Lolita couldn’t afford to stay in school. She wants to go back to school and study nursing (she has volunteered at a hospital for years) but wants to improve her writing first so that she can move beyond ENG100.
“Literacy will let me get higher paying jobs. It might take a while to move up… there are other factors that may keep you from moving up… but you need reading, writing, and understanding to move up in the world.”
For Lolita, the motivation for improving her reading, writing, a math skills is to be able to finally move toward her career as a nurse. She sees this as the only path to a better life. Lolita thinks that only through improved literacy will she be able to move in the path to equal opportunity.
Will Lolita's hard work at the Tolton Center really lead her to a better life? Or are there too many other factors that will keep her static despite her best try?
Catherine Prendergast wrote that after the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education decision that overturned the "separate but equal" mentality in public education, America has adopted the "notion of education as the path to equal opportunity" (Prendergast 2). Prendergast writes that the Brown v. Board of Ed decision basically created a false pretense of equal opportunity. In other words, when African American children were finally allowed to go to school with Whites, other factors that contributed to the oppression of African Americans were no longer taken into account.
What other factors of oppression are not being taken into account in Lolita's life? What about the "pretty good high school" that Lolita attended? Was it one of the underfunded public schools in Lolita's low-income neighborhood? Why did Lolita fail in community college? Was she perhaps enduring language policies that discriminated against African American English varieties?
I don't know the specifics about Lolita's life. I hope to be able to talk to her about these things some day. However, it is hard to imagine that she has had the same opportunities as someone living in a nicer part of town.
I agree with Prendergast in thinking that public education plays a big role in the perpetuation of the literacy myth. America believes that because the government provides all children with public education, that this puts everyone on equal footing to compete for jobs, access, and power. I wish I could tell Lolita that this is true.
Although Lolita says she went to a “pretty good high school,” the classes that she placed into were not designed for college-bound students.
She says, “I should have the skills. I don’t have the skills.”
She said that the reason that she quit college was because she couldn’t pass English 100. She took it four times and could not pass; the first three times, she received federal aid to pay for the classes, but the fourth time she had to pay for herself because the government will not pay for the same class more than three times. After she failed ENG100 a fourth time, Lolita couldn’t afford to stay in school. She wants to go back to school and study nursing (she has volunteered at a hospital for years) but wants to improve her writing first so that she can move beyond ENG100.
“Literacy will let me get higher paying jobs. It might take a while to move up… there are other factors that may keep you from moving up… but you need reading, writing, and understanding to move up in the world.”
For Lolita, the motivation for improving her reading, writing, a math skills is to be able to finally move toward her career as a nurse. She sees this as the only path to a better life. Lolita thinks that only through improved literacy will she be able to move in the path to equal opportunity.
Will Lolita's hard work at the Tolton Center really lead her to a better life? Or are there too many other factors that will keep her static despite her best try?
Catherine Prendergast wrote that after the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education decision that overturned the "separate but equal" mentality in public education, America has adopted the "notion of education as the path to equal opportunity" (Prendergast 2). Prendergast writes that the Brown v. Board of Ed decision basically created a false pretense of equal opportunity. In other words, when African American children were finally allowed to go to school with Whites, other factors that contributed to the oppression of African Americans were no longer taken into account.
What other factors of oppression are not being taken into account in Lolita's life? What about the "pretty good high school" that Lolita attended? Was it one of the underfunded public schools in Lolita's low-income neighborhood? Why did Lolita fail in community college? Was she perhaps enduring language policies that discriminated against African American English varieties?
I don't know the specifics about Lolita's life. I hope to be able to talk to her about these things some day. However, it is hard to imagine that she has had the same opportunities as someone living in a nicer part of town.
I agree with Prendergast in thinking that public education plays a big role in the perpetuation of the literacy myth. America believes that because the government provides all children with public education, that this puts everyone on equal footing to compete for jobs, access, and power. I wish I could tell Lolita that this is true.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)