[NLA] Literacy Day 2002

[Eileen Eckert]

There was much to provoke reflection in Archie's message, but I'm just 
responding to this statement: "If we are going to help, first we need to 
encourage people who need help, then help mend their broken spirits before 
they can improve their reading and writing. Somehow the hidden spark inside 
of them that will make them want to have a better life needs to be found and 
kindled. All the testing and facts are useless without some kind of initial 
moral support."

There has been mention before on this list of the teacher's and program's 
responsibilities and expectations for students. Some have said that if 
students do not come to programs "ready" to learn--emotionally, 
attitudinally, with the situational barriers of child care and 
transportation taken care of--then the programs cannot and shouldn't be 
expected to help them. In other words, the program's and the teacher's job 
is academic skill development--reading, writing, and/or arithmetic.

Another view--the one I think Archie is espousing--is that literacy, 
schooling, and one's sense of self are inextricably bound together, and that 
anyone who is dealing with adults with low literacy also needs to deal with 
the "spiritual" damage that comes with it. In other words, programs and 
teachers can't take the "not my problem" attitude and only deal with those 
who are "ready"--at least not if we want to make gains in adult literacy in 
our communities and society as a whole.

What does this have to do with policy? First, David's question about waiting 
lists made me look at waiting lists in terms of the issue of learner 
readiness. If our responsibilities are limited to academic development, then 
waiting lists are fine. If they're ready and motivated, they'll come back. 
However, if we consider it our responsibility to deal with a whole person, 
attitudes, fears and all, then waiting lists are not okay. Someone who is 
turned away may never gather the courage to try again.

Second, Tom's post about literacy funding seems to me to be related. I think 
it's a chicken-and-egg problem, but serious and chronic underfunding and a 
limited view of programs' responsibilities to learners go hand in hand.

I have to disagree with one statement Archie made: literacy is not a gift 
from society to the learner. Literacy benefits society as a whole as much as 
it does the literate individual. We don't just owe it to learners to meet 
their needs, we owe it to ourselves, our communities, the world, and future 
generations to build an informed and literate society by helping people--one 
by one--to become literate.

Eileen




_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com

_______________________________________________
NLA mailing list: NLA at lists.literacytent.org
http://lists.literacytent.org/mailman/listinfo/nla
LiteracyTent: web hosting, news, community and goodies for literacy
http://literacytent.org