[NLA] Discourse on adult literacy

[Catherine King]

A short note to Andrea and George, who have
apparently misunderstood my comments about
the relationship between capitalism, 
commonwealth and democracy.  

I said their **principles**  are opposed if the are 
"at their worst."     If you need an example,
try slavery, or labor mills, or the reason why
labor unions needed to rise in this country before
the turn of the last century; or if you need a more
available example, try Erin Brockovich.   

Neither capitalism nor business is bad as such.  
But when we replace the principles that drive 
commonwealth and democracy with the principles 
that drive capitalism **alone**, i.e., our health industry, 
it becomes an extremely dangerous social evil.   

Education has been slipping down that slope for
a long time.  One manifestation of it is the obsession
with assembly-line type "results."  

Democracy and commonwealth will always rightly
have a tensional relationship with capitalism and its
financial base, but the balance is on its way to being 
out of order.

My exact comment to Andrea was:

"Education has an economic base, but if seen in 
only economic terms, it becomes a tool for anything 
but democracy and development of adults."

And to Tom I said:  

I think the use of "investment" "is degrading to 
education by marking a dangerous blending of the 
ideas of capitalism with those that support 
commonwealth--vastly different principles that, at 
best, are tensional and, at worst, are violently 
antithetical and have been shown to be so in 
historical events too numerous to mention."

If you depict what I say, please do it correctly.

Happy New Year to all,

Catherine King 

.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: George E. Demetrion <sophocles5 at juno.com>
To: <nla at lists.literacytent.org>
Sent: Tuesday, January 01, 2002 6:05 PM
Subject: [NLA] Discourse on adult literacy


> (Note:  This is a bit long in part because I include substantive
> statements by others).
> 
> Colleagues:
> 
> For a variety of reasons, I think this discussion on investment imagery
> is an important one for our field, particularly if one assume that
> language and beliefs have a significant impact on reality.  I briefly
> comment on the last 4 messages on this topic, by David Hayes, Andrea
> Wilder, Catherine King, and Harry Foster.  Among the several critically
> important points David H. made, I refer to the following:
> 
> "The possibility that AE isn't even on the radar for mainstream Americans
> suggests that a public awareness campaign would need to make an issue out
> of something that isn't an issue to them already (contrast this with,
> say, an antismoking campaign). Thus, the appeal would do well to go
> initially to an issue which Americans are familiar with and already
> embrace, such as equal opportunity.  While they may not be aware of the
> range of barriers in place which limit access to the social and economic
> opportunity they enjoy (and uncomfortable or ambiguous about eliminating
> some of them), mainstream Americans are probably largely in agreement
> that equal opportunity is critical to our national well-being, and that
> education lays the foundation for equal opportunity.  By painting a
> picture of the opportunities denied to people of all ages, races, and
> beliefs -- and with an equally wide range of reasons for not having been
> well educated in the K-12 system -- we can generate public support for
> the idea that people who have not been well educated deserve to be
> educated because it is as much their right as anyone else's, regardless
> of whether they are over 18 or under 18."
>  
> I would simply add my agreement with these comments that equal
> opportunity language offers a potentially viable way of shifting language
> on literacy, from more restrictive versions on ROI that might be narrowly
> construed, to common sense language about democracy.  I can't think of an
> organization that could make this case more powerfully than VALUE which
> can also show that such opportunity also results in individuals making
> more viable contributions to important social institutions of the family,
> workplace, and community.  Thus, providing such expanded opportunities
> that increased support to adult literacy education would result in, can
> also be seen as a sound social investment.
>  
> With Andrea, I agree that the idea of "investment in democracy," as
> commented upon above, is a good way of moving the imagery issue forward
> toward more empowering notions.  I also agree with her that democracy and
> capitalism do not represent opposite poles.  Rather, as I might put it,
> democracy and capitalism represent the two most powerful and enduring
> sources of sustained influence inherent within the US political culture. 
> Therefore, that the task, as I see it, is to construct a viable politics
> of literacy within the US that is grounded in some version of democratic
> capitalism. 
> 
> The concern, rather, is the tendency to reduce discourse on the public
> value of adult literacy through a somewhat narrow economic calculus that
> "return on investment" language often portrays, which is a business
> metaphor that has also been appropriated by the government in the Clinton
> era through the aegis of "reinventing government."  This is clearly
> spelled out in Merrifield's NCSALL policy study, Contested Ground.  So,
> based on this vision of democratic capitalism, the goal, as I see it, is
> to help shift discourse about literacy a bit more toward the democratic
> pole, perhaps starting with an expansion of what the notion of investment
> means, such as investment in democracy as Andrea suggests, and then, via
> the support of VALUE and EFF, incorporating specific democratic language
> into discourse about the field.
>  
> In her last message, some of what Catherine King says is the following:
> 
> "That, whatever terms we use in advocacy, we need to 
> include in our understanding of advocacy the more 
> comprehensive relationship of adult education 
> education) to democracies and to the civilizing of peoples. 
> 
> A part of our "civilizing" ourselves means the long-term
> effects of communities supporting places where continuing
> education is respected and even hallowed, and where people 
> from all groups come together with a common purpose
> (religions, ages, genders, races, families, classes).   
> 
> I suggest that, though we in the United States have come far
> in our efforts to include everyone and to rid ourselves from
> such blights as racism, sexism, classism, etc., I doubt anyone
> can claim we are finished with this project--it is, as it were,
> "continuing."  
>  
>  The law is where we work that out when we cannot settle it for 
> ourselves.  But the community is where our hearts are,
> and, though the law is essential, civility is in the heart.  
>  
> Adult education **in its broader sense** sets up the conditions to
> change people's hearts.  All of the other important issues that
> Tom and others speak to are absolutely essential.  But the whole
> thing is couched in the development of civilized communities.
>  
> I suggested that, in our advocacy, if we do not understand and take
> up the theme of developing ourselves as civilized, democratic 
> communities to those who claim to work in-for-and-of a democracy
> under commonwealth principles, we will have squandered our 
> long-term investment potential by not betting on the best horse. 
>  
> I also suggest, if we are to join leaders in the international 
> community, that we need to introduce and maintain this broader
> intimate identity of adult education to civilized democracies in
> our rhetoric so perhaps others, who do not understand how 
> important adult education is to everyone's long-term survival,
> may begin to do so."
>  
> Yes, I agree with all of this, that adult literacy education at its best 
> makes an important contribution in the development of viable and healthy
> communities, so in that sense, it contributes to the inherent worth of
> the commonwealth, the collective people.  If one goes to the VALUE web
> page and reads the biographies of the students who are listed there, one
> will see a manifestation of this, where through adult literacy education,
> individuals are also contributing to the commonwealth, or as I put in
> different language yesterday, to the mediating institutions and
> organizations of family, work, and community.  Without argument or
> elaboration, this is also   the claim of EFF, so in addition to equal
> opportunity language, discourse about "investment in democracy, the
> contribution of VALUE to the culture and society as well as more
> specifically to our field, democratic discourse can also be extended
> through language provided by EFF.  All of this contributes to the
> commonwealth tradition as discussed by Catherine.
> 
> Also, I would add to this, the importance of our national volunteer
> literacy agencies.  In addition to the important work they provide in
> assisting adults in basic literacy and ESOL instruction, they also
> contribute to the public good through the ethos of voluntarism, which is
> a major core value within the culture of the United States.  Volunteers
> play a substantial role within the adult literacy sector not simply as
> tutors, but as trainers, as specialists of a wide sort, and providing
> support also on boards of directors, helping to keep the institutions
> that provide these basic services intact and viable.  Thus, through the
> service of such volunteers, the ethos of voluntarism is strengthened, a
> cultural value of no small proportion in the commonwealth (if you will)
> of the United States.
> 
> Finally, from Harry Foster, I comment on his three terms, "return on
> investment," "cost benefits," and "quality of life."  On the first two
> terms, the critique that I am issuing is aimed simply at a somewhat
> reductive use of "return on investment" language particularly when tied
> to a cost-benefits analysis interpreted predominantly through the venue
> of economic worth, including the use of metaphors and arguments that draw
> predominantly on such language.  As stated above, an elaboration of the
> meaning of investment beyond such a narrow calculus is an important step
> toward a more comprehensive vision of adult literacy grounded in a more
> democratic discourse, though keeping attuned to the importance of
> bridging in any language shifting, as I have argued.  Finally, on the
> "quality of life" language yes, that also can be utilized to structure
> discourse about the value of adult literacy in a more comprehensive
> direction.
> 
> In short, the various comments by David, Andrea, Catherine, and Harry
> provide much food for thought in the rethinking of issues related to the
> discourses to which draws upon in discussing the public value of adult
> literacy education.  May this thoughtful discussion continue.
> 
> George Demetrion
> Literacy Volunteers of Greater Hartford
> Sophocles5 at juno.com
> 
> 
> ________________________________________________________________
> GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
> Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
> Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:
> http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/.
> _______________________________________________
> 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