Comment on Adult Literacy as Social Practices by Uta Papen

Overall I found this to be an informative, straightforward read. For those who took Sociolinguistics last semester, I think Prof. Rorschach assigned it. (Correct me if I'm wrong!) Some quotes looked very familiar. Reading more of Uta Papen's writings is shining a light for me on many concepts which I've been hearing repeated since last year, such as the various definitions of literacy. Particularly interesting was the difference described, between functional and basic literacy: "Basic literacy appears to place greater importance overall on the individual and their needs, whereas functional literacy, as already argued, moves the debate away from the individual towards externally-set needs for reading and writing -- that is, literacy becomes linked to work-related skills and emphasises society's demands on the individual. Both concepts, however, conceive of literacy as a set of neutral, technical skills, which have little if anything to do with culture and society. In this view, literacy itself is valued for its assumed benefits. These are believed to be to enable learning and access to information, and thereby to support knowledge acquisition, to develop thinking and to improve the individual's chances of finding employment and income." I agree with this statement because I find that literacy having to do with culture and society is the next step beyond its basic and functional forms. I see literacy as something more than just a tool to get to a better life, but also as a way of life. Mention of Paulo Freire in Papen's writings is so helpful Until now I had not seen any other straightforward mention of his theories and work in our class readings, though he's been mentioned in class discussions. If I were to choose a favorite literacy of all it would be critical literacy, based on the following quotes from Papen's essay: "Critical literacy refers tot the potential of literacy as not only 'reading the word,' but also 'reading the world' (Freire and Macedo 1987)." "...for Freire, literacy was political and the question of how to teach adults to read and write became part of a political project, and was no longer seen as a neutral technique as in the functional view." "Contrary to the functional model, critical literacy's primary purpose is not to help the individual to move up higher on the existing social ladder, but a radical critique of the dominant culture and the existing power relationship between social groups." Freire expresses what I had in mind when reading about literacy as a basic and functional tool, that it is meant to provide something more for humans, whether in developing countries or developed countries. One new concept for me which I haven't heard mentioned much in class (though mentioned only briefly) is liberal literacy. It makes sense that this theory was developed in a diverse nation such as Britain. Finally I enjoyed reading more about Papen's interpretation of discourse and normalisation, especially her second point in this section: "Secondly, if we think about normalisation in the sense of some people or some institutions trying to impose their way of looking at literacy on others, we can begin to look at power in relation to literacy. We can ask who determines what literacy levels people need to attain, what kind of reading and writing skills they should acquire and how this should be achieved. And, whose interests are being served by a particular literacy policy?" These are all very important questions to ask. All we do know about literacy has become the "norm" in our society. Become literate, become empowered, get a job, etc. Questioning normalization is especially important when certain practices are not working for certain populations.