But who decides if the functioning is effective? One faction says the individual. If people aren't bothered by their own low skills, then they're not functionally illiterate even if, like a Grade 12 graduate now in a Windsor literacy program, they must write down 2 + 2 in order to add to 4, instead of doing it in their heads. But the majority view defines functional literacy as having the reading, writing and numbers skills necessary to perform tasks demanded by the community and, especially, by the job. Some experts fear an overemphasis on functional tasks could shove fundamental reading and writing into the background. One experienced literacy instructor in British Columbia complained that the tasks in the Southam survey were based on experience rather than competency. "They reflect middle-class values and assumptions," wrote Cindy Onstad of Vancouver Community College. Onstad agreed the task of calculating the ticket and transportation costs to an event was "a good choice." But "that becomes ridiculous when the event is the play On the Town and the place is Stratford." No objections to the survey questions were received from the jurors who worked in smelters, steelmills, on farms or as literacy co-ordinators. Literacy students at the Saint John Learning Exchange, however, said they would feel more comfortable calculating costs for a ball game than a play. In its landmark l985 study of Americans aged 21 to 25, the National Assessment of Education Progress went one step further, talking only about levels of literacy rather than use the term illiterate. Literacy, said NAEP, is "using printed and written information to function in society, to achieve one's goals and to develop one's knowledge and potential." As expected, others disagreed and the debate rages on. Southam's literacy jury included: Margaret Atwood, author, Toronto; |
| Back | Table of Contents | Next |