To point out that these forms of literacy are ignored in literacy tests is not to fault the tests. The measurement problems involved in testing them would be difficult and perhaps insurmountable: we could not say what it is in general to write the story of one's life adequately; and the literacy of public discourse involves not just informational reading, but critical reading from diverse perspectives. But even if these forms of literacy are difficult to measure, they are important in literacy practice. People often come to study because they want to write their stories, and many programs find that learners' stories and other narratives, in fiction or history, are at the heart of literacy work. Other people come to study because they "want to know what's going on in the world." Literacy workers see this every day.

"Illiterate" is only a label

The most common use of literacy statistics is to assert that a certain proportion of people can't cope with everyday literacy demands. But such claims do not tell us how many people can avoid everyday literacy demands by using information sources other than print, or asking someone for help. They do not tell us how many people feel that limited literacy is a problem, feel a need or desire to improve their literacy. Neither do they tell us how much literacy programming we should provide.

In literacy programs, we see that many people strongly associate literacy with personal competence and satisfaction, and with social effectiveness. Media accounts often portray people who are "hungry for words." It is however clear from surveys, as from programming experience, that not all those identified as having limited literacy feel "hungry," or think they have a problem. For example, of those classified as functionally illiterate in the Southam study, only 4 in 10 said they needed help with written information from government or business; only 2 in 10 said they were held back in any way by limited reading and writing; only 1 in 10 said they might study in a program. The Statistics Canada survey shows that only 13% of adult Canadians feel their literacy skills are not adequate to work, job opportunities or job search, or some other area of life (compared to a total of 38% who have some level of difficulty dealing with everyday printed materials). Of those who reported inadequate skills in some area, 9% are now taking some course, 53% might someday take one, and 39% have no intention of taking one. The data on levels of literacy ability and self-perceptions of literacy need is only beginning to be incorporated into the public discussion.¹⁵