Article published In: Literacy
[Australian Review of Applied Linguistics 9:2] 1986
► pp. 1–22
Defining literacy
Common myths and alternative readings
Published online: 1 January 1986
https://doi.org/10.1075/aral.9.2.01gra
https://doi.org/10.1075/aral.9.2.01gra
Abstract
This paper is concerned with crucial issues which need to be addressed in attempting to define literacy. Several persistent myths or common misreadings of the nature of literacy are critiqued, namely the myths of literacy as: an absolute, word perfect standard; a collection of functional skills; an autonomous, context-free and unified competence; and a means of economic benefit. Alternative definitions, differing radically from the myths in their reading of reality, are proposed. These argue for a broad, inclusive definition which takes into account two broad perspectives – (i) the essentially creative meaning-centred and relative nature of language learning or use, and (ii) the patterns of social and cultural contexts in which literate behaviours are learnt, developed, constrained by or act to constrain the literacy of others. A dual focus is argued for. First, a focus on individual learning and experience serves to highlight the essentially constructive, selective, purposeful nature of the literacy process and the organic relation between literacy, experience, personal growth and autonomy. Thus, literacy is seen as transcending exclusively linguistic considerations and empowering its possessors to make sense of, to read and reread their experience, both to “take meanings” from the world and to act to transform that world. The second essential focus entails the recognition that socio-cultural contexts, including the nature, availability or distribution of information and printed materials in a society, are a vital part of the literacy process itself, shaping the meaning, values status and conceptions of literacy practices or competences. Hence discussion moves to the wider definitional framework for the analysis of literacies as social practices embedded in socio-cultural contexts of parent-child relationships, socialization patterns and ideologies.
References (46)
Anderson, R. et al., (1985) Becoming a nation of readers: the report of the Commission on Reading. Champaign, IL. Centre for the study of reading, university of Illinois.
Boomer, G. (1983) In search of a universal literacy program. In J. Anderson and K. Lovett (eds.) Teaching reading and writing to every child. Adelaide, Australian Reading Association: 2–15
Bourke, S.F. and J.P. Keeves (1977) Australian studies in school performance: Volume III, the mastery of literacy and numeracy. Final Report, E.R.D.C., Report 13, Canberra, Australian Government Publishing Service.
Britton, J., T. Burgess, N. Martin, A. McLeod and H. Rosen (1975) The development of writing abilities 11–18. London, Macmillan Education.
Bruner, J. (1984) Language, mind and reading. In H. Goelman, A. Oberg and F. Smith (eds.) Awakening to literacy. Exeter, Heinemann: 193–200.
Cambourne, B. and P. Rousch (1980) There’s more to reading than meets the eye .... Australian Journal of Reading. 3,2, June:107–114.
Carroll, L. (1975) Alice’s adventures in wonderland and through the looking glass. Berkshire, Purnell Books.
De Ford, D. and J. Harste (1982) Child language research and curriculum. Language Arts. 59,6, September:590–600.
Foster, P. (1983) Keynote Address: 7th National Conference of the Australian Council for Adult Literacy, Canberra, October 1983. Literacy Link. 165,1:5–11.
Goodman, Y. and C. Burke (1980) Reading strategies: focus on comprehension. New York, Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Grant, A. (1985) Learning from the life stories of adult literacy students. Readings in adult basic education. Melbourne, Australian Council for Adult Literacy: 19–33.
(1986) Opportunity to do brilliantly: TAFE and the challenge of adult literacy provisions in Australia. Canberra, Australian Government Publishing Service.
(in press) Towards a transactive theory of the reading process and research in evaluation. Institute of Student Assessment and Evaluation, University of Florida.
Gribble, H. and A. Grant (1983) Adult literacy research report 1982-1983. Melbourne, Draft Report, Council of Adult Education.
Halliday, M. and R. Hasan (1980) Text and context: aspects of language in social-semiotic perspective, (Sophia Linguistica VI), Tokyo, Sophia university Press.
Harste, J., V. Woodward and C. Burke (1984) Examining our assumptions: a transactional view of literacy and learning. Research in the Teaching of English. 18,1, February:84–108.
Heath, S.B. (1982) What no bedtime story means: narrative skills at home and school. Language in Society. 111:49–76.
Hildyard, A. and D. Olson (1978) Literacy and the specialisation of language. Unpublished MS, Ontario Institute for Studies in Education.
Hunter, G. and D. Harman (1979) Adult literacy in the united States: a report to the Ford Foundation. New York, McGraw-Hill.
Levine, K. (1980) Becoming literate: final report on a research project Adult illiteracy and the socialization of adult illiterates. Dept. of Sociology, University of Nottingham.
(1982) Functional literacy: fond illusions and false economies. Harvard Educational Review. 52,3:249–266.
Moy, B. and M. Raleigh (1984) Comprehension: bringing it back alive. In J. Miller (ed.) Eccentric propositions. London, Routledge and Kegan Paul: 148–192.
Olson, D. (1977) From utterance to text: the bias of language in speech and writing. Harvard Educational Review. 47,3:257–281.
Pollock, Y. (1983) A study of the reading strategies of five adult literacy students. Unpublished report, School of Education, La Trobe University.
Cited by (2)
Cited by two other publications
Grant, Audrey N.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 14 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.
