Complexity behind ‘Literacy’
What is “Literacy?” When a professor asks such a question, we are always hesitant to answer because we are not sure if it is a ‘tricky question’ or not. As we have learned in middle school, high school, and even a few semesters of college, we know the term “literacy” refers to someone’s ability to read and write, especially considering this is practically the definition most dictionaries provide to the public. So why are we puzzled and timid to respond to such a question? Indeed, we can agree that the definition above is not inaccurate, but from this reading, we can also assert that there is much more to this term than simply having the ability to read and write. In James Paul Gee’s “Literacy, Discourse, and Linguistics: Introduction,” he gives a much more complex definition of literacy. He explains that literacy goes beyond the basics of understanding to reading and writing. In addition, he supports his thesis by explaining why literacy is not simply the ability to analyze texts and shows how literacy also involves understanding and participating in the social and cultural practices associated with different forms of discourse.
The Various Forms of Discourse
Now, before we continue this blog, I should note that the term discourse alone is quite difficult to comprehend– at least for me– if you will, especially considering that there are multiple forms of discourse. These include the following: primary and secondary discourse, non-dominant secondary, and dominant secondary. Gee states, “All of us, through our primary socialization early in life in the home and peer group, acquire (at least) one initial Discourse. This initial Discourse, which I call our primary Discourse, is the one we first use to make sense of the world and interact with others.” I was born and raised in a Creole-French dominant cultural and social background, so it is my primary language of communication. I was raised in a household with my two parents and three siblings- our social and economic status and religious beliefs are my primary discourse. This initial discourse, which could also be referred to as primary dominant if we wish to be pedantic, is always family. The first group of people you interact with.
Gee defines secondary Discourse as a specific language and communication style required for individuals to participate effectively in particular social and institutional contexts. Secondary Discourse may include formal or informal vocabulary, terminology, and specific ways of interaction with one another. For example, this can be the language/communication style that we use when talking/discussing with Professor Friend or hanging out with friends generally. When we talk to Professor Friend, we speak in a professional, “college” manner because we wish to gain something from the conversation, whether it is advice on assignments or mentorship insights. This is a secondary dominant Discourse, as we are aiming to develop some status to get ahead in life– it can be economically or socially. Furthermore, secondary non-dominant discourse is the latter example stated above. This is when you are in discourse and are not trying to develop any form of status– basically, you are in that discourse for enjoyment and pleasure. In this case, hanging out with your friends is our example. When you hang out with your friends, the thought of growing socially or economically does not cross your mind. Sure, you can think of it every so often, but the way the groups communicate, you are not seeking that same growth you are as opposed to my other example.
“Discourse” vs. “discourse”
Moreover, In Gee’s text, he discusses why the term “discourse” does not hold the same meaning as “Discourse.” Gee explains his perceptual view of the terms by declaring that Discourse is essentially the combination of “saying (writing) -doing- being-valuing-believing.” He states that “discourse is the connected stretches of language that make sense, so ‘discourse’ is part of ‘Discourse.” So, in a much-simplified explanation, Discourse encompasses the broader sociocultural systems, values, and practices that shape how language is used within specific social/cultural groups and communities, while discourse is how we use language to communicate in particular situations.
Importance of Digital Literacy
Comically and somewhat embarrassingly enough, I never knew or heard of ‘digital literacy’ until the first day of our class. I had an understanding of the term because it was fairly straightforward, but I did not understand its significance. That is, until I read “Becoming Literate in the Information Age: Cultural Ecologies and the Literacies of Technology” by Gail E. Hawisher and Cynthia Selfe. In this text, the author does a phenomenal job of highlighting the importance of digital literacy, conveying why we should be knowledgeable of digital literacy. We must understand why it is vital, especially considering how rapid and innovative technology is becoming. The author conveys this by comparing two women, Melissa Pearson, an African-American born in 1964, and Brittney Moraski, who was born in 1986. In Melissa’s generation, the idea of digital literacy was around, but it was limited. Melissa knew about some computers, but she was not familiar with them until her college years when she had to fabricate her resume for a job. I am sure many individuals were digitally literate from Melissa’s era, but then we had to include their status, wealth, and possibly even skin color. Melissa’s primary Discourse believed that education and hard work were beneficial for a successful life. So, Melissa was academically driven and had an aptitude for learning–but a computer, where she could develop her digital literacy skills, was not accessible. Melissa’s hardworking nature gave her the ability to study and learn how to operate a computer, and thus, her development in digital literacy started.
Conversely, Brittney, born in a suburban household where the same ideals of education were shared by both primary Discourses, had exceptional digital literacy skills at sixteen years- old. Her primary Discourse had a computer available for her at the age of five years old. She knew how to function in photoshop programs, send emails, use Microsoft money, and grow her expertise past her parents. This was practically second nature to her because she was so accustomed to computers– but for most individuals in Melissa’s era, it took them countless years to understand the basic functions. Both generations knew how important digital literacy was, but factoring accessibility and primary Discourse, it took them different lengths to get accustomed to the technological world. I think that is what is so fascinating about both stories. Both women in this article enjoy literature and value education, but think of it as a 50-50 coin toss on who has to face the challenges the most. It is completely arbitrary, which is somewhat ‘cool’ but disheartening. The same 50-50 coin toss can be said for individuals born in the 1980s: Many people in Britteny’s era did not have access to computers until they were in their mid-twenties, as opposed to Brittney, who had them at five years of age.
Leave a Reply