Literacy levels and orality... are they the same thing?

[Stephen M Young II]

I've been doing some research about the Baton Rouge area (where I grew up) and the statistics show that 28% of the Baton Rouge population functions at the lowest level of literacy. (National Assessment of Adult Literacy).

Does this mean we are looking at about a third of the population as oral learners in the Baton Rouge area, or is there more to the story?

[Paul.Mark]

My educated guess is that the orality rate is almost always significantly greater than the non- or low-literacy rate. Reason being that many people who have learned to decipher marks on paper--which we call reading--still prefer an oral communication style for most purposes. I like the way J.O. Terry puts it, "I believe that we are all oral and that any literacy we have rests upon that orality and in time may suppress our orality to some extent. But we reserve many corners of our lives to orality as our preferred mode of thinking and communicating." J.O.Terry (personal email, 3-2006).

[Regina Manley]

I believe you need to look beyond literacy levels to how people receive and share information. Tex Sample has coined the term "Traditional Oral" people in his book "Ministry in an Oral Culture: LIving with Will Rogers, Uncle Remus and Minnie Pearl." Many Traditional Oral people DO know how to read, but they rarely use this skill in daily life and relationships. MOst of these will be in the 2 lowest literacy levels (that run about 50% of the adult US population, regardless of where they live!). A good summary of how they relate to social change includes the following characteristics quoted from page 72:
Thinking in stories, proverbs and relationships
Memorization
Mentoring and apprenticeship
The focus on concrete and practical life
Empathic and relational morality
The use of tradition and traditional authority
Resistance and subversion
Gatherings
Arguing, fussing, complaining and gossiping
Solidarities
Factions and factional conflicts

I'd encourage you to consider using oral communication strategies as useful for dealing with the MAJORITY of adults in most areas of the US.
Regina Manley
MAF-LT Orality Specialist
[e-mail]

[Jim Stahl]

Thanks for the question. Yes, I definitely think that the issue is more complex, than not being functionally literate equating oral learner status. The topic of orality is broad and complex and oral learners can be functionally literate. Some of this behavior has to do with tradition, personality, experience and social settings. Literacy also is a complex idea and varies from application and setting.

In some ways, oral stories can foster motivation for literate behaviors. And stories can help people makes sense of their world.

Finding a solution to illiteracy is also complex, but some of it has to do with frequency, motivation, some economic, and some social and cultural.

I'm just touching the surface, but I hope this helps.

Jim

[Tom Stout]

I think one of the mistakes we make is we say "orality is the opposite of literate". This is comparing apples and oranges. Orality is at it's root a "learning style" and literacy addresses an "acquired skill".

It is more helpful to me when I limit the discussion to "cognitive learning styles". Now there are lots of ways to slice and dice learning styles, but the one I have found most helpful is the distinction between Field-Dependent learners and Field-Independent learners. The majority of people that are oral and secondary oral learners will be field-dependent, where those from more literate groups will be mostly field-independent.

Why is this distinction important? Because it gets us out of the the rut of thinking that the only way we can teach oral learners is by storying the Bible. There are good journal articles and practical studies that provide a myriad of ways we might be able to teach someone who's cognitive learning style is "Field Dependency" more effectively.

My context is Paraguay, South America and we are teaching FD learners almost exclusively. Some have more skills in literacy than others, but they are definately FD learners for the most part.

Most of the stuff that I have read about cognitive learning styles tells me that these ways of learning are established at an early age, and once established, form the basis for the way that person will naturally process information for the rest of his life.

So someone who has an established FD learning style may adapt very well to a North American university teaching style which is focused on FI learners, but unless he stays in the environment or re-enforces that way of learning, he will slowly drift back into learning in a FD way.

Colors, Teacher Student Relationships, Peer on Peer relationships, Teaching material organization and Clasroom setting, to name a few, have all been studied with cognitive learning styles in mind.

Have I peeked your interest? Do you want to read more? Visit my Google group:
http://groups.google.com/group/beyond-storying
There you will find articles you can download and discussions that you can participate in. You will have to wait for me to approve your membership, as some of the participants are from challenging parts of this world.

I hope that you will find this info helpful.