I think that Kaestle’s definition of literacy as “the ability to decode and comprehend written language at a rudimentary level, that is, the ability to look at written words corresponding to ordinary oral discourse, to say them, and to understand them” (13) is limiting. While literacy has been largely attributed to reading and writing, I have studied visual literacy and technological literacy very frequently. The term, from my own studies, is applied broadly as possessing a capability for comprehension and response, but not necessarily confined to the boundaries of written works or to oral discourse.
From the article “Literacy and Literacies”, Collins develops a “distinction between a universalist or autonomous literacy, seen as a general, uniform set of techniques and uses of language, with identifiable stages and clear consequences for culture and cognition, and relativist or situated literacies, seen as diverse, historically and culturally variable practices with texts.” (Collins 76) I think that Collins’ definition is much closer to what I would attribute literacy to. Not only does he move away from literacy as a means of socially improvement, but he gives a fuller consideration to how literacy can be understand within a variety of cultural contexts. I think that his use of the term “texts” is critical. While we could interpret this to mean strictly written texts, I think that it can more broadly be used in the study of literacy. Texts, from my perspective, can include visual media, audio recordings, online media, and physical, traditional texts. I think that when viewed as a universal set of techniques or as simply a means of translating oral discourse, removes possibility from what literacy is and can be. We could apply literacy to everyday occurrences. To reading signs, to reading grocery lists, to interacting with artwork, to listening to podcasts. My issue with Kaestle’s definition of literacy is that it simplifies a term that has a broad and mutable definition – a definition that can be applied from countless perspectives and fields of study. If we expand our definition of literacy, we can see more broadly how literacy is present in different genres, discourses, and communities.
