Defining Literacy of the Variances between L1 and L2 - Literature review Example

Table of Content Table of Content 1 Introduction 2 2 Defining Literacy 2 3 L1 and L2 Literacy 4 4 Socio-Cultural and Ideological Implications 6 5 Conclusion 8 5 Bibliography 9 1 Introduction Within the parameters of intensively competitive labor and job markets, on the one hand, and global markets for goods and services, on the other, literacy, in all its variant forms and manifestations, has assumed unique importance. Whether as relates to immigrant L2 communities in the United States or native citizens, literacy often emerges as a non-negotiable criterion for employment and hence, the capacities and abilities of individuals to integrate into their societies and become constructive members therein. Given the importance of literacy, both on the individual and the societal levels, understanding what literacy means, clarifying the variances between L1 and L2 literacy and outlining the socio-cultural and ideological implications of literacy emerge as the primary concerns and objectives of this paper. 2 Defining Literacy Popular understandings of literacy as the ability to read and write, while accurate, effectively obscure the inherent complexities of the term and over-simplify its implications. As Speilmann and Radnofsky (2001) contend, literacy extends beyond the narrow parameters of the aforementioned definition to encompass the communicative skills requisite for both integration in society and the realization of individual career and social potentials and aspirations. Concurring with the aforementioned Kern (2000) defines literacy as "an elastic concept: its meaning varies according to the disciplinary lens through which one examines it." It is, from this definitional perspective, a mercurial and fluid concept, both difficult to pin down and even more problematic to pin down. Not withstanding the fluid nature of the concept or the multiple contending definitions which surround it, Tompkins (2001) defines concept as functional/basic and computer/post-modern literacy. The former refers to the capacity to read and write with some degrees of skill and competency. The latter, whose importance has expanded with the onset of the present century, references computer skills and an individual's ability to use and work with computers and other information technologies. The proliferation of computers as a primary medium of communication and information exchange has, according to McGrail (2007), made computer literacy as important as basic/functional literacy, insofar as the former is needed just as much as is the latter for employment and social integrative, let alone communicative, purposes. In further testament to the highly complex and multi-dimensional nature of literacy Baynham (1995) identifies six literacy models. These are the (1) skills development, (2) the therapeutic, (3) the personal empowerment, (4) the social empowerment, (5) functional and (6) the critical models of literacy. Taken together, these models effectively underscore the extent, to which literacy facilitates all of personal development, social integration and the acquisition of career/job skills, on the one hand, and allows an individual to realize his/her potential, on the other. Proceeding on the basis of the literature reviewed in the above, it is evident that literacy encompasses far more than reading and writing skills. Indeed, it may very well be defined as the primary predicator of social and professional success. The concept, complex enough as it is, is rendered even more so upon its contextualization with L1 and L2 frameworks. 3 L1 and L2 Literacy Within the context of an L2 setting, the definition of literacy, as outlined in the preceding section, retains both its validity and viability. Hayes and Schrier (2000) make this amply clear when they define L2 literacy as socio-communicative skills within a non-mother tongue environment or linguistic setting. In the L2 setting, just as in the L1, being literate means possessing reading and writing skills and having the capacity to utilize those skills in both social and professional contexts, ultimately facilitating the socio-cultural integration of immigrant communities into their host socio-cultural environments and communities. Insofar as L1 literacy implies the same, one may affirm that L1 and L2 literacy and the implications of being either L1 or L2 literate add to the same thing. The difference between the two, at least according to Robertson (2006), is one of degrees and strategy. The first identifiable difference between L1 and L2 is one of degrees. Duff, Wong and Early (2002) highlight this last upon clarifying that L2 literacy does not require that a person attain the linguistic proficiency levels of an L1 speaker but only that he/she acquire a level of writing, reading, and speaking communication skills as would allow for the fulfillment of the purposes of literacy. That is, personal, social and career development. In other words, and may also be inferred from Roberston's (2006) discussion, L2 literacy requirements and standards are not as stringent as those for L1. A second difference between the two lies in the strategies by which each is acquired. Researchers have emphasized that within the context of L1 acquisition, linguistic proficiency and comprehension precedes formal training in reading and writing. In the L2 setting, however, linguistic acquisition and proficiency may not precede literacy and indeed, the one may be acquired and taught alongside the other. Needless to say, and especially given that the L2 speaker may be accustomed to a very different linguistic tradition, as pertains to all of speaking, reading and writing, the acquisition of L2 literacy may be fat more complicated than the acquisition of L1 literacy (Hayes and Schrier, 2000; Baker, 2001; Kenner, 2004; Roberston, 2006). There are a number of implications to the above stated. The first is that the definitions of L1 and L2 literacy correspond, just as do the reasons for the acquisition of either and the benefits of doing so. This, however, does not imply that they two forms of literacy are interchangeable as, they are ultimately differentiated by degrees. The implication of the aforementioned is that L1 literacy requirements are somewhat higher than those for L2. Added to that, strategies fir the acquisition of either are different. Consequently, even though the literacy development of L2 speakers, as Roberson (2006) notes may be parallel to that of L1 speakers, it is not identifiable to it. Hence, even though the definitions betray a strong similarity, there are important areas of difference between them. 4 Socio-Cultural and Ideological Implications Literacy, as Kern (2000) quite rightly maintains, is primarily a lingo-cognitive phenomenon. Literacy skills effectively endow a person with the means by which to express himself, communicate with others, and comprehend that which others are communicating. Added to that, land as both Kern (2000) and Buffington (2007) assert, literacy effectively provides an individual with the tools requisite for engagement in critical thinking and, accordingly, invaluably contributes to both the development and the expansion of cognition. Indeed, the aforementioned is self-evident to the extent that it hardly needs expounding upon. Mire interesting to consider, however, is the socio-cultural and ideological dimensions of literacy, as attested to by several scholars. Language, as may be inferred by the totality of Kern's (2000) discussion is a socio-cultural construct with ideological implications and undertones. Language, the taxonomy, idioms and modes of formal and informal expression contained therein, are expressive of a particular culture and ideology. Therefore, the acquisition of literacy in any particular language, the acquisition of communicative skills, implies both the attainment of an understanding of the culture in question and the tools by which to negotiate one's way within (Kern, 2000). Kern (2000) is hardly alone in his identification of a socio-cultural and ideological dimension to both L1 and l2 literacy. Freebody and Luke (1990) make much the same point in their emphasis upon language as a cultural terrain and as the primary tool for social interaction. Indeed, as may be inferred from both the named researchers and Wallace (1992) the acquisition of literacy requires a level of textual engagement as which can only be attained through an understanding, however basic, of the culture which produced the text, the language in question. The point here is that literacy does not simply mean reading and understanding written word on a lexical level but on understanding that which is read on the socio-cultural and ideological level, as which allows for the comprehension of underlying meanings and the detection of the between the lines' meaning (Freebody and Luke, 1990; Wallace, 1992). The fact that language, and by association literacy, has socio-cultural and ideological dimensions, evidences the difficulties which may confront L2 literacy seekers. Quite simply stated, they are operating within the parameters of what, to them, is a foreign culture whose nuances they will hardly be in a position to comprehend as much as will an L1 speaker. It is, thus, that L2 literacy levels are less stringent than are L1 literacy levels and that the acquisition of the former, L2 literacy, occurs alongside a process of acculturation into the culture which produced the language being learnt. 5 Conclusion As presented in the foregoing, the concept of literacy is a fluid, even mercurial one which, although definable, resists absolute and concrete definitions. While it withstands accurate definition as the ability to read and write, that definition is constantly evolving parallel to the evolution of knowledge and technology. Accordingly, its parameters have recently expanded to include computer and IT literacy. This, in itself, evidences the complex nature of the concept in question. This complexity is only exacerbated upon consideration of the similarities and differences between L1 and L2 learning, on the one hand, and the socio-cultural and ideological dimensions of language/literacy on the other. Critical consideration of all of the aforementioned ultimately lends to the conclusion that both L1 and L2 constitute rich areas of exploration and investigation. 5 Bibliography Buffington, M.L. (2007). Contemporary approaches to critical thinking and the World Wide Web. Art Education, 60. Duff, P.A., Wong, P. and Early, M. (2002) Language learning for work and life: The linguistic socialization of immigrant Canadians seeking careers in healthcare.' The Modern Language Journal, 86(3) Hayes, N. and Schrier, L. (2000) Encouraging second language literacy in the early grades.' Hispania, 83(2). McGrail, E. (2007). Laptop technology and pedagogy in the English language arts classroom. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 15. Spielmann, G. and Radnofsky, M.L. (2001) Learning language under tension: New directions from a qualitative study.' The Modern Language Journal, 85(2). Read More