6 How is critical literacy different from functional literacy?
In the previous section we gave some explanations about the specific ways of understanding functional literacy. In this section we are going to ask you to engage as learners in the process of clarifying and developing your own understanding of critical literacy. As well as asking you to actively analyse the concept and relevant texts, we will be asking you to reflect on texts related to critical literacy.
Activity 6
1. Using a search engine designed to find academic papers, such as Google Scholar [Tip: hold Ctrl and click a link to open it in a new tab. (Hide tip)] , what information do you find if you search for ‘critical literacy’ as a keyword? Think about the following questions:
- How does critical literacy differ from functional literacy?
- How is the concept of critical literacy different from ‘being critical’ and concepts such as ‘critical thinking’?
- How is critical literacy related to critical theory?
2. Choose two key readings that you would argue are related to critical literacy. We would like you to be clear about why you have chosen these particular readings as representative of critical literacy. Do they interrogate social issues such as poverty, equity, inequality, disability etc.? Do they critique power relations in institutions (such as the school), adult education, and the family?
3. Using a search engine designed to find academic papers, such as Google Scholar, search for both articles listed below.
- Luke, A. (2012) ‘Critical literacy: foundational notes’, Theory Into Practice, vol. 51, no. 1, pp. 4–11.
- Perry, K. (2012) ‘What is literacy? – a critical overview of sociocultural perspectives’, Journal of Language and Literacy Education, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 50–71.
As you read, consider the following questions:
- What are your understandings of ‘critical literacy’ and ‘functional literacy’?
- Can you see when you might use either approach in your own practice?
- Can you can think of ways to critique both of these concepts in relation to your own engagement with literacy and/or your own experiences of working with learners?
Discussion
Through engaging with Activity 5 as well as the readings in Activity 6, you may have noted that the concept of functional literacy positions literacy as a set of tangible skills. Functional literacy also usually implies an emphasis on the cognitive, individually based, basic skills of reading or decoding print. Taking a functional literacy perspective towards literacy acquisition would, therefore, emphasise the individual and their basic literacy skills and rather than highlighting the ways in which individuals can use literacy to engage in complex and ever-changing social practices.
Critical literacy, however, has a different emphasis. As Luke (2012) points out, critical literacy has its origins in critical theory. It is thus underpinned by a notion that literacy evolves from entering into dialogue and engagement with cultural and social problems. From this viewpoint, functional literacy can be seen as a form of ‘banking education’ (Freire, 1970), with a passive learner, rather than stressing the need for a learner to be actively engaged in learner–teacher dialogue. Where functional literacy focuses on being able to read the words, critical literacy implies a need to interrogate the text for implicit meanings and agendas.
From this perspective, those who take a critical literacy stance often argue that functional literacy treats reading and writing text as a neutral technique, where nuances of meaning are not stressed. From a functional literacy perspective, surrounding agendas, cultural viewpoints and the influence of different agendas and groups would have very little, if any, influence on students’ abilities to interpret and respond to printed text.
Luke (2012) refers to Paulo Freire and his literacy programmes as an example of a critical approach to literacy. He also notes that this perspective arises from critical literacy and its links to philosophy, sociology and Marxist theory in particular. This contrasts with approaches that have been influenced by psychology, particularly behaviourism and psychometrics. Two specific examples arising from these two very different approaches to literacy are Freirian literacy programmes and dyslexia assessment and related interventions.
Perry (2012) explores ways in which critical and social literacy practices, like Freire’s programmes, attempt to focus on responding to the wider structural inequalities. You may have noted that this contrasts with the way in which functional literacy tends de-emphasise a relationship between literacy acquisition and wider power relationships or social inequalities. Programmes designed to develop functional literacy place the emphasis on the individual decoding text rather than on the wider social and cultural environment.
In her paper, Perry critiques the functional literacy approach. She specifically highlights how it excludes many ways in which people engage with print in everyday contexts and the contextual nature of communication. You may want to reflect on how you view this issue, and on the way in which you think that viewing learners as being deficient in technical skills may or may not be problematic for inclusive practice. For example, would you agree with Perry that literacy development needs to be seen within a wider context, of which formal education is just one aspect? Or would you support a counterargument that literacy needs to address barriers within the individual in order to produce proficient decoders and writers who can gain a functional level in literacy? It is often argued that gaining basic functional literacy skills enables learners to have greater opportunities and access to resources in society. The approach you would develop for learners who struggle with literacy could depend on your answer to these questions. The stance you take in relation to these questions would also influence what you would consider to be inclusive practice for these learners.