Mahogany adolescent literacy identities: Nurturing relationships with literacy as if our lives depended on it

and analytic, and d) develops modern orientations and democratic inclinations (Brandt & Clinton, 2002). Opponents of the Literacy Thesis questioned and conducted studies that debunked the belief that literacy can be treated as an isolated entity because it is deeply embedded in broader cultural, historical frameworks and specific cultural factors. Some of the studies that represented this opposing viewpoint outright challenged the veracity of the Literacy Thesis by demonstrating that there is little to no evidence to 67 support the claim that literacy independently and automatically effects life prospects (Lockriges, 1974; Graff, 1978). In fact, the findings from some of these studies suggest that non-literate peoples can/do have richly developed logical reasoning, philosophies of language, metalinguistic discourses, and systematic formal procedures of inquiry (Collins, 1995; Gough, 1968; Finnegan, 1988). Ultimately, the Literacy Thesis was ruled untenable by even those who were once proponents of it (Goody, 1986; Olson, 1994) because they eventually realized that it was prematurely treated as truth and later proven to be merely a hypothesis as more studies critiqued and discredited its unsubstantiated Western claims. Likewise, the literacy myth also speaks to the alleged grandiose benefits associated with literacy both at the micro individual level and the macro societal level. Individually, the myth articulates that one who is literate is also automatically and universally more highly evolved, intellectual and sophisticated, not to mention more civil and morally minded; all lofty ideals with little evidence (Gee, 2012). On a societal level, popular conceptions of the literacy myth reasons that the literacy “effect” directly results in improved job prospects, increased political engagement and participation of its citizenry, as well as augmented macro-economic mobility and growth (Barlett, 2008). As Street (1984) articulated, the autonomous model of literacy confers benefits and presumes that literacy at the individual level will result in economic, social and political development at the national level. On the contrary, the ideological model is more wary of the grand generalizations and cherished assumptions about literacy (Street, 1993). Literacy is more complex and is always inextricably associated with other factors that contribute to upward mobility. Scribner and Cole (1981) echoed other scholars’ concern 68 that researchers whose work falls on the spectrum of literacy studies, i.e., ranging from the psycholinguistic aspects of reading to the cognitive consequences of writing, have merely developed “starting points” for theorizing about the intellectual implications of reading and writing, but still lack conclusive tests. Therefore, both the Literacy Thesis and the literacy myth may be an enduring popular belief in Western society and the academy, but both cultural clichés remain overstated and fail to be strong predictors of student or societal success. Answering the question of who had access to become literate throughout history is just as noteworthy as attempting to trace and expound upon the definitions, purposes and perceived benefits of literacy throughout the ages. In the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries in the U.S., a literate person had an understanding of basic economics and performed business-related transactions, typical day-to-day activities, and had varying degrees of education and employment. These individuals were chiefly elite White men and smaller percentages of White women of higher social statuses (Lockridges, 1974; Willis, 1997). The types of activities they engaged in would range from examining legal documents and records like wills, deeds, marriage licenses, birth and death certificates, criminal and census reports, newspapers, books, biblical texts, etc. It is also important to note that explanations that detail why access to literacy was denied or limited to nonWhite demographics have been generally absent from most literacy historian accounts. However, the withholding of access to literacy has always been closely connected with the ideological, political, social, racial, and economic goals of the nation and the systematic denying of access allowed certain groups to exercise power over other groups (Willis, 1997; Collins & Blot, 2003). 69 Another notable shift in paradigm for literacy studies was the fact that literacy became synonymous with schooling. In other words, literacy took on more of a schoolbased conceptualization, and there remains a tendency to conflate literacy with education in general (Harris, 1992; Bartlett, 2008). Willis (1997) asserts that literacy historians have oftentimes defined literacy as a skill or knowledge acquired in schooling. It was considered a cognitive skill that was equated with early 20 century notions of classroom expectations to demonstratively prove one’s oration and recitation skills, and prowess with vocabulary and writing, which heavily concentrated on grammar, mechanics, penmanship and spelling. Narrowly framing literacy as an individual’s display of school knowledge essentially means that literacy is strictly viewed as a cognitive skill that is measurable according to intelligence and school achievement-based assessments that too often do not account for variability in social, political or cultural contexts. Rather the prized school practices, learning styles, and assessments have deep roots in privileging the skills, experiences and exposures of middle and upper-middle class White students (Delpit, 1988; Ladson-Billings, 1994). Willis (1997) suggests that “the inglorious history of standardized tests of literacy is a gate-keeping mechanism for poor and culturallyand linguistically-diverse children is one of the legacies of this definition of literacy” (Pg, 391). Although some of the outmoded ways of measuring students’ literacy proficiencies such as writing in cursive, diagraming sentences, and mastering skill-drill grammar exercises are less prominent today in classrooms. Unfortunately, many other limiting ways of defining literacy and students’ literate identities as strictly school-based knowledge continue to dominate literacy policies, required school practices, curricula and especially high-stakes assessments. 70 The ideology that literacy serves emancipatory functions and could help the oppressed reconstruct their personal and familial lives, improve their economic stability, and ameliorate societal structures at large is another significant research paradigm in the historical lineage of literacy acquisition and instruction. Anderson’s (1988) The Education of Blacks in the South 1860-1935 re-introduced the belief that many African American scholars maintained (Dubois, 1935; Woodson, 1933) that the best way for African Americans to realize social upward mobility— political power and economic prosperity for the race— was through literacy actualization. Likewise, Freire’s (1970) seminal text Pedagogy of the Oppressed, which was based on his work with adult Brazilians, evinced a similar philosophy that literacy could serve as the impetus for critical personal and social transformations. Later, emancipatory constructs in literacy research paved the way for more ethnographic oriented studies. The employment of ethnographic methodology generated new revelations in the field that contextualized and investigated literacy beyond cognitive, psychological, and school factors by situating the research in community, family, and cultural practices. Scribner and Cole (1978) and their ethnography conducted in Liberia exposed the dangers and need to rethink the Western literacy hierarchical continuum of reading, writing and oral skills. Taylor’s (1983) work on family literacy, and the literacy practices of inner city families in particular (Taylor & Dorsey-Gaines, 1988), also showed how ethnography offers new opportunities to examine the home and familial contexts and literacy exchanges between children and parents. Most notably, Heath (1983) elucidated the importance of analyzing socio-economic as well as racial