Reference Publications

Literacy and the elite - letters to the editor - Letter to the Editor

Humanist, Jan-Feb, 2003 by Earl Gates

Since I'm especially concerned about the future of our public education system, I read--at least twice--Gregory Shafer's "What's Literacy Got to Do with It" in the September/October 2002 issue of the Humanist. I was searching for the reason that an article with so many interesting sources cited could turn out to be so disappointing.

I admit that I was unable to come to a satisfactory conclusion. I'm convinced that a part of my difficulty is a result of the disparity between the real world, the educational environment I'm familiar with, and the one Shafer discusses.

My teacher daughters describe an environment in which the most pervasive problems are lack of funds and too much ego-driven bureaucracy. Shafer describes an environment in which the greatest problems are curriculum control by anonymously sinister philosophical forces bent on stifling literacy.

Shafer closes by suggesting that the kind of learning he hopes for "will only be possible when schooling becomes democratic rather than despotic, when it abandons its political agenda and facilitates a curriculum that embraces real diversity and the intellectual growth of its populace." That sort of language may mean something in the sheltered confines of academia. It is meaningless and even counterproductive in an inner city environment where ideas and theories must often rank in priority somewhat behind raw survival.

If "schooling becomes democratic," we must expect that some portion of the student/parent population will exercise their democratic right to opt out entirely, at some point short of literacy. I can't think of a more effective way to ensure continued growth toward the elitist, class-based society to which we seem to be evolving.