'Literacy' sucks


In sum, there are multiple literacies out there, but they can be organized in a way that makes sense. In fact, I think they should be organized better. I'll admit that the organizational structure I tossed up there is a work in progress and may be completely, utterly idiotic. But, it's a start. Feel free to criticize, compliment, or call me a moron, but at least let me know what you think. I'm always open to suggestions for improvement.


I think I'm just getting old because, I'm told, when you get old all the things you used to know take on different names. Those things don't change much, only the name gets adjusted and you have learn what to call that thing you used to know.

I know what literacy is, or I thought I did. Now a days when I see articles or posts or, in this case, charts about literacy I think to myself what I used to know about literacy. I can't help thinking that what these good folks are calling "literacy" is something I used to call "critical thinking."

Okay, that's enough. Back to my hermitage. :)

So what's the point? We break literacy down into 150 pieces. What does that do for us? What is the practical application?

Just trying to keep up with all the different types and categories of literacy gives me a headache. I have to agree with Anon, "So what's the point?" Does all this analysis really give anyone a better understanding or ability to address "literacy" issues?

The more important types of literacy are basic and computer :P

Add new comment

Plain text

  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <blockquote> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.