The Politics of Literacy.
The Politics of Literacy.
复制标题
识字的政治。
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2005
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Jeffery M. Jones
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
David L. Davenport;Jeffery M. Jones
经过教育界几十年的争论，扫盲政策最近已经进入了国家政治的更大舞台。在1997年之前，没有任何联邦法案专门将儿童识字作为一个问题来处理。但在2000年的总统竞选中，乔治.布什经常吹嘘他在识字方面的记录，他和他的妻子劳拉，前图书管理员，把阅读称为“新的公民权利”。立法者们争论识字的哲学和方法论--比如自然拼读法和全语言--报纸头条追踪美国孩子与世界其他地区孩子的阅读情况。2002年的《不让一个孩子掉队法案》在重要方面将扫盲政策联邦化，该法案在州立法机构、国会和联邦法院引起了激烈的辩论。扫盲从一个教育问题转变为一个全国性的政治问题是迅速而重要的。从某种意义上说，扫盲已经走过了与教育政策相同的联邦化道路，在不到十年的时间里从地方学校董事会和州议会转移到我们国家的首都。两位前州长，比尔克林顿和乔治W。在把这些问题打包并沿着带到白宫之前，布什在州一级的扫盲和教育问题上进行了斗争。事实上，扫盲政策的联邦化之路主要是通过萨克拉门托、加州和德克萨斯州的奥斯汀，然后再到华盛顿，华盛顿特区。在国家政治舞台上开展扫盲活动，重塑了一切--问题、词汇和角色。现在，识字不仅仅是一个问题;它是一场危机。提高识字率不仅是教育或社会的需要;如果美国要在新的全球经济中竞争，这是必不可少的。每个人似乎都准备好向敌人--文盲--宣战，但专家们对这个问题的定义和衡量方法不同，并提出了各种各样的攻击方法。事实上，扫盲战争中的几个战斗员似乎在互相开火时消耗的弹药与他们在解决这个问题时消耗的弹药一样多。华盛顿的政客们，象牙塔里的学者们，我们社区的既得利益者，以及战壕里的教师和学生们，似乎都在努力打击共同的敌人的同时，也在相互争斗。当扫盲作为一个教育问题出现在学术舞台上时，有很多关于扫盲的文章。既然涉及到政治关注和政府资金，现在是在公共政策舞台上评估扫盲的时候了。我们可以通过跟踪扫盲的政治学来了解什么？更多的政治关注和政府支出是否会提高识字率？能否在21世纪消除文盲？扫盲政策向东传播要了解扫盲如何成为一个全国性的政治问题，一种方法是沿着它的路径穿过两个关键州，然后到达华盛顿，华盛顿特区。正如新的政治趋势经常发生的那样，故事开始于金州，加州。在那里，一位雄心勃勃的政治家，教育总监比尔·霍尼格，与“全语言”教学的倡导者联手修改了加州的阅读课程。像加州这样的大州，其教育方针的变化，会对全国教科书出版和其他州的政策产生相应的影响。20世纪80年代末，霍尼格决定对加州教育发起一场以阅读为中心的重大改革。有人说他只是在做他作为教育主管的工作，但大多数人认为霍尼格有一个更大的政治议程，包括可能竞选加州州长。在他的领导下，该州发起了一项名为阅读恢复的计划，该计划是由新西兰教师玛丽克莱开发的。霍尼格显然想以一种“伟大的书籍”的形式来重塑阅读教学，在让学生接触丰富文学作品的背景下鼓励阅读技能的发展。然而，也许是无意中，他把自己的政策与一场名为“全语言”的教育/政治运动联系在一起。…
AFTER DECADES OF debate inside the educational community, literacy policy has recently moved to the larger stage of national politics. Prior to 1997 no federal bill had specifically addressed child literacy as an issue. But in the 2000 presidential campaign, George W. Bush regularly touted his record on literacy, and he and his wife Laura, a former librarian, speak of reading as "the new civil right." Legislators debate literacy philosophy and methodology--such as phonics versus whole language--and newspaper headlines track how U.S. kids read in comparison with the rest of the world. The No Child Left Behind Act of 2002, which federalizes literacy policy in important ways, is hotly debated in state legislatures, Congress, and federal courts. The transformation of literacy from an educational concern to a national political issue has been swift and significant. In a sense, literacy has traveled the same federalization road as educational policy generally, moving from local school boards and statehouses to our nation's capital in less than a decade. Two former governors, Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, wrestled with literacy and education at the state level before packing up the problems and bringing them along to the White House. In fact, the road to federalizing literacy policy moves largely through Sacramento, California and Austin, Texas on its way to Washington, D.C. Playing out literacy on the national political stage reframes everything--the issues, the vocabulary, and the cast of characters. Literacy is not merely a problem now; it is a crisis. Improving literacy is not just an educational or social need; it is essential if the United States is to compete in the new global economy. Everyone seems ready to declare war on the enemy--illiteracy--but experts define and measure the problem differently and propose varied methods of attack. In fact, the several combatants in the war on illiteracy seem to expend as much ammunition firing on one another as they do in attacking the problem. The politicians in Washington, the scholars in their ivory towers, the vested interests in our communities, and the teachers and students in the trenches all seem to be warring among themselves at the same time they are trying to combat the common enemy. Much was written about literacy when it played on the academic stage as an educational issue. Now that political attention and governmental dollars are involved, it is time to assess literacy on the public policy stage. What can we learn by tracking the politics of literacy? Will greater political attention and government expenditure improve literacy? Can illiteracy be overcome in the twenty-first century? Literacy policy travels eastward ONE WAY TO TRACK the story of how literacy became a national political issue is to follow its path through two key states on its way to Washington, D.C. The story begins, as new political trends often do, in the Golden State, California. There, an ambitious politician, Superintendent of Education Bill Honig, joined forces with advocates of "whole language" instruction to revise the California reading curriculum. Changes in the educational approach of a major state such as California have a corresponding effect on national textbook publishing and on the policies of other states. In the late 1980s, Honig decided to launch a major reform of California education centered on reading. Some say he was simply doing his job as superintendent of education, but most believe Honig had a larger political agenda, including a possible run for governor of California. Under his leadership, the state initiated a program called Reading Recovery that had been developed by a New Zealand teacher, Mary Clay. Honig apparently wanted to recast reading instruction in a "great books" format, encouraging the development of reading skills in the context of exposing students to rich literature. Perhaps unwittingly, however, he tied his policies to an educational/political movement called "whole language. …