How do you define literate?

[Weird Harold]

re: No one can hold it all

I think that I'm literate and function well within my community (although some members of my community might disagree).

I appreciate Literature, Art and Music but I have limitations, as do most of us.

I can't follow most modern literature, the sort that gets nominated for the Booker Prize.

I find some modern artists inaccessible. I'm not surprised that I don't appreciate the sort of music that seems popular with local teenagers, but some classical music can be too abstruse for me.

I think you're straying into the realm of "Well-rounded" or "Complete" education rather than the "minimum essential requirements" I'm looking for.

At one time, in the USA, a "Seventh Grade Education" was considered sufficient to provide the necessary education to function as a citizen. Of course, a seventh grade education of the late 19th or early 20th centuries bears very little resemblance to a modern seventh grade education, including as it did practical geometry, algebra and elementary trigonometry.

 

[elsol]

Can they read a newspaper WITH comprehension?

Yes: Literate

Can they balance a checkbook? (Not will, do, want to... but can they do the math required to balance a checkbook.)

Yes: Math-ate.

Can you fill out a job application? (Without asking anyone questions.)

Yes: Writ-ate.

Everything else is pretty much trivia or a specialized skill-set.

 

[elsol]

I
Next I would dequire a literate person to be able to program a computer in at least one high-order language [e.g. BASIC.]

Well, if we're going to go here...

I would require a literate person to be able to do a critical explanation of 17th century poetry in at least three styles: Feminist, Deconstructive, and their choice of Religious or Historical.

 

[Weird Harold]

This is the kind of answers I'm looking for. Thanks.

Can they read a newspaper WITH comprehension?

Yes: Literate

Given the variable quality of newspapers, and the apparent illiteracy of some newspaper contributors, did you have some particular newspaper in mind, or is the National Enquirer enough to qualify?

Can they balance a checkbook? (Not will, do, want to... but can they do the math required to balance a checkbook.)

Yes: Math-ate.

That's reasonable. I think I'd want a bit more qualification, but not much -- enough to manage a household budget, for example.

Can you fill out a job application? (Without asking anyone questions.)

Yes: Writ-ate.

I've encountered a few job applications that would disqualify me as "write-ate."

Everything else is pretty much trivia or a specialized skill-set.

I think you're discounting how much general science is part of every day life. Not so much in the sense of being able to pass a test full of latin terms and esoteric equations, but in the sense of practical applications -- like judging a car's speed to cross the street safely.

 

[WRJames]

Well, I've been busy with a thread I started over on GB, and I've got to say that there are some functional illiterates over there -- at least without the ability to actually read and understand a fairly complex argument.

I would qualify for RR's definition of literate, being a mathematician by training (and a programmer by profession) -- but it is obviously too ambitious. It would be good, however, if literacy included some training in how to reason, how to discuss, how to come to a consensus. These are tools that are vital for our society to function, but the quick breakdown of discussions into polarized mudslinging shows how most of our citizens have no concept of abstract thought, consideration of alternatives, etc. Rather late in my education, went I went back to business school, I took a course in decision analysis. It is actually rather simple stuff, could be taught at the high school level, but extremely useful in providing a framework for discussions that don't turn into mudslinging after the first sentence.

Aside from that -- it would be nice if by the tenth grade or so people were capable of understanding the rules of grammer, punctuation, spelling, etc. From what I've seen in the business world, that would exclude about 90% of the current adult population.

 

[oggbashan]

Next I would dequire a literate person to be able to program a computer in at least one high-order language [e.g. BASIC.]

I can still program a IBM 1401 main frame in machine code.

However I don't think there are any IBM 1401s still operational, and if there were would anyone want to use them.

Og

 

[WRJames]

Next I would dequire a literate person to be able to program a computer in at least one high-order language [e.g. BASIC.]

BASIC !!! Argh!! You'll ruin them for life! I taught my son Smalltalk at age 12 to save him from BASIC.

 

[NoJo]

Well, I've been busy with a thread I started over on GB, and I've got to say that there are some functional illiterates over there -- at least without the ability to actually read and understand a fairly complex argument.

I would qualify for RR's definition of literate, being a mathematician by training (and a programmer by profession) -- but it is obviously too ambitious. It would be good, however, if literacy included some training in how to reason, how to discuss, how to come to a consensus. These are tools that are vital for our society to function, but the quick breakdown of discussions into polarized mudslinging shows how most of our citizens have no concept of abstract thought, consideration of alternatives, etc. Rather late in my education, went I went back to business school, I took a course in decision analysis. It is actually rather simple stuff, could be taught at the high school level, but extremely useful in providing a framework for discussions that don't turn into mudslinging after the first sentence.

Aside from that -- it would be nice if by the tenth grade or so people were capable of understanding the rules of grammer, punctuation, spelling, etc. From what I've seen in the business world, that would exclude about 90% of the current adult population.

You misspelt "grammar". Whether a typo or a lacuna in your education, it's still pretty ironic.

 

[HappyLlama]

Paddy and Mick are walking along a road and see a sign saying 'Tree fellers wanted'.

Paddy turns to Mick and says,'It's a shame Seamus isn't here, we could have got the job.'

 

[Xelebes]

If you can read this, you're doing pretty good.

 

[R. Richard]

Well, if we're going to go here...

I would require a literate person to be able to do a critical explanation of 17th century poetry in at least three styles: Feminist, Deconstructive, and their choice of Religious or Historical.

Computers are ubiquitous. Your car has one [and probably more,] your microwave has one, hell, yout toaster may have one. The understanding of what is involved in the programming of a computer is an understanding of a tool that you use [or uses you] in everyday life.

Precisely what is the daily life application of poetry and, specifically, 17th century poetry in daily life? [Please be prepared to address the issue that I, for one, will never, unforced, read another line of poetry in my life.]

 

[R. Richard]

I can still program a IBM 1401 main frame in machine code.

However I don't think there are any IBM 1401s still operational, and if there were would anyone want to use them.

Og

It would not overly surprise me to find a 1401 [or 1410] in use in some dark corner of a third world country. You might be amazed to find legacy code still being run on computers that are not just outmoded, but almost prehistoric.

 

[R. Richard]

BASIC !!! Argh!! You'll ruin them for life! I taught my son Smalltalk at age 12 to save him from BASIC.

I prefer C# myself, or at least C++. However, a computer language at least shows the user the basics of how to use the computers that are so much a part of our daily lives.

 

[R. Richard]

Well, I've been busy with a thread I started over on GB, and I've got to say that there are some functional illiterates over there -- at least without the ability to actually read and understand a fairly complex argument.

Functional illiterates is one thing, but I find myself constantly dealing with nonfunctional illiterates.

 

[HappyLlama]

Does ignorance,
or education,
make the man?

A twisted stance,
or compassion,
moulds the man.

An angry glance,
or love's passion,
reveals the man.

 

[gauchecritic]

Does ignorance,
or education,
make the man?

A twisted stance,
or compassion,
moulds the man.

An angry glance,
or love's passion,
reveals the man.

Are you trying to make RR read poetry?

 

[HappyLlama]

Are you trying to make RR read poetry?

*shuffles four feet, falls over*

Moi?

That's french, BTW.

 

[gauchecritic]

*shuffles four feet, falls over*

Moi?

That's french, BTW.

I know that's sarcasm but it comes very close to irony. I just hope you're not American or they'll make you swear allegiance all over again.

 

[WRJames]

You misspelt "grammar". Whether a typo or a lacuna in your education, it's still pretty ironic.

Ahh-- I probably should use spell check on these posts -- it's such a crutch. When I'm writing I use MS Word and it just autocorrects those errors.

 

[Weird Harold]

I prefer C# myself, or at least C++. However, a computer language at least shows the user the basics of how to use the computers that are so much a part of our daily lives.

For teaching the basics of computer function through programming, I would choose to teach "Program Design with PsuedoCode" -- (I just happen to have a textbook/self-help book with that title). What is useful about learning a programming language is the underlying problem solving methodology and logical thinking, not the specific language used to teach programming. PseudoCode is a way of organizing a programs logical processes without getting bogged down in language specific funtionality.

In one sense, this whole thread is an attempt to apply the idea of "PsuedoCode" to the perceived problems of the educational system. The first step in designing -- or debugging -- a program is to define just what the program is supposed to DO.

 

[elsol]

Given the variable quality of newspapers, and the apparent illiteracy of some newspaper contributors, did you have some particular newspaper in mind, or is the National Enquirer enough to qualify?

Newspaper: The New York Times
Magazine: Newsweek

I've encountered a few job applications that would disqualify me as "write-ate."

I love the applications that give paragraph space to write in and people write one word. It better be a damn good word.

I think you're discounting how much general science is part of every day life. Not so much in the sense of being able to pass a test full of latin terms and esoteric equations, but in the sense of practical applications -- like judging a car's speed to cross the street safely.

I think that you're counting things we do with our senses as something we do with general science. My mother doesn't know jack about algebra or physics, but she knows when the maniac behind the wheel is going a bit too fast for her to chance it even when the light says she should cross.

 

[elsol]

Computers are ubiquitous. Your car has one [and probably more,] your microwave has one, hell, yout toaster may have one. The understanding of what is involved in the programming of a computer is an understanding of a tool that you use [or uses you] in everyday life.

Precisely what is the daily life application of poetry and, specifically, 17th century poetry in daily life? [Please be prepared to address the issue that I, for one, will never, unforced, read another line of poetry in my life.]

You required a higher order language programming for a situation where none of us have to reprogram our car's braking computer or even understand how it works.

Do I also have to understand the physics of how an airplane flies to buy a plane ticket?

Reading to acquire information is just as ubiquitous; understanding when the author is weighing the argument in their direction and what their goal might be is critical to understanding WHAT you'rer reading.

You believe knowing how to program will give you an understanding of a tool that we use everyday. I would say that you don't need to know how to program at all, take a formal logic class and you're there.

I believe that thinking critically about 17th century poetry will teach people how to think critically about a politician's stances. There's other ways to learn it... but you picked programming so I'm going with 17th century poetry.

 

[Weird Harold]

I think that you're counting things we do with our senses as something we do with general science. My mother doesn't know jack about algebra or physics, but she knows when the maniac behind the wheel is going a bit too fast for her to chance it even when the light says she should cross.

Judging the ability of oncoming traffic to stop or avoid pedestrians is only one of milions of examples of how people use what they've learned about "general science" -- learned from somewhere if not learned in a formal educational evironment. Your mother wasn't born with the ability to recognise when someone is going to fast to stop; she learned the practical application of one of Newton's three laws of motion somewhere.

That's one of the points I'm trying to get people to think about: what kinds of things that don't fit easily into formal curiculim definitions are we expecting people to know? If we expect people to know something, should we require schools to teach it?

 

[Liar]

I love the applications that give paragraph space to write in and people write one word. It better be a damn good word.

Skilled brevity rocks.