Learning to read by learning the Bible may seem a bit odd to 21st-century readers. But the fact is that one of the great incentives was the need to learn what really mattered for your dignity on earth and your salvation in heaven. We may not put it like that these days but literacy is still about dignity and freedom. When we forget this, we are in real trouble.
That’s why it was so shocking to learn that rates of improvement in young people’s literacy have slowed down disturbingly since 2006 and that a quarter of children and young people do not see any connection between reading and success or stability in their lives. Yet the figures clearly show the correlations between inadequate literacy and a variety of social ills – unemployment, lack of a stable family life, and, significantly, apathy about voting. The percentage of functionally illiterate people in our prisons (nearly 50 per cent) tells its own story.
More worrying still are the figures for young people in London. One in three children does not own a book. One in four leaves primary school with a substandard level of literacy.
The one caution I would use is the definition of “sub-standard literacy”. I don’t know how Britain measures it, but I am always suspicious of large numbers like his 50%. For instance here in New Zealand we keep getting told that 20% of our kids are failing to read and need to go into reading recovery programmes. The 20% comes from the fact the government is prepared to fund 20% of kids — they could all be reading more than adequately but they are reading less than their peers — who for what we know from this statistic could be reading geniuses. So what you need is an absolute measure of “failing to read enough for life” and that statistic is far lower in NZ than the 20% we put through our support programme.
Another day, another statement of the blindingly obvious.
No. 2: I disagree. As a teacher, I’d say that poor reading-comprehension skills are a growing problem.
“That’s why it was so shocking to learn that rates of improvement in young people’s literacy have slowed down disturbingly since 2006 and that a quarter of children and young people do not see any connection between reading and success or stability in their lives.”
I do find these data shocking–and true. Something is happening. Williams has not provided anything like a solution or even an etiology, if that is the right word.
I just know that, as a teacher of young people, I have started to require “abstracts” of the reading–just one para. in length–as well as short papers. The short papers often weren’t good because students were trying to comment on essays whose main point they hadn’t grasped. I thought their poorly written papers were poorly written because their authors were poor writers. Eventually I learned that, behind the poor writing, lay poor skills of reading and critical thinking.
We all know who the usual suspects are which might be causing this downturn. I just want to affirm that the problem is real, it’s alarming, and, yes, it will affect democracies in years to come. And, yes, young people think it’s not a problem; they–the majority, not the top 10%–think that reading and writing are not very important.
If fishing were as easy and predictable as sparking negative personal comments by putting up any statement by the Archbishop of Canterbury on this site, however thoughtful, I would have beautiful trout jumping on my lures at every cast. I’ve dreamed of such a situation, but, frankly, if it ever happened, it would no doubt cause me to lose interest in fishing.
I have lately enjoyed the comments from No. 3, who seems to read these posts critically and more than superficially. He finds value where there is value and yet maintains some analytical distance.
#4 and yet you continue to cast your bait on these waters NoVA Scout?
There is truth in the proposition that literacy standards are declining, and it is an issue worthy of thought. Nevertheless the Archbishop’s statement du jour of the blindingly obvious remains just that. What will he have to tell us today? Perhaps that the world is in need of hope, that higher education is a good idea or that the tectonic plates of politics are shifting? Now if he were to make the effort to write about something we didn’t already know, that might be worth reading.
According to the blurb, the Evening Standard [i]asked[/i] ++Rowan for an article as part of its Get London Reading initiative and he obliged. It’s not as if he wrote it unprompted.
I agree with David Hein. There have been times when, trying to explain to some students what was wrong with their writing, I felt a disconnect that was extremely hard to bridge. Some things that seemed to me to go without saying left them staring blankly at me.
#6 “It’s not as if he wrote it unprompted.”
Indeed – daily wise saws and common instances provided on all subjects at the drop of a hat – and if they can rile the government or somebody else at the same time, even better.
If one went back and looked, I imagine that one could find similar sorts of popular and “obvious” pieces authored by Temple (as Abp. of York and Abp. of Canterbury), Fisher, Ramsey, and, for that matter, Carey. Blame lingering establishmentarianism.
Had he said, no, and the Evening Standard had publicized the fact, there would probably have been cries of “Can’t he spare time from bashing the government to defend literacy.”
I don’t mind him writing, but obviously it would be more interesting for everyone concerned if he made the effort to spend more time researching, revising and publishing one or two worthwhile and carefully thought through original contributions rather than launching daily cluster bombs of the trite.
I suppose the other issue, bearing in mind his latest little number today, is whether his contributions actually are of benefit to the interests of the Church which employs him and which apparently leaves him loose to fire off at whoever and whatever he fancies. His grasp of affairs is already being criticised across the board. What does he really bring to the Church of England? Does any perceived benefit actually outweigh the liability which he is?
I think probably the other issue inherent in Pageantmaster’s concern is why Rowan Williams does not invest similar effort in CofE and Anglican Communion affairs?
I don’t have a problem with ABC writing this little piece on literacy per se. There is nothing that most people would find particularly controversial in it, nor can anyone deny that it is an important political topic. But, there are about a thousand other topics of which one could say the same. In every case, it is possible to draw some sort of connection with the church’s mission, but how far does this go?
Perhaps its just coincidence, but we seem to be seeing an increasing number of articles by Rowan Williams on matters with no primary connection to church governance. If his in-tray at Lambeth Palace were empty, I could understand this, but there are an awful lot of current ecclesiastical issues which are his direct responsibility. For example:
• explaining and stopping the buck on controversial choices of bishops;
• new ecclesiastical law, especially the women bishops measure which is being debated in diocesan synods up and down the country;
• alternative oversight for dissenting CofE members;
• sundry other issues being raised in synods;
• congregations leaving for the Ordinariate;
• property negotiations with said Ordinariate, both in terms of usage and freehold;
• relations with the wider Anglican Communion, in particular questions issues and communiques raised by groups as diverse as the Global South, CAPA, and TEC/ACoC;
• the Anglican covenant;
• Anglican Communion governance;
• Opening of a Gafcon office in London;
• Scottish episcopal church measures to do with Same Sex blessings and how this affects the CofE moving at a faster or slower pace;
• Apparent shortages of income and lack of maintenance funds;
• relations with his own large evangelical parishes who appear to be withdrawing practical contributions to diocesan organisations;
• Proposals by British parliamentarians to force the church to conform to public anti-discrimination law
The ABC doesn’t actually seem to make many public announcements on the above issues (I grant you he does make some, but they are few and far between). Yet we seem to be getting a lot of articles recently about his comments on such things as general literacy, public welfare, and answering enquiries from small children.
I can understand the frustration felt by Pageantmaster as his Primate issues yet another piece on a current political topic. Its not just carping; rather, it reflects a real concern about Rowan Williams’ abilities to marshal his priorities. By all means answer the letters from little kids and encourage the spread of literacy, but let this be done AT THE SAME TIME as giving strong leadership on the many far more pressing issues which are directly his responsibility.