First Commentary: Orality and Literacy in Teaching
Ong provides us with some very convincing arguments that there is a marked difference between the thought processes of a purely oral society compared to a literate society. One cannot deny that his examples of the work A. R. Luria appear to show very conclusively that the oral speaker thinks in more lifeworld terms, meanwhile the literate or even semi-literate man is capable of more abstract thinking processes. Ong clearly states that “Literate users of a grapholect such as standard English have access to vocabularies hundreds of times larger than any oral language can manage” (p. 14).On the whole I find myself in agreement with him. However, I have several in laws who are illiterate and when we have problems it is often due to misunderstandings because I have used language in a different way than they do.
Therefore, I find myself left with doubts about the validity of some of his arguments. I wonder if it is really possible for a literate person to know what questions to ask an illiterate person in order to determine their thought processes. I can empathize if I have this skill, but I have been literate all my life. I have had access as Ong quotes Finnegan as saying to “The new way to store knowledge … in the written text. This freed the mind for more original, more abstract thought” (Ong, p. 24).Is it possible to be objective if I have so much more language to command? I believe that as teachers we need to look at orality and literacy at all levels of education. I train teachers from kinder to high school. It is important for kinder teachers to realise how important their use of language is. Children entering kinder garden are being exposed, often for the first time, to new language and new voices. Ong (p.71) explains how one can become immersed in sound. Children love repeated sounds and the use of onomatopoeia and alliteration is crucial for keeping their attention. Small children develop language skills when language is introduced in an additive and aggregative way.
I think almost all teachers would agree that storytelling and giving new information using story telling techniques is a standard practice. However, when we come to older children the reverse is true. Mexico, in particular, is a very sociable and oral culture. However, in the secondary and high school, children until recently, were expected to increase their knowledge by almost exclusively literate means. Whereas, in primary school they were encouraged to vocalise their thoughts, now they are expected to listen to the teacher, read their textbook or investigate on their computers and finally to produce a written document or answer a written exam. Oral skills are not encouraged and children are told to not waste their time talking. It would appear that these teachers believe that “Writing heightens consciousness. Alienation from a natural milieu can be good for us and indeed is in many ways essential for full human life” (Ong, p. 81). Some teachers have tried to change the heavily weighted literary elements of their teaching method by getting their students to present their investigation to the group. Unfortunately, in my opinion, this has not been very successful; as most students read their presentation and some adolescents find it a traumatising experience to be singled out to speak in front of the group.
I became aware of these drawbacks about a few years ago and I have tried to adapt my curriculum accordingly. I see no reason why students have to read alone or in silence. I encourage my students to read aloud in groups and to each other. I find this allows them to stop and discuss relevant points, take notes (written or pictorial) or ask for help if a concept is not clear. I give them options on how to present their knowledge, either, mental or conceptual maps, written summaries, pictorial representations or in oral form. Most of my students come from families were reading is not a common pastime and very few of them read for pleasure. Ong states that “High literacy fosters truly written composition” (p. 94) and I find myself in agreement to some extent. Nevertheless, if a culture does not have very developed literary skills, I believe that it is necessary to find some intermediate path between orality and literacy and from the results I have encountered in my classroom I think that combining orality and literacy is one method that is effective.
Ong, W. (2002). Orality and Literacy. New York: Routledge.
2 comments
1 Catherine Gagnon { 09.29.09 at 5:18 pm }
Clare, I enjoyed reading your commentary. I was particularly interested in the following: “Some teachers have tried to change the heavily weighted literary elements of their teaching method by getting their students to present their investigation to the group. Unfortunately, in my opinion, this has not been very successful; as most students read their presentation and some adolescents find it a traumatising experience to be singled out to speak in front of the group.”
I too had tried to adapt the curriculum to allow students to demonstrate their knowledge in more than one medium. And like you, I find oral presentations particularly difficult for them. I am reminded of a French Second Language Improvisation exam where student were allowed to prepare two subjects before their presentation to the class. This involved writing a short text and they were allowed the use of cue cards if necessary. I believe Ong discussed this habit of rhetoric being a written form perform it is performed. We have indeed come a long way from our Oral roots.
I have found it helpful to suggest to my students that they bring along a prop when doing an oral presentation. I tell them it will help them hide their shaking hands and hopefully keep them from drawing a blank while speaking. Of course, a prop is often a source of interest to the audience, keeping them engaged as well.
From the point of view of the learner, I have also experienced students who could not learn from my oral teachings, no matter how many concrete examples or practical exercises we did to reinforce the subject matter. Some learners just seem to prefer reading about it so they can teach themselves. It seemed odd at the time, but I can see how some people would rather put words into their own context, even if oral texts seem more contextual than written words. I have to mention as well, that the particular student was of a different ethnicity. His lack of understanding may have been due to my use of local figures of speech and examples that were not relevant to his frame of reference.
2 Clare Roche { 10.14.09 at 1:24 pm }
Dear Catherine,
I have been checking my students multiple intelligences (following Howard Gardner’s guidelines) and I have noticed that the students who have the most difficulties with oral presentations are the same ones who get a very low score on verbal / linguistic ability.
You must log in to post a comment.