Chapter

OBJECTIVES

At the end of this chapter, you should be able to develop a clear and practical understanding of the following: • definitions of conventional literacy; and • expanded views of literacy in the 21 st century.

Literacy is defined by dictionaries as the state of being able to read and write (Literacy, Literate, n.d.). Although it is the ultimate thesis of this chapter that such a traditional definition no longer suffices in the information age, a thorough understanding of literacy and its past nuances will give us a solid foundation in exploring and discussing the "n e w " literacies of the 21st century and why possessing them is now mandatory for both teachers and students in all levels of education.

This chapter explores several definitions of literacy and what being literate means in the multiplicity of contexts in the 21st century, with the goal of raising awareness in readers who might be presently unaware of the evolving perspectives on literacy and giving teachers the opportunity to pause and reflect on their own literacies even as they attempt to teach the new literacies to their students.

Traditional or Conventional Literacy

The word “literacy" stems from the word “literate,” which first appeared in the 15th century and is in turn derived from the Latin word litteratus, meaning “ (a person) marked with le tte rs"— that is, “distinguished or identified by letters”— and it carried with it the idea that such a person was cultured and educated. Since the subjects of the time (e.g., grammar, logic, arithmetic, geometry, etc.) all had written texts (which were composed of letters) that had to be studied, the ability to read and write was therefore of prime importance, leading to the strong association of being “literate” with the ability to read and write.

Miller (1973) divides this conventional concept of literacy into three subcategories: 1. Basic Literacy - It is the ability to correspond visual shapes to spoken sounds in order to decode written materials and translate them into oral language. Simply put, it is the ability to recognize letters and words. This would be akin to recognizing that the sequence of letters “b-a-s-a" forms the word basa in Filipino, even without understanding what it means.

2. Comprehension Literacy - It is the ability to understand the meaning of what is being read. To capitalize on the example above, this would be like knowing that basa can mean either “to read" or “to be w et." 3. Functional or Practical Literacy - It is the ability to read (i.e., decode and comprehend) written materials needed to perform everyday vocational tasks. This is the equivalent of reading the text “Ang bata ay nagbabasa.” and being able to understand that basa here refers to reading and not to being wet.

Based on this conventional view of literacy, we notice two things for reading (and therefore literacy) to exist: (1) a text (consisting of symbols and grammar) to be read; and (2) a meaning or message being communicated by the text for the reader to extract. Without a text, there would be nothing to read; without meaning, the text is reduced to series of incomprehensible doodles.

It should therefore be noted that even in M ille r's definition of literacy, the act of reading implies a level of understanding. Sim ply knowing how to say a word (or a series of words) is not the same as being able to understand what it means. Without understanding of the meaning of the words, reading has not taken place. Based on this, Schlechty (2001) defines the concept of functional illiteracy as the state of being able to read, but not well enough to manage daily living and employment tasks that require reading skills beyond a basic level.

As the rest of this chapter will argue, this synchronicity between decoding textual symbols and being able to extract and understand their meaning is a necessary part of being literate, even as the new contexts of the 21st century change the nature of what the “te xt" is, and what it means to “read” and “w rite."

Expanded Views of Literacy

Despite the popularity of American films in the Philippines, many Filipinos cannot follow the actors’ dialogue, and thus resort to guessing the overall story based on the actions onscreen.

Despite the ubiquity of the traditional view of literacy, Roberts (1995) notes that “in the past fifty years, hundreds of definitions of ‘literacy’ have been advanced by scholars, adult literacy workers, and programme planners," with even the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO, 2006) acknowledging that literacy as a concept has proven to be complex and dynamic, it being continually defined and interpreted in multiple ways.

In 2004, UNESCO formally defined literacy as “the ability to identify, understand, interpret, create, communicate, and compute, using printed and written materials associated with varying contexts. Literacy involves a continuum of learning in enabling individuals to achieve their goals, to develop their knowledge and potential, and to participate fully in their community and wider society. ”

Note that “reading" does not appear in UNESCO's definition of literacy. Instead, literacy has taken on a definition more akin to “knowing about something and what to do with it."

In this vein, Mkandawire (2018) more succinctly posits that literacy is “a form of knowledge, competence, and skills in a particular field or area,” being supported by UNESCO (2006), Barton (2007), and Mkandawire, Simooya- Mudenda, & Cheelo (2017), which acknowledged that— as we have just pointed out— modern views appear to equate literacy with knowledge.

This shift in the definition of literacy from "reading and w riting" to “knowledge” is especially important as we explore the "n e w " literacies of the 21 st century that seem far-removed from the contexts upon which conventional literacy is based.

When viewed from the perspective of conventional/traditional literacy, the concept of “new" literacies is a bit of a misnomer, as even these new literacies of the 21st century make generous use of being able to read and write, rather than supplant them as skills necessary for survival. However, when viewed from the perspective of literacy as knowledge, the new literacies begin to make sense as they are the "skills and bodies of knowledge” that are necessary for survival and productivity in the information age.

In the same vein of reasoning, the new literacies are not "n e w ” per se— as in the sense that they never existed before. Rather, we consider them to be new because the contexts in which old skills and knowledge are being employed are new, both in nature and in scope. The ability to translate textual information into images is not a new skill, but it is the ability to do so in a way that is concise, complete, and clear that is certainly new, given that it will be how ninety percent of the population will be informed on the issue. Similarly, being able to verify the truth-value and veracity of a document is not a new skill— but being able to do so when there are a hundred similar documents available to you online is.

Case in point: Throughout history, humans have communicated on levels apart from the spoken and written word, for example, visually, using the longdistance communication system of smoke signals used by the ancient Chinese, the ancient Greeks, and the indigenous peoples of North America.

In the Victorian era, there was such a thing as the “Language of Flowers,” where the kind, color, and arrangement of a bouquet of flowers were used to communicate messages that could not otherwise be spoken aloud in Victorian society (Greenaway, 1884). For example, a bouquet of oak leaves (representing strength), purple roses (sorrow), white lilies (resurrection), and pale yellow tulips and rosemary (memory or remembrance) would altogether communicate a message of sympathy, usually over the death of a loved one.

Successfully interpreting these “visual languages” required a kind of “visual literacy” to understand the message being presented and to manage the information encoded therein— skills which, as following chapters will further reveal, are coming into use again in the 21st century literacies. The difference is that now we are not analyzing smoke signals or bouquets, but rather sounds, texts, and images from a hundred different sources at a nearly non-stop rate to the point where accuracy, validity, and reliability of the messages we interpret form the basis for some very important personal and collective decision-making.

Another difference involves the question of necessity: One did not need to be literate in the language of flowers to live a fruitful and fulfilled life in Victorian- era England, but to be not media or digitally literate in the 21 st century makes one vulnerable to manipulation by those who are, and such manipulation can easily cost an individual time, money, property, and even life.

These so-called “new” literacies arose from the increasing availability of communication technologies that were once unavailable to the average* individual. Technologies like blogging and vlogging, social networking, and even text-messaging change and expand both the extent and the form of our communication— blending text, sound, and images in ways unforeseen and unprecedented (Richardson, 2014). Never before have the opinions of a twelve year-old child in an unheard-of town in an unheard-of country been available for everyone on earth to read and hear, and while adults might scoff at a c hild ’s opinions, that child might have more than a thousand online subscribers who certainly think his or her opinions are important, maybe even more so than the opinions of adults. Simply put, three things have been critical in the rise of the new literacies: 1. Increased Reach - We are communicating with more people, from more diverse cultures, across vaster distances than ever before.

2. Increased Means of Communication - We are communicating in more ways and at faster speeds than ever before. 3. Increased Breadth of Content - We are communicating about more things than ever before.

How do we work together with people of different cultures who might have vastly different perspectives on communication, work ethics, values, religious beliefs, and worldviews? What do we do when some of these might be mutually exclusive to our own? In an age where information is power— where knowing more and knowing first can spell the difference between success and failure— how do we leverage both current and emergent technologies so that our endeavors are both productive and profitable? Moreover, how do we navigate and manage the veritable minefield of information that was once considered taboo and private and is now online, for all the world to see and judge, whether we like it or not?

Answering such complex questions requires new sets of skills and knowledge— ones that our school system have never had to teach before. With these changes in with whom, how, and why we communicate, new literacies are required not only to make sense of the changes, but also to use these new technologies and paradigms in meaningful and productive ways— something required not only of students, but of teachers as well.

To better address the need for teachers to be literate in these new literacies, this book discusses and explores them in the ensuing chapters, namely:

Globalization and Multicultural Literacy discusses how our increasing ability to communicate with almost anyone, anywhere, in real time requires new skills and attitudes in interacting with people with cultures, perspectives, worldviews, and priorities different from our own, particularly with the end-view of not only peace and understanding, but also mutual benefit and productivity.

The chapter on Social and Financial Literacies meanwhile explores the need for the ability to navigate our own social networks— of both the online and off-line variety— to not only communicate clearly, but also to leverage resources which we ourselves might not possess. At the same time, the chapter addresses the notorious problem of short-sightedness in Filipino culture regarding personal finances and how this must be addressed at an increasingly earlier age to help mitigate the ever-widening gap between the rich and the poor.

Media and Cyber/Digital Literacies explore the emerging need to locate, verify, and ultimately manage online information, especially in an age where information is power and where having the right (and wrong) information and the ability to communicate it with others and use it to address real-world problems easily spell the difference between both personal and career success and failure.

Ecoliteracy and Artistic and Creative Literacy explore the emerging demands for knowing how to effectively and sustainably manage the natural resources that our increased industrialization and demands for productivity are so rapidly eating up. The chapter also explores how this increase in productivity also brings with it an increased demand for arts and aesthetics and the need to develop ways of effectively communicating through the creative arts in industries dominated by objective data.

Finally, Critical Literacy addresses the increasing need to discern the underlying (and often tacit) messages behind the new “texts” of the 21st century, particularly in an ever-increasingly multicultural society where ideas, cultures, and ideologies vie with one another for power and dominance in the minds of the masses.

One of the ways students can be trained in the new literacies is to engage them in digital storytelling, wherein the students take part in the traditional process of storytelling, but with some digital enhancements. They choose a topic, conduct research, write a script, develop a story, and through the use of multimedia, create something that can be played online or on a computer. Digital Storytelling can be broken down into following six steps: 1. Writing - Write about a particular story from your life. The story must have a central theme.

2. Developing a Script - Develop a script that identifies the important points of your story. 3. Creating a Storyboard - Create a storyboard that visually organizes the flow of the story. Assign a particular image to portions of the script. 4. Locating Multimedia - Use search engines to locate photos and videos. Photos and videos from one's personal collection may also be used.

5. Creating the Digital Story - Record the voice over for your movie.

Create the movie using the software that is available to you. 6. Sharing and Uploading - Share your story in class and upload your work online.

Wrap Up

• Traditional Literacy is the ability to read and write. • The traditional or conventional concept of literacy can be divided into sub-categories: 1. Basic Literacy, which is the ability to recognize letters and words; 2. Comprehension Literacy, which is the ability to understand the meaning of what is being read; and

3. Functional/Practical Literacy, which is the ability to read written materials needed to perform everyday vocational tasks. • Modern views of literacy equate it with knowledge. • New literacies have risen due to increased reach, increased means of communication, and increased breadth of content. These new literacies are globalization and multicultural literacy, social and financial literacy, media and cyber/digital literacy, ecoliteracy, artistic and creative literacy, and critical literacy.

Questions to Ponder

Read the questions and instructions carefully. Write your answers in the space provided. 1. Given the traditional/conventional concept of literacy, how literate are you?

2. How deep is your level of comprehension?

3. As a pre-service teacher, what kind of written materials should you be able to read and understand? Are you reading these materials? How well can you understand them?

4. Which of the new literacies are you knowledgeable in? Which of the new literacies do you lack knowledge in?

5. Although reading education in the Philippines aims to develop Functional/

Practical literacy in learners, what level of literacy is being developed when classroom practices focus more on memorization rather than on understanding and application?

Read the questions and instructions carefully. Write your answers in the space provided. 1. Compare and contrast the traditional concept of literacy to the modern view of literacy.

Describe the changes in the 21st century that have led to the rise of new literacies.

With a partner or triad, brainstorm and answer this question: What teaching strategies and forms of assessment could you use to help develop functional literacy?

Lesson Planning and Lesson Demonstration: Prepare and deliver a lesson that incorporates some of the new literacies.

Barton, D. (2007). Literacy: An introduction to the ecology of written language.

Oxford, UK: Blackwell.

Greenaway, K. (1884). The language of flowers. New York: Gramercy Publishing

Company. Jakes, D. S., & Brennan, J. (2005). Capturing stories, capturing lives: An introduction to digital storytelling. Retrieved from http://www.jakesonline. o rg /d sto ryjc e .p d f Literacy, Literate (n.d.). In M erriam-W ebster's collegiate dictionary. Retrieved from https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/literacy Miller, G. A. (1973). Linguistic communication: Perspectives for Research.

Newark, Del.: International Reading Association. Mkandawire, S. B. (2018). Literacy versus language: Exploring their similarities and differences. Journal of Lexicography and Terminology, 2 (1). Mkandawire, S. B„ Simooya-Mudenda, S., & Cheelo, P. (2017). Cultural literacy in Zambia: A focus on selected myths and taboos. Lusaka: Unzapress. Nijhuis, M. (2015, August). The whistled language of Northern Turkey. Retrieved from https://www.newyorker.com/tech/annals-of-technology/the-whistled- language-of-northern-turkey Richardson, W. (2014). New literacies in the classroom. Retrieved from https:// modernlearners.com/new-literacies-in-the-classroom

Roberts, P. (1995). Defining literacy: Paradise, nightmare, or red herring? British

Journal of Educational Studies, 43(4), 412-432. Robin, B. R. (2008). Digital storytelling: A powerful technology tool for the 21st century classroom. Theory into Practice, 47(3), 220-228. Schlechty, P. C. (2001). Shaking up the schoolhouse: How to support and sustain educational innovation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. United Nations Education Scientific and Cultural Organization (2004). The plurality of literacy and its implications for policies and programmes. Retrieved from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/ images/0013/001362/136246e.pdf United Nations Education Scientific and Cultural Organization (2006). Education for all global monitoring report. Retrieved from http://www.unesco.org/ education/GMR2006/full/chapt6_ eng.pdf

Globalization and Cultural and Multicultural Literacies

OBJECTIVES

At the end of this chapter, you should be able to develop a clear and practical understanding of the following: • globalization and its implications on both the national and individual level;

• cultural and multicultural literacy in the Philippines; and • one's personal level of cultural and multicultural literacy.

Globalization is the process of interaction and integration between people, business entities, governments, and cultures from other nations, driven by international trade and investment and supported by information technology (Levin Institute, 2017).

To better illustrate this, consider two people from different countries, for example, the Philippines and South Korea. Let us say they meet in college and become good friends, so that the Korean comes to be treated like a member of the Filipino’s family. After some time, the Korean returns to her own country, but something has changed— she notices an aspect of her culture that she finds herself wishing to be more Filipino. She knows very well that she cannot change Korean culture as a whole, so she decides to just change herself. She

does not change everything, of course—just a little thing here and there; she is still obviously Korean, but she just does a few things differently from those who have never been to the Philippines.

Now suppose a little more time passes and the Korean is very happy with the changes she has made to her life that makes it just a little more Filipino. Let us say some of her colleagues notice how she does some things differently and they become curious, so she tells them about her experiences in the Philippines and how that in some ways, she wishes to do things the way the Filipinos do. Her colleagues decide to give it a try, and they find that they like this different way of doing things, too.

Now let us say that when we look at the person from the Philippines, something similar has taken place: the Filipino, while still being Filipino through and through, has made a few changes in her life as a result of her experience of Korean culture through her friend during their years in college. Some of her friends have also noticed it and have made similar little changes in their own lives.

Because our exposure to the concept of globalization has largely been through an economic lens, it is tempting to limit globalization as something that concerns economists and businessmen. But globalization and its effects go beyond im port or export and Foreign Direct Investment (FDI). Notice that in our illustration, the friends of the two people in question were affected by their interaction, even if they themselves had never been to Korea or had not met a Filipino. Now scale this up to the point where it is not ju st two people from two different nations interacting, but millions of people, from nearly two hundred different countries, where we are no longer integrating just languages or mannerisms or food recipes, but everything from styles of clothing, forms of entertainment, education, technology, manufacturing, ways of doing business, ideas, and whole worldviews. This is globalization as we know it today.

Globalization as a phenomenon is not new. Nations and cultures have been interacting and integrating with one another for millennia. Consider how ancient Greek culture was so widespread across the Mediterranean that even the Egyptians could speak their language, and how Rome was so inspired by Greek culture that they adopted it wholesale. Consider how so much of the Chinese, Arab, and Indian cultures have become part of our own; these interactions and subsequent integrations did not happen recently, but even during centuries before there was even a political entity known as the Philippines.

What is different now, however, is the speed at which globalization is happening, its overall scope, and its effects on the lives of ordinary people. Not only are we interacting with, learning from, and integrating knowledge gleaned from other cultures and nations at an unprecedented rate, there is now also a sense that no matter where one lives or how limited is one's

face-to-face interaction with members of another nation or culture and how limited o ne’s time is spent online, globalization and its effects are inescapable. Even remote villages will be exposed to the latest KPOP hit, if they have access to a radio. If they produce rice, they will also feel the effects of more affordable rice imports from Thailand and Vietnam. If they have access to a kerosene stove, they will feel the effects of the fluctuations in oil prices originating from Arab nations. All these things take place without having to know anyone from or anything about Korea, Thailand, Vietnam, or the Middle East.

The Effects of Globalization

The effects of globalization are multi-dimensional. As shown earlier, they range from economic to cultural, on both national and individual levels. Meyer (2000) summarizes the effects of globalization as follows: • economic, political, and military dependence and interdependence between nations;

• expanded flow of individual people among societies; • interdependence of expressive culture among nations; and • expanded flow of instrumental culture around the world.

Economic Dependence/Interdependence

When the term globalization entered the Philippine public mindset in the early 90s, it was popularly understood to be a mainly economic phenomenon, and a negative one at that. The idea that foreign-owned businesses could come into the country and freely "set-up shop," thereby choking-out local industries was not a welcome thought, even though it was erroneous.

While Philippine society has come to realize that this early perspective represented a shallow understanding of globalization, the fact of the matter is that globalization has brought economic development to our society as a whole. By attracting Foreign Direct Investment (FDI), new technologies, employment opportunities, and money have come into the country. The phenomenon of a taxi driver owning multiple smartphones to browse social media while stuck in traffic because of the rise of the number of vehicles on our roads is testament to this fact.

This does not mean, however, that there have been no negative effects of globalization. Kentor (2001) notes that foreign capital dependence increases income inequality in four ways: (1) It creates a small, highly paid class of elites to manage these investments, who create many but usually low-pay jobs; (2) Profits from these investments are repatriated, rather than invested in the host country, therefore inhibiting domestic capital formation; (3) Foreign capital penetration tends to concentrate land ownership among the very rich; and (4) Host countries tend to create political and economic climates favorable to foreign capital that in turn limit domestic labor’s ability to obtain better wages. In simple words, ‘‘the rich become richer, and the poor become poorer.”

Hout (1980) observes that international dependence (another word for globalization) tends to suppress adult wages, which in turn perpetuates the role of children as economic necessities (the familiar saying “Kapag maraming anak, maraming katulong sa hanapbuhay"), leading to explosive population growth.

In a chain reaction of negative effects, this explosive population growth creates a large sub-sector of society that is insulated from economic development yet Competes for resources with the rest of the population. Coupled with the economic inequalities in which this society is couched, this encourages political instability, resulting in policies that favor the redistribution of income, which in turn discourages investment, which then slows economic growth.

Political and Military Dependence/Interdependence

A survey conducted in late 2018 found that three in five Filipinos believe that the United States would intervene on behalf of the country in case of war (Viray, 2018). Despite the current very conservative stance of the US on its foreign policies, this can be taken as evidence of the Philippines’ dependence on both the political and military power of the US in order to maintain its

sovereignty as a nation-state in the Southeast Asia region. Similar things can be said of Russia and the many communist nations throughout the world.

The point is that where there are some forms of economic dependence/ interdependence, political dependence/interdependence is not far behind, as the participating nations strive to protect their investments and interests in one another.

Expanded Flow of Expressive and Instrumental Culture

Expressive culture, as the term suggests, deals with how a particular culture expresses itself in its language, music, arts, and the like. Globalization encourages the monetization of these cultural artifacts and their import/export among participating cultures; the increased consumption of which changes the consuming culture. Case in point, KPOP music and culture was a relatively niche occupation ten years ago, with very few people aware of its existence, let alone actual fans. Today it is practically ubiquitous in Philippine society, alongside the consumption of all things Korean, from skin-care products to instant noodles.

Instrumental culture, on the other hand, refers to "com m on models of social order" (Meyer, 2000)— that is, models or ways of thinking about and enacting national identity, nation-state policies both domestic and foreign, socio-economic development, human rights, education, and social progress. A simple example of this is the Philippine educational system: Closely patterned after the American educational system, education leaders in the country closely follow the educational trends in America and select European countries, perceiving them to be the global leaders in the field. While this has served us to an arguably satisfactory degree thus far, it is interesting to observe that the problems and difficulties in American education eventually show-up in Philippine education, albeit five to ten years removed.

Expanded Flow of People among Societies

The fact that globalization encourages the movement of people between nation-states should come as no surprise to us. The Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA) estimates that there were 2.3 million Overseas Filipino Workers (OFWs) during the period of April to September 2017, who were responsible for up to 205.2 billion pesos in remittances (Philippine Statistics Authority, 2018).

Meyer (2000) observes three reasons for this: socio-economic migration, political expulsion, and travel/tourism.

Socio-economic migration explains the Philippines’ OFW phenomenon. Filipinos travel abroad to find better economic opportunities for themselves and their families for lack of said opportunities here.

Political expulsion, on the other hand, has more to do with trying to escape the political climate of a particular country, thereby forcing an individual to seek asylum (and ultimately, resettlement) in another more favorable country.

Travel for the sake of leisure (i.e., tourism) is a strong indicator of economic development as more and more Filipinos are able to finance short-term travels abroad, fueled by curiosity that is fed by social media and enabled by globalization.

Cultural Literacy

Cultural Literacy is a term coined by Hirsch (1983), referring to the ability to understand the signs and symbols of a given culture and being able to participate in its activities and customs as opposed to simply being a passive (and outside) observer. The signs and symbols of a culture include both its formal and informal languages, its idioms and forms of expression, entertainment, values, customs, roles, traditions, and the like— most of which are assumed and unstated. Thus, they are learned by being part of the culture, rather than by any formal means.

To illustrate this, consider the following statement: “The classroom was in absolute bedlam ." Without any sort of background, the reader is forced to guess the meaning of the word “bedlam” from its context within the sentence. As it turns out, “bedlam” refers to a scene of uproar, confusion, and chaos. The term is British in origin, referring to a psychiatric hospital in London by the name of St. Mary Bethlehem that was once representative of the worst excesses of insane asylums during the 14th century and “bedlam " is a corruption of the word “Bethlehem" in the name. While it is one thing to know that meaning of the word, note that it is knowledge of its cultural origins that better enables a person to both appreciate and participate in conversations and activities.

Of course, by its very definition, cultural literacy is culture-specific, but it is not limited to national cultures, contrary to what many people assume. The culture of one workplace can be very different from another, just as the culture of a particular school can differ widely from another school nearby.

There are far too many cultures for any one person to be literate in all of them. As more and more Filipinos travel— both domestically and abroad— as the result of globalization and the increased opportunities it brings, the need to develop new cultural literacies comes to the fore.

Cultural Literacy in the Philippines

The National Commission for Culture and the Arts (NCCA) is the government body tasked with the documentation, preservation, and dissemination of Philippine culture, both locally and abroad. Part of how the NCCA is addressing this and related matters is through the establishment of the Philippine Cultural Education Program (PCEP), which "envisions a nation of culturally literate and empowered Filipinos" (NCCA, 2015). Designed to make cultural education accessible to all sectors of Philippine society, the PCEP held national consultative meetings, conferences, workshops, art camps, and festivals on culture-based teaching and good governance from 2003 to 2007. As a result of Republic

Act 10066 (2010), PCEP has been designated as the body, together with the Department of Education (DepEd), tasked to "formulate the cultural heritage education programs both for local and overseas Filipinos” that are to be an integral part of Philippine education in all its aspects.

Cultural education— and thus cultural literacy— in the Philippines is quite a challenge, given that Philippine culture is a complex blend of many indigenous and colonial cultures and varies widely across regions, and the average citizen is almost as ignorant of other Philippine cultures as foreigners are. To point out, consider the question, "W hat makes something or someone ‘Filipino’?”

The average reader will be hard-pressed to pin down a definite answer. De Leon (2011) argues that this is in part due to a colonial mindset among Filipino artists that inhibits the full development and realization of Filipino artistic creativity— a kind of artistic and cultural creativity that is fully Filipino.

De Leon (2011) coins this propensity for Filipinos to look at their culture and themselves through Western lenses as the Doha Victorina Syndrome, a kind of inferiority complex wherein anything and everything natively Filipino is considered by the Filipinos themselves as being inferior, backward, and worthless in comparison to their Western counterparts, and therefore a source of embarrassment and unease. As De Leon puts it, our low self-esteem borders on self-contempt, the results of which are doubt in the Filipino capacity for achievement, perverse delight in belittling ourselves, lack of respect and even outright contempt for one another, and blind dependence on foreign goods, concepts, techniques, approaches, and expertise (2011). The biggest challenge then, according to him, is the deconstruction of the negative self- images and notions of ourselves that we have imbibed over generations through “a workable, effective program of education that can make Filipinos more responsive and sensitive to Filipino dignity, needs, values, and cultural potentials and assets."

For De Leon, it is excellence in the arts— via an expression that is truly Filipino— that can form the core of national unity. Of course, this remains to be seen.

Challenges for Cultural Literacy in the Philippines

As Applebee (1987) observes, interesting discussions on cultural literacy give rise to some very difficult questions which are particularly important to a multicultural and multilingual nation like the Philippines. • What kinds of knowledge constitute cultural literacy? Is it knowing facts, names, and dates, or is it something more experiential like being familiar with a story or a particular song? • If culture is more “caught than taught,” should cultural literacy be one of the goals of education? If yes, how does one teach it?

• Whose cultures must we be literate in to be considered “culturally literate"? Who decides which cultures are included and which ones are excluded, and on what bases? • Is cultural literacy education simply a means for the dominant culture to express its dominance over minority cultures? • How is cultural literacy to be assessed and evaluated? How can we know someone is “culturally literate”?

As of the writing of this book, no definitive answers to these questions exist in the literature.

Multicultural Literacy

The All-Nite Images [CC BY-SA2.0 (https://creativecommons.Org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)] <lavy_SEAL_Teams_One_and_Seven,_Naval_Special_Boat_Teams_12_and_20,_and_medical _personnef_assigned_to_Joint_Speciai_Operatioi

As cultures begin to mix and change as a result of globalization, conflicts inevitably arise over identity, values, and worldviews. This situation consequently needs for a literacy that enables us to quickly and easily identify and resolve such conflicts, preferably before they even begin. This has come to be understood as multicultural literacy.

Multicultural Literacy as a set of skills and knowledge is difficult to define because of how it changes depending on the contexts in which it is discussed. For example, multicultural literacy as defined in American literature is different from how it is deployed in a more European context.

In America, multicultural literacy has very strong leanings toward knowing or identifying the poly-ethnic origins of knowledge with the express goal of fostering equality, diversity, and social justice. This is in direct response to the “Euro-centric” and “white-dominant” traditions of education that in the eyes of American cultural minorities (particularly the blacks) is a form of racial injustice. This is very foreign to the Philippine context, which, despite having our own deeply ingrained traditions of discrimination, does not have the same issues of discrimination as in the United States, nor the same amount of hostility. Nevertheless, the fact that the perceived need for multicultural literacy stems from a slighted sense of justice for “the other” (that is, any individual, group, or culture that another individual, group, or culture considers “not of us,” for any reason) cannot be ignored in our attempts to pin down a functional definition of multicultural literacy for ourselves.

Meanwhile, in Europe, multicultural literacy comes more in the form of intercultural communication competence (ICC), which is defined by Dusi, Messetti, and Steinbach (2014) as a composite of skills, abilities, attitudes, personality patterns, etc. necessary for clear and productive communication with cultures other than our own. Similarly, Fantini (2006) defines it as “a complex of abilities needed to perform effectively and appropriately when interacting with others who are linguistically and culturally different from oneself.”

Clearly, the broader and more magnanimous European definition of multicultural literacy is more fitting for the Philippine context, even if the exact definition of what ICC consists of is still being hotly debated. For the purposes of this book, it would also be wise to include how justice contributes to the literacy; that is, there would be no discussion on multicultural literacy if not for the lack of justice in a multicultural discussion or discourse.

We define multicultural literacy here as the knowledge and skills necessary to ensure that any communication with a culture different from our own is clear, productive, and respectful such that their differences are celebrated and neither culture is demeaned or treated as inferior.

It is important to realize that under this definition, a “different culture” is not just limited to “someone from another country,” but could also include someone whose gender, economic background, religious beliefs, sexual orientation, or even sense of fashion is different from our own.

The skills and knowledge required for one fo be multi-culturally literate are not mere language skills, since it is assumed that some medium of communication already exists between two cultures. Rather, true multicultural literacy consists of perspectives, attitudes, and beliefs about other cultures that affect the manner in which we communicate and the motives behind our communication. Here are some examples: 1. Be selfless - An attitude of selflessness— one that is less concerned with how I feel and more concerned with how I am making others feel— is crucial to multicultural literacy, as so much of the offense and conflict associated with the meeting of different cultures is the result of a “me first" attitude: I should be accommodated, you should be the one to adjust to me, I should feel comfortable with you before I make efforts to make you feel comfortable, etc. Such selflessness is not instinctive to people, and is especially difficult when one feels insecure of oneself and identity. 2. Know that good and useful things can (and do) come from those different from us - Hand-in-hand with a dismissive attitude toward another culture is the idea that nothing good can come from them. Furthermore, there is a tendency to ignore or outright dismiss evidence to the contrary. Simply acknowledging that good ideas and products have come from cultures we might not like goes a long way in preparing our minds to perceive them as being equally valuable. 3. Be willing to compromise - Any significant interaction with someone from a different culture is governed by the principle of “He/She wants something, and I want something." In other words, cultures do not interact out of pure magnanimity. If both of you are willing to give the other what they want, well and good. But what happens when one or both are unwilling to give what the other wants? There must be a compromise: a reciprocal adjustment of demands and expectations to accommodate what the other party is willing to give. 4. Accept that there are limits - At some point however, one or both cultures will be unwilling/unable to adjust their wants for the sake of the other any further. Beyond this point, the productivity of the interaction drops and one must either change the purpose of the interaction or walk away, accepting that what you want cannot be had from that particular source. Attempting to force the other party to adjust (when you refuse to do the same) only results in misunderstanding, hurt, and conflict. The sooner we accept this, the sooner we can set realistic expectations of one another.

A number of important issues stand in the way of Philippine educators attempting to learn multicultural literacy for themselves and teach it in turn to others, which are different from what can be found in Western literature, particularly those of the United States.

Conflicting Requirements for Peace

When all is said and done, the heart of multicultural literacy is peace among different cultures— that is, productive and non-violent interaction. It is easy to assume that all cultures value peace to the same degree and are therefore willing to make the same compromises in order to attain it, but this is not necessarily true.

Take for example the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, which is really a conflict over territory: Both sides desire peace, but they do not desire it enough to be willing to compromise. In a very real sense, both sides would rather live in

perpetual conflict with one another rather than give-up their claim to the land which each side believes is rightfully theirs.

On a more personal, immediate front, I am reminded of an activity a fellow teacher conducted in her class where she asked her students to write down how they defined “peace.” One student revealingly wrote: “Peace is when I get what I w ant.”

Nationalistic and Regionalistic Pushback

The increasing demand for multicultural sensitivity, inclusion, and diversity in the recent years has also given rise to resistance from groups who believe that their identity is being “watered-down" by the needed compromises.

Case in point is the very recent proposal of “Ortograpiya ti Pagsasao nga llokano” by officials of the Komisyon ng Wikang Filipino (KWF) in October of 2018. The proposal was met with intense backlash from group of llokano writers and language advocates over the “incompetence in preparing the llokano orthography that d id n't conform with the existing orthography being used by the llokano writers and experts,” claiming that the proposed orthography was based on Tagalog and not llokano and that the commission's attempts to compel the regional language to conform to the standards of the Ortograpiyang Pambansa (National Orthography) would "destroy the identity of the llokano language" (Dumlao, 2018).

In the ensuing online firestorm, one particular individual commented on how such regional pride is out of step with modernity, particularly with our need to be united as a country. Now this sentiment is consistent with the multicultural literacy of being able to put aside differences for the sake of a common goal, but notice how for the llokanos, national unity (as far as language is concerned) is not worth the cost of giving-up their ability to determine the orthography of their language for themselves.

Such issues become even more complex and clouded when they come to a head with economics, social justice, and religion. What is to be done when accommodating the idiosyncrasies of another culture means decreased economic opportunities for other members of my culture? What about when we must decide between gender equality and retaining a venerable, historical institution like the Boy Scouts of the Philippines? What about if, for the sake of peace, one culture must compromise on its religious values? We might think that peace is worth it, but what if the other culture believes otherwise?

We see here that while multicultural inclusiveness is by and large a good thing, it comes at a cost. Part of the identity of the host culture becomes diluted and lost— the inevitable result of the compromises necessary for it to have some form of multicultural understanding. In effect, pushing for multicultural inclusion might very well be asking some cultures to decide which has more value: Inclusion or Identity?

We must be aware that these questions are easier to answer for the culture that wants to be accommodated (because it will cost them nothing), rather than the one that must do the accommodating.

The Persistence of the Problem

On the surface, multicultural literacy might seem to just be a matter of “good common sense,” and understandably so, no one actively desires to experience discrimination regarding what they know and what they can and cannot do simply on the basis of race, ethnicity, or in the case of the Philippines, region of origin. It therefore makes perfect sense to collectively refrain from such behavior under the assumption that " If you don't do it to me, I w on’t do it to you.” And yet, to our horror and shame, the practice persists. Worse, we sometimes find ourselves participating in and justifying such discriminatory behavior— if only online and not in real life (as if anything written or posted online is not, in fact, in real life).

Therefore, the primary issue that educators face in teaching multicultural literacy to their students and learning it for themselves is, "W h y does this problem persist?" Or to put it in another way, “Despite all out advances in science, technology, and culture, why is this still a problem today?”

Boutte (2008) suggests that issues of discrimination in all its forms (racial, religious, tribal, cultural, etc.) are really issues of hatred, which she defines in an educational setting as “the lack of compassion and lack of respect for the rights of others," and that such hatred must be fought and its roots must be attacked, because for as long as hatred exists in the human mind, real peace will be impossible (Vreeland, 2001).

If this is true, then it leads to some interesting questions: For one, what is the root of this hatred? Boutte (2008) suggests that, at least in an educational context, such hate is often unintentional, but is usually the result of a lack of education. Now if a lack of education is to blame, then a lack of education in what, exactly? Is it awareness of the existence of those different from us? Is it awareness that those different from us are worthy of respect?

The former is unlikely: Thanks'to the Internet; we are very much aware of the existence of people and cultures that are fundamentally different from us, yet this has done nothing to mitigate the hatred that Boutte speaks of. The latter question is more promising, but presumes that something exists in all individuals— regardless of color, language, religion, education, social status, etc.— that is worthy of respect. If this is true, what is this som ething? How do you teach it?

To date, no literature exists within academia that gives a definitive, authoritative, and final answer to these questions.

Another issue in teaching and learning multicultural literacy is better posited as a question: “Why should I treat people of another culture with respect?”

It might seem that the answer to the question is a simple one: for peace. But as we have seen earlier, not everyone values peace to the same degree. What if, for a certain culture, it is easier to just destroy anyone who opposes them rather than expend the effort needed to come to a mutual understanding?

Such statements might sound crass, but only if we believe that we, as a society, are above such things. How many times have we broken “sm all" laws and rules of etiquette— running red traffic lights “because no one is there to catch m e,” or asking a vendor at a flea market or tiangge to list a different price on the receipt than what an item is worth— because it is more convenient than to do otherwise? How many times have we been selfish in our decision-making, not thinking about, not caring about its implications for others? And how many times have we justified such behavior “because of the circumstances” or “because everyone else is doing it”?

In other words, “Why should I value another culture, another society, another person more than myself and my own?” If we subscribe to Dawkins' (2016) concept of a “selfish gene”— where on a genetic level, the more two individuals are genetically similar to one another, the more sense it makes to behave selflessly toward one another and selfishly toward others who are different— then we can easily frame the issue of discrimination of cultural discrimination and injustice as one of both genetics and survival. This means that the injustice you experience is necessary for my survival, and therefore it is in my best interests (genetic and otherwise) that I maintain the status quo— or

reverse it, as the case may be. Educators like Freire (2000) have recognized and written against such a monstrous perspective— and rightly so— but have also admitted that when the oppressed are freed from their oppression, they inevitably become the new oppressors.

If such perspectives seem horrible to us (and they should), it is because the question of the value of humanity, both individually and collectively as a culture, makes no sense without subscribing to some absolute moral standard— one that is true and right for all people, regardless of race, color, or creed. But in today’s society where such absolutes are reduced to matters of perspective, there remains no final and sensible answer to the question.

A majority of research on multicultural literacy stems from the West, specifically the United States, and focuses on teaching teachers to be more multicultural in their pedagogies. • Learn about other cultures. Banks (1991a) posits that the first step to teaching multiculturalism is knowing about cultures that are not your own. It follows that if you, the teacher, know only your own culture, then you will be unable to teach your students to appreciate a culture that is different from your own.

• Familiarize yourself with how discrimination and prejudice appear in

your own culture. Boutte (2008) and Banks (1991 b) agree that teachers must be able to identify and confront patterns of discrimination and prejudice in their own lives before they can teach their students to do the same. For example, when someone you just met says he or she is from Mindanao, what words immediately come out of your mouth, in response? Do Ih ey express genuine acceptance, or do they betray some long-held preconceptions about people from the region? • As you are, so will you behave. Key to genuine multicultural literacy is core values— that is, what you, the teacher, really believe about people who are different from you; not the kind of belief that you can just say you possess when talking to your class, but the kind that determines your behavior when you think no one is watching.

Simply put, if you do not truly believe that those who are different have value equal to your own, it will show, and your students will detect it. It will be seen in the words you use, in the expression on your face, in the change of you behavior when you think no one can see, etc. The converse is also true: If you do believe others have value equal to your own, no matter their social class, educational background, skin color; or regional accent, it will show; and what is shown is what students will learn.

• Model more, tell more. Young students, by nature, will have difficulty in exercising empathy toward those who are different from them.

The ability is there, but it will naturally lack practice. It is therefore not enough that teachers tell them to be more compassionate— you, the teacher, must model for them what empathy and compassion for others look like on a day-to-day basis.

Wrap Up

• Globalization is the process of interaction and integration between people, business entities, governments, and cultures from other nations, driven by international trade and investment and supported by information technology. • Cultural Literacy is the knowledge and understanding of the life of a culture to the point where one can fluently participate in the activities of the said culture. This includes, but is not limited to, its languages, traditions, values, beliefs, forms of entertainment, and worldviews.

• Multicultural Literacy is the knowledge and skills necessary to ensure that any communication with a culture different from our own is clear, productive, and respectful such that their differences are celebrated and neither culture is demeaned or treated as inferior.

• The skills and knowledge required to be multi-culturally literate are: 1. selflessness;

2. knowledge that good and useful things can (and do) come from those different from us;

3. willingness to compromise; 4. acceptance that there are limits; and 5. idea that we cannot be friends with everyone. • The issues in teaching and learning multicultural literacy in the Philippines are the nationalistic/regionalistic pushback, the persistence of the problem, and the question of value.

Questions to Ponder

Read the questions and instructions carefully. Write your answers on the space provided. 1. What makes a person Filipino? If a person has Filipino parents but is born in another country, is he/she still a Filipino? What about if a person with