Communicative Literacy:

The standard for interchange

Shareen Abramson

Abramson, S. (Summer , 2006). Communicative literacy: The standard for interchange. Co-Inquiry Journal, 1(2).

© All rights reserved. This publication is protected by copyright and permission should be obtained from the author prior to any prohibited reproduction, storage in a retrieval system, or transmission in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or likewise. The author can be contacted at: shareena@coinquiry.org 


The ability to communicate is a birthright. The newborn’s first cry demonstrates the power of communication. With intense clarity, the infant’s cry is a message that is open to interpretation. Experiencing this unforgettable declaration of arrival and in an emotional state that is beyond words, the parents respond with gestures of comfort and love as they embrace their new baby with a hug. Thus life’s primary relationship begins in symbolic expression. Although no words have been spoken, meaning passes from one to another in physical signs, the cry and the hug, that are universal and timeless. In this iconic moment, when new life enters the world, meaning is conveyed through interchange.

Interchange is a communicative act that involves the negotiation of meaning using signs and symbols. From birth until the end of life, interchange with people, objects, events and ideas provokes the search for meaning that distinguishes human experience. Interchange of symbolic ideas through dialogue or shared experience is a source of learning and development. While different, interchange can also take place between individuals and inanimate objects, phenomena or cultural symbols. For example reading a book, viewing a work of art or experiencing the beauty of the nature can precipitate new insights. In all its innumerable forms, including verbal and written, language, gesture, music, visual media, etc., interchange represents a dynamic interplay of ideas communicated in signs and symbols that must be interpreted to discover meaning.

Interchange and Communicative Literacy

To understand another’s meaning, ideas must be clear, coherent and relevant.  Having a standard system for communication, such as verbal language, enables more successful interchange because the intended meaning is more discernible to another. For example, an appropriate response becomes more likely when a preschool child uses words instead of only crying to describe an upsetting situation. Communicative literacy is the term proposed to describe the essential ability for expressing meaning using standard symbolic systems such as language that are common to a group or culture.

Different ways to communicate ideas multiply the possibilities for interchange with people and in the larger world of experience, culture and thought. Examples of communicative literacy include: reading, writing, creating art, singing, performing cultural rituals, acting, dancing or producing a video. Critical for interchange, developing communicative literacy benefits both children and adults alike, fostering relationships and learning at home, school, work and other settings. Endeavoring to improve and expand one’s communicative literacy should be a goal pursued across the life span.

Although the capacity to communicate is innate, communicative literacy, the ability to use the symbols that comprise communication systems, is acquired through interchange, often in an educational context. Many factors may advance or inhibit communicative literacy. Individual factors such as ability, aptitude and motivation as well as social factors such as the quality of relationships affect communicative literacy. Time and opportunity for practice and receiving help or guidance from someone who is an expert are also crucial considerations

Communicative Literacy and Language

It is generally recognized that language is the most valuable tool for learning that humans possess. In linguistics, there are two distinctive but interrelated aspects of language: 1) distinct sounds and 2) distinct meanings. First, language is a system of sounds, structures and technical features. In the case of verbal language, specific elements such as phonemes, words, sentences and grammatical structures can be separately analyzed and explicitly taught. As most early educators already know, phonemic awareness, aural recognition of the sequence of sounds that make up words, is significantly related to early literacy development.

Second, language is a symbolic system for communication and interchange. This view of language emphasizes that language and literacy are meaning-oriented processes having various practical, educational and communicative functions. For more than 30 years, researchers have known that awareness of the functions and purposes of literacy, the communication aspects of language, plays a major role in the emergence of literacy (Teale & Sulzby, 1986). Understanding that one listens to a book to hear a story, follows a recipe to make cookies, writes one’s name to identify work, recognizes environmental print, and other meaning-related functions are key breakthroughs in language development.

Communicative literacy is both a learned behavior and a mechanism for building learning capacity. For young children, communicative literacy plays an essential role and influences the course of development. Very early, infants demonstrate tremendous aptitude for learning signs, attending to stimuli, gesturing, talking, showing interest in books, scribbling and using other forms of expression. In the first few months, the infant uses verbal and physical signs to obtain comfort.

Mastery of an intentional symbolic gesture, the infant’s pointing to an object as a means to signal the parent, represents one of the earliest acts of communicative interaction (Carpendale & Lewis, 2004). In recognizing that this particular gesture has a unique symbolic meaning, the infant and parent can proceed to give joint attention to the object of interest. In this way, body language becomes a means for promoting communicative literacy. As more shared symbols accumulate, the acquisition of language by the infant progresses more quickly. Knowing the basics for symbolic communication and having many occasions for practice lead to proficiency and fluent expression that become the support for continued learning and conceptual development.

Communicative Literacy as an Educational Standard

By the time they arrive in the early education classroom, children already possess a high degree of communicative literacy and the desire to continue to develop their abilities.  At five years of age, most children know more than 75% of their spoken language. Evidence of communicative literacy in many others areas can also be documented through careful observation. Coming into the classroom, children make typical social expressions such as a smile to signal their pleasure in greeting their friends. At the morning group meeting, when the teacher asks a question, children use recognizable physical gestures like raising a hand to signify their desire to participate in the discussion, an occasion for group interchange. During the morning activities, children express meaning in visual images, by scribbling or drawing; in sounds, by humming a favorite song; in social conventions by setting the table for lunch; and in conceptual thinking by constructing a road in blocks. Children engage in communicative literacy in all of these activities as well as in more conventional areas of language and literacy such as conversation and interest in books and print.

Not only is communicative literacy present in children’s efforts to create, interpret and respond to meaning, but also in the ways adults respond with their own expressions, gestures, words and actions. Children have an intrinsic desire to improve their communicative literacy and look to adults to assist their efforts.

Communicative literacy employs different symbolic systems or “languages”--visual expression, musical, gestural, constructive and other symbolic systems and codes--to communicate meaning. Communicative literacy contributes to meaningful, high level interchange. While not necessarily prized in today’s achievement-oriented society, communicative literacy, such as speaking a second language, composing a ballad, playing the cello, painting a landscape, knowing a folkdance, directing a film or writing poetry, expand one’s horizons for intellectual, creative and cultural interchange that enriches experience and understanding.

Until recently, developing communicative literacy in multiple symbolic systems was integral to early education programs, birth through third grade. Because of the current, narrow focus on testing and rigidly defined academic skills, invaluable early learning experiences in different channels of expression are being marginalized. In public education, the current stress on testing may be a well-intentioned effort to raise academic standards to improve later school performance. However when testing is the main focus of the program, learning experiences that develop communicative literacy can be severely curtailed. Because of the length of time needed to attain higher levels of performance, it is beneficial to introduce different types of communicative literacy in early education. When this happens, children who demonstrate interest in a particular type of symbolic communication can be given greater opportunities to develop their literacy gifts.

Narrowly defined standards for literacy ignore the communicative purpose of language and other symbolic systems. Unfortunately, in the majority of US early education programs, including preschool, kindergarten and primary classrooms, learning the sounds and structures of language constitutes the majority of children’s literacy program. In these classrooms, interchange and communicative literacy are seen as disruptive, interfering with accomplishing academic objectives. The exclusive focus on linguistic features, such as phonemic awareness, deprives children of more meaningful experiences that include interchange with other children, creative materials, plants and animals as well as literacy experiences that develop written expression, critical analysis, appreciation of literature and include reading in many genres and comprehension development.

Communicative literacy is critical to our future as a communicative society in dialogue with the rest of the world. To restore fundamental communicative literacy experiences to young children, educators themselves must also be able to clearly, capably and coherently have interchange with others—fellow educators, parents and community members—about the value of communicative literacy and its relevance to living in a diverse, rapidly changing and technology-driven world, our global society.

Communicative Literacy, The Hundred Languages, and Multiple Intelligences

Communicative literacy links with other approaches to learning in early education. Exploring the similarities and differences among these approaches yields insights about the best ways to design quality early education programs.

Reggio Emilia Approach. According to educators in Reggio Emilia, Italy, children have a hundred languages for communicating their ideas and cultural understandings (Edwards, Gandini & Forman, 1998). The philosophy underlying the Reggio approach is beautifully distilled in Loris Malaguzzi’s poem, No way: The hundred is there, which begins with the affirmation: “The child is made of one hundred/The child has a hundred languages/a hundred hands/a hundred thoughts/a hundred ways of thinking/of playing, of speaking.” (Malaguzzi, 1998, p. 3). Thus the Reggio Emilia Approach considers language and communication to be central to children’s development and learning.

Both the communicative literacy perspective and the Reggio Emilia approach regard children as powerful communicators who have the ability to express ideas in many languages. Social interaction, dialogue and negotiation are also prominent emphases. In the Reggio schools, children are afforded ongoing, multi-layered experiences that develop different languages and symbolic abilities as children research projects of interest often in small groups. Teachers demonstrate their communicative ability in utilizing materials as an educational resource and in documenting the learning process in a variety of ways including observation and making photos and videos for study.

Reggio educators look at development through the lens of social constructivism and a number of related philosophies. Having a slightly different orientation, but one that is very compatible, communicative literacy aligns with theories of literacy, language and communication.

Multiple Intelligences. The communicative literacy perspective is consistent with Howard Gardner’s theory of multiple intelligences (1983; 1993). The multiple intellectual faculties delineated in Gardner’s theory are: linguistic intelligence (ability with words); logical-mathematical intelligence (ability in mathematics and logical thinking); musical intelligence (ability to play a musical instrument or create music); spatial intelligence (ability to think visually, appreciate, create and design works of art); body-kinesthetic (ability to excel in athletics, mime and dance), interpersonal intelligence (ability to understand others); and intrapersonal intelligence (ability to understand oneself Recently Gardner (1999) has added another category: naturalist intelligence (the ability to know and relate to the natural world). Each of these eight intellectual abilities is correlated with a separate symbolic system. Thus both communicative literacy and multiple intelligences involve mastery of symbolic communication.

The theory of multiple intelligences has significant implications for understanding individual differences in learning. However in a typical classroom, designing curriculum and assessment using the theory of multiple intelligences can be a challenge. Moreover because definitions of intelligence vary, for example, Guilford’s structure of intellect model (1967) recognizes 150 abilities, and given the concerns related to test bias, many schools prohibit intelligence testing for the general student population. When used for special education placement,  intelligence tests are required to have high reliability and validity and be administered by a qualified psychologist.

While very similar to multiple intelligences, communicative literacy is easier to define and observe. Clear standards for performance can be established indicative of progressive mastery for a particular symbolic system. Thus growth in specific areas of communicative literacy can be assessed by authentic measures of performance without becoming tangled in the controversies surrounding the construct of intelligence.

While intelligence is believed to be a relatively fixed, static capacity, communicative literacy develops through education, experience and practice. The possibility that new symbolic systems might materialize in the future, strengthens rather than diminishes the definition of communicative literacy. Adopting communicative literacy as a standard for interchange in education has immediate, practical applications for the types of early learning experiences that could benefit learners and the kinds of experiences that should be offered to cultivate early symbolic communication.

The communicative literacy paradigm suggests new ways to think about the importance of early learning in fostering communicative literacy. Rather than organizing curriculum around a specific “intelligence” or “language,” early education for communicative literacy involves a process where children communicate understanding and integrate meaning using different languages. As children engage in a meaning-centered, experience-based interchange in education, they develop understanding, apply literacy skills, solve problems and interact with others both adults and children in ways that continually promote communicative literacy.

Early education in communicative literacy allows the enormous potential present in every child to be realized. A curriculum based on communicative literacy serves all children including those with diverse cultural, ethnic and linguistic backgrounds and differing abilities. To develop symbolic languages, an educational approach that encourages communicative literacy and multiple paths for learning must be restored to curriculum.  Adopting communicative literacy as a standard for early education guarantees the right of every child to develop fully their abilities and talents to strengthen interchange with others and the world.

In the Co-Inquiry Blog that accompanies this article, a wide variety of learning experiences develop young children’s communicative literacy. The documentation shows children acquiring symbolic knowledge through interchange with peers and adults and in experiences with paper, common household objects, paint,, etc.

Please go to: http://www.fanslerece.org/coinquiry/2006/08/interchange_and_communicative.html to view documentation and to engage in interchange concerning the value of early education for communicative literacy.

Communicative Literacy and Technology

Technology promises new venues for communicative literacy. Virtual communication among people throughout the world is already bringing about major social changes. People everywhere are transmitting and receiving meaning over the internet. Text, photo, graphic, sound and video have become basic languages for electronic communication. While personal and business uses dominate the web, educational applications of these electronic languages are gaining popularity.

Technology, like other symbolic systems, has both structural and communicative features. When technical knowledge is the exclusive focus, computer literacy can be a misnomer. For example, spreading computer viruses and sending spam require high-level knowledge but show a callous disrespect for the communicative purpose of the medium. If the global village is to flourish and survive, users must have communicative literacy.

Electronic communication promises new ways to acquire and develop communicative literacy as well the developing new languages for communication such as the blog. Electronic languages are already making changes in communicative interchange among educators, children and parents:

A change in speaking:

To chatting, messaging and dialoguing in networks, forums, lists and chat rooms

A change in listening:

To listening to sound and audio recordings both synchronic and asynchronic such as podcasts

A change in reading:

To accessing text from websites, databases, RSS feeds, blogs, etc.

A change in writing:

Emailing, blogging and text messaging

A change in creative and symbolic expression:

To downloading and uploading as well as designing, producing and synthesizing video, sound and/or images

These transformative developments challenge educators to think in new ways about communication, early learning and professional development.

Communicative Literacy and Community Action

In his poem referred to earlier, Malaguzzi sharply criticizes schools because “they steal 99” of the hundred languages with their exclusive focus on rigid academic standards. Although the ability to read is fundamental, developing communicative literacy in many languages reflects inclusive early learning environments that welcome diversity, multiple intelligences, culture and new technologies into the educational dialogue. In such an environment, both children and adults can engage in the never-ending process of developing their communicative literacy to make sense of the world, their lives and their relationships with others. Communicative literacy pertains to the right to use many different symbolic languages to create meaningful experiences, build personal and professional relationships, honor culture and foster connections with the others of the world.

Communicative literacy unifies adults and children in a co-constructive, meaning-making process of educational interchange that enriches experience at every stage of development. The words, communication and community are derived from the same Latin root word, communis, translated as common, shared by all or many. Through a shared vision for early education dedicated to communicative literacy, a multigenerational, interactive community of learners can be a force for real educational change. As a major step toward educational and cultural renewal, communicative literacy is a sign for innovation and community action in seeking another direction for early education.

References

Carpendale, J.I.M. & Lewis, C. (2004).  Constructing an understanding of mind: The development of children’s social understanding within social interaction. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 27, 79-151.

Edwards, C., Gandini, L. & Forman, G.  (Eds.).  (1998).  The hundred languages of children: The Reggio Emilia Approach – Advanced Reflections.  (2nd Ed.). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

Gardner, Howard (1983; 1993) Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences, NY: Basic Books.

Gardner, Howard (1999) Intelligence reframed. Multiple intelligences for the 21st century, New York: Basic Books.

Guilford, J. P. (1967). The nature of human intelligence. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Malaguzzi, L. (1998). No way the hundred is there. In C. Edwards, L. Gandini & G. Forman (Eds.), The hundred languages of children: The Reggio Emilia approach– Advanced Reflections. (2^nd Ed., pp. 2-3). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

Teal, W. H. & Sulby, E. (1986). Emergent literacy: Writing and reading. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.