"EACH ONE TEACH ONE" Finally, in the third part, "each one teach one." By "each one teach one," we feel that there may be a key to helping to unlock the door of this problem, sir, that the device of the technique of "each one teach one" and what the philosophy of "each one teach one" means, if plied in this country, and it has not yet been so applied to any degree, may be useful. ap Because if this legislation is actualized, there are small amounts of funds. We do not feel that this will really take care of it, unless many people are brought it. Therefore, in this statement, which I would also like to submit if I may, sir, the "each one teach one" technique plus philosophy is described in some detail, with an example of how it might be used in this country. Senator MORSE. It will be inserted in the record after your testimony. Mr. CORTRIGHT. Finally, sir, I would like to summarize by saying that the Laubach Literacy Fund as a small, private educational foundation, is delighted to add its support to this proposed legislation, because we feel as Americans that perhaps selfishly, what we are trying to do abroad in the 10 countries where we are now working is hindered because others will say to us and to our colleagues, both Americans and nationals abroad, "Well, what is happening to the problem of illiteracy back in the United States"? Whether it be our oranization, the Point 4, the Government, the philanthropy, the church missions, no matter what they are, when you are trying to do the program abroad, they are hindered because of the problem of illiteracy here in the United States. Thank you, sir. (The statement of Richard W. Cortright follows:) PREPARED STATEMENT OF RICHARD W. CORTRIGHT My name is Richard W. Cortright. I am director of education of the Laubach Literacy Fund, Inc., 1424 16th Street NW., Washington, D.C. I would like to add support to S. 580 in addition to that this morning offered by Dr. Frank C. Laubach. Laubach Literacy Fund, Inc. (LLF) is a nonprofit, educational organization founded by Dr. Frank C. Laubach, originator of the "each one teach one" literacy concept. The objective of Laubach Literary Fund is to aid in the reduction of adult illiteracy throughout the world. Laubach Literacy Fund is convinced that the ability to read and write opens a door for the new reader to a more abundant life, and that every nation needs a literate people. Laubach Literacy Fund works through its own staff, field representatives and literacy centers, and in cooperation with other individuals, agencies and governments in three major types of activities: Teaching adult illiterates to read and write their own language. Providing teaching materials and followup reading matter. Among the current activities of Laubach Literacy Fund are Aiding the work of individuals and literacy centers in East Pakistan, India (four places), Mexico (three places), Kenya, Nigeria (two places), Jordan, Guatemala, Colombia, Ecuador, Brazil, Congo (Brazzaville), and the United States. Developing a series of graded books for new readers in Spanish, and working on similar series in other languages, including Portuguese, Yoruba, Igbo, Tamil, Bengali, Kannada, Santali, Malayalam, and Swahili. Developing in English: 1. A new adult reading series leading to functional literacy. 3. A series of books leading to the ability to read the books of faith. Providing scholarship aid to literacy and writer training programs in several universities and centers, including Syracuse University, San Francisco State College, Hislop College (India), Memphis State College, Upland College, California Western University, and American University. Conducting workshops for training volunteer teachers and writers concerned with illiteracy in their own communities in the United States. Literacy councils have been established in 20 States. Conducting research in new literacy methods, and in the use of audiovisuals, television, radio, and programed learning. Providing a program of information and training on literacy as a vocation for American and international students in colleges and informing America about world literacy needs. Cooperating with the University of Virginia in offering a correspondence course for literacy teachers anywhere in the world. Laubach Literacy Fund draws upon the experience, materials and ideals of Dr. Laubach, who, with his teams and associates, has worked with Government leaders, educators, and missionaries in more than 100 countries. His unique literacy methods, developed over a period of 35 years, have been adapted to more than 130 languages. For 12 years a training program in literacy-journalism has been offered at Syracuse University. The program leads to an M.A. The American University leads to a M. Ed. Perhaps a brief statement will help put the development of literacy efforts in the United States into historical perspective. Before World War II probably all effort and interest concerning illiteracy was centered in Asia, Africa, and Latin America. There was a tacit assumption that the problem existed only in "backward" nations. Educational statistics concerning American military rejects during World War II dispelled this notion. Since then some State programs, a few municipal programs, and numerous but small volunteer programs called literacy councils have begun or expanded. The fact that illiteracy, to the extent that it does exist, exists in the United States, strikes home to Europeans. In fact, one of the ways that Laubach Literacy Fund approaches foreign leaders, specialists and students, is to talk at first primarily about the problem here. Our foreign student representative has done this with more than 2,000 present or future leaders from abroad. The editor of Oversea Education (vol. 33, No. 2, July 1961, H.M. Stationery Office, London), a journal published for the Secretary of State for the colonies, editorialized: "Most of us will be surprised to learn that Texas has so much illiteracy, and that there are 10 States in the Union where illiteracy is even higher. This brings it home to us that illiteracy is a worldwide problem. It affects us all. A famous university don said long ago that none of us is infallible, not even the youngest of us; similarly, no nation is wholly literate, not even the richest, the most highly educated, or the most plan ridden. "Yet, like the comparative illiteracy figures produced by UNESCO, which are so gleefully pounced upon for anticolonialist prograpanda, these Texas illiteracy figures make us wonder. What exactly is literacy, and what is illiteracy? Nobody has yet devised a satisfactory definition or scheme of grading. Is a man to be classified as literate because in his childhood he attended school for 6 years or because 5 years ago he showed that he could read a page from an adultliteracy primer? (Two years ago,' wrote the dirty man in a famous advertisement, 'I used your soap; since then I have used no other.') Is a man literate if he can read, or could once read, but does not? In our April issue we were told of an African people who claim that they could count their cattle, but they never do so because it would be unlucky. Are they to be regarded as 'numerate'? Some countries claim that they have no illiterates because all their children attend school. Yet we know that people can relapse into illiteracy if they make no use of their reading skill; just as I was once able to use the binomial theorem, but have now completely forgotten what the binomial theorem means. For UNESCO's purpose, to say that X percent of a country's people have not learned to read at school and have not obtained a literacy certificate from an adult literacy class may be a convenient index of the country's educational progress. But it is a very inaccurate index. To learn to read is one thing; to have access to reading matter is another; to have the desire to read is yet a third. The important question is not, Can you read? but Do you read? and, still more, What do you read? When educational organizations like the Laubach Literacy Fund support with attempting to undergird American efforts in the same field abroad. Drs. Frank and Robert Laubach spelled this out in a recent program to the International Reading Association: "There are two races in which everyone in the United States is a contestant. "The first race is between literacy and the world's growing population. There are 140,000 more people in the world today than there were yesterday. Since a week ago today, the world could populate a brandnew city the size of St. Louis. There are 60 million more people in the world this year than there were last year. Each year an estimated 10 million adults learn to read, in addition to the millions of children learning. But, at this moment, literacy is losing the race with population. "But there is another race which we are losing. This race is the race with Communist mass education. When Lenin took over Russia for communism in 1919, he started an enormous literacy campaign, and by World War II Russia claimed to have made 100 million people literate. (Life, vol. XIV, Mar. 29, 1943, p. 80.) "In 1914, 67 percent of the people in Russia were illiterate; in 1939, less than 20 percent were illiterate. (The Atlantic, vol. 191, April 1953, p. 16.) Today, Russia is not only one of the most literate countries in the world, but millions of her people have gone far beyond bare literacy. For example, the Russian census of 1926 showed less than 12 percent of all manually employed workers and peasants have been through a 7-year school; by 1959 close to 39 percent of all workers and 21 percent of the farm peasants had completed at least a 7-year school. (Paul Wohl, 'Soviet Figures Shout Educational Upsurge,' Christian Science Monitor, Feb. 21, 1961, p. 2.) "Undoubtedly we must take figures from Russia with a grain of salt, but few of us will argue with the measured words of George Kline, in Current History: * whether in fact the present percentage of adult literacy in the Soviet Union is 5, 7, or even 10 percent, the Soviet achievement in reducing illiteracy from 76 percent in a single generation remains truly impressive.' (George L. Kline, 'Education Toward Literacy,' Current History, vol. XXXV, July 1958, p. 20.) "Communists in China, too, are making their people literate at an incredible rate. Says Kenneth E. Priestley, writing in the Yearbook of Education: "The Chinese Government is nowhere seen to better advantage than in its determination to produce a literate population. It is probably conducting the world's largest mass education movement.' (Kenneth E. Priestley, 'Asia: The Campaign Against Illiteracy,' Yearbook of Education, 1952, p. 509.) AND ON OUR SIDE OF THE CURTAIN ? Meanwhile we have been neglecting literacy on our side of the Iron Curtain. We have over 700 million illiterates in the underdeveloped countries, and the number increases each year with the rising population. It is in these underdeveloped areas that population is outstripping literacy. The authors-and a multitude of teachers-have been trying for 30 years to make the world literate, but there are more illiterates now than ever. The elder of the authors admits this with reluctance and shame, for it shows him up as the world's worst failure. We labor under one tremendous disadvantage, as compared with the Communists. We cannot say to the illiterate, "Learn or die." The Communists do say that, in effect. We cannot coerce the governments in underdeveloped areas to teach their illiterates. We wield nothing but moral suasion in a free world which will have nothing remotely like compulsion. Under these circumstances can we hope to win the races? Or will the educational gap grow wider and wider? If we fail to educate our side of the curtain, we may lose the world on the educational front. We are fighting with our backs to the wall. Our problem is aggravated by the fact that so many people among us still doubt the value of making people literate. But everyone who has worked abroad knows that there are at least two urgent reasons for literacy. The first is that the illiterates are the hungry people. They do not produce as much as they consume, because they cannot employ scientific methods if they cannot read and figure. The governments of newly free countries want literacy, for, as they become industrialized, they will need literate workers. Another reason for literacy is that the mind of the illiterate is very difficult to reach. Literacy has until recently been almost the only medium of mass communication. Russia started its enormous literacy campaign because it realized that it could never spread communism to its millions while they remained illiterate. If we want to teach the illiterates in the free world the values of democracy, we, too, need literacy as a medium for mass communication. For these reasons we also support S. 580. The phrase which has summarized our position in the LLF has been "each one teach one." We believe that S. 580 in practice could well use the each-oneteach-one approach. This is what it means: A new unalienable right may be appended to the historic list: the right to read. Traditionally children have had the right to attend school and learn to read. Even so, large numbers of adults have not climbed the "ladder of literacy." Over 11 million Americans are adult functional illiterates, according to the 1960 U.S. Bureau of the Census "Characteristics of Economic and Social Population." The Laubach method is often called "Each one teach one." This name has come to mean different things to different men. The term was first dramatically used by a Philippine chief in Mindanao who under the penalty of death compelled each of his followers to teach another-each one teach one, "or I'll kill one." Successful motivation? Each one teach one has since been adapted as: each one tell one, each one win one, or each one get one. Currently each one teach one usually is considered as a method of teaching reading. However, this method is actually a description of an entire literacy world view. That is, each one teach one means (1) a technique of teaching and (2) a philosophy of teaching. It means both, or each of these, depending on who is using the term. Each one teach one is not the same today as it was yesterday. Literacy specialists visiting literacy programs and examining literacy materials overseas have heard local teachers sometimes say, "We are using the Laubach materials," or "This is the each-one-teach-one way." They are both right and wrong. The materials have been prepared 20 years previously: they were the each-one-teachone materials then, but they have been superceded by new techniques. For example, the principle of configuration as illustrated by "leg" was unknown in the 1930 Philippine materials. The each one teach one method continually changes. For example, in early Malayo-Polynesian literacy materials certain key words were used. Each key word contained three or more different consonants, but only the same vowel. As many key words were used as was necessary to include all the different consonants, but still only using the one vowel. This key word approach was later superseded by a chain approach associating the first letter of a word with that word. Later, the term key word took on a different meaning. Words like "leg" were called key words because they began with a letter which was easily pictureable. In order for all of these changes and refinements to have been made, many educators besides Dr. Laubach have participated in Laubach literacy programs. Therefore, it is not easy to prepare a simple formula for the each one teach one method. Nevertheless, we might write ECOTO=C+W+S+N+M; that is, each one teach one is the principle of configuration and identification, combined with teaching the whole word, then breaking it into its first and later syllables, and finally teaching the sound and the name of the first letter of that syllable in a meaningful context. Therefore, the each one teach one method is a combination of several teaching techniques plus ways of preparing materials, training teachers, and organizing literacy programs. In this sense each one teach one is eclectic, neither using only a global approach, nor a phonics approach, nor any one approach. In fact, both analytic and synthetic procedures are followed in preparing each one teach one materials. The second meaning of each one teach one is a philosophy of teaching. This philosophy is based on an understanding of the difference between teaching a child to read and teaching an adult to read. Since the literacy books are tailormade for adults, they are written from an assumption that the adult learns in a way different from that of a child. Writers of each one teach one books assume the accumulated experience of the adult outweighs the limited experience of the child. Nevertheless, children in remedial and retarded classes also use the each one teach one materials successfully. In fact, each one teach one is increasingly becoming an aid to elementary English teachers. A literacy teacher appreciates the adult new literate. Great effort is made to be considerate and understanding. A number of suggestions have been prepared by Dr. Laubach to guide the literacy teacher as he attempts to close the education gap between the three-fifths of the world who are functionally illiterate and the two-fifths of the world who are functionally literate. 2. Do not ask the new literate a question he cannot answer. 3. Do not talk too much. 4. Do not tell the new literate what he has already learned. 5. Do not shout. 6. Do not move about nervously. 7. Do not look disappointed. This adult psychology assumes that the adult can learn and that he wants to learn. Literacy programs around the world demonstrate the fact that adults do want to learn, but that they are sometimes embarrassed or afraid of failure. The literists (specialists who study literacy methods, materials, and programs) have discovered that when the suggestions are followed, the adult illiterate can learn to read. The American democratic goal of a nation of teachers and learners can only be achieved when the increasing shortage of high talent is made up for, and those at the lower rungs of the formal educational ladder learn to use the language skills of their teachers. Teachers have felt that they must do the most necessary job next. In this case, an understanding of illiteracy in America means that one of the very next educational jobs to be done at home is the teaching of the more than 11 million adults who have a sixth-grade education or less and are therefore classified as adult functional American illiterates. The philosophy of each one teach one can mean that a person who learns to read will then teach another person to read. An ever-present goal of the literacy teacher is to inspire the new literate to go and do likewise. However, some new literates are not confident enough to do this, nor are they sufficiently motivated to teach another. Nevertheless, they themselves are learning and should not be discouraged from learning, even if they are unwilling or unable to teach another. Hence, each one teach one means more than simply teaching another to read. Rather, it means, as a philosophy of teaching, a basic attitude of responsibility. Hence, the new literate can pay back his volunteer teacher by recruiting other new literates, by being a one-man promotionalist or by assisting in numerous ways which will help the local literacy program. The each one teach one method, technique, plus philosophy, is an important resource for teachers in the struggle to insure the right to read. (Richard W. Cortright, "The Right to Read," Elementary English, Mar. 11, 1963, pp. 299-302.) STATEMENT OF DR. FRANK C. LAUBACH, PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LAUBACH LITERACY FUND, INC. If there is anything true in this world it is that we need greater aid for adult education in this country. It is a national disgrace that at least 8 million Americans are functionally illiterate. With Russia, China, and Cuba all pressing ruthlessly for complete literacy, we are asking for defeat on the educational front in the eyes of mankind unless and until we liquidate our own illiteracy. There is another and equally cogent reason for support of the adult education section of S. 580. Communities are beginning to require adults on relief to study until they are literate enough to be employable. A new term often used today is "employment literacy." It expresses the first reason why we should educate our illiterates, educate them to fill useful and remunerative jobs. Illiteracy is expensive both because it causes the loss of the productive capacity of millions and because we must then support these millions. Teaching them to fill a job is not an expense but an economy. If one scans the newspapers or listens to the radio about jobs which are unfilled, every one of them is for people who are literate. Every new machine introduced into industry makes the need for educated or at least functionally literate people more urgent. Machines can take the place of the illiterates. We need these bills passed not only to provide for education for all illiterate adults, but also to make possible a drastic adjustment of adult education training to job requirements. There ought to be an office which constantly studies present and future job requirements and directs adults into those channels. Since youth now presents the greatest problem of unemployment, there needs to be a vigorous and comprehensive study of the education which these young people need in order to fill a job requirement. I believe there should be a law requiring all unemployed people to become literate and then to learn a skill which the country needs. I support S. 580. |