In Cultural Literacy: What Every American Needs to Know, Hirsch cultivates an extensive list of exact ideas and words that all “literate” beings must know in order to successfully participate in American society. This unrealistic catalog is what Hirsch refers to as “cultural literacy.” According to Hirsch, cultural literacy is defined as, “the network of information that all competent readers possess (p. 2).” He further proclaims that it (cultural literacy) is “the background information, stored in their [readers] minds, that enables them to take up a newspaper and read it with an adequate level of comprehension, getting the point, grasping the implications, relating what they read to the unstated context which alone gives meaning to what they read (p. 2).”
Upon my review of Hirsch’s list and the evidence he uses to support this laboriously long list, I am overwhelmingly flooded with many emotions. From these emotions, I have generated some questions for Mr. Hirsch to consider. So, in an attempt to “comprehend” his ideas, “get” his “point,” and “grasp his implications,” I have chosen to draft a letter to Mr. Hirsch.
Dear Mr. Hirsch,
I have most recently become familiar with your work, Cultural Literacy: What Every American Needs to Know. There are many points that you express that I have difficulty digesting, including your list of terms and ideas that you deem important for Americans to know in order to be active, productive members of society. So, I have taken responsibility for my cultural literacy (or lack thereof) and seek out some more “background” information.. In my stab at becoming comfortably literate with your theories, I please invite you to answer a few questions.
First and foremost, after reading your opening sentence in Chapter One, “This book explains why we need to make some very specific educational changes in order to achieve a higher level of national literacy (p. 1),” I immediately checked the date of publication of this work. For me, this was crucial “background” information in understanding your frame of reference. It is important to know and have a clear understanding of what society looked like when you wrote these words.
Upon seeing that your claims and theories were published in 1988, twenty-three years ago, I, without delay, thought about the significant and insignificant changes that have occurred in the past quarter century. And, what impact these changes may have on your theory. I ask you first, Mr. Hirsch, has the passing of twenty-three years, and all that our society has faced over these years, changed any of your assertions? And, if any, in what way? What I am asking you, Mr. Hirsch, is, in today’s society, 2011, is there still validity in what you proposed twenty-three years ago? To further my point, I ask, in another twenty-three years, almost sixty years from your original publication date of 1988, what legitimacy will remain?
I specifically question your list in regards to changing times. Would the list that you proposed in 1988 be the same today? Would a list in 2025 contain these terms and ideas? Or, do you believe that it is possible to have a standard, concrete list of specific ideas that must, even with societal changes and technological advances, be known in order to successfully participate?
I am asking you to consider, Mr. Hirsch, that there are many reasons why your proposed list is not a “constant,” and will always be forever-changing. There is continual advancement and changes in society that also filter-down to our daily routines. While it was previously deemed important to know how to tell the time by the Sun’s location, I simply can look at my watch, my clock, my cable box, or my cell phone to obtain this information.
The fact that technological advancements allow most people not only accessibility and immediacy to much of what your list contains, should also alter the contents of a revised list.. Within in seconds, by using the Internet, I can become familiar with any term or phrase. Yes, not all information is always accurate, but the availability of the thousands of resources that may be “just a click away” cannot be refuted. Mr. Hirsch, I am not asserting that we, as an educated society, should rely solely on technology and the Internet. I am, however, asking you to perhaps reconsider what it is that you deem worthy considering society is constantly changing.
Piggy-backing on the notion that humanity/society is not a stagnant realm, I do inquire why it is that you place such heavy importance on just specific, concrete terms. For me, how we interact with other beings and our knowledge and understandings of human emotions such as compassion, empathy, and selflessness, are what determine how successful we are in our participation in society. These life lessons, are not found on the Internet, and therefore, Mr. Hirsch, should be a focus educational systems. Because so many of us in today’s world hide behind our computer, cell phone, text messages, emails, etc., many have forgotten how to effectively interact face-to-face with another human. These successful interactions are not learned over night either; they are lifelong lessons that all should be allowed the opportunity to explore in educational settings.
I will use my fifth grade classroom experience as an example, Mr. Hirsch. As students, we were required to memorize and recite the Preamble to the Constitution. Guess what, Mr. Hirsch, twenty years later, I could not recite it for you, nor could I probably have recited it for you one year after the class. However, this same year, I was afforded the experience to work with my peers who needed a little extra assistance through a peer tutoring program. It was through this involvement that I took away lessons far more important than that of the memorization you encourage in your writings(p. 30). These were lessons of human contact, human interaction, and human differences. That Mr. Hirsch, cannot be drilled into one’s mind and quizzed on the next day, nor can it be “looked-up” on the Internet.
Ultimately, I ask that you please, twenty-three years later, reexamine your work, and consider that with the progression of the past quarter century, your ideas, may in fact be outdated and unfounded. Yes, we do need to scrutinize our educational system. But, we must recognize society as evolutionary and always developing. Although I see the immediate purpose in creating a “go-to” list of “what every American should know,” we must look beyond that and realize the flaws in this method. It is unfathomably and naïve to create a steadfast list and believe that higher levels of national literacy will be achieved.
Sincerely,
Suzanna Paserba
