It is a simple fact that phonics and early childhood literacy come first before all other langue arts learning. There is serious cause for alarm there. But early childhood education while vital for future success of each child, is only part of the illiteracy problem in America.
According to the article from September 2013 published on the Huffington post website (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/06/illiteracy-rate_n_3880355.html), entitled “The U.S. Illiteracy Rate Hasn't Changed In 10 Years” 32 million adults or 14 percent of the population are functionally illiterate. 63 million more can only read at a 5th grade level and 19 percent of high school graduates can’t even read. Are we ok with these statistics because at least most adults can read at a 5thgrade level? Is that good enough?
No matter what the early childhood literacy advocates say, there needs to be more than just basic literacy, if 93 plus million adults are reading at or below 5thgrade levels, this is clearly not just a early childhood literacy problem.
One way to approach the literacy gap is through following the readers advisory method, particularly the Reading Rainbow approach through an empowering peer to peer method for children is key. Starting a dialogue between all types of readers especially peer to peer is another key to creating life long readers. But even with all the efforts of all the literacy nonprofits, we have a long way to go.
In terms of the detractors from Levar Burton’s kickstarter campaign for fund a digital Reading Rainbow, Burton tells it like it is “I believe that this is a world that was designed to create opportunities for us to work together so that everybody’s needs get met. And I genuinely believe if we had more economic cooperation as opposed to competition, we’d be a lot better off as a society.” If the detractors from Burtons Reading Rainbow kickstarter, actually did something themselves for literacy (either donate time or donate money) then there would be less need for bickering and there would be less of a literacy problem here in the States.
Here is further proof that the digital reading rainbow will cross most digital platforms and will be available in some needy schools.
Personally I am currently a manager at a bookstore, those places that are for profit libraries. I see nothing wrong with both making a profit and promoting literacy. There is no inherent conflict between the two ideas of making money and helping families read, in fact, if you think about it even libraries need to get money (grants) you wouldn’t call public librarians money grabbers would you?
Today’s socially responsible business practices are focused on improving the world while benefiting the company. Socially responsible plans are an increasing part of the big business world. And as a one store business I think we are doing our part by providing a crucial missing piece of the Los Altos business scene as well as our community outreach and how we have always been a community gathering spot not to mention our collections for charities and donations to other charities. We are customer and community oriented much the same way a library is.
The need for profit for all companies (even not for profits have to bring in money somehow) does to make profit making a bad thing. It is then what the company does with it’s profits that is what needs to be investigated. This and then we have to look at the business as a whole in all its parts before we can be fully accurate in our perceptions. There is nothing wrong with reader advisory especially peer to peer reading advisory, which is endlessly effective. And yes we need basic literacy in early childhood education. These too need never be in conflict, neither does the what some have called conflict between the for profit motive and working towards literacy causes.
