Literacy Defense

Teachers and their supporters have developed numerous defenses that have become overused. These defenses almost seem conditioned due to their tendency to show up just about every time that they encounter the appropriate trigger.

Trigger:

The literacy defense is used primarily when someone has written a comment that questions the value of the schooling process.

Argument:

If you can read and write, it’s because you learned in school.

Flaws:

The literacy rate is higher than the graduation rate, indicating that it is at least possible to learn how to read and write outside of school. We also know that development of written language, a related but more difficult task, had to have been learned elsewhere. Necessity is a strong motivator to learn how to read and write, and increased literacy that corresponded with increased schooling access would have occurred even without the schools. As far as I’m aware, no evidence exists that shows that the schools have legitimately improved literacy rates.

Related Misconception:

Misconception #26: If you can read this, thank your teachers