Baozhu Helen Liu

76-100m

Geoffrey Sauer

Dec. 6, 1996

Since its advent as a means of mass media communication in the fifties, television has come roaring into American life in the last four decades, and it has become an important part of the daily life of ordinary people in the U.S. After work and sleep, Americans spend more time viewing television than any other activity. Television has become an irreplaceable part of the people's lives. On the other hand, as technology advances with astonishing speed, the society is facing a pressing need to meet the literacy challenge. It was reported in a recent monograph Literacy in the Television Age: The Myth of the TV Effect by Susan Neuman (Neuman, vii) that "there are as many as 26 million Americans who can not read or write", and "there are as many as 72 million Americans who are functionally illiterate, not being able to read or write above the fifth grade level". As the general public spends more and more time watching television, what is the impact of television viewing on the literacy level of an individual? There are contradictory answers to this question. Some believe that television is responsible for a steep decline in literacy in the U.S. due to the decline of the amount of time people spend on reading and studying (Glenn 216); others think that "the amount of children's viewing of educational programming is positively correlated with time spent reading or being read to and time spent in educational activities;" (Fowles 730); "television viewing has replaced neither book reading nor homework, and has not lessened the desire for achievement" (Neuman 158), and television technologies have been, and will continue to be playing a vital role in promoting literacy and raising the literacy standard in the U.S. (Neuman 1). This paper will assess the different opinions on the impact of television on literacy. First, the notion that television has negative influence on literacy, as promoted by Norval D. Glenn, will be discussed. Then the research findings by Jib Fowles, and by Vernon C. Hall, Karen S. Chiarello, and Beverly Edmondson, which counter Gleen's view, will be presented. Finally, the work by Susan Neuman, who believes that television enhances learning, and calls for the appropriate use of television technology to expand children's learning and literacy, will be discussed.

Before a formal discussion on the impact of television on literacy begins, it is necessary to give a clear definition for literacy (or illiteracy). The word illiteracy obviously applies to a continuum of reading abilities, from the inability to read at all to the ability to read somewhat. Where one sets the point on this continuum that divides the illiterate from the literate is clearly open to debate. But because people have differing views about literacy's social purpose and value, it would be difficult to achieve a consensus on how best to define literacy. To assess the impact of television on the national literacy level, it is apparently more productive to consider how the emergence of television has changed people's reading habits and reading materials, and what television technologies can do in promote literacy.

In 1962, 77% of a Gallop Poll respondents said they had watched television the day before; in 1988, 91% admitted doing so. Nowadays "an average American spends at least three hours a day in front of a television set" (Glenn 223). Considering the impact of television on reading only in terms of time, conventional wisdom has it that television has a detrimental influence on the development of a person's literacy level simply because that people have allocated less time on reading. Thus it is not surprising for the general public to have the notion that Americans' reading habits are on the decline. Such view is reinforced by the popularity of such books as Jonathan Kozol's Illiterate America, in which Kozol states that more than one-third of American adults cannot read successfully. David Harman, the author of Illiteracy: A National Dilemma, observes that "more and more working members of mainstream America are found to be either totally illiterate or unable to read at the level presumably required by their job or their position in society."

Many educators, educational policymakers, and individuals with public influence have suggested that television watching has indeed lowered the academic performance of school children, both in reading and writing, and in mathematics. Support for such assertions frequently appears on television screens. Although children may learn the meaning of some words from watching television, television viewing presumably lessens the time they spend on homework, reading books, listening to adult conversation, and other activities with greater potential (than watching television) for the development of vocabulary, a major component of an individual's literacy proficiency. The increase in television watching by adults may also have adversely affected their development and retention of vocabulary by decreasing such activities as reading and conversing.

Some researchers on education and literacy believe that television influences the national literacy level indirectly, rather than directly, through effects on other activities which are related to the advancement of an individual's literacy level. In a recent extensive study on "Television Watching, Newspaper Reading, and Cohort Differences in Verbal Ability", Norval D. Glenn of the University of Texas at Austin found that an intercohort decline in vocabulary at all or most educational levels in the United States in recent years was closely related to an intercohort decline in newspaper reading. He states that the "decline in newspaper reading, in turn, may have resulted largely from an increase in television watching" (Glenn 228). The advent of television and the continued increase in television viewing are apparently important reasons for the decline in reading. With so many television news programs available, especially the all-news channels such as CNN, Headline News, and the just-inaugurated FOX News Channel, people now are much less relying on newspapers to receive news reports on major events, which is evidenced by the fact that the daily newspaper circulation in the U.S. has been level during the last twenty years -- this at a time when the total population and the number of households have been rising. But Glenn also concedes that other major reasons are also contributing to the decline in reading as well. For instance, popular reading materials may have been "dumbed down" as book publishers and the print media have tried to compete with television and the movies for a mass audience, and there is evidence (Glenn 229) that schoolbooks published after World War II are less difficult than their pre-war counterparts.

Though Glenn's work provided some insights into the influence of television on reading (so as to literacy), in general it does not rule out important effects from other factors. For example, any decline in serious conversation as a leisure-time activity could also have an effect similar to that of a decline of reading; when people spend more time doing exercises and engage in sports activities, the time that could be used for reading would also be reduced. Therefore Gleen's work on the negative impact of television on literacy is not conclusive.

Another study by Jib Fowles of the University of Houston, author of popular books Why Viewers Watch: A Reappraisal of Television's Effects and Celebrity Performers and the American Public, on the trend of Americans' reading habits found that even though television viewing habits may be stronger, nevertheless "they are not by any means shouldering reading aside. Time with television has simply been added on the time spent with more traditional media" (Fowles730). Fowles writes that "contrary to what some might guess, every available statistical measure indicates that the reading of books is an increasingly common practice for the U.S. public." (Fowles 727). He cites that Americans spent a total of $2.9 billion on books in 1970 and $9.8 billion in 1988" (Fowles 727). This is a more than threefold increase -- far too great to be attributed to population growth or inflation. On the other hand, "not only have Americans been buying more books, they have also been borrowing more books from public libraries" (Fowles 727). He further rebuts the notion that "Americans are buying and borrowing a steadily increasing number of books but are leaving them unread" by citing many survey data which just show the opposite. Therefore he concludes that "the answer to the question of whether Americans are reading more or less appears to be, on balance, that they are reading more". So, Fowles believes that to put the blame of the widespread illiteracy in the U.S. on people' spending more time watching television and less time reading books is not justified. Americans are watching a lot of television shows, but they are also reading more. "The two activities of reading books and watching television are perhaps best understood as complementary rather than competitive: television deals largely in fantasy material that helps people relax during leisure hours, while print frequently communicates the information that is the essence of school and work activities". (Fowles 730)

In a paper co-authored by Vernon C. Hall and Karen S. Chiarello of Syracuse University, and Beverly Edmondson of Hamilton College, "Deciding Where Knowledge Comes From Depends on Where You Look," they report, based on their experimental results, that "measures of both general ability and television exposure exhibited a strong relationship to declarative knowledge" (Hall 305), and suggest that "watching educational television increases literacy whereas watching noneducational television may actually limit it" (Hall 305). Their work is in contrast to that of other researchers, such as K. E. Stanovich and A. E. Cunningham, who believe that "television exposure was a statistically nonsignificant predictor of the acquired knowledge" (Hall 305). The Hall, Chiarello, and Edmondson paper carefully examined the measures of general ability and television viewing, and proclaims that there is a positive relationship between viewing educational programs and cognitive performance for both preschoolers and college students. They found that "prior viewing of children's educational programs in general and Sesame Street in particular were consistent positive predictors of letter-word knowledge, mathematical skills, vocabulary size, and school readiness on age-appropriate standardized achievement tests, even when statistical controls for children's background and initial levels of language skills were applied", and "about twenty-five minutes per day of viewing added a third of a standard deviation in test scores (about five points on a test with a range of scores from seventy to one hundred thirty points)" (Hall 312). They also realize that television viewing has become a time-consuming pastime for much of the population and has probably replaced tome formerly used for reading, and they expressed their concern over those who question the expenditure of tax funds for educational television programs, and called for public and government's support for these channels that devote much of their time to relevant topics (e.g., the Learning Channel, the History Channel, the Discovery Channel). (Hall 312).

Apparently, excess of television watching for the sole purpose of entertainment surely has negative impact on reading and learning, but educational television programs will definitely help the learning process. Glenn's views were contradicted by the seemingly more objective investigations by Fowles, and by Hall, Chiarello, and Edmondson, and further, the work of Hall, Chiarello, and Edmondson is more persuasive than that of Hall's. But none of them explored how television as a technology could fundamentally enhance the learning process and promote literacy on a national scale. This subject was taken on by another researcher, Susan Neuman.

In her book, Literacy in the Television Age, Neuman presents extensive evidence to praise the role television has played in promoting literacy in America. Based on her review of the literature of experimental investigations, as well as on her own empirical research, Neuman states that the charges against the media have been unwarranted; though the general population have spent more time watching television, this has not replaced book reading and doing homework. She argues that "television has certainly not replaced or diminished literacy. On the contrary, there is a synergy among media", and "there is spirited interplay between print and video activities that may spark children's interests and enhance literacy opportunities." (Neuman xiv). In general, Neuman strongly believes that the influence of television on literacy is positive. She presents an "Interest Stimulation Theory", saying that "television's persuaders and entertainers opened up new gateways of learning for children. With television, many of the conceptual and logical barriers to extending children's experiences posed by other media were virtually swept away. Its very accessibility means that children were exposed to ideas, events, and places that were once for adults alone" (Neuman 107); "television can enhance learning by stimulating children's interests, and argumenting their knowledge related to school subjects" (Neuman 122). Though it appears she tries to play down the negative impact of television by stressing that the potential of television in promoting literacy has not been fully exploited, her presentation of the overall scenario of the impact of television on literacy is very convincing.

In summary, television as a technology can do much more good than harm to promote literacy in this country. As a unique mass medium, television is capable of transferring information and experiences, widely, quickly, vividly with a realism and immediacy hardly matched by other mass media. Television has the potential to extend learning and literacy well beyond the classroom walls. But whether it actually realizes its potential depends on the cooperative efforts and sense of public responsibility of the broadcasters, the guidance and supervision of parents, and the skills and vision of educators building linkages between home and school learning. Such efforts undoubtedly will greatly enrich all children's as well as adults' lives and further their understanding of what it means to be truly literate.

Glenn, N. D., "Television Watching, Newspaper Reading, and Cohort Difference in Verbal Ability", Sociology of Education, Vol. 67, pp 216-230 (1994)

Neuman, S., "Literacy in the Television Age: The Myth of the TV Effect", Norwood, N.J. 1991

Hall, V. C., Chiarallo, K. S., and Edmondson, B., "Deciding Where Knowledge Comes from Depends on Where You Look", Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 88, pp 305-313 (1996)

Fowles, J., "Are American Reading Less? Or More?", Phi Delta Kappan, May 1993, pp726-730