Literacy and Numeracy Practices of Market Women of Quetzaltenango, Guatemala
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
University of Massachusetts Amherst ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst Doctoral Dissertations 1896 - February 2014 1-1-2005 Literacy and numeracy practices of market women of Quetzaltenango, Guatemala. Joan B. Cohen-Mitchell University of Massachusetts Amherst Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umass.edu/dissertations_1 Recommended Citation Cohen-Mitchell, Joan B., "Literacy and numeracy practices of market women of Quetzaltenango, Guatemala." (2005). Doctoral Dissertations 1896 - February 2014. 2386. https://scholarworks.umass.edu/dissertations_1/2386 This Open Access Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. It has been accepted for inclusion in Doctoral Dissertations 1896 - February 2014 by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. For more information, please contact [email protected]. LITERACY AND NUMERACY PRACTICES OF MARKET WOMEN OF QUETZALTENANGO, GUATEMALA A Dissertation Presented by JOAN B. COHEN-MITCHELL Submitted to the Graduate School of the University of Massachusetts Amherst in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF EDUCATION February 2005 School of Education © Copyright by Joan B. Cohen-Mitchell 2005 All Rights Reserved LITERACY AND NUMERACY PRACTICES OF MARKET WOMEN IN QUETZALTENANGO, GUATEMALA A Dissertation Presented by Joan B. Cohen-Mitchell Approved as to style and content by; Andrew Effrat, Des School of Education ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This dissertation would not have been possible without the support of family, friends and colleagues both in the US and Guatemala. My research could not have been conducted without the translation support and collegial friendship of Rosa Zapeta and Gerardo Vasquez. Rosa’s dedication to helping my study succeed was unwavering and her insights invaluable. The Center for International Education and The Literacy Support Initiative, my intellectual home for many years, provided me the foundation for exploring and making meaning of my interest in literacy and nonformal education. The Center is a truly unique environment and I have benefited immensely from the experiences, knowledge and fnendship of my colleagues. I am indebted to my formal mentors; David Kinsey, my first advisor, whose eyes sparkled as we discussed my experiences in Haiti and El Salvador, and who took the time to write back to me in long hand when I was puzzling over my research data in El Salvador during my masters program. David Evans, my advisor through my doctoral process, who nudged me along through my (extended) writing process and mentored me through the management of the Guatemala project - no easy task. And finally to Gretchen Rossman, whose thoughtful analysis and careful editing supported me in my task to pull the ideas out of my head and put them onto paper. I also owe a debt of gratitude to two of my informal mentors, Joan Dixon and Jane Benbow, women who walked before me at CIE, sharing their knowledge and expertise unselfishly and allowing me to work beside them honing my skills. IV Muchisimas gracias to my beloved friends who cared for Noah on a rotating basis so I could write: Sally Aheam, Mark and Francia Wisnewski, Marilyn Andrews, Janet Hodos and Hazel Dawkins. A special thank you to my family, Tim and Noah, my sister Pam, and my mom, whose unconditional love saw me through. Finally, this dissertation is dedicated to the loving memory of my dad, Norman Cohen, who inspired me to go out and experience all I could of this world. His unrelenting belief in me buoyed me through the most difficult and lonely times. My achievements are just a small reflection of the mensch that he was. V ABSTRACT LITERACY AND NUMERACY PRACTICES OF MARKET WOMEN IN QUETZALTENANGO, GUATEMALA FEBRUARY 2005 JOAN B. COHEN-MITCFIELL, B. S., UNIVERSITY OF VERMONT M Ed., UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS AMHERST Ed D UNIVERSITY OF MASSSACHUSETS AMFIERST Directed by; Professor David R. Evans Current policy statements concerning adult literacy in Guatemala state that Mayan women need literacy skills in order to better themselves and their families socially and economically and need to possess these tools and skills in order to participate in the emerging civil society. Responding to this rhetoric, and a chance to win funding, organizations that design and develop literacy programming have responded with adult literacy “classes” that focus on a single model of literacy learning for women that tends to be equated to a school model of basic education. Central to this single model for literacy learning, is a single conception of literacy, as a unified, quantifiable easily attainable goal. This reductionist tendency in Guatemala has led to focusing on a single literacy as the solution to the problem of indigenous women’s illiteracy. Assumptions about the needs and desires of beneficiaries are made by literacy experts and planners without taking the time to understand the literacy practices that Mayan women and communities are already engaged in. Examining and analyzing the literacy and numeracy practices women are already engaged in is a very different approach to program planning than the hegemonic VI centralism of the more traditional autonomous model By using ethnographic methods to conduct literacy research, a potentially empowering model for literacy programming can emerge that is sensitive to local context and needs. The following guidelines resulted from this study; It cannot be assumed (1) that programs designed for literacy acquisition are in the best educational or social interests of the target audience; (2) that ‘best practices” of teaching and learning developed and advocated by Western educators and planners are the most effective and successful in all contexts. Whole language approaches or learner-generated materials may work in some contexts and not in others and we cannot simply impose “state of the art” approaches in all contexts and expect them to work well. Any sustainable, meaningful literacy intervention in Guatemala would best be conceptualized as a long-term process that helps to establish an intergenerational network of communicative relationships that focus on the social, cultural, economic and linguistic processes of communities. vii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ABSTRACT ... VI LIST OF TABLES ^ LIST OF FIGURES CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION 1 Statement of the Problem 2 Purpose of the Study 4 Overview of the Dissertation 5 2. THE HISTORICAL, POLITICAL AND EDUCATIONAL CONTEXT OF GUATEMALA 8 Historical Background 8 The Mayan Education Movement in Guatemala 19 Literacy in Mayan Languages 22 3. QUETZALTENANGO AND THE MARKETPLACE 29 About Quetzaltenango 29 The Markets ofXela 31 4. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE 32 Models of Literacy 32 Multiple Languages, Multiple Literacies? 41 Literacy and Numeracy Skills 43 Strategies for Literacy Teaching in Developing Countries 45 Planning in Educational and Development Contexts 50 Language Planning and Policy 52 Language Policy in Literacy Programs 54 Language Policy in Guatemala 58 viii 5. METHODOLOGY 55 Approach to the Problem 65 Rationale for the Ethnographic Approach 67 My Location Research Assistants Goal of the Research 84 Research Design 85 Observations 85 Observation Guide 87 Interviews 87 Interview Protocol I 88 Interview Protocol II 89 Focus Groups 90 Document Analysis 90 Selection of the Research Participants 91 Analyzing My Data; A More Detailed Look at the Process 93 Final Analysis and Structuring of the Thesis 95 6. FALSE DICHOTOMIES AND (UN)FORTUNATE CHOICES: LITERACY AND LANGUAGE IN RURAL GUATEMALA 97 Margarita 97 Rosa and Isabel 101 Mari 104 Glorimar and Rosa 107 Carmen 109 Theme I: Cultural Loss and Fear Ill Theme II: Economic Sustainability and Mobility 123 Theme HI: Language and Power 133 7. SITUATED LITERACIES AND NUMERACIES: NEGOTIATING LITERACY EVENTS IN THIS RESEARCH STUDY 147 Code Switching 150 Literacy Event I; The Consent Form in Spanish Literacy Event II: The Focus Group Process 155 Literacy Event III; The Data Table 15^ ix 8. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS . 164 Ideological vs. Autonomous Literacy 155 Linking Ethnographic Research to Planning and Policy; Implications for Guatemala j5g Planning as Both a Micro and Macro Issue 171 Insights into Policy I <72 Process vs. Products: Using an Ethnographic Approach to Plan Programs 175 Planning and Literacy Practices 177 APPENDICES A DATA GATHERING AND ANALYSIS PROCESS 181 B. CONSENT FORM IN SPANISH 184 BIBLIOGRAPHY X LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Themes Presented at the Second Focus Group . 94 2 Points From and Questions About Consent for Voluntary Participation Form . 153 3. Themes and Pictures . 160 XI LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page I Linguistic Map of Guatemala . 12 2. Map . 29 3. Sample Script 157 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION While many societies enter into the information and knowledge age, and modem technologies develop and spread at rapid speed, 860 million adults are illiterate, over 100 miUion children have no access to school, and countless children, youth and adults who attend school or other education programs fall short of the required level to be considered literate in today’s complex world according to UNESCO’s latest statistics (“United Nations Literacy Decade,” January, 2003). Hoping to energize governments of the world to reconsider the goals of Education for All” not met in the last decade, the United Nations has recast its literacy efforts as “Literacy for Freedom” and announced 2003-2012 as the Literacy Decade. UNESCO, the World Bank, UNICEF as well as other international non- governmental organizations continue to be fixated on eradicating illiteracy as if it were some terrible disease that a single dose of antibiotics should easily cure. The discourse promoted by these large funding and policy-setting bodies stems in large part from the belief that if community members change; then society will be more developed; that if community members become literate, then they will be less ignorant; if they are less ignorant, they will make more socially concerned decisions; and if they make more socially concerned decisions, the whole of society will benefit. This more traditional and linear development discourse is of course seldom justified in practice.