Writing for Civic Engagement

Photo courtesy of Gratisography

For decades, policymakers have claimed America suffers from a literacy crisis. They point to statistics showing millions of people are functionally illiterate and blame this crisis for our economic and social problems. The real crisis, though, lies in the failure of federal education policy to support the critical thinking and writing that would empower people to contribute to public discourse.

More people rely on writing every day, yet writing remains subordinate to reading in conversations about literacy education. Limited experience with writing means limited access to public discourse and civic engagement. While schools provide writing instruction for youth, adults outside of the school system have few opportunities for continuing writing support. If we want to improve civic engagement, enhance social movements, and ensure equitable participation in democratic life, we need to expand writing education beyond schools into communities.

Writing is not just the purview of award-winning authors, it is not just something done in school, and it is not limited to following some narrow set of rules deemed “standard” English. Writing is communication, personal expression, and learning. Writing is how we engage with one another, get things done, establish policies, and record history. Sustained writing activity produces so many cognitive, social, emotional, and intellectual benefits that as a society we just don’t explore or even give much attention. Research shows that writing can improve critical thinking, aid in trauma recovery, and increase empathy. 

At the same time, writing can be exclusionary. Perceptions of what counts as good writing have led to shaming or shunning anyone whose writing doesn’t meet those standards. As a result, historically disenfranchised groups get further excluded from educational, political, and economic opportunites. A study by 826 National, an organization that supports youth empowerment through writing, found unequal access to writing education across the U.S. The writing instruction that does exist is often limited and formulaic as a result of overemphasis on standardized testing over the past two decades. Writing can also be weaponized and used to manipulate groups of people into believing misinformation, supporting behavior harmful to their own and the public’s interest, and even taking violent and illegal action. 

Educators in K-12 and higher education contexts are pushing back against these dangers by developing inclusive teaching practices and curriculum focused on media literacy, critical digital literacy, and public writing. The National Writing Project (NWP), for example, developed a Civically Engaged Writing Analysis Continuum that allows assessment of students’ ability to participate in civic arguments in a variety of settings. 

These efforts should continue but we need to develop alternatives for adults outside of formal schooling who don’t have the classroom or curricular support of such programs. Writing changes as our communications technologies and our social and cultural contexts change. Writing learned in school two decades ago will be different than writing one does for their job now. Likewise, the platforms for civically engaged writing look much different now than twenty or even ten years ago. Literacy learning is a lifelong collaborative process requiring continued support from experts and other learners along the way. 

While writing and critical thinking are crucial to increasing people’s civic engagement, federally funded adult education fails to fully support it. Instead, policies like the Adult Education and Family Literacy Act adhere to a functional view of literacy that prioritizes skill acquisition for the purpose of gaining employment and completing daily tasks like filling out a job application​, ​reading a prescription label, or navigating a bus schedule. This focus has not shifted in decades. 

Federally funded adult education and family literacy programs have been heavily controlled by accountability requirements that demand performance indicators like employment rates, median income, measurable skill gains, and acquisition of credentials. Programs receiving funding are certainly making an incredible impact in these areas and they provide community building experiences that in turn give learners more avenues for participating in social, cultural, and political activity both locally and nationally. This important part of literacy education, however, remains limited by federal grant requirements, and it often happens not because of the policy but in spite of it, driven by the dedication and expertise of educators, volunteers, and learners themselves. 

We need more than just functional literacy in order to have an impact on our communities, personal lives, and public lives. People want to engage. They want to speak back to public officials. People from all walks of life try to voice their concerns, fears, and ideas. When we have virtually no national support for writing education — either in dollars or spirit — we get public conversations that quickly break down and turn into public fights. Is training in written forms of exchange and debate the solution to all of our problems? Of course not. But it might give us a much more productive means of finding solutions together.

Nonprofit organizations have begun efforts that should be expanded. The Coalition for Community Writing is a fantastic organization of scholars and educators across various institutions of higher education who provide mentorship and consultation for those interested in starting community writing projects. The National Writing Project provides professional development for teachers, engages in community outreach, and offers models that could be adapted to community writing centers.

Community writing centers can expand the reach of writing instruction to people outside of formal schooling, using in-person and virtual formats. They could provide both training and opportunities for community members to engage in activism on issues that directly affect them. Participants could individually and collaboratively write letters to public officials and compose statements to share at school board meetings or city council hearings. They could even design websites to circulate on social media covering different issues important to their neighborhood but that also resonate with a broader national audience. 

People are going to keep communicating online and that communication is going to happen in writing. If we want public media platforms to live up to their potential to promote active democratic participation, then people need more writing support.

Author Bio

Dr. Jessica Lyn Bannon is an Associate Professor of English and Director of the Writing Lab at the University of Indianapolis and a Public Voices Fellow of the OpEd Project. She teaches courses in professional writing and composition and has led service projects focused on publishing the stories of undocumented Latin American immigrants and tutoring for local schools and nonprofits. Her work has appeared in College English and Spark: A 4C4Equality Journal and her research interests include literacy studies, political discourse, rhetoric and social movements, linguistic justice, and critical language awareness. 

(c) 2022 Dr. Jessica Lyn Bannon