• partial_accumen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    29 days ago

    Of course it is a low confidence answer for that non-English but literate population. I’m not saying that 100% of those called illiterate are actually literate in another language. I’m saying that the statement that the illiteracy rate is as high as posted is likely wrong because it only accounts for English.

    The “may” statement you’re taking issue with is a quick attempt to find out possibly how big that non-English but literate population might be. Its not a definitive answer. You’re welcome to spend your time chasing a more precise number. I’d exhausted my interested when I got my number.

    • atro_city@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      29 days ago

      I’m not going to say it was your intention, but it reads like “immigrants are lowering the literacy rate”. It’s something I’ve seen too often.

      Regardles, from the page you linked:

      54% of adults have a literacy below sixth-grade level

      That would not be explained by a 13.8 percent of foreign-born residents.

      According to researchers, 4 out of 5 Americans 18 and over possess medium to high proficiency in English reading and writing.

      The emphasis is because “American” is not the same as “foreign-born resident”.

      • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        29 days ago

        I’m not going to say it was your intention, but it reads like “immigrants are lowering the literacy rate”. It’s something I’ve seen too often.

        I’m having trouble seeing the mental gymnastics to get that reading when I’m saying that the immigrants are unfairly being called illiterate, when they ARE literate, just in a different language.

        The emphasis is because “American” is not the same as “foreign-born resident”.

        I’m discarding any of the statistics from that page I linked because I don’t trust their methodology. I linked it not to support OPs argument about the rate if illiteracy, but to discredit it for being questionable based. The stats from my linked page match much of the stats from their linked page. My guess is that both draw from the same flawed measures and should not be trusted.