In Dr. Vee’s article, she makes the argument that computer coding is a type of literacy in and of itself, much like reading or writing literacy. In a broader sense, she defines literacy to be, ” a human facility with a symbolic and infrastructural technology—such as a textual writing system—that can be used for creative, communicative and rhetorical purposes”. By this definition, computer coding is indeed literacy. Personally, I agree with her overall literacy definition as well as her stance on coding literacy.
However, defining literacy in such a way leaves some wiggle-room and ambiguity. By that definition, modes such as music, painting, and even emojis could technically be considered forms of literacy, though each of these has intrinsic differences in complexity and structure. What do you think? At what level of complexity do we draw the line between something being literacy and it being a mere task?
I also agree with Professor Vee’s article that computer coding is a type of literacy, as well as this definition, but I feel that including other modes stretches the definition beyond that what is intended. In order for this definition to function, there needs to be guidelines. Is banging on my pots with spoons music? Maybe to some, but I certainly do not believe this form of music is similar to the definition of literacy. On the reverse, creating sheet music, which people across the world can read and as a communication tool can be a form of literacy, but how can you distinguish between the two. The greatest visible difference I see is the “writing” aspect of the definition. If a written piece is not included, then I do not believe it should be considered literacy.
I also agree with Professor Vee’s argument, that computer coding is a literacy under her definition. When it comes to where the line is drawn for types of literacy I would argue that the line is drawn in the same way you would draw the line for calling something a written language. For example you mention music can be considered a literacy under this definition, and I would agree.
The uses of marks (musical notes, etc.) can be translated into placement of hands on instruments to create a sound. The reading of musical notes is not like the reading of a novel, or article as one would think of with typical literacy, however it is still reading nonetheless, just as reading computer code is. These music, computer code, and novels are completely separate from each other, yet the word read connects them all, in my mind making them literacy.
I think it’s incredibly important when defining something to not following the logic of the definition to a self-defeating or overly confusing spot. While I agree with Dr. Vee’s inclusion of coding as a form of literacy (albeit a currently disproportionately utilized one) I don’t necessarily think that the implications of this are all that far reaching. As in, I don’t think it’s a slippery slope type deal where if one thing is literacy because it shares a certain trait, that all other things then must be literacy if they share that trait. I feel as though it would be easy enough to look at things like emojis, for example, and treat them as literacy aides, rather than feel the need to expand our definition of literacy to encompass every and all things to the point where we don’t even know what literacy is anymore.