Fad or Renaissance? Misconceptions of the Orality Movement
BY DR. JAY MOON
For more details, see: “Fad or Renaissance: Misconceptions of the Orality Movement,” International Bulletin of Missionary Research 40(1): 6-21.
In the realm of missions and education, the advent of print-based learning was long perceived as the pinnacle of effective communication. However, as the awareness grew that a significant portion of the global population either cannot read or prefers oral learning, the orality movement gained momentum. This movement aims to understand and reach oral learners through various oral communication strategies. In this article, we will address some prevailing misconceptions about the orality movement and shed light on its true nature and implications.
Misconception #1: Orality is limited to a few small mission organizations. Contrary to popular belief, orality is not confined to a handful of mission organizations. It has become a global missiological topic, discussed by large mission organizations such as Cru, IMB, TWR, YWAM, and Wycliffe. Collaborations like the OneStory Partnership and the International Orality Network (ION) have brought together numerous organizations, leading to international collaborations and symposiums on orality. The significance of the orality movement has drawn attention from the academic community, and even the Missions Exchange recognized it with the 2009 Innovation in Missions award.
Misconception #2: Orality is simply about storytelling. While storytelling is an essential genre in oral cultures, the orality movement encompasses a wide range of oral communication strategies. Oral learners benefit from various genres, including proverbs, songs, symbols, rituals, drama, and dance. Proverbs condense wisdom into memorable statements, songs aid memory and spiritual formation, symbols connect the visible with the unseen, rituals foster communal participation and deep meaning, drama engages and immerses people, and dance encourages full-body participation. Effective oral communicators draw from this diverse repertoire to engage and teach oral learners.
Misconception #3: Oral learning preference is only about auditory learning. Orality is not solely about auditory learning, as some assume. It encompasses the use of multiple modalities, including auditory, visual, and tactile/kinesthetic. While auditory learning is an important aspect, oral communicators recognize the significance of visual elements such as symbols, pictures, art, and drama. Tactile and kinesthetic experiences, such as rituals, dance, apprenticeships, and hands-on learning, also play a crucial role in the learning process for oral-preference learners. Orality goes beyond individual learning preferences and focuses on understanding how these modalities are used differently in oral cultures.
Misconception #4: People are either oral or print learners, but in reality, individuals often combine both methods for learning. While education teaches literacy, there remains an oral core that individuals draw from. In the process of learning to read and write, some develop a preference for print-based learning, while others retain a preference for oral learning.
Furthermore, writing can be utilized in both oral and print cultures, but its purposes differ. In literate societies, writing serves record-keeping, legal, and referential functions, as well as introspective activities like composing literature. In contrast, in societies with a strong oral tradition, writing takes on a symbolic role, representing sacred space, embodying group identity, and reminding of core cultural values.
The orality movement acknowledges the concept of preference, recognizing that individuals tend to lean toward either oral or print learning when given the choice. Lynn Abney developed a continuum that assesses learning preferences, ranging from "primary oral" to "highly print." Primary oral learners have exclusive reliance on oral methods, while highly print learners heavily emphasize literacy. The continuum illustrates that individuals often combine oral and print methods but demonstrate a preference for one or the other to varying degrees.
This understanding of learning preferences assists cross-cultural workers, particularly those engaging with primary oral learners, by revealing hidden assumptions and facilitating more effective service within these contexts.
Misconception #5: Orality is only applicable to ministry in remote folk cultures. In reality, it has significant implications for Western contexts as well. Technological advancements have led to a shift in learning preferences, with many contemporary students preferring oral forms of instruction. This trend, known as secondary orality or digitoral learning, is characterized by a preference for audio and visual communication. Even in U.S. seminaries, a majority of students (53.5%) exhibit an oral learning preference. This challenges the assumption that print-based teaching methods are most effective. The relevance of orality extends beyond remote cultures and is acknowledged by seminary students and professors worldwide.
Misconception #6: Orality is a passing fad that will diminish as people become more literate. However, the orality movement represents an oral renaissance, a return to how cultures functioned before the printing press. The preference for oral learning is not regressing but evolving in the form of digitoral learning, embracing the orality of digital culture. Over a nine-year period, the percentage of seminary students with an oral learning preference increased from 42% to 62%. Similar trends were observed among undergraduate religious studies students, with 78% showing an oral learning preference. Combined with the fact that 70% of the world prefers oral learning, it is clear that orality is not a passing fad but a significant phenomenon deserving further attention and research.
Missiological implications related to the orality movement:
Mission organizations and academic institutions should recognize the prevalence of oral learners worldwide and strive to understand and apply oral learning approaches. This movement is not a passing fad and deserves further research and exploration.
Storytelling methods are commendable, but equal attention should be given to other oral genres such as proverbs, songs, symbols, rituals, drama, and dance. Expanding the use of various genres will help the orality movement gain traction.
Missionaries involved in theological education/training need to understand the differences between oral and print learners and adjust their approaches accordingly. Collaboration, experimentation, and dialogue are encouraged to develop effective oral learning strategies.
Instead of pitting oral learning against print learning, both approaches can be combined to benefit teaching and ministering to oral learners. A both/and approach should be adopted rather than an either/or offering.
Understanding and applying digitoral learning can help the Western church engage the "twenty-something" generation, reconnecting them with the message of Christ. Church planters should consider digitoral approaches for evangelism, discipleship, leadership training, and coaching to reach receptive audiences among the de-churched or unchurched.
Engaging the orality movement can start by using Abney's "Orality Assessment Tool" continuum to locate oneself and initiate dialogue about the missiological implications of orality in the specific context.
By embracing the orality movement, mission organizations and academic institutions can better reach and communicate with oral learners, adapt theological education, and engage new generations in meaningful ways.
Technological changes create opportunities to challenge long-held assumptions. The printing press initially emphasized the dominance of print, overshadowing oral learning. However, the emergence of the Internet has prompted a reconsideration of oral learning. The orality movement is not a passing trend but a deep-rooted renaissance. It recognizes a continuum of oral learning preferences rather than strict categorization as oral or print learners. Contrary to misconceptions, the movement is gaining attention and momentum in mission organizations. Storytelling is just one aspect of a rich variety of oral genres. Discussions on oral learning go beyond existing learning theories and highlight the fundamental differences in the learning process between oral and print learners. The rise of "digitoral" learners, who prefer oral instruction despite being literate, indicates the relevance of orality in various mission contexts. This trend is on the rise and shows no signs of decline. While the printing press seemed to suppress oral learning, the Internet has revived its importance, and oral learning is gaining prominence once again.
The orality movement has emerged as a response to the realization that a significant portion of the world's population learns best through oral methods. It has garnered attention and collaboration from major mission organizations, leading to a diverse range of oral communication strategies. Contrary to misconceptions, orality encompasses more than storytelling and engages multiple senses, including visual and tactile elements. Recognizing the unique characteristics of oral learners and embracing the rich repertoire of oral genres can lead to effective communication, transformative learning experiences, and the formation of sustainable indigenous church movements.
CONTACT TO LEARN MORE