A number of studies of the educational levels of inmates have concluded that their literacy proficiencies are substantially lower than those of the general population. Based on the author's own research, however, she concludes that such general statements and statistical evidence about inmates' low levels of literacy are not only a gross misjudgment of inmates' actual abilities, but that confining the assessment and measure of inmates' literacy to institutional testing reveals only part of the prison literacy situation. This paper begins by providing an overview of the author's data sources, followed by a broad outline of the overall theory in which her research is grounded. The paper then discusses some possible answers to three relevant questions. First, are the almost universal claims of high levels of inmates' illiteracy correct? Second, if these claims are incorrect, why on certain occasions do some inmates continue to prioritize spoken modes of communication over written? Third, could it be said that prisons provide an environment in which inmates' literacies can flourish? In considering these questions, the author argues that inmates choose spoken communication, not because they have insufficient levels of literacy, but because they have appraised the domain in which their interaction is occurring and have judged the appropriate discourse for the situation. Despite the fact that prisons are not always supportive of inmates' literacy abilities, inmates still engage in a multitude of literacy practices that are relevant to the social context in which they occur. By increasing an institutional awareness of the diversity of literacy that exists among inmates and that is generated within all areas of the prison community, correctional educators can develop and acknowledge literacy abilities that will be acceptable to all parties. 14 references