Teaching Reading: We've Been Doing it Wrong!

Today's Teaching, Tomorrow's Text: Exploring the Teaching of Reading. By John McAlister

The article I chose for the next couple of posts is one that gives teachers some really great ideas for actually teaching reading. It begins by giving a common scenario present in thousands of classrooms across the nation. A teacher announces that there will be a reading assignment and proceeds to teach new vocabulary that the students will encounter in the reading. Then, the students take turns reading aloud. When the reading is complete, they answer written questions about the text, exchange books with their peers, and check their work. All assume that reading has been “taught.”

However, the author, John McAlister (2011), is quick to point out that no reading has actually been taught. Instead, it has been practiced. The real teaching of reading comes in when a teacher truly understands the purpose of reading. A question he proposes for teachers to ask themselves is “How does today’s teaching make tomorrow’s reading easier?” (p. 162).  If a teacher can identify what they want to teach today in order to give more substance to the next day’s reading, they can truly teach reading.  If not, then there are some revisions to be made.

From there, McAlister points out the four points of language—reading, writing, listening, and speaking (p. 162). However, these ideas don’t help in the teaching or understanding language.  Instead, he encourages the focus on “meaning-focused input, language-focused learning, meaning-focused output, and fluency development.” He goes on to explain that reading and listening are considered meaning-focused input, while writing and speaking belong to meaning-focused output. When a teacher focuses on these four “strands,” he or she can begin to understand the goals and intentions of the specific reading activity.

When teachers consider a reading activity, it is in their best interest to see if it falls into the strand of “meaning-focused input.” To help make this process easier, McAlister has included a mnemonic device to remind teacher of the goals (p. 162):

M – there is a focus on meaning

I – the texts and tasks interest the learners

N – there is new learning

U – for understanding; the input is understandable, activities help understanding

S– tasks are stress-free or, at least, designed to reduce stress for the learners

I found this device to be helpful in being able to see if certain activities are useful in the classroom. If an activity only fits one or two of the ideas, then it probably isn’t a great activity to include in the lesson schedule. For instance, if an activity has meaning, such as learning new vocabulary, but is boring to the students, or is too intensive for the grade level, then the activity should be omitted. The best activities will fulfill all of the requirements.

I really liked these ideas. I felt justified in feeling that even if an activity was important for knowledge, if it didn’t hold the interest of the students, then it was a waste of time. I find this happens a lot in my Chinese classrooms. The younger students need more games and educational cartoons (Blue’s Clues is a favorite).  I think I will start implementing some of these ideas when I am planning for class to make sure the activities are good ones to use. 

References:

Macalister, J. (2011). Today's Teaching, Tomorrow's Text: Exploring the Teaching of 

Reading. ELT Journal, 65(2), 161-169. doi:10.1093/elt/ccq023