Reflections on Content-Area Reading

     Emerging from a secondary education characterized by reading and writing about academic texts with minimal focus on comprehension and critical thinking, I am encouraged by the current integration of literacy standards and processes into content learning. Specifically, I recognize the benefits of incorporating new literacies, explicit instruction and modeling in comprehension strategies, and the inclusion of varied and differentiated texts.

      I agree that teaching comprehension strategies is useful and effective for developing good readers. The field of education has responded with clarity and urgency to the instructional needs of today’s students. Yet, despite the persistent efforts of educators to model how to think about, question, discuss, and respond to text, many students still struggle with comprehension of academic texts. Reutzel & Cooter (2015) note that over half of students in fourth through eighth grade cannot read informational texts at grade level. The documented effectiveness of direct instruction in comprehension is further confounded by low motivation and low reading rates among secondary students and young adults. Many students and adults simply do not read enough. Maybe thinking aloud about what we read, discussing it, and using reading guides can only move students so far because readers only become good readers by reading more.

     My education has informed me that reading practice and wide reading are critical to building students’ background knowledge, vocabulary, confidence and motivation, fluency, and comprehension. In the early years, teachers reserve precious instructional time for reading to self, but the increasing demands for content learning, teacher accountability, a broad college readiness curriculum, and extracurricular activities limit such reading time at the secondary level. Will students read more if extra texts and reading logs are assigned for homework? I suspect that would create more frustration among students. If reading development depends on regular practice, how can that be cultivated and sustained within our current models for scheduling and classes at the middle and high school level? Does the need for more reading time demand a holistic evaluation of how secondary classes are structured?

     Reading practice provides development in vocabulary, content, and language forms, but sustained growth also requires reading texts at increasing levels of complexity. When students read difficult texts, they get better at understanding and responding. Their writing skills also improve through direct and delayed spillover. Some students may have the motivation and stamina to push through challenging content-area texts with rereading and understanding checks, but many do not. Just like elementary teachers, secondary educators need to honor their students’ unique instructional needs by providing differentiated reading materials within instruction. In this way, secondary teachers across multiple content areas really are literacy teachers as well. They offer access to knowledge with the promise of both learning and growth.

     Today’s students bring many cognitive strengths and contributions to learning, and as a teacher, I want to appreciate the assets of each student. At the same time, students come to school with literacy gaps because of poor literacy exposure, limited reading models outside of school, limited English proficiency, and low motivation to read and write. Technology and personal interests offer two powerful connections, but ultimately, every teacher needs to embrace her role as a reading teacher regardless of grade and discipline. If we agree that reading is foundational to academic achievement, vocational success, and personal enrichment, then we need to prioritize literacy within every content area.

Reutzel, D.R. & Cooter, R.B. (2015). Teaching children to read: The teacher makes the difference (7^th ed.). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson.