Content Vs Skills Reading Instruction

A key discussion point regarding reading instructionideas on their own. Additionally, the content side raises
today involves those favoring skills-based instructionthorny issues, such as what should be the content
and those favoring content-based instruction. This ispoured into students and who decides what content is
not the old ph0nics-whole language debate. Other thanand is not important? Some cultural literacy is certainly
a few hold-outs, such as Stephen Krashen, most in thefine, but I feel more comfortable in playing the equipping
reading field would agree that this debate has beenrole, rather than the inculcating role in reading instruction.
largely settled. The current debate involves whetherFurthermore, many in the content-only camp are under
teachers at all levels should be teaching the what ofthe false assumption that reading is a basic skill, such
reading.as simple addition. Once multiple digit addition with
There are, indeed, some who would restrict reading tocarrying over is mastered, the skill can be applied to
a measurable skill-set. These would pigeon-holemore complex operations such as multiplication, division,
reading instruction into a continuum of increasinglyand algebra. Although learning the phonetic code and
complex rules, while ignoring the thinking processthe syllabication rules certainly serve as the basic skills
necessary to advanced reading. Teachers of this ilkto enable pronunciation of multi-syllabic words,
love their phonics, context clues, and inferencepronunciation is not reading. Reading is ultimately about
worksheets when they are not leading their students inmeaning-making. And meaning-making is a complex
fluency exercises, ad nauseum, whether the studentsprocess. Indeed, reading is a skill in the same manner
need fluency practice or not.as writing and thinking are each skills.
On the other side of the debate are those who wouldAlthough I lean toward the skill side of reading skills
claim that content is the real reading instruction. Theseinstruction, I do believe that at some point the
would limit reading skill instruction in favor of pouringspoon-feeding of skills-based reading instruction needs
shared cultural knowledge into learners. They favorto morph into providing the recipes for critical-thinking
teacher read-alouds, Cornell note-taking, and directreaders to create on his or her own. Having taught
instruction. They argue that subject area disciplinesreading and trained teachers of reading at elementary
such as English literature, science, and history oftenschool, middle school, high school, and college levels, I
provide the best reading instruction by the content thatam of the opinion that teaching more advanced
they teach.reading skills are necessary to get students to this
Both are extremes. Students need some of each tolevel of independence and that these skills are better
become skilled and complex readers. One need not be"taught" than "caught." Students of all ages need both
at the expense of the other. However, if I had to side"learning to read" and "reading to learn."
with one group, I would lean toward the skill teachersCheck out the writer's comprehensive curricula:
because at least those of their persuasions are tryingTeaching Grammar and Mechanics and Teaching
to impact the students' abilities to increase their ownSpelling and Vocabulary that help teachers
reading competencies. We need to teach developingdifferentiate instruction with little additional teacher prep
readers of all levels how to access information andand/or training.