Reading has multiple meanings, ranging from the simple act of recital (which some machines are capable of) to the concept of perusal and interpretation (the domain thus far solely reserved for human being). A range of reading-related activities, also commonly referred to as simply reading, can be fitted into the spectrum, such as reading for the teaching of language, reading for the teaching of a specific subject, reading for pleasure, reading as a result of peer pressure, etc. The style which reading is conducted can be described in two qualities, viz. intensive reading and extensive reading. Taking into consideration the interplay of these factors, we shall be able to find some interesting as well as problematic areas of reading, a supposedly simple activity.
Firstly I would like to discuss the various meanings of reading. From the Oxford English Dictionary Online (available through subscription only), a range of meaning can be found, of which those relevant to the current discussion are presented:
- The action of uttering aloud the words of written or printed matter.
This is supposedly the explicit part of reading. It refers to the ability of the reader to interprete the symbols (i.e. alphabets or words) into the correct phoneme, or in simple terms, converting words into sounds. However, that mere action does not connote the reader is literate, for a literate person must be able to assign a (sufficiently large range of) word the meaning correspond to the one commonly accepted by the society. A literate person should also be able to dispense judgment to the materials he read, as of the fifth point below. - Ability to read; the art of reading.
The ability to read suggests not only the role played by the faculty of senses during the course of reading, but the faculty of thought as well. Reading is a process of give-and-take; a reader needs to give up his presuppositions to examine the author’s expression so as not to mis-interprete what the author is trying to convey; yet he needs to equip himself with a critical mind so as to dispense judgment as regards fallacy and alternative explanations, after the process of perusal. - The action of perusing written or printed matter; the practice of occupying oneself in this way.
The action of reading can be induced out of coercion, persuasion or voluntarism. One can be coerced to read, for example, as part of school work or as a result of peer pressure (to follow “fashion”). One can be persuaded to read, as a result of parental advice or campaign. One can read voluntarily out of curiosity, or to the quest of knowledge, or simply for pleasure. In most cases the three elements are likely to be present simultaneously, for one may be coerced to read some materials, be persuaded to read another set, yet be voluntarily reading another set. - The extent to which one reads or has read; literary knowledge; scholarship.
The “extensiveness” of one’s reading is the extent which a reader reads. Some may be very good in a single subject and ignorant of others; some may be good in a large number of fields but does not excel in a particular one. There are also cases where one has excellent knowledge in many fields (so-called polymath), for example, Zhang Heng, Thomas Jefferson and Ernst Mach. However, it is not assumed that all the knowledge that one acquires derives solely from reading alone; however reading is considered a primary means of acquiring knowledge, especially before one is able to create knowledge out of the existing pool of knowledge. - The interpretation or meaning one attaches to anything, or the view one takes of it; in recent use esp. the rendering given to a play or a character, a piece of music, etc., as expressing the actor’s or performer’s point of view.
This has some pertinence to point 2 above. Premature judgment is dangerous, since the reader is at risk of obtaining a distorted context and partial information, and so misinterpreting the text. However, the lack of interpretation defeats the purpose of reading (as give-and-take), and is nothing more than the mechanical task as defined in point 1. Therefore it is important that a reader be equipped with the correct ‘art of reading’ so as to make the process a meaningful one.
Having discussed the various meanings of reading, I now turn to the two qualities of intensive reading and extensive reading. In contrast to the widely accepted meaning of the two terms, I refer to intensive reading as a reading method emphasizing depth over breadth from the start, and extensive reading is the opposite. Even though the time frame taken to study the same subject may be the same with the two approaches, the outcomes may have been radically different. In order to give a more concrete example of intensive and extensive reading, it is useful to include two quotes which I believe highlight their respective qualities. As regards intensive reading, a quote from the article In Search of an East Asian Identity in Mathematics Education demonstrates its quality:
From the literature, it is found that the curricula in these East Asian countries are content oriented and examination driven. Teaching is very traditional and old fashioned. Teachers in these countries seem to be ignorant about the latest methods of teaching, and think that competence in mathematics alone is sufficient for an effective teaching of the subject. Classroom teaching is conducted in a whole class setting, and given the large class size involved, there are virtually no group work or activities. Instruction is teacher dominated, and student involvement is minimal. Memorization of mathematical facts is stressed and students learn mainly by rote. There is ample amount of practice of mathematical skills, mostly without thorough understanding. Students and teachers are subjected to excessive pressure by the highly competitive examinations, and students do not seem to enjoy their study. (Brimer and Griffin, 1985; Biggs, 1994; Leung, 1995, 2000; Wong and Cheung, 1998; Wong, 1998)
Of course, by quoting the passage, I do not mean to highlight the deficiencies of the method, but rather to highlight the features of intensive reading in a subjective manner. The features of intensive reading, more or less, can be summarized as:
- Fulfillment of a clear goal;
- The presence of a time limit; and
- Form is stressed over function.
Fulfillment of a clear goal. In intensive reading there normally presents a goal the reader should achieve, be it the understanding (or ability to imitate) of certain topic or mere memorization of text. The goal can be set by other people, and more uncommonly the reader himself.
The presence of a time limit. There is usually a prescribed time limit in which the reader needs to complete his reading. This implies, to a considerable extent, that he must at least progress with certain speed so as to finish his reading on time.
Form is stressed over function. This is rather a generalization of a series of descriptions. In mathematics, it means that theories and working are presented with little or no regard to its application. In languages, it means memorization of rules is stressed over the practical use of the rules. Again, I wish to emphasize that the above statements do not carry any negative connotations. The effect depends on a person’s stage of learning; those who know little or nothing about a certain subject may find it helpful that the reading method quickly builds up his competency in that subject, and so to achieve a level of sustainable self learning; those who is already reasonably competent in a certain subject may find the method not so fruitful when it comes to such purpose as reading for pleasure and reading as a preparation for writing a topic which a good understanding over many fields is required.
As regards extensive reading, there is not a single, readily available definition that is satisfactory for the purpose of this article. However, the Oxford English Dictionary has suggested the quality of being extensive:
Far-reaching, large in comprehension or scope; wide in application or operation; comprehensive; also, lengthy, full of detail.
Far-reaching, large in comprehension or scope. In contrast to intensive reading, which text is selected, limited in length and highly focused, the text for extensive reading covers a wider range which at times may not appear to be relevant to the subject studied, however may form a useful ‘auxiliary’ knowledge. Of course, in studying a specific subject, reading something entirely out of scope and without any reasonable justification is not considered to be in the realm of extensive reading. Therefore, in adapting the approach of extensive reading, the reader shall have a certain level of maturity and sensible judgment so as to read in a fruitful manner, and not to read indiscriminately.
Wide in application or operation. The reading of materials of certain subjects, especially those related to technology, should in theory incorporate a great degree of emphasis on practical application of knowledge. This, of course, is true to all kinds of reading in general. However, again, the reader needs to have a good understanding of the relevant subject before he can embark on such a course. For example, in order to study linguistics through extensive reading, the reader inevitably needs some understanding, at least, about a language and good foundation in grammar. Without having the prerequisite skills and merely reading indiscriminately could only produce marginal understanding of the subject at best, and the materials could even be misleading to the reader. With the necessary skills in hand, the reader could conduct self study in a sensible and sustainable manner, and with interest he may immediately put what he learned into good use.
Lengthy, full of detail. This is not an exclusive feature of intensive reading; it is a feature of extensive reading as well. The word lengthy connotes not on an absolute basis, but rather on a relative one. That is to say, a reader practicing extensive reading may read a number of materials, which has overlapping elements among each other, but overall provides a greater coverage of the subject.
Function is stressed over form. In contrast to intensive reading, real-world example and application are more important than formalized rule under extensive reading. Hence, the introduction of examples shall precede that of formalized rules, and the former shall be in some ways relevant to the experience of the student. This notion is best illustrated by the cognitive linguistics movement. According to the article Cognitive Linguistics in Wikipedia,
In linguistics and cognitive science, cognitive linguistics (CL) refers to the school of linguistics that understands language creation, learning, and usage as best explained by reference to human cognition in general. It is characterized by adherence to three central positions. First, it denies that there is an autonomous linguistic faculty in the mind; second, it understands grammar in terms of conceptualization; and third, it claims that knowledge of language arises out of language use.
The teaching of grammar makes a rather controversial illustration. In the field of language grammar, specifically that of English, there has been intense debate whether grammar is worth teaching. Ann L. Warner (1993) surveyed nearly a hundred secondary school educators (teachers) throughout West Virginia, United States, to find out “why, when, and how often they teach traditional grammar [i.e. formalized grammatical rules]“, and “how grammar instruction affects instruction in writing.” To quote directly the result,
- Most (61%) responded that they teach traditional grammar as a unit separate from literature or composition study and spend more than 30% of their total instructional time teaching grammar.
- Of those who teach a grammar unit, 56% use sentence diagramming in their instruction.
- By a 3:1 margin, teachers reported having a written curriculum in use for the teaching of grammar. (However, discrepancies in responses from teachers in the same school system suggest that while such a curriculum may exist, it is not necessarily in use.)
- Of those who reported teaching grammar as an isolated unit of study, by a 2:1 margin, the majority indicated that their students do not seem to retain knowledge of grammar study and that much instruction is reteaching of concepts not learned in the previous years of study.
One respondent remarked, “I believe something must be done in regard to writing and grammar. Students are not retaught the times tables in math; they are taught it once and then held accountable. Why can’t this be done in English grammar?”- Of those who claimed awareness of current research, 71% felt grammar should be taught as an adjunct to writing, if at all. Of those who did not claim awareness of research, 76% felt grammar should be taught as separate unit of instruction.
- Of those who taught grammar as a separate unit, 60% spent more than 30% of their instructional time teaching grammar. Of those who did not teach grammar as a separate unit, 74% spent more than 30% of instructional time teaching writing.
- Of those who spent more than 30% of instructional time teaching grammar, 34% spent less than 15% of their time teaching writing; another 53% spent 15-30% of instructional time teaching writing.
- Most teachers were satisfied with the amount of time they spent teaching grammar. Of those who weren’t, 62% felt less grammar should be taught.
- Of the 18% who felt we should teach more grammar, 60% claimed not to be aware of current research on this subject. Of those who say we should teach less grammar, 79% claimed to be aware of current research.
- A significant majority (81%) felt more writing should be taught.
To summarize,
- Most teachers felt that more writing should be taught;
- Those who were aware of current research in the teaching of grammar clearly favored the reduction of the teaching of grammar to an optional role, not to mention the former point.
While there has been much dispute concerning the means (whether grammar should be taught), it is nearly unanimous that the end itself is the ability to write. Much of the current research favors the ‘natural’ learning of grammar rather than through formalized rules, and it lends the approach of entensive reading some respect.
Which approach is the best when it comes to reading? Unfortunately this is not within the scope of this article to reach such a conclusion. However, as the third (and last) part of this article, I would like to describe my personal experience in reading from my childhood until the current moment, so as to perform a self-evaluation regarding my reading, as well as to verify the statements laid in the preceding sections.
Concerning my family background, I had been born into a family which practices little reading except for newspapers. I am fortunate that my parents and grandfather encourage me to read, and have dedicated considerable financial resources for this purpose. However they are unwilling to devote too much money towards the purchase of books, which is understandable considering our financial position. For many years, I would have to combat for increase in budget for books, and at times our relation was strained because of the matter. I am again being fortunate as I recently had obtained sufficient amount of money in the form of bursary, dedicated mainly for the purchasing of reading materials.
I would like to say that their early encouragement (to read) has a tremendous amount of influence upon me, and I started to read various materials not within the school syllabus when I was in Standard Three and has continued since. (I marked this approach as extensive reading earlier in this article.) My venture out of the syllabus is both beneficial and harmful from the purely academic point of view. Benefit wise, the wide range of reading equips me with a breadth of knowledge not obtainable from the school syllabus alone. The prevalence of voluntarism (out of enthusiasm and personal interest) over coercion means that I am able to memorize and understand what I read well, as well as to make good use of it. On the harmful side, I would have to contend with other subjects in the syllabus over the amount of reading time, and frequently I would have to dedicate more time for my own reading than other subjects. This inevitably has some negative effect over my grades, however over time, say several years, my overall understanding about the subjects has been far better than the range of topics covered by the syllabus. This is because I tend to read widely, and so can only study a limited amount of subjects, sometimes only one, at one time. (It resembles intensive reading in this respect.) Working over years at my own pleasure and with the materials that I select myself, it often strikes a greater impression upon me compared to the materials recommended by the syllabus. Of course, I am not hinting that the school syllabus is not good; without the solid grounding of the various languages and mathematics, I could not possibly venture far in the quest for knowledge. However, as my study progresses, I would appreciate greater freedom in reading and learning. I believe the process of learning is not complete if one is to read without first asking questions and subsequently looking for the answers himself.
Experts have debated over the preferable method of teaching, either for extensive reading or for intensive reading. I would say that due to the widely disparate preference of learning method, it is impossible to create a one-size-fits-all reading (and teaching) method in school. It is not economical too in creating a truly personalized teaching method, since the best a school can get economically is to reduce the student-to-teacher ratio down to a certain figure, and certainly far from one-to-one. It is therefore important that the student should not be overly concerned over the achievement measured by grades, but rather how well the material he read serves him, and whether he can make good use of the knowledge. Only then the enjoyment and purpose of reading is not diminished or even destroyed.
Reference
- Ambigapathy Pandian: Reading in Malaysia
- Steven C. Scheer: The Art of Reading
- Frederick K. S. Leung: In Search of an East Asian Identity in Mathematics Education, in Educational Studies in Mathematics 2001
- Ralph R. Williams: Extensive Reading versus Intensive Study of Literature, in The School Review 1929
- Robert B. Weaver: The Relative Value of Intensive Study and Extensive Reading in United States History, in The School Review 1931
- Eleanor F. Brown: An Experiment in Poetry Appreciation, in The English Journal 1938
- Ann L. Warner: If the Shoe No Longer Fits, Wear It Anyway?, in The English Journal 1993
- The Oxford English Dictionary Online
