Muses on the meaning of last month's column, chides instructional materials that include instructions on how and what to think about their contents, and lists a large number of books that the author recently enjoyed reading. (SR)

Discusses Janice A. Radway's "Reading the Romance: Women, Patriarchy and Popular Literature." Argues that reading educators should consider a more general premise embodied in the book: in order to understand the appeal (or lack of it) of certain books, then educators first need to understand what the books are for the students who read them. (RS)

Argues that reading specialists' lack of success in persuading content area teachers to help their students read and study texts in social studies, science, and mathematics is a result of reading specialists' lack of careful thought about text structures. Discusses the text structures of textbooks in these content areas. (RS)

Argues that the field of education has produced and absorbed a steady barrage of information about the threats and causes of illiteracy. Contends that the field has managed to demystify the wondrous and profound acts of reading and writing. Concludes that research on reader response has much to offer in the rehumanization of literacy. (RS)

States that comprehension of expository text and the ability to summarize are factors in students' success with such material. Describes a model that induces students to use existing schemata to create new and necessary expectations while providing a technique for explicitly teaching the components of effective summaries. (JK)

Notes the weakness of comprehension assessment as it occurs in standardized tests and exercise books, and reports on a new approach which views reading as a constructive process that results from a complex set of interactions between reader and texts. (NH)

Humorously describes the "dumbing down/smartening up" phenomenon which, on the one hand, attempts to convey complex ideas in simple language, but on the other hand may water down the material so much that readers will never have to tackle even a moderately challenging reading task on their own. (RS)

Advocates the use of literature response journals. Describes their use with an eighth-grade class and discusses teaching students how to respond well and how to include parents. (SR)

Reviews current approaches to the assessment of the great variety of retellings encountered by teacher and tutor. Proposes a set of three criteria by which teachers can judge whether approaches to retellings developed by researchers are likely to be useful in classroom settings. (JK)

Describes how a high school English teacher's belief that text contains a single, unchanging meaning evolved to an understanding that students create their own meanings through their own experiences. Discusses ways he tried (with mixed success) to provide students with the opportunity to bring their own experience to their reading. (SR)

Argues that as reading is taught increasingly as a tool, the delight that comes from personal literacy is becoming obscured. Argues that bringing personal values and experiences to poetry is an important way for students to discover the meaning of a poem. Describes how students can "map" their reading journey. (RS)

Notes that expository text, the predominant form of writing in content textbooks, is generally more difficult for students to comprehend than narrative, which predominates in basal readers. Recommends the use of extended anticipation guides as a strategy for helping students build background knowledge for understanding content area texts. (SKC)

Describes the fundamentals of reader response theory, focuses on the aspects most relevant to reading instruction, and presents a method of teaching using reader response as a vehicle for improving student ability to learn from text. (NKA)