Discusses the different ways theorists and researchers define "reading." (FL)

Compares the Darwinian approach to understanding reading (irrational) with the Cartesian approach (rational). Argues for the superiority of the Darwinian approach, and in the future will consider how research and practice might be conceptualized from a Cartesian approach to understanding and reading. (NKA)

Argues that researchers and practitioners largely view reading in terms of a "storage and conduit metaphor." Examines the metaphor and explains why it is necessary for the profession to move beyond it. (FL)

Discusses the conventions that define the range of legitimate routine in the reading profession. (FL)

Concludes that there are advantages to both the theorists' and synthesizers' perspectives of progress. (FL)

Notes the limitations of the traditional conceptualization of reading in terms of a conduit metaphor, consisting of three parts: (l) an input, (2) an output, and (3) a model that describes the relationship. Argues the merits of looking at reading in light of the tool metaphor, viewing readers and writers as users of information. (NH)

Proposes a pyramid organization for constructing theories of reading. Discusses each category of the proposed organization: (1) readers and learners, (2) materials, (3) tasks, (4) situation organizers, and (5) settings. (FL)

Poses the question of whether reading researchers should acknowledge that different definitions of reading are really geometries, each with its own set of theorems and means of validating its hypotheses. (FL)

Continues a discussion begun in the February column concerning the pyramid taxonomy of reading. Makes 10 suggestions for reading researchers attempting to define reading. (FL)

Discusses several recent contributions to reading research and concludes that before changing teaching methods and programs, educators need to consider ends, decide what the ideal is, and develop criteria to achieve that ideal. (FL)

Discusses the various phases of studies designed to determine the best ways to train readers and reading teachers to be "metacognitively aware." Concludes that these studies can be used to prove the superiority of any one technique over another. (FL)

Notes the problem in reading instruction of teaching children both one-to-one representational meaning of words and world-meaning of words, a distinction that can alter their perception of truth as found in written works. (JC)

Discusses the fallacy in the Procrustean approach of fitting reading instruction to reading theory. (FL)