Daniel Kies Department of English College of DuPage
Composition 2 English 1102		Contact Form

Levels of Reading

Current work:   Days remaining this term: Notes: Add Note |  Log in? | Privacy | Change Name & Email Mail this page to a friend

Like other human activities, reading is a complex, multi-leveled phenomenon. If you ask me to read something, say a fable like Cinderella for example, there are a number of questions you could ask of me, questions that would elicit information from different levels of my reading experience. If you asked me "what was the story about?" I might reply "The story is about a poor girl, the step-daughter of a mean woman, who is forced to work under miserable conditions in the service of her step-sisters and step-mother. She is saved from this horrible life by a magical fairy god-mother, who enables Cinderella to attend a ball where she meets her Prince and falls in love." "Fine," you might say, since that response seems to capture one level of reading adequately enough. I am able to summarize content and have read the story adequately at that level.

This is the level of reading that is most easy to test by the way. We have all taken standardized reading tests before, I'm sure, in which we had to read a paragraph and answer questions about the meaning of certain key words, or choose a title of the paragraph from a list of suggestions. Such tests measure our ability to get content from the material we read. Reading for content is the first level and the level we use when we highlight text with a marker as we study.

However, if you asked me a different question, like "what does the story mean?" then you force me to think and read the fable at another level completely. You are asking me not for the content alone (though that obviously is still important), but you are asking me to interpret what I read. Reading for interpretation is the second level of reading. To answer this question, a summary of content is inadequate, and you expect of me something such as "The story illustrates the fact that life is hard, often cruel and unjust, but that virtue is rewarded in the end."

Now, what's interesting is that is not the only possible valid interpretation. It is feasible for reasonable people to read anything and to interpret that piece differently. (Remember when we were discussing factual claims, we had to distinguish between fact and interpretation of fact — which is why different people can look at the same glass and call it either half-full or half-empty. They are both right; they "simply" interpret the facts differently.) This interpretive level of the reading process has been the source of a great deal of research among psychologists, educators, and literary theorists alike.

Others interpret the Cinderella fable quite differently. A feminist perspective might focus on the subservient roles that women take in the story and in society. A Marxist perspective might highlight the unequal distribution of power and wealth. All of these and more are equally valid interpretations of the same piece of reading.

Finally, you might ask me yet a third question: "Did you like the story?" or "What did you like about the story?" Such questions force me to read and think at yet a third level, a level of evaluation. In answer to those questions, you would expect me to describe the parts of the story I found most effective at conveying the message, as I interpret it. I would analyze and explain my reactions to the story and how the parts fit together to produce a coherent whole that is moving and memorable. I am now working at the third level of the reading process. I am simultaneously reading for content, interpreting that content, and evaluating the strengths (and weakness should I see them) of that content.

^Take Note! | Table of Contents | Syllabus | Course Calendar | eForum | Search

The HyperTextBooks | The English Main Page | College of DuPage