Education Policy, Methodology, Principles of Learning, School-wide Literacy
Comments 25

Reading is Knowledge

We shouldn’t confuse skills with knowledge 

One of the most discussed topics in education today is that of the so-called ‘knowledge curriculum’. Its most famous proponent is E D Hirsch, who has written extensively on the subject. Hirsch argues that depriving students – especially poorer students – of the ‘cultural capital’ that middle and upper class children have access to perpetuates inequality and injustice. Instead, he believes that the curriculum should reflect ‘powerful knowledge’ that enables students to gain the same access to higher education and working opportunities that those in better-off circumstances tend to have.


Hirsch, and many others, recognise that reading is an essential tool in this approach. The amount of knowledge that students need to consume in order to be well-equipped by the end of secondary school is vast. It is not possible to cover it all in lessons alone; nor is this desirable. Developing independence in learning is surely one of the major goals of education, and while we may debate how we achieve this, it is obvious that those with access to reading have a much greater chance of success. Conversely, students’ ability to access knowledge is greatly reduced by weak reading.

One of the seminal papers in this field is by Cunningham and Stanovich (2003) entitled “What Reading Does For the Mind”. Amongst the authors’ findings are that students encounter vastly more rare and subject-specific vocabulary in print than they do in speech, and that better readers develop better domain-specific knowledge which further helps their comprehension.


What is perhaps less obvious is that learning to read is itself an exercise in acquiring knowledge. We tend to think of reading as a skill, or a set of skills, when in fact it is the application of knowledge. The fact that this knowledge is usually applied (by educated adults like teachers) at lightning speed, so that it seems effortless, the words almost disappearing while we contemplate their meaning, is on the one hand a remarkable tribute to the ability of the human mind, and on the other quite deceptive. In fact, Stanovich (and others) argue that what is really happening is that every letter-sound combination is being quickly and effortlessly decoded by the reader. In fluent readers, it is the auditory part of the brain that shows activity in scans. How can this be? Surely reading is a visual process?

The answer is to do with the fact that writing is, not language per se, but a representation of spoken language. As a result, any gaps in our understanding of spoken language will have an impact on our reading. This is why children who are very good readers will sometimes mispronounce an unusual word – they have come across the term in reading and often have worked out a sense of the meaning from context, but because it’s not part of their spoken vocabulary they aren’t sure which way to sound it out.


Likewise, gaps in students’ appreciation of different sounds – their ability to distinguish between phonemes, or ‘phonemic awareness’ – will lead to complications in them learning to decode the relationship between printed and spoken language. This process in English is already complex because of the history of the language, but it is much more difficult if a student cannot, for example, hear the difference between /n/ and /ng/. So gaps in knowledge at the phoneme level, grapheme level, and word level can all make a major difference to how well readers are able to apply the code. Often we focus on the application level – how students use the knowledge – when the problem is that students simply don’t know enough, or know it well enough. For example, we worry about their comprehension strategies, when the issue is vocabulary, background knowledge or perhaps even decoding some of the text. They may be able to decode, but so laboriously and slowly that there is no room left in working memory for them to remember or analyse what they are reading. (This is sometimes used to argue against phonics, in the same way that being unfit is an argument against exercise.) The way to respond is not to try to get the student to superficially emulate a good reader (‘predicting’, ‘using context clues’, ‘using visual cues’) but to teach them what they don’t know, or to practice that knowledge until they can recall it effortlessly and fluently.

Understanding the problem in this way is liberating for teachers. Once we conceptualise reading problems as a matter of how clearly we have communicated knowledge, we are free to set to work to find a solution. We can stop looking for reasons within the child as to why they were ‘unteachable’ and instead, work out the missing knowledge and the most effective ways to teach it.

That is why, when it comes to reading, knowledge really is power.

You may also be interested in:

Why We Can’t Remember How We Learned

No Excuses Left

Seven Steps to Improving Reading Comprehension

7 Misconceptions About Teaching Adolescents to Read


    • Currently working with “skill = fluent application of knowledge”. Thornbury:”Knowledge becomes skill through successive stages of practice.”


  1. The thing is, any child who can speak in full sentences and participate in everyday conversation has the knowledge/skill or combination thereof to be reliably taught how to read. This is, the kid has a sufficiently large vocabulary and “fluent application” of syntax,
    phonology, and comprehension to be taught how to read. It’s in the instruction, not in the kid’s lack of knowledge. What the kid lacks is how to handle the Alphabetic Code, which makes the “representation of spoken language” possible.

    Sure “knowledge” trumps everything–except wisdom. But that begs the question of “what to do with kids/adults who can’t yet read.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Agreed! It’s all about the instruction – hence teachers need to master the knowledge first before they can usefully teach those who are struggling. Overall, teachers have not been well prepared in this respect.

      Liked by 1 person

      • hence teachers need to master the knowledge first before they can usefully teach those who are struggling
        True. But as with little kids, teachers already have the large bulk of knowledge to do the job reliably. What they lack is any understanding of the structure and substance of the Alphabetic Code that makes the representation of spoken language possible. This knowledge can be conveyed in a few pages and mastered “enough” in a few minutes. So that obstacle is readily tractable.

        Overall, teachers have not been well prepared in this respect.
        Overall and under all, that’s true! The etiology of struggling teachers is akin to that of struggling readers. Whether by deliberate design or by inadvertent intent they’ve acquired faulty knowledge that has to extinguished and replaced. We call the kids dyslexic, and we could call the teachers dysteachic, but the labels don’t help. The “extinguish and replace” task is tricky, because whatever the teacher is doing works well with some kids, and whatever maladaptive shortcuts the kid is taking to read words works with some words some of the time. As with addictive gambling, this pattern of intermittent reinforcement is tough to alter, but it’s easier to pull off with teachers than with kids. Teachers have to be convinced to stop trying to teach kids “literacy” and “meaning” and to stop teaching kids to use “the three-cuing system”–look at the first letter and guess, and so on. This goes by “balanced literacy” in some quarters of EdLand and as “mixed methods” in other quarters, but it’s toxic and pandemic.

        Liked by 1 person

  2. Thomas Conrí says

    This is a fantastic thing you are doing. I am looking forward to starting the LDP in July, and I will look out for the work that you do.


  3. Pingback: Struggling readers in the secondary English classroom | thinkingreadingwritings

  4. Pingback: Climbing Mountains in Small Steps | thinkingreadingwritings

  5. Pingback: On Blog of the Week 2016-17 | The Learning Profession

  6. Pingback: Doors to Opportunity | thinkingreadingwritings

  7. Pingback: Reading Helps Students With a Variety of Cognitive Functions

  8. Pingback: What Every Secondary Teacher Needs to Know About Reading | thinkingreadingwritings

  9. Pingback: Calling secondary English teachers – work with us to make a real difference! | thinkingreadingwritings

  10. Pingback: Reading Makes You Smarter - How to Convince Your Students ⋆ Selma Dawani

  11. Pingback: Teaching reading: it’s not as ‘niche’ as you think | thinkingreadingwritings

  12. Pingback: MFL – The Bridge Over the Reading Gap (Part 5) | thinkingreadingwritings

  13. Pingback: Promoting a Reading Culture – The Bridge Over the Reading Gap revisited (Part 7) | thinkingreadingwritings

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.