The widely endorsed practice of activating relevant knowledge1 prior to reading is challenged in this paper. It is argued that the endorsement is derived from a god's eye point of view that fails to acknowledge that relevance can be determined only by readers with respect to and in the course of making their own interpretations. To sustain this conclusion, the paper first outlines a perspectival (perspective-relative) view of reading that includes theoretical positions on the relation of reading to inferring meaning, on the importance of understanding first-person intentionality, on the intelligibility of the concept of text information, on the distinction between literal and inferential interpretations, on what it means for readers to integrate their knowledge with text information, and on why the concept of interpretation is more suitable than the concept of comprehension for theorizing about reading. This perspectival view of reading provides a means to make coherent sense of interpretations, at one and the same time, being justifiably relative to readers' different beliefs and purposes for reading, and also constrained by universal interpretive standards of adequacy. The paper thence proceeds to show that, as a consequence of the nature of inference, the relevance of a reader's knowledge to a text interpretation is founded on a relation that is created as part of the interpretative act, and is not something to be sought in its own right. The paper concludes by arguing that having specific knowledge is not the main desideratum in interpreting texts. Rather, the main desideratum is using effectively the knowledge one has.
References
1.
AndersonR. C. (1985). Role of the reader's schema in comprehension, learning and memory. In SingerH.RuddellR. B. (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (3rd ed., pp. 372–84). Newark, DE.: International Reading Association.
2.
AuneB. (1967). Intention. In EdwardsP. (Ed.), The encyclopedia of philosophy (Vol. 3, pp. 198–201). New York: Macmillan.
3.
BeckI. L.CarpenterP. A. (1986). Cognitive approaches to understanding reading: Implications for instructional practice. American Psychologist, 41, 1098–1105.
4.
BeckI. L.McCaslinE. S.McKeownM. G. (1981). Basal readers' purpose for story reading: Smoothly paving the road or setting up a detour. Elementary School Journal, 81, 156–161.
5.
BogdanD.StrawS. B. (1990). Beyond communication: Reading comprehension and criticism, Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann-Boynton-Cook.
6.
CareyS. (1985). Are children fundamentally different kinds of thinkers and learners than adults? In ChipmanS. F.SegalJ. W.GlaserR. (Eds.), Thinking and learning skills (pp. 485–517). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
7.
CollinsA. J.BrownJ. S.LarkinK. M. (1980). Inference in text understanding. In SpiroR. J.BruceB. C.BrewerW. F. (Eds.), Theoretical issues in reading comprehension (pp. 385–407). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
8.
DanemanM. (1991). Individual differences in reading skills. In BarrR.KamilM. L.MosenthalP. B.PearsonP. D. (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 2, pp. 512–538). New York: Longman.
EnnisR. H. (1992). The degree to which critical thinking is subject specific: Clarification and needed research. In NorrisS. P. (Ed.), The generalizability of critical thinking (pp. 21–37). New York: Teachers College Press.
11.
FarrR. (1988). The changing basal reader. Educational Leadership, 45, 86.
12.
FenstermacherG. D. (1994). The knower and the known: The nature of knowledge in research in teaching. In Darling-HammondL. (Ed.), Review of research in education (Vol. 20, pp. 3–56). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
13.
FishS. E. (1978). Normal circumstances, literal language, direct speech acts, the ordinary, the everyday, the obvious, what goes without saying, and other special cases. Critical Inquiry, 4, 625–644.
14.
GlaserR. (1984). Education and thinking: The role of knowledge. American Psychologist, 39, 93–104.
15.
GriceH. P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In ColeP.MorganJ. L. (Eds.), Syntax and semantics (pp. 41–58). New York: Academic Press.
16.
HansonN. R. (1958). Patterns of discovery.Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
17.
HarréR. (1986). Varieties of realism.Oxford, England: Basil Blackwell.
18.
McInnesJ. (1978). Language development reading program.Don Mills, Ontario: Thomas Nelson & Sons.
McKeownM. G.BeckI. L. (1990). The assessment and characterization of young learners' knowledge of a topic in history. American Educational Research Journal, 27, 688–726.
21.
McKeownM. G.BeckI. L.SinatraG. M.LoxtermanJ. A. (1992). The contribution of prior knowledge and coherent text to comprehension. Reading Research Quarterly, 27, 78–93.
22.
McPeckJ. (1981). Critical thinking and education.New York: St. Martin's.
23.
NickersonR. S. (1988). On improving thinking through instruction. In RothkopfE. Z. (Ed.), Review of research in education (pp. 3–57). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
24.
NorrisS. P. (1985). The philosophical basis of observation in science and science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 22, 817–833.
25.
NorrisS. P. (1989). Can we test validly for critical thinking?Educational Researcher, 18, 21–26.
26.
NorrisS. P. (Ed.). (1992). The generalizability of critical thinking.New York: Teachers College Press.
27.
NorrisS. P.PhillipsL. M. (1987). Explanations of reading comprehension: Schema theory and critical thinking theory. Teachers College Record, 89, 281–306.
28.
NorrisS. P.PhillipsL. M. (1994). Interpreting pragmatic meaning when reading popular reports of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 1994, 31(9).
29.
PalincsarA. S.BrownA. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and comprehension-monitoring strategies. Cognition and Instruction, 1, 117–175.
30.
ParisS. G.WasikB. A.TurnerJ. C. (1991). The development of strategic readers. In BarrR.KamilM. L.MosenthalP.PearsonP. D. (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 2, pp. 609–640). New York: Longman.
31.
PearsonP. D.HansenJ.GordonC. (1979). The effect of background knowledge on young children's comprehension of explicit and implicit information. Journal of Reading Behavior, 11, 201–210.
PhillipsL. M. (1988). Young readers' inference strategies in reading comprehension. Cognition and Instruction, 5, 193–222.
34.
PhillipsL. M. (1990). Specific content knowledge is not necessary for good reading. Philosophy of Education, 45, 163–167.
35.
PhillipsL. M. (1992). The generalizability of self-regulatory thinking strategies. In NorrisS. P. (Ed.), The generalizability of critical thinking (pp. 138–156). New York: Teachers College Press.
36.
QuineW. V. (1953). Two dogmas of empiricism. In QuineW. V., From a logical point of view (pp. 20–46). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
37.
ResnickL. B. (1987). Education and learning to think.Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
38.
RollerC. M. (1990). The interaction between knowledge and structure variables in the processing of expository prose. Reading Research Quarterly, 25, 79–89.
39.
SearleJ. R. (1979). Expression and meaning.Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
40.
SearleJ. R. (1990). Consciousness, explanatory inversion, and cognitive science. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 13, 585–642.
41.
ShapereD. (1982). The concept of observation in science and philosophy. Philosophy of Science, 49, 485–525.
42.
ShymanskyJ. A.YoreL. D.GoodR. (1991). Elementary school teachers beliefs about the perceptions of elementary school science, science reading, science textbooks, and supportive instructional factors. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28, 437–454.
43.
SpilichG. J.VesonderG. T.ChiesiH. L.VossJ. F. (1979). Text processing of domain-related information for individuals with high and low domain knowledge. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 18, 275–290.
44.
StrawS. B. (1990). The actualization of reading and writing: Public policy and conceptualizations of literacy. In NorrisS. P.PhillipsL. M. (Eds.), Foundations of literacy policy in Canada (pp. 165–181). Calgary, Alberta: Detselig.
45.
SuppesP. (1957). Introduction to logic.New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
46.
TierneyR. J.CunninghamJ. W. (1984). Research on teaching reading comprehension. In PearsonP. D.BarrR.KamilM. L.MosenthalP. (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 1, pp. 609–655). New York: Longman.
47.
VosniadouS.OrtonyA. (1989). Similarity and analogical reasoning.New York: Cambridge University Press.
48.
WatsonG.GlaserE. M. (1980). Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal.Cleveland, OH: Psychological Corporation.
