Section 1
1. Why teach reading?
According to Beaumont (1996, unit 1, p.31) there are two primary aims of
reading in the second language classroom: “…to extend our learner’s knowledge of
the target language by actively engaging them with meaningful texts and to help them
to develop effective strategies and skills for comprehension”. The above aims have a
number of pedagogical implications concerning the criteria that should be employed
in the teaching of reading. For the reader’s convenience, these criteria will be
analyzed below under the following topics: The texts, the interaction between the
reader and the text and the role of the teacher as a planner of the lesson and a
facilitator for learning.
1.1. The text
The characteristics that make the texts appropriate for use in the classroom
refer to their authenticity, their topic, and the visuals that accompany them.
1.1.1. Authentic texts
According to Williams and Moran (1989) a text is authentic when it is not
specially produced for language learners. Widdowson (1978:3), who makes a
distinction between language usage (i.e. the ability to compose correct sentences) and
language use (i.e. the ability to achieve some kind of communicative output), stresses
the importance of using authentic texts as they present instances of language use and
help the learner to use language for effective communication. Grellet (1981) argues
that authentic texts are not only more interesting and motivating but they are also
easier as a simplified text often results in increased difficulty (p.7) due to a reduction
of linguistic and extralinguistic cues. This can also lead to the distortion of the text
genre depriving the reader of the ability to distinguish between text genres which,
according to Grabe (1988) is an important part of the reading process.
However, not everybody defines authenticity so strictly. Williams and
Moran(1989:219), referring to Widdowson (1976), define authenticity not in origin
but in the interaction of reader and text. Finally, according to Breen (1985) and
Davies (1984) as they are referred in Williams and Moran (ibid) authenticity is
defined solely by reference to the reader’s response.
10