Is there an advantage in "reading for teaching" vs. "reading for testing"?
For more than twenty years, my students have done their (almost) nightly reading with the expectation that they would have a short quiz on some of the main plot elements the next day. The quiz gives students immediate feedback on their understanding of the basic plot and characters in the reading and me a sense of who is prepared for that day’s discussion of the text. But, has this “reading for testing” approach been a detriment to them? Can a slight adjustment in their expectations for what may happen after the reading improve their understanding? In the article “Learning from Others” by Matthew D. Lieberman in the April 19, 2014 issue of The Chronicle Review, the author cites a 1980 Yale study that showed when college students read with the expectation that they would have to teach the content to others (summarize and evaluate) as opposed to reading to prepare to be tested on it, the “reading to teach” group did better when tested on the content. Lieberman did a similar study recentl