QandR#2

What are the pros and cons of using the contextual strategy to better understand a piece of literary work?

Many people simply read a report or story. Very few readers infer parts and pieces to know what they are reading. Like zombies, many readers have no idea what or how to comprehend what they are reading. However, to properly take anything away from spending minutes or even hours reading, one must have an opinion or at minimum inference on what they read.

Although reading a report or story includes you reading every word and detail of what the author wrote, when using the content strategy you must try clearly understanding what is being said. Content is what is in the article itself. All readers are supposed to take what is said and make sense of it. It can be difficult to do this, but it is imperative that readers know what they are reading and what the meaning is behind it. Otherwise what is the point of having read every word of the work? The content strategy is in my opinion the bare minimum of reading compared to other methods of comprehension. Content reading is doing the easiest form of reading. When content reading, most of what you do is sum up what you are reading or paraphrase.

College professors want students to break the habit of what we as students learn from elementary school up to high school. I myself as a young reader am lazy. After reading this article I realize what these college educators desire. I hate reading, I will do anything not to read, unless it peaks my interest. So naturally reading things that do not interest me will make me do what this study is analyzing. I read with no attention to detail on what exactly the author is trying to say or if to see if there is underlying meaning to their words.

During the course of the study with inexperienced and experienced readers it was clear that both types of students used the content strategy while they were reading. This result shows that it is just human nature to pick the easiest way of doing things. Therefore, the fact of the ease of the reading and how it works is a pro for the content method or analytical reading. Using the content method of reading you can get the full view of everything in the article, also building a clear representation of the reading.

One of the cons of the content strategy compared to the rhetorical strategy is that using the rhetorical strategy gives less attention to what the author’s purpose is. The rhetorical strategy offers more of an in depth analyzing of what the author is trying to say and what the message is. While the content method focuses mainly on what is in the article, the rhetorical focuses on why things are in the article and who they are meant to target to be able to understand why they are there. Rhetorical reading is used to focus more on the author and their purpose of writing and what they wrote.

In conclusion the content method of analyzing a reading is good in building a representation of what you are reading. It is a simple and more of a natural way of reading and thinking while you read. However, content reading leaves a gap in thinking where rhetorical reading is superior is giving the reader a chance to see more of what the author wants them to see. To see through the authors glasses is the point of rhetorical reading. Content reading is very effective in finding information and making a picture in your mind on what the author is saying.