Originally published on January 26, 2021 (Episode 196)
Introduction
When I used to grade historical essays, I used a rubric I borrowed from historian Lendol Calder. The very first line on that rubric read:
Comprehension: What do the documents say/mean? Accurately reconstructs the meaning of documents. No misreadings, serious misconceptions of authors’ meanings, or relevant documents ignored.
At the time, I didn’t give much thought to why comprehension came first. But the more I taught, the clearer it became that most academic problems begin with a problem of comprehension. Too often, students (and teachers!) mistake reading for understanding. Without comprehension, there is no effective reading. And without reading, there is no historical thinking.
Historians aren’t trained to study comprehension itself—that belongs to psychologists and cognitive scientists. Which is why, in this conversation, I turn to Daniel Willingham, Professor of Psychology at the University of Virginia, and one of the leading researchers applying cognitive psychology to K–16 education. Our discussion is built around his book The Reading Mind: A Cognitive Approach to Understanding How the Mind Works.
In this episode, you’ll hear us explore:
Why reading is like cooking Chicken Milanese
How “task analysis” can help break down the act of reading
Why background knowledge is indispensable for comprehension
And why digital devices may not be the villains they’re often made out to be
About the Guest
Daniel T. Willingham is Professor of Psychology at the University of Virginia. His research focuses on the application of findings from cognitive psychology and neuroscience to education. He is the author of numerous books and articles on reading, learning, and teaching, including The Reading Mind and Why Don’t Students Like School?
For Further Investigation
Daniel Willingham, The Reading Mind: A Cognitive Approach to Understanding How the Mind Works
Daniel Willingham, Why Don’t Students Like School?
Lendol Calder, “Uncoverage: Toward a Signature Pedagogy for the History Survey” The Journal of American History, Vol. 92, No. 4 (Mar., 2006), pp. 1358-1370
Listen & Discuss
How do you think about comprehension in your own reading—or in teaching others to read? Share your reflections in the comments, and consider forwarding this episode to a friend who wrestles with the same challenges.
Share this post