Reading And Writing As A Fundamental Instrument

Reading and writing as a fundamental instrument

Reflection on reading has become a central aspect in different disciplines (psychology, linguistic, psycholinguistic, didactic, among others) given the fundamental role that it fulfills both individual and socially. From the reflections that have been generated from the different disciplines that try to account for it, the reading has ceased to be conceived as the mere recognition of some graphic signs, or the simple transcription of the graphic to the verbal, or the decoding ofSome literacy symbols, to become, first of all, a dynamic process, into a cognitive work, through which an individual advances a series of mental operations aimed at reconstruct). "The complete reading process consists in the construction of the global meaning of the text" (P. 17). But this activity does not focus solely on the appropriation of the content but, in turn, it constitutes a process of construction and production of the latter, since it is the reader who activates the interpretive semiotic process (Santiago, 2005);Consequently, reading is understood as an activity of understanding and production of meaning;It is not a simple decoding work but an interrogation, participation and update process by an active receiver that recognizes it as a textual cooperation process.

Reading and writing are work tools for many professionals in the legal communities in which we live. Being a good lawyer, a good engineer or a good doctor is also a good reader and writer of the texts of these disciplines.

With these texts we manage our incorporation and permanence in the respective communities of law, engineering and medicine: we access their knowledge, we adopt their professional practices, we update, we make our personal contributions, etc. Learning reading and writing these texts is a relevant task, which requires effort, time and practice and does not happen naturally. The place where this learning begins is the university, although it does not always develop formally, explicitly and organizedly and although not all teachers – the students themselves – are aware of this.

The action of reading and writing always occurs in a specific cultural or disciplinary context and the very fact that literacy knowledge and experiences are unconditionally transferable is a reason for inquiry. With (Bode, 2001), we understand literacy as the ability to use the verbal language system in specific situations, through which knowledge is much more accessible to our own society. Therefore, it could hardly be accepted that the responsibility of writing and reading properly at the university is of exclusive domain of the student.

Many university teachers consider that students learn to read and write in compulsory education: in primary rudiments or bases are learned and in secondary school they consolidate. In addition, since students with better preparation reach higher education, it can be assumed that everyone knows how to read and write acceptably and that the university can begin to build learning from these bases, without having to worry about these skills. These ideas are based on a rather debatable axiom, when not false. First, reading and writing are conceived as a cognitive ability, disconnected from any bond with the social, affective or personal. Reading is a unique, limited, static, decontextualized skill, which: a) should only be learned once;b) is the same for all (that is, universal; with the denomination functional literacy);c) It is applied similarly in all areas, levels and texts;and d) allows to solve all the lawyers that occur. On the contrary, sociocultural vision assumes that reading and writing are cultural tasks, tremendously imbricated in the social context. Therefore they vary throughout space and time. Each idiomatic or cultural community, each discipline of knowledge, develop particular lawyers, with distinctive features. Apart from the fact that there may be general cognitive skills, used by all users in any context, practice reading and writing also implies learning the cultural conventions of each environment.

(Smith, 1995) argues that: “Reading is not a process that can be explained simply describing the relationships between eye, brain and text. It states that the questions we ask ourselves about reading depend on our personal interests. If we are teachers, we will possibly be looking for an answer that helps us to guide our pedagogical practice. Similarly, other ideas about reading will depend on interest and particular representations. Therefore, the answer expected from an expert in the area will vary considerably from one person to another (parents, doctors, journalists, lawyers, writers, etc.) "

In order to talk about reading habits, it is necessary for the subject to interpret reading as a relevant cultural fact and as an important individual skill. To do this, reading should be understood as a socially well valued practice. Unfortunately, we live in the "Curriculum Society" (Zaid, 1996), in which we are attending courses, conferences, congresses …, and where reading takes time if it does not work for immediate and specific learning. Increasingly, reading is restricted to the professional field or the consumption of punctual information, having a purely instrumental value for the majority.

To strengthen the reading habit of university students it is essential to create environments in which reading is a pleasant and daily activity. The promotion of reading among university students must be considered as a fundamental objective for the integral training of students, valuing the development of their reading capacity as a key educational element and a necessary skill that must also be enhanced and reinforced from the library.

Bibliography

1. González, b. Y. (2010). Problematize reading and writing at Sergio Arboleda University. In v. Vega (ed.), Reading and writing practices at the university (First ed., p. 12). Bogotá, Colombia: Publications Fund.
2. Sánchez-García, s., Yubero, s. , and Larrañaga, and. (2010). Reading and University: the promotion of reading from the University Library. Retrieved June 20, 2020, from https: // d1wqtxts1xzle7.Cloudfront.net/34627620/LECURA_Y_UNIVERSIDAD_BRASIL.PDF?1409831235 = & Response-Content
3. Cassany, d., and moral, or. A. (2008). Read and write at the University: towards reading and critical writing of scientific genres. Retrieved June 20, 2020, from https: // d1wqtxts1xzle7.Cloudfront.net/30933540/read_y_ writer_en_university.PDF?13631977 I.pdf & expires = 1592711660 & signature = gmgkjh ~ haautrxbxcgtf0l9ba31-j4bvkju8glhlmje ~ xuetbcapy8 ~ pvcaj0q20ilzvwke ~ emwzixvu1x4 ~ i2undmhzfu5doae9hwyb8x 
4. Santiago G., Álvaro w., and Castle p., Myriam c., & Morales, Dora Luz (2007). Strategies and Teaching – Reading Learning. Folios Magazine, (26), 27-38. [Date of consultation June 21, 2020]. ISSN: 0123-4870. Available at: https: // www.Redalyc.org/article.OA?ID = 3459/345941356003
5. Sánchez, Carla, and Chacón Contreras, Yamira (2006). Reading: a sublime experience. EDUCER, 10 (33), 279-282. [Date of consultation June 21, 2020]. ISSN: 1316-4910. Available at: https: // www.Redalyc.org/article.OA?ID = 356/35603311