Traditional vs. Action Research Approaches to Reading Comprehension Instruction

Reading comprehension is a skill learners need in every subject. It also supports their later academic and professional success. Teachers have long debated how best to teach it. This guide compares two approaches, the traditional approach and the action research approach, and shows where each one helps and where it falls short.

On this page 6 sections

The traditional approach

The traditional approach is teacher-centered. The teacher is the main source of knowledge, and the teacher’s job is to pass that knowledge on to learners.

Key features:

• It usually follows a pre-set curriculum and standardized tests.
• Learners mostly receive information rather than build it themselves.
• Practice comes through lectures, worksheets, and reading assignments.

Limitations

• It does not fully account for different learners. Learners have different learning styles and preferences, so a single teacher-led method may work well for only some of them.
• It offers fewer chances for meaningful engagement. When learners mostly listen and complete worksheets, engagement and retention can be lower.

The action research approach

As this guide describes it, the action research approach is student-centered. It rests on the belief that learners learn best by doing. The teacher’s role is to facilitate and guide rather than lecture.

Key features:

• The teacher works with learners to identify and address their learning needs.
• Learners are encouraged to reflect on and evaluate their own learning.
• Learners take part in designing, carrying out, and evaluating the strategies used in class.

Benefits

• Flexibility. Teachers can change their strategies based on learner feedback, so instruction responds to each learner’s needs.
• Deeper engagement. Learners work with the material in meaningful ways, which can improve engagement and retention.

Trade-off

This approach takes more planning and preparation from the teacher.

Side-by-side comparison

Area	Traditional approach	Action research approach
Center of instruction	Teacher	Learner
Belief about learning	Learners learn best from teacher-led instruction	Learners learn best by doing
Teacher’s role	Gives information	Facilitates and guides
Learner’s role	Mostly receives information	Takes an active part, including planning and evaluating strategies
Typical activities	Lectures, worksheets, reading assignments	Collaboration, self-reflection, self-evaluation
Best suited to	More uniform groups of learners	Diverse groups of learners
Adaptability	Follows a set curriculum and tests	Adjusts to learner feedback
Teacher workload	Lower planning demand	More planning and preparation

What this means for teachers

Both approaches have strengths and limits. The right choice depends on three things:

1. The needs of your learners.
2. The goals of the curriculum.
3. Your classroom and learning environment.

A practical way to use both:

• Use the traditional approach for foundational skills. It can work well for decoding (sounding out and recognizing words) and fluency (reading smoothly and accurately).
• Add the action research approach for higher-level skills. The traditional approach alone may not be enough to develop critical thinking and analysis. A learner-centered, feedback-driven approach can build engagement, independence, and critical thinking.

Summary

The traditional approach gives structure and is useful for basic reading skills. The action research approach is more flexible and engaging but takes more preparation. By matching the approach to your learners and your classroom, you can teach reading comprehension more effectively and help learners keep learning for life.

Frequently asked questions