This article aims to make it clear where the ‘reader’ in social constructivism is different from that of dominant discourses of reading education. For this, this ariticle analyzes the epistemologies of them and describes the reader formation effec...
This article aims to make it clear where the ‘reader’ in social constructivism is different from that of dominant discourses of reading education. For this, this ariticle analyzes the epistemologies of them and describes the reader formation effects of those discourses by assessing the student-readers` actual responses. Dominant discourses are classified into autonomism and constructivism. Autonomism supposes that a subject is not constructed through the relation with the other, but exists independently. It includes the text-centered view on reading and expressivistic view on reading: The former is likely to form the passive reader who obeys the intention of text, the latter fix the reader`s present response ability. To the contrary, constructivism has the context-centerd thought and emphasizes the interrelation among subject, object and context. The cognitivism on reading and socialcultural reading viewpoint have the constructivistic implication. The cognitivism on reading has the possibility of deconstructing the autonomism, but it doesn`t consider reader`s background knowledge within the social context. Social-cultural reading viewpoint explains that text and reader are socially constructed, but it maybe turned into objectiveautonomistic discourse. To set up a truly social constructivistic reading discourse, we should recognize that the reader is ‘determined’ by dominant discourse as well as ‘deconstructs’ and ‘reconstructs’ it. The reader is both stable and fluid; he/she is partly confined within self identity and partly open to context. To form the reflective and critical reader, reading education shoud stress the interrelationship between readers, the critical reflection on context, and the recovery of ‘self’.