Reply to comment

Maybe we could enjoy biochemistry articles as much as we enjoy the pieces of writing we select to read ourselves if we made an effort to think about why the biochemistry article is interesting/beautiful/relevant, etc.  I've read academic articles before and made them more appealing by reasoning through why each point is actually interesting (fake it until you make it theory of reading?).  However, this process is exhausting since it doesn't come naturally - maybe if the process were practiced more often, it would become natural, or at least easier. 

Should students be expected to make this effort to engage with all/most of their readings (or assignments or lectures)?  Or does the burden of being "interesting" or "appealing" fall on the author/teacher?  In school we seem to place a lot of this responsibility on the teacher - is teaching and creating material such as readings comparable?  Where does the burden lie?  There is a gap between the information we are expected to absorb and ourselves - should bridging the gap be a cooperative effort or should one side of the gap be held more accountable?