This paper argues against the expenditure of large amounts of money and the allotment of large segments of classroom time for the formal teaching of reading. While students at all levels should receive up to one-half hour per day of formal reading instruction, more concentrated study does not produce commensurate gains in learning and may, in fact, lead to diminished learning and even to antipathy for the subject. Furthermore, devoting a great deal of time to reading instruction reduces the time spent on other essential learning. The paper examines arguments proffered by those in the reading movement for emphasizing the teaching of reading and suggests that the arguments are based on the false beliefs that reading is prerequisite, at all levels, to all other forms of learning; that reading is a discrete, rather than continuous, skill; that there is a certain "magic" minimum level of reading that all people must achieve; and that the assessment of all students should be standardized. The author proposes that the time spent in enlarging formal reading instruction be devoted to stimulating interest in all the other curriculum areas and in teaching reading as an adjunct to other pursuits rather than for its own sake. (GW)