As a first-year writing teacher, I started to believe that students were better off learning to do the kind of writing they needed for their other classes, so we would work on discipline-specific papers, which went pretty well.

This was the best thing that I learned as a teaching assistant, though, and I liked to pass it on to my students: A study was done showing that when grappling with new ideas, learners' writing tended to get considerably worse before making a quantum leap to better. So poor writing can be a sign of growth. Part of the discovery process.

Years ago as a teaching assistant in composition, I did an experiment on reading comprehension by asking students to read and outline a specific article. It was not particularly difficult to understand although it presented information that would be new for them. My students generally did not pick up what were to me obvious structural indicators of main points. Instead, they focused on information that was familiar to them, especially if it had some emotional connection, and would identify that  as the main point of the article. So my conclusion is that higher-level reading skills (basically discourse analysis) need to be taught for many or maybe most postsecondary learners.

I agree about requiring a course in discourse (or content) analysis. When I was working on my BA (English) in English, I took a stylistics course (which was taught by a linguist). I don't think that I have ever deconstructed the English language with such intensity as I did in that course. She had us counting the number of adverbial phrases, the number of negatives used in a single page of a novel (I choose Faulkner's The Sound and the Fury). Some students found it a very clinical approach, I thought it was fascinating.

I remember an undergraduate anthropology (sort of a mix of sociobiology, ethology, and biological anthropology) course in which students were asked to analyse scientific articles on a particular subject (generally related to animal behaviour (sometimes human, primate)), not necessarily in the discipline of anthropology, e.g. kin selection in ground squirrels. It really taught me to read closely, carefully and critically. Because the articles (which the students chose, based on certain parameters) were not in the discipline I was studying and because we were limited to a single-spaced page in which to summarize and critique the article.