As I scroll through Facebook posts, I still see some misinformation about reading aloud. I have seen this sort of thing for some time. It seems we are "relitigating" reading aloud and its efficacy. We are also allowing others to use the phrase read aloud to actually describe an activity that is more skill-and-drill than reading aloud. If read aloud is interrupted for questioning of students, if reading aloud is interrupted by the teacher to point out something, if reading aloud is followed up with worksheets, I think we have crossed from reading aloud to something else.
Yes, there is a time and place for questions, observations, and comments. Generally, that comes AFTER the reading or on a SECOND reading of text. I used to pause after a rereading and direct students to a piece of figurative language. On more than one occasion I followed up a repeated reading with a personal response. But reading aloud was meant to introduce my students to a book or poem or short story. It wa meant to broaden their exposure to genre, form, and format. It was dedicated to let them hear prosody and fluency. It was NOT intended for learning a lesson. If a teachable moment arose, I took advantage of it. But the purpose was NOT to create a teachable moment. It was meant to demonstrate my love of words, of language, of story.
If we want to be able to defend our classroom approaches, each and every one of us needs to be a collector of research. Donalyn Miller wrote about this in a blog post called, "I've got research, yes I do. I've got research how about you?" Here is the lin: https://bookwhisperer.com/2015/02/08/ive-got-research-yes-i-do-ive-got-research-how-about-you/. Bookmark it. Add it to your reading list. Print off copies for your colleagues and administrators.
Be a bookmaker.