From: H C (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Sat Jan 28 2006 - 09:50:57 MST
>From: "Herb Martin" <HerbM@LearnQuick.Com>
>Subject: RE: Self Improvement
>Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 09:12:38 -0600
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: email@example.com [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] On Behalf Of H C
> > > > Modality level: reading, speed reading (how effective is this,
> > > > anybody?),
> > >
> > >Extremely -- 2500 WPM is easily reproducible, while
> > >some claim 25,000+ but I haven't personally achieved
> > >that.
> > Haha.
> > Honestly. How much are you really accomplishing here?
>About 10 times more per unit of time that I did
>before learning the skill.
>Most educated people read at 200-450 WPM.
>2500 WPM with similar comprehension is attainable
>through moderate but serious practice.
>For many people, comprehension improves, but my
>(typical) comprehension rates had always been
>95-100% in 'normal' reading so I typically lose
>a few percentage points down to 90%+.
>Even if someone loses comprehension, then reading
>'three times' still gives a 3 to 1 increase and
>this is almost certainly at increased comprehension.
Somehow reading at speeds like this gives the impression to me of simply
blindly integrating a lot of base level data. That just isn't enough though.
Imagine attempting to read a math textbook, over a section you have no
previous knowledge about, at 2500 WPM.
It just doesn't make sense to me. You aren't really comprehending in a "more
optimal" way, because integrating base level data just isn't nearly as
important as appying more complex constructions of this base level data. You
would be better off spending your time going slowly and
updating/adding/subtracting hypotheses on all the levels of abstraction for
every piece of information you are getting.
Does that makes sense?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:55 MDT