Speed Reading Course Forum

thisislife49 · Post by **thisislife49** » Fri Mar 28, 2014 1:30 pm

Many have recommended to take a speed reading course just to freshen up. Also, to increase reading speed and comprehension due to the high amounts of reading. Does anyone know of a good speed reading course?

jkhalfa · Post by **jkhalfa** » Sat Mar 29, 2014 11:50 pm

Related question: Is eliminating "subvocalization" (the voice in your head) a real thing? When I try to do this I remember like 10% of what I read... and that 10% is generally the words where I slipped and subvocalized. A lot of speed readers claim to not subvocalize at all but that seems impossible to me.

patogordo · Post by **patogordo** » Sat Mar 29, 2014 11:53 pm

pretty sure speed reading is flame

Pneumonia · Post by **Pneumonia** » Sat Mar 29, 2014 11:55 pm

speed reading is stupid in general and also a 100% guaranteed way to worse at RC on the LSAT. idk wtf subvocalization is but it sounds ridiculous. just read.

SnakySalmon · Post by **SnakySalmon** » Sun Mar 30, 2014 1:45 am

Pneumonia wrote:speed reading is stupid in general and also a 100% guaranteed way to worse at RC on the LSAT. idk wtf subvocalization is but it sounds ridiculous. just read.

It's the internal narration you have when you read. IIRC, the military actually did some experiments on training people to read without it by displaying one word at a time, and found that people thought they read much faster with total comprehension. When they tested them though, they found that the people who had read without sub-vocalization just thought they understood what they'd read, and were actually clueless.

TL;DR: Yeah, speed reading is a flame.

NYC-WVU · Post by **NYC-WVU** » Mon Mar 31, 2014 11:37 am

SnakySalmon wrote:
Pneumonia wrote:speed reading is stupid in general and also a 100% guaranteed way to worse at RC on the LSAT. idk wtf subvocalization is but it sounds ridiculous. just read.
It's the internal narration you have when you read. IIRC, the military actually did some experiments on training people to read without it by displaying one word at a time, and found that people thought they read much faster with total comprehension. When they tested them though, they found that the people who had read without sub-vocalization just thought they understood what they'd read, and were actually clueless.

TL;DR: Yeah, speed reading is a flame.

Reading without subvocalization has to be possible. Otherwise, people who are born without hearing would be incapable of reading effectively, but I haven't heard that that is the case.

MistakenGenius · Post by **MistakenGenius** » Tue Apr 08, 2014 7:35 am

Post removed.

Mack.Hambleton · Post by **Mack.Hambleton** » Tue Apr 08, 2014 9:24 am

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_read ... prehension

it seems questionable

NYC-WVU · Post by **NYC-WVU** » Tue Apr 08, 2014 11:03 am

MistakenGenius wrote:I call bullshit on all the previous posts except for the most recent. I've never taken an in person class but I did some software for speed reading and found it helped me considerably. Contrary to what they said, virtually every study has been telling because they found speed reading actually INCREASES comprehension. Many presidents have sworn by speed reading (Kennedy and Carter both made speed reading courses mandatory for staff). They also found that learning speed reading increases speed and scores on standardized tests. It certainly did mine. I credit my speed reading as responsible for my -0 on reading comp and easier homework load in undergrad. That said, that chick who "reads" 5000 words a minute (average is around 300) only has 50% comprehension. But short of those liars in competitions, everyone can raise their reading speed past 600 or so (I'm around 900) by doing three things.

1.) Remove vocalization- A lot of readers actually mouth the words they are reading, they limits your comprehension and your speed considerably
2.) Remove subvocalization- subvocalization is the term used to describe the act of "talking" inside your head when you read. 90% of readers do this. Your brain is better than people give it credit for, and it can comprehend much faster than you can talk. If you do not take the time to say every word in your head, you will actually comprehend overall ideas much more clearly and efficiently.
3.) Chunking- Once you no longer subvocalize, there's no reason your brain cannot comprehend two or three words at a time, by reading words in chunks instead of individually, you speed up even further.

Why call it flame when you literally have no idea what you're talking about?

This is the part I have trouble with. I don't say every word in my head, but I feel like I have to say the ones that count. If I don't say any of them, I don't retain any of the information. Subvocalization feels like the only way that my conscious self understands what I am reading (or what I am thinking, for that matter.)
But, like I said before, I know it's not a requirement to reading (or thinking), I just don't understand how people do it.

MistakenGenius · Post by **MistakenGenius** » Tue Apr 08, 2014 8:41 pm

Post removed.

drawstring · Post by **drawstring** » Tue Apr 08, 2014 11:27 pm

How long did it take you to go from being a pretty slow reader to breezing through RC passages?

I remember reading an article in which Sandra Day O'Connor suggested that she benefited significantly from taking a speed reading course, though obviously that alone doesn't make it legit.

MistakenGenius · Post by **MistakenGenius** » Thu Apr 10, 2014 5:55 pm

Post removed.