Speed Reading Doesn't Work

[ApK]

Every speed reading book I've looked at, and I've looked at a few, makes the point that the techniques they are offering are not intended for pleasure reading.
My wife and my son read novels at what seems to me to be super speed, but that's not because of anything like the "speed-reading" that is taught through the various books and programs.
Call it what you will, but effective skimming, with good comprehension and retention, would be a great skill to develop for folks who have to read a lot of reports, release notes, manuals, etc. and I have no doubt that skill can be learned.

[rkomar]

Originally Posted by kennyc

I just sped read this thread....wait....what?

Don't worry about it. Your lack of comprehension may not be the fault of speed reading.

[Sydney's Mom]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Yes, there's clearly a significant difference between reading for pleasure, and needing to absorb the maximum amount of information in a short time. In some professions, such as the law, or many fields of academic research, the ability to read quickly and take in the pertinent facts is essential.

Agreed. I am a tax lawyer, and I couldn't begin to read all the cases and treatises I need to. I decide the question I need to research, and then skim to be able to find exactly that in what I am reading. There are all sorts of things that help with skimming-headnotes, which detail what is in the case, key notes, which identify where a particular question is discussed.

I do the same thing when reading for pleasure. There are certain things I have determined are not central to the plot of what I am reading (long descriptions of geography, descriptions of sex) and I skip over them.

[Freeshadow]

The joke is: If you are a 'faster than average' reader simply by long practice, you often find out you have enough time spared, to have no need for said "skimming techniques"

[Phogg]

I tried to get away with taking a self paced speed reading course in highschool, but they caught me filling out seven units of the course work at once. My plan had been to do all of the material up front and turn in one or two units per day...and read my own books for the rest of the nine weeks.

They made me take poetry instead. I already wrote decent poetry by that point. An easy "A" either way.

[ApK]

Originally Posted by Phogg

I tried to get away with taking a self paced speed reading course in highschool, but they caught me filling out seven units of the course work at once. My plan had been to do all of the material up front and turn in one or two units per day...and read my own books for the rest of the nine weeks.

If it was a self-paced course, why would they care how fast you did it? And wouldn't reading your own books afterwards be a practical exercise for what you'd learned?
Or was the "self-paced" part your idea, not the schools...?

[cvkemp]

I was a very slow reader in high school. And being so I hated to read. But going into the tech fields I had to read so much research just to stay up with the field. I found the more I read the faster I became at reading. I took classes to learn how to read for what I needed to get out of the material that I was reading. There are materials that I have to read word for word and there are books to read for fun that i can read very fast now. But most important to me was the fact that I learned how to scan the material first before going back and reading it. That way I knew just how important the material was to what I was needing it for. Reading is an art that has to be learned so you read it correctly. And there is nothing that can replace practice at reading so read, read and read. You will become faster the more you read.

[ApK]

Originally Posted by Freeshadow

The joke is: If you are a 'faster than average' reader simply by long practice, you often find out you have enough time spared, to have no need for said "skimming techniques"

Originally Posted by cvkemp

And there is nothing that can replace practice at reading so read, read and read. You will become faster the more you read.

Or you won't. I certainly never got much faster. And my wife and son have always been remarkably fast readers, with comparatively little "practice."
So I don't think it's always simple as just "read more, get fast."

[cvkemp]

It all depends on the way you read. If I do research then I have to modes of reading, scanning and detail. If I am reading for fun and relaxation I am some where in between the two. I am normally reading two to four books at time. Reading a chapter or two from one book then switching to another book. And I normally complete two books a week. Most now that I am retired are novels, but I do still keep up with my trade, never know when someone will ask for a little help.

[Phogg]

Originally Posted by ApK

If it was a self-paced course, why would they care how fast you did it? And wouldn't reading your own books afterwards be a practical exercise for what you'd learned?
Or was the "self-paced" part your idea, not the schools...?

I naturally read faster than the machine would go to.
They wanted me to have to work.

[Freeshadow]

ApK, ok point maybe even a so mechanical skill is a matter of talent too, don't know.
Maybe also - when you learn it is significant. I am among those here who learned it before school. With four years or so; as my Ma recalls it. I myself have only very few memories of times where I couldn't read. It's certainly among the first things I learned at all

[Jason90]

I am probably one of the slowest readers going and i re-read sentences multiple times sometimes before i move on,however i mainly read non-fiction and religious related works that by definition need that sort of determination to fully comprehend anyway.

I did read through the hobbit pretty fast though and found it highly entertaining,so it depends on the source material for me i guess.

Thanks to the OP btw i'll bookmark this for future reference.