AnimeSuki Forums

Register Forum Rules FAQ Members List Social Groups Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Go Back   AnimeSuki Forum > General > General Chat

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2008-05-14, 02:48   Link #61
Irenicus
Le fou, c'est moi
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Las Vegas, NV, USA
Age: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kang Seung Jae View Post
I tend to reach over 3000 words per minutes when skimming through the passages, talking in only about 75% of the important details.[/B][/COLOR]
I wish I could do that.

I did my SAT the very opposite way, I enjoyed the passages, reading them for fun (oh, how interesting!), and the test be damned. I am crazy.
Irenicus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-05-14, 02:49   Link #62
KholdStare
ISML Technical Staff
*Graphic Designer
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Age: 26
Send a message via AIM to KholdStare Send a message via MSN to KholdStare
It's true that if you skim through the questions then passages, you don't need to retain all info. However, the 90% is what I think isn't true.

I got through my SATs with slow reading. I wasn't in any time trouble either, but I always finished 30 seconds to 1 minute before he time limit. I tend to relax during the SATs and similar tests so I don't use my full brain power on one single section.
KholdStare is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-05-14, 09:38   Link #63
nanafan
horo fan
 
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: missouri, usa
Age: 29
didn't take the SAT, took the ACT fun stuff those standardized tests..pure torture.
__________________

All my little plans and schemes, lost like some forgotten dreams, seems like all i really was doing was waiting for you..-Real Love
nanafan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-05-14, 14:15   Link #64
raikage
日本語を食べません!
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: San Francisco
Age: 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vexx View Post
Like I said before, the test linked to is totally useless in that it fails to test for comprehension and retention.
Couldn't agree more.

My raw score for that test was quite high, but how much of it did I retain? Did I get the important bits, or did I miss something vital?

(It didn't hurt that I'm very familiar with two or three of those concepts already, and somewhat familiar with another two.)

As for how I speed-read -- I discard tons of words upon the initial scan, only going back if it doesn't make sense.

Quote:
Subvocalized reading combines sight reading with internal sounding of the words as if spoken. Advocates of speed reading claim it can be a bad habit that slows reading and comprehension. These claims are currently backed only by controversial, sometimes non-existent
scientific research.
The way I read it:
Quote:
Subvocalized reading... sight reading... internal sounding of the words...bad habit... advocates of speed reading... slows reading/comprehension...controversial... non-existent research.
raikage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-05-15, 14:52   Link #65
Jaden
Witch of Betrayal
 
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Age: 27
I got 470 words a minute there, I actually tried to read fast though which I don't usually do. I'm stuck with the entrance exam way of learning where I spent a whole lot of time on a small amount of material.
Also I could read finnish quite a bit faster :P
__________________
Jaden is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-05-16, 04:44   Link #66
wnmnkh
Not that simple.
 
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Well, English is not my first language, I can read my native language much faster.



Typical Reading....

You read 532 words in 0.16 minutes. Your reading speed is 3325 words per minute!


When Carefully....

You read 532 words in 0.29 minutes. Your reading speed is 1834 words per minute!


I don't know whether this is fast enough or not.
I see my reading speed got halved when I am meticulously reading things. Interesting.




Edit : Now I see others' scores....

Ah, what the hell? Why my score is off the chart? And I just cannot read slow enough to reach sub-1000wpm like others. I read as carefully as I can (almost memorized the whole contents) and I got...

You read 532 words in 0.46 minutes. Your reading speed is 1157 words per minute!

I just can't go below 1000 wpm.........
__________________
Even after so many companies jumped into IEM market, I shall only stick to UE!!!

Last edited by wnmnkh; 2008-05-16 at 04:52. Reason: edit.
wnmnkh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-05-16, 12:46   Link #67
Vexx
Obey the Darkly Cute ...
*Author
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: On the whole, I'd rather be in Kyoto ...
Age: 57
Like we keep saying, the test is bogus since it doesn't test the reader on comprehension or retention. Its as serious as those stupid tabloid quizzes for Your Perfect Mate.
__________________
Vexx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-05-16, 18:50   Link #68
bbduece
Ultimate Coordinator
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: San Francisco
Feels like this thread is created to let people brag about thier reading ability or brag about thier fake reading ability. 0.o
bbduece is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-05-16, 20:19   Link #69
Zu Ra
✖ ǝʇ ɯıqnɾl ☆
 
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Mortuary : D
To be honest pretty fast but it doesnt help much I suffer from STM ( Short term Memory ) when it comes to these things
__________________
Zu Ra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-05-16, 21:49   Link #70
Marina
~La-la Land~
*Graphic Designer
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Seattle
Age: 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by bbduece View Post
Feels like this thread is created to let people brag about thier reading ability or brag about thier fake reading ability. 0.o
Agreed, I don't believe half of what people claim to be their speed. But hey, if it makes them feel better *shrug*

SAT and ACT were both annoying, but just wait until you take the GRE. Now THAT is retarded (mainly the general GRE, not the subject ones) since a good portion of it is useless for certain areas of graduate study.
__________________
My Anime Blog:
Anime B&B
Follow me on Twitter!
_________________
Visit my gallery
Sig: HSxHoneycomb
_________________

My Anime List

ISML
Marina is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-05-16, 22:24   Link #71
Supah Em
WHO DO YOU THINK WE ARE?!
*Scanlator
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Age: 26
at first it was okay but at as the thread went on the reading spead became like:

page 1 = 400 WPM average
page 2 = 400-600 WPM average
page 3-4 = 1500-3000WPM? wtf? you kidding me?


oh well, what can we do.


does anyone know any legit(if not, quite accurate) tests that really tickle your mind?
Supah Em is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-05-17, 02:41   Link #72
teachopvutru
Urusai~Urusai~Urusai~
 
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Location
Age: 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by Supah Em View Post
at first it was okay but at as the thread went on the reading spead became like:

page 1 = 400 WPM average
page 2 = 400-600 WPM average
page 3-4 = 1500-3000WPM? wtf? you kidding me?


oh well, what can we do.


does anyone know any legit(if not, quite accurate) tests that really tickle your mind?
Actually, there aren't that many people in this thread who claim to be able to read 1500-3000 WPM, so don't exaggerate.

Regarding a legit test, it would have to have its own standard of what the normal reading speed is, since the difficulty of the subject and your understanding of it do affect the speed.
__________________

"FOUND YOU!" ~Taiga
teachopvutru is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-05-17, 02:53   Link #73
Supah Em
WHO DO YOU THINK WE ARE?!
*Scanlator
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Age: 26
note that in indicating page 1 and 2 i said "average"

on page 3-4 i never wrote anything like that so im not exaggerating or anything, geez.


anyways, i've tried e-mode and it seems kinda ok, but i dont know if its accurate though.
Supah Em is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-05-17, 05:13   Link #74
Kinny Riddle
Gone for Good
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Quote:
Originally Posted by bbduece View Post
Feels like this thread is created to let people brag about thier reading ability or brag about thier fake reading ability. 0.o
That was certainly not my original intention when I created this thread, if that is what you were thinking.

Maybe there are users out there bragging about their reading speed, but my intention is to discuss if there is any feasible way to increase reading speed and retain comprehension at the same time.

Like Vexx, I agree that test link that I randomly placed there is just crap.
__________________
哀莫大於心死。
我對這裡的管理員的霸道與毫無準則的執法行為感到徹底失望﹗

It was fun while it lasted.
Kinny Riddle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-05-17, 10:05   Link #75
felix
sleepyhead
*Author
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: event horizon
This thread needs to be close, it serves no purpose other then pointless spam.

To all those who posted their score,
If to the best of your reading ability of a wikipedia article on reading is to come back to this thread dedicated to the subject, brag about your score and concoct some biased opinion on what makes a good reader by glorifying yourself, please stop reading anything ever again! Your tiny mind might crumble if at some point you accidentally understand the point of the entire process...

Simple facts: You read with your eyes and brain, not your mouth. Your eyes have a limit, you will never read faster then that limit. You learn to read some things faster with practice because just as the article says you build understanding on the subject, thus you skip things and still understand the semantics. (reading random stuff wont help you at all)
__________________
felix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-05-17, 10:09   Link #76
Anh_Minh
I disagree with you all.
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Sure it will. We read by recognizing the shape of the words more than that of individual letters. The more words you can recognize that way, the faster you read.
Anh_Minh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-05-17, 11:18   Link #77
felix
sleepyhead
*Author
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: event horizon
Reading anime slang and other topics irrelevant to a wikipedia article, as some people have glorified themselves with, helps you not. The point is you wont read fresh content at light speed even if some words are familiar to you. If that article is not fresh enough to you, well that means the result is complete bias.

Also, please try to understand, recognition of words is not the point! You are as dumb as a rock if you read words and not sentences / paragraphs; might as well start reading spaces if you want to pass through words fast.
__________________
felix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-05-17, 11:36   Link #78
gabbytay
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Age: 24
You read 518 words in 1 minutes. Your reading speed is 518 words per minute!

The test is quite inaccurate it needs to be longer.
gabbytay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-05-17, 12:01   Link #79
Irenicus
Le fou, c'est moi
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Las Vegas, NV, USA
Age: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cats View Post
Also, please try to understand, recognition of words is not the point! You are as dumb as a rock if you read words and not sentences / paragraphs; might as well start reading spaces if you want to pass through words fast.
Actually, you are kind of missing the point.

Now that I think about Anh Minh's comment, it actually makes sense. When I consciously think about it, I realize I am reading by recognizing words rather than letters. Words which tie together to form sentences, then paragraphs, and so on. When I read, say, "Irenicus." I'm not reading I-r-e-n-i-c-u-s. Technically I'm reading I-re-ni-cus, but that is not entirely correct, since I process it as simply "Irenicus" -- a unified whole.

On the other hand, I can't read "Irenicus is handsome!" () and just process it as "Irenicusishandsome!" I need to process it as "Irenicus," then "is," then "handsome!" Maybe the exclamation is even a separate piece in itself. I suspect speed readers (as in those who use speed reading techniques) skip the "is" in the process and goes straight from "Irenicus" to "handsome".

Put it this way, the English language has this structure:

Letter --> Word --> Sentence.

What he's saying is that we naturally skip the very first step and goes directly to the "Word." Recognition of the Letter is not necessary to understand the Word, but recognizing the word is necessary to process more complex levels of language like sentence and so on. And this is where experience comes into play, since similar material can conceivably share similar patterns that experience will allow one to process the information faster. Legalese, for example, is incomprehensible to the normal person without slow, scrutinized reading and frequent clarifications; while trained lawyers and judges just cruise through them as they're both familiar with the syntax and the word.

I don't think there's any tricks to that though. Just reading.

On the other hand, speed reading is all about techniques and grasping at the concept of written language at another angle (key words vs. supporting syntax, looking at clarifying phrases, etc.). I for one don't know how to speed read. I wish I could, it is quite a useful skill for anyone involved in academia.
Irenicus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-05-17, 12:12   Link #80
Anh_Minh
I disagree with you all.
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
What Irenicus said. Unfamiliar words have to be painstakingly deciphered letter by letter, or at least syllable by syllable. Common words, common turn of phrases, on the other hand, are processed almost as soon as you lay eyes on them. That doesn't mean you can't understand unfamiliar words, but it does mean you'll take longer to read them than to read familiar words of equal length.

And I've never heard of anyone who reads whole paragraphs, or even long sentences, without reading the words they're made of.
Anh_Minh is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:58.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
We use Silk.