In her 2000 study, she found that:

“The extremely rapid reading rates claimed by PhotoReaders were not observed; indeed, the reading rates were generally comparable to those for normal reading. Moreover, the PhotoReading expert generally showed an increase in reading time when using the PhotoReading technique in comparison to when using normal reading strategies to process text. This increase in reading time when PhotoReading was accompanied by a decrease in text comprehension.”

Here is a link to the research done on Photoreading:
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20000011599_2000009345.pdf

But I discovered Paul R Scheele’s PhotoReading home study course recently and it’s changed my opinion because it’s NOT speed reading. Now, I photoread a book before I read it the ‘proper’ way and guess what? There’s really more between the lines!

very interesting post indeed. I think pretty much about the subject was said in the above posts. One aspect though I would like to call the attention for: that speed reading is not the same as speed reading. It depends on the definition. Some specialists call “speed reading” the ability to read really fast, abnormally fast. Other specialists use the term to refer to what I call “normal reading”. Indeed, studies show that more than 80% of literate persons have some bad habits when reading, like reading a sentence twice or thrice, in some cases whole paragraphs. This has to do with concentration, among other things. Learning to “speedread” would mean, in these frequent cases, eliminating such bad habits, so that the reading really flows. And reading faster, or making efforts to read faster, is one of the strategies to improve concentration and minimize back and forth reading. It is like driving a car: if you speed up from 20 mph to 60 mph, you are then forced to concentrate more on the road, on your movements. Or like riding a bike: if you ride too slow, the bike starts to swing and you spend too much energy trying to keep the balance. Anyone can try this when reading, just make an effort to read faster. You are not going to be able to read 10 times faster, but maybe twice as fast, or even 3 times faster. If this is the speed reading we are talking about, then, yes, I like it, I practice it, everybody should

And it is really just fast reading because I don’t read as fast as they describe in the long sales letters or on infomercials for speed-reading courses. A book in an hour? Not unless it’s one of those book of the month romances. Most books take me at least two or three hours.

Unlike those who have been taught, I am not conscious of switching speeds or choosing speeds as a I read, though I know it takes longer to get through some pieces of writing than others.

I think it is primarily genetic because I remember my Grandfather reading a book a night and my eldest son reads like me, but my other two don’t.

People have always insisted that the speed affects comprehension and there is no way that someone can read that fast and retain information. I don’t know if my parents had to put up with it, but I’ve heard that so often from teachers throughout my son’s school experience. They tested him at the end of grade 5 (though I don’t know how or how accurate the tests they used were) and found that his reading comprehension was that of an average 24 year old. He was 10.

What I have always wished for is the ability to write as fast as I read. That would truly be a useful skill

So… is there a difference between scanning something (which I think lots of people can do already) and “speed reading” it? Or does speed reading allow you to scan something even faster?

Thanks for the thoughtful and kind comments everyone…