Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
#43790 02/19/05 05:29 PM
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 10
Member
Member

Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 10
Greetings,
i just READ a report by nasa on PR and they said it didn`t work for such materials like physiology and biology especially in conceptual and open-ended questions where they did an expriment for PR expert and a trainee with pretests by normal reading and then posttests by photoreading to see if there is a real benefit from it as 25,000 wpm with 4.5/5 comprehension is just too good to be true so they carried out the tests and somehow later when the PR expert was going to take the physiology,biology test she thought she had comprehension of 4.5 out of 5 and suggested a c+ but she answered the choose with 2 correct out of 6 and didn`t answer conceptual questions at all e.g fill in the spaces at the end she didn`t pass the exam also she took quite some time although she read the text before and so later after comparing the results they found it is inbenefitical as comprehension of the texts and even courses become superficial missing conceptual and realtionships between reading materials in different subjects and so providing with a false confidence as in the case of the expert that thought she had comprehension of 4.5/5 but had only 2/5 with less speed and so they concluded unlike what paul scheele said about :when the mind is relaxed is the best for accelerative learning unlike the chattering mind which is full of thoughts but unlike this they thought that when the mind is full of thought it becomes more active increasing relationships between info entering the mind while in this relaxed state the mind tends to be less active gaining just superficial information so afterall they concluded that PR isn`t the type for intelligent reader ,so what are the cons and pros of PR afterall and is this report is true or is it another fake about PR as it had tabular results of all the tests and even the texts and it was rather disappointing after all,so is the PR is like this or what because this is confusing me and it is NASA .
Jack

Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 5
Member
Member

Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 5
I've read about such tests too. Photoreading just sounds too goo to be true. But everytime they're confronted with these type of evidence, they just dismiss it. They have to stand behind their product, they're never gonna accept photoreading doesn't work. They're deceiving their customers with false promises.

Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 7,089
Likes: 1
Learning Strategies Admin
Member
Learning Strategies Admin
Member

Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 7,089
Likes: 1
This has been presented on the forum before.

The question we ask if the evidence is so damning why wasn't Learning Strategies presented with a copy.

When you look at the what making it's rounds as the NASA reports we notice that there is no mention of NASA within the report. No names, not even the author and no date.

If you are referencing the same report you will notice some glaring problems with it with might explain why NASA never acted on the report if in fact it is a NASA report.

1 The researcher is measuring reading at 25,000 wpm. PhotoReading is not reading at 25,000 wpm.

2. The creator of the research is both the trainee and administrator of the test.

3. Once you are a PhotoReader it affects your natural approach to reading and your baseline reading speed. You cannot help it, so how can you compare the PhotoReaders before PhotoReading and after PhotoReading?

4. The PhotoReading instructor refused to participate with part of the test under any normal testing situations any results producted by an unwilling participant must be excluded from the measurements as results become untrue when the subjects are unwilling.

5. Since the researcher is not identified and there are only two people in the test, an unwilling PhotoReader and the Researcher/trainee, what was the purpose of the research? How can this be considered unbiased research?

Lets consider some test that are done repeatedly with serious numbers.

The deomgraphics of the people are the same, they are the same age, live in the same area, attend the same classes have the same teacher for the same number of lessons, room temperature is the same for all the particpants, lighting is the same.

You've managed to control everything except the attitude toward the test and it's fair to say that by far the majority are unwilling participants. What results will you get? In some classes the majority fail, with one or two barely passing. In other classes, it swings with an unusually exceptional 1st grade to dismal most barely passing and a couple of dismal failures to boot.

This test is carried out in schools around the world. It doesn't just apply to English and reading comprehension classes but every conceivable subject being taught.

What is the factor that affects these test results? The only thing that one cannot control in a participant, their attitude.

People can always choose not to let things like chopping wood with the bare hands or PhotoReading work. Or theydecide to learn it for themselves.

BTW. The "NASA" research has been repeated many many times by individuals who decided to learn PhotoReading and are glad they did. Because they get their homework done faster.

Alex

[This message has been edited by Alex K. Viefhaus (edited February 20, 2005).]


Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 167
Member
Member

Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 167
PhotoReading is perhaps so extremely radical that the average person is more than skeptical about it. But with study on the brain and how different portions of it work, photoreading is much more credible of a technique. It has elements from hypnosis, suggestion, positive thinking, intuition, logic, neuroscience, and a whole bunch more.

Again, representatives themselves are not naive, they know that proving that PR doesn't work is one of the easiest things to do. It's like trying to prove that emotions don't exist. It's a relative thing, primarily.


Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 10
Member
Member

Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 10
okay u r right i searched for any thing relevant to photoreading in nasa`s site but none was present,but again i want to ask some questions,I think that every system have advantages and disadvantages as i didn`t have trouble believing about PR because many times before somehow our teachers used to teach us to memorize pages of our study books this way but less benefitical so afterall thats not the proplem,my question is how PR covers with detail & relationships between different concepts and can we memorize complex stuff in complex subjects like taxonomy and Engineering ?also can we depend on the PR phase only without the other phases?whats the average readind speed afterall that can anyone reach with full comprehension for complex and simple subjects?does activation phase bring every word from photoread pages to the conscious mind to use easily?what are the gaps in PR especially in purposes?what are common mistakes of PR beginners?do we have to use the memory supercharger to memorize anything that we photoread?does PR increase awareness or consciousness?
& thanks
Jack

Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 7,089
Likes: 1
Learning Strategies Admin
Member
Learning Strategies Admin
Member

Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 7,089
Likes: 1
quote:
Originally posted by crazysnake_36:
okay u r right i searched for any thing relevant to photoreading in nasa`s site but none was present,but again i want to ask some questions,I think that every system have advantages and disadvantages as i didn`t have trouble believing about PR because many times before somehow our teachers used to teach us to memorize pages of our study books this way but less benefitical so afterall thats not the proplem,my question is how PR covers with detail & relationships between different concepts and can we memorize complex stuff in complex subjects like taxonomy and Engineering ?

PhotoReading does not erase the mind that is capable of learning this it is a system that allows you to speed up the learning process.

If you can read it PhotoReading works with it. PhotoReading works on ALL material.

quote:
also can we depend on the PR phase only without the other phases?

Can you depend on an accelerator peddle without a break peddle in a car? It's all there for a reason.


quote:
whats the average readind speed afterall that can anyone reach with full comprehension for complex and simple subjects?

Analytical reading 60 to 90WPM, tradtional reading 90 to 400 wpm, Rhythmic perusal 600 wpm, and no longer "reading" but still representive of the minds ability to gather information, Speed reading 1000-1500wpm Superreading 3000wpm PhotoReading 25,000+++ wpm

quote:
does activation phase bring every word from photoread pages to the conscious mind to use easily?

I don't know you. Do you find it easy to stand on one leg, flap your arms while singing Old Man River with your eyes close?

Some people find it easy as tripping over a twig others need a push. It depends on the individual.

quote:
what are the gaps in PR especially in purposes?

Sorry that question makes no sense to me, the only answer that comes to mind is...

The gap is smaller than a hairline between an ants teeth and wider than the Grand Canyon in my imagination.

quote:
what are common mistakes of PR beginners?

Number one mistake people make about PhotoReading... they spend too much time analysing it... it's something you do, not watch.

quote:
do we have to use the memory supercharger to memorize anything that we photoread?

Nope. It's a bonus in the course since most people learning PhotoReading are students and memory Supercharger helps in all areas of study, not just PhotoReading.

quote:
does PR increase awareness or consciousness?
& thanks
Jack


Subjective

Alex

[This message has been edited by Alex K. Viefhaus (edited February 21, 2005).]



Moderated by  Patrick O'Neil 

Link Copied to Clipboard
©, Learning Strategies Corporation, All Rights Reserved
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 8.0.0
(Release build 20240826)
Responsive Width:

PHP: 8.3.33 Page Time: 0.028s Queries: 25 (0.009s) Memory: 3.0105 MB (Peak: 3.5947 MB) Data Comp: Off Server Time: 2026-09-18 07:40:28 UTC
Valid HTML 5 and Valid CSS