Posted by me on posted January 26, 2004 05:21 AM
quote:
The "NASA" report was based on one study done using only two subjects the researcher/trainee photoreader and an experience photoreader of some years.The researcher asked that the experienced photoreader read a passage at her regular reading speed. (Being a photoreader of some years her regular reading speed and techniques is Photoreading). This flaws the research in the first instant. This (1) person is not an unbiased sample. In fact their speed should be on average the same through the test.
The trainee was also the researcher who was controlling the application of the research proceedure. This again flaws the research. This (1) person is also not and unbiased sample.
NASA has based it's comments on this one research.
The trainee was also the researcher who was controlling the application of the research proceedure. This again flaws the research. This (1) person is also not and unbiased sample.
NASA has based it's comments on this one research.
As soon as you use human subjects in a research you can only speculate not produce facts.
If you would like to look further to look at the failure rate of instruction methods relating to reading you only need to look at failure rates in reading comprehension in schools the world over. The institutions are admitting to a failure rates 60%. Meaning that students are failing to achieve the expected standard of literacy in greater numbers than those who reach it. Many are sliding through the school system who are really illiterate. How can you compare average reading speed with someone who has reached the level of proficiency for their age against someone who hasn't? Also just because someon is literate in one subject doesn't make them equally literate in another. So, How can one really compare when the necessity of understanding the subject will slow down a reader no matter how fast they read.
Having seen the actual report I have some 50 questions for the researcher.
Alex
