When I attended a workshop by an American well-known speaker in marketing, I was told that to become an expert in any field, you need to invest 1000 hours of learning about the subject. It was claimed that this was proven by a study carried out at Harvard. I think here the assumption is that the person has no previous knowledge in a field, as this is not necessary (eg in marketing, some person development techniques, but not becoming a doctor, an civil engineer, etc). I think by expert it means that you are able to operate in a certain field at a level that the layman, who knows nothing about it, would start trusting you, hence influenced by you.
Although learning can assume different forms, reading about a subject is the most common way of acquiring knowledge. At school and college, the vast majority of the knowledge we get certified to have acquired via exams come from reading books, papers, etc. PhotoReading shows that acquisition using this technique can safe lots of time. So my question is: how much time of normal learning can be saved by using PhotoReading? Has anybody attempted to become an expert in a field using PhotoReading.
As an example, if I invest 1000 working on learning and practicing PhotoReading, would that be enough for me pass an LSC accredition test to become a PhotoReading instructor?