Nice debate guys I'm willing to sit back and let it continue.
john Grinder
John Grinder did in fact endorse the manuscript for the original book in 1992.. I note the discussion on that forum never went further after Mr Grinder received a copy.
It must be remembered that he sees many manuscripts with requests for endorsement. And many things in his life have transpired since that time. So not remembering PhotoReading after just having read about it is not a crime.
The book has been updated and is in it's third edition. The third edition introduced Direct Learning. Skittering and Rhythmic perusal were introduced thanks to Dr J Michael Bennett.
Independent studies have been done but not been published for one reason or another much to Learning Strategies disappointment. We have enough of our own studies.
There is also a lot of interesting studies that put some light on the brain processes of PhotoReading.
While the "Vicary" experiment has been bunked, advertisers have successfully used the subliminal process. There research published this year highlighting successful influence. Of course the word "rat" appearing in Bush campaign may have had little influence over who won the won. It did outrage the people who manage to see it there. CNN still had the video and story about it if you want to track it down.
Tangerine Technique
The history of the thinking cap. In the thirteenth century Franciscan theologian and philosopher John Duns Scotus designed a conical hat he believed increased learning potential. The hat ultimately came to be called the Dunce Cap and connected with someone unable to learn.
Ron Davis was a Dyslexic who wanted to know what proficient readers did that dyslexics didn't. He discovered that proficient readers had a fixed point of attention at the top back part of their head. The tangerine was an incidental creation by Pete Bissonette when explaining the fixed point of attention. PET scans of Dyslexic and proficient readers confirm Ron Davis conclusion.
The " NASA "report
Isn't it interesting that NASA is never mentioned in the report other than in the file name? Nor do the copies making rounds offer the name of the trainee come researcher and PhotoReading instructor? Yes, the trainee and the researcher are one and the same. Unfortunately we don't know who the PhotoReading instructor in the report was Paul has asked. It's a little pointless comparing research results when the instructor refused to participate. The one person was trainee, time keeper and researcher. That experiment is conducted with everyone who explores PhotoReading. your beliefs do say whether you succeed of not at anything. You might want to recreate the graphs in that report
The consistency in results for the PhotoReading instructor (who apparently wasn't an academic and would have found the material more challenging than the researcher who had assistance in creating that report.) Once you know how to PhotoRead you don't exactly "traditionally" read anymore, you fall into the pattern of PhotoReading whether you want to or not. I found this to be the case within one year of learning PhotoReading.
The report was never made available to Paul Scheele for comment.
Why only one moderator? One is enough, don't you think?
Paul would love to see independent research on PhotoReading. Using proper brain scans . If someone can come up with a research method that separates the human scientifically enough from the process. That is remove a persons belief and enthusiasm from the process. Since even with the same demographics same teacher and same environment students don't all pass the same test. The results are always a Bell curve when you grade the students on an exam.
50% of the US population cannot even read instructions on a prescription bottles. Yes many college students are not making the grade with basic reading skills for reading comprehension. I am not surprised that they find PhotoReading difficult they missed out on learning the basic reading skill that they should be able to learn before the age of 14. Because by the age of 14 a student will have learned 80% of their reading vocabulary.
PhotoReading is not Speed Reading. Yes you cannot be reading if you are going at speeds greater than 800 words a minute. That's why there have been no more entries into the Guineas Book of record.
When you PhotoRead at 25,000 or more words a minute you are not conscious of the information you've taken in. Anyone who has experienced spontaneous activation or Direct learning will tell you that it's not the same as reading. It's acquiring knowledge and using it with understanding.
Amatory , just so you know. That file includes is the so called NASA report. You don't recognise it because the file name has been removed. I have received a number of copies with selective inclusions and exclusions. Lacking in all is the name of the author.
Alex
[This message has been edited by Alex K. Viefhaus (edited May 09, 2006).]
