The Professor calls out Unkotare on speed-reading and logic classes.

[Unkotare]

PS: That little link you sent is meaningless. If you're trying to prove speed reading doesn't work by that submission, you failed.

That unsupported dismissal is hardly 'logical,' is it?

 

[Unkotare]

What do you have against teaching speed-reading and logic?.

I have stated unambiguously at least three times now that I am not opposed to teaching logic. Are you not paying attention, or just being dishonest?

 

[The Professor]

When I said, “Some students would be able to increase their reading speed to thousands of words a minute and this would give them a tremendous advantage,” you responded , “Not necessarily.”

The only way your response would be logical is if you were concerned with decreased comprehension at these higher reading speeds. For clarification I am assuming that one does not loss comprehension at these speeds. I certainly didn't. The various programs are structured to increase speed while maintaining high levels of comprehension.

 

[The Professor]

My dismissal of your link was logical given that I read the link and others like it. I have also read hundred of links about speed-reading, read books about speed reading and completed a speed-reading course. I am very familiar with the problems with some speed-reading methods, but I also know that speed reading works, and it works well. I told you there are over 270,000,000 links for speed-reading. You gave me one and thought it would change my world.

It's nice to know that you admitted we should teach logic. So you would also agree that my recommendation to teach the subject was not based solely upon the fact I had taken the course. I accept your apology.

 

[The Professor]

Now if only we can agree that speed-reading should be taught in school we can close the Bull Ring.

Should speed-reading be taught in school?

 

[Unkotare]

When I said, “Some students would be able to increase their reading speed to thousands of words a minute and this would give them a tremendous advantage,” you responded , “Not necessarily.”

The only way your response would be logical is if you were concerned with decreased comprehension. A these higher reading speeds. For clarification I am assuming that one does not loss [sic] comprehension at these speeds. .

Basing a conclusion on assumption is, by definition, not logical.

At both significantly higher and significantly lower reading speeds comprehension tends to fall. The ideal speed : comprehension ratio for each student will vary according to the individual. Therefore, students should be taught to read well, not to read quickly as an end unto itself.

Are you starting to understand yet?

 

[Unkotare]

My dismissal of your link was logical given that I read the link and others like it. .

Go ahead and read that back to yourself, slowly.

 

[Unkotare]

You gave me one [link] and thought it would change my world. .

Now you are being dishonest again, since I made no such claim. Are you being dishonest because you know you are running out of steam here?

 

[Unkotare]

It's nice to know that you admitted we should teach logic. .

I didn't say that either. You know, despite your claims to the contrary it does seem that your reading comprehension has suffered quite a bit.

 

[Unkotare]

Is this all there is? Is this what you "called me out" here for? Seems a bit anti-climactic. You could have just done all this on the original thread.

 

[Unkotare]

So you would also agree that my recommendation to teach the subject was not based solely upon the fact I had taken the course. I accept your apology.

I indicated no such agreement and issued no such apology. Are you paying attention at all, or just trying to read each post as quickly as possible?

 

[Unkotare]

Well, this has been a thrill so far. Not quite as exciting as watching paint dry, but right up there.

ZZZzzzzzz....

 

[The Professor]

It appears you're taking a break and I will do the same. I will be gone for at least 6 hours.

 

[Unkotare]

It appears you're taking a break and I will do the same. .

I'm not "taking a break," you just seem to have run out of things to be wrong about. Well done.

 

[Unkotare]

I will be gone for at least 6 hours.

You were "gone" before you started, 'professor.'

 

[Unkotare]

Nothing else? I see...

 

[The Professor]

You said: Basing a conclusion on assumption is, by definition, not logical.

At both significantly higher and significantly lower reading speeds comprehension tends to fall. The ideal speed : comprehension ratio for each student will vary according to the individual. Therefore, students should be taught to read well, not to read quickly as an end unto itself.

Are you starting to understand yet?

My conclusion was that your statement that increased reading speeds was not necessarily and advantage was illogical unless you considered lost comprehension, and I am right. My assumption was that reading levels would not fall and my assumption was based upon personally experience and a hell of a lot of research. You are correct in that reading quickly is not an end in itself. However, it is advisable that one reads as quickly as possibly within his personal ability to comprehend. This is what speed-reading does. If speed-reading results in inferior comprehension, the various programs would not be as successful as they are. You are wrong in stating that students should be taught to read well. They should be taught to read at the highest possible level possible, period.

So should speed reading by taught in school?

PS: I thought you had left and that is why I said I was taking a break too, but this time I am outta here. See you.

PS: Thanks for pointing out my misspellings. I usually don't notice when others misspell a word. Bet you don't know why. The answer, when I come back will surprise you.

 

[Unkotare]

PS: Thanks for pointing out my misspellings. I usually don't notice when others misspell a word. Bet you don't know why. The answer, when I come back will surprise you.

I do know why, and what you think the answer is won't surprise me.

 

[Unkotare]

My assumption was that reading levels would not fall and my assumption was based upon personally [sic] experience and a hell of a lot of research. .

Any personal anecdotes of yours are proof of nothing, and "research" shows that at both the upper and lower ends of reading speed comprehension tends to fall.

 

[Unkotare]

You are wrong in stating that students should be taught to read well.

They shouldn't, eh? What great insight into education you possess...