5 thoughts on “How Many Words-Per-Minute Do You Read?”
I was at 450-500 words. I’ve always been a “sped redder” 🙂
This was fun.
Thanks!
I was above average, but not greatly. (250-300) As a writer myself, I like to savor the words, so I have never really worked at speeding it up. There is so much more than content to the written word. I like to take in the sounds, the rhythms, and the juxtapositions–not only in poetry, but in prose as well. In this case it was a speech, intended to be heard, not read, so these aspects are even more important. When reading, I generally strive to slow down and smell the roses, as it were, and not always be in such a hurry to accomplish everything. This is especially true with a gifted writer, such as Barbara Kingsolver, who puts so much heart into every sentence.
I did a little research.
Repeated and various studies demonstrate that comprehension and accuracy are the same whether we read from paper or a monitor (though most of us prefer paper).
With the advent of better monitors in recent years, reading from a monitor is now just as fast as reading from paper (though must of us prefer paper).
Preferring paper is a cultural bias not a physiological one.
Lack of attention while reading is generally attributed to slow reading, not fast. The brain is bored and looking for something else to do while your eyes meander along.
I took two tests, non-fiction and fiction, at the link above and got different results.
I evidently read pretty quickly, but I attribute this to the technique that I learned in school (it was encouraged) — selectively skipping passages that I can tell will not contribute to my comprehension of the material. I find that I do this with both fiction and non-fiction.
Indeed, I thought the JFK speech was a rather poor choice for the non-fiction reading sample because it is full of rhetorical flourishes (that is, things you could skip) rather than meaning.
I was at 450-500 words. I’ve always been a “sped redder” 🙂
This was fun.
Thanks!
I was above average, but not greatly. (250-300) As a writer myself, I like to savor the words, so I have never really worked at speeding it up. There is so much more than content to the written word. I like to take in the sounds, the rhythms, and the juxtapositions–not only in poetry, but in prose as well. In this case it was a speech, intended to be heard, not read, so these aspects are even more important. When reading, I generally strive to slow down and smell the roses, as it were, and not always be in such a hurry to accomplish everything. This is especially true with a gifted writer, such as Barbara Kingsolver, who puts so much heart into every sentence.
I did a little research.
Repeated and various studies demonstrate that comprehension and accuracy are the same whether we read from paper or a monitor (though most of us prefer paper).
With the advent of better monitors in recent years, reading from a monitor is now just as fast as reading from paper (though must of us prefer paper).
Preferring paper is a cultural bias not a physiological one.
Lack of attention while reading is generally attributed to slow reading, not fast. The brain is bored and looking for something else to do while your eyes meander along.
I took two tests, non-fiction and fiction, at the link above and got different results.
I evidently read pretty quickly, but I attribute this to the technique that I learned in school (it was encouraged) — selectively skipping passages that I can tell will not contribute to my comprehension of the material. I find that I do this with both fiction and non-fiction.
Indeed, I thought the JFK speech was a rather poor choice for the non-fiction reading sample because it is full of rhetorical flourishes (that is, things you could skip) rather than meaning.
Try this Speed Reading Test. NewMexiKen got 353 wpm without skimming.