Rating: 
Summary: Hard work
Review: Photoreading can work, if you practice hard enough at it and really work hard. The materials in this package were top notch in quality and presentation. All that's left is to apply some top notch sweat and effort to learning the method.
Rating: 
Summary: Give It Time It Will Work
Review: I saw this advertised on a late night commercial. I thought for $17 I would give it a try. I have to say that it really works. It took me a couple of week to get the system down, but I can now read a book in 30 minutes. As I read more and more books I can tell that I'm getting faster and faster. If you stick with the program, and give yourself time, you will be successful at PhotoReading.
Rating:
Summary: A good book
Review: I found this book useful is several ways. First, it gives a thourough overview of some of the more conventional reading comprehension enhancement techniques. Many of these techniques will help reading comprehension, regardless of whether or not you apply photoreading. It is no big surprise to see that they are incorporated into the Photoreading system.
Second, I have found the photoreading aspect of this book is based on truth. My experience with photoreading so far is that my mind IS capable of grasping concepts, even from a photoread. I have reserverations about what the author claims actually causes the phenonmena; however, until science advances more in the area, this seems to be the only book that offers anything about it.
Even if you don't adhere to the photoread philosophy, the other techniques in the book should improve your reading. The book is definitely worth reading.
Rating: 
Summary: I'd give it a 0 stars if I could
Review: I really, really wanted photoreading to work. Unfortunately, it doesn't. I read the book, tried the techniques, and could get anywhere. I then bought the Paul Scheele's Photoreading Personal Learning Course. As I said, I really, really wanted this to work. The photoreading part is pure fantasy. "Effortlessly photoread the book, let your unconscious mind process it, and then 'activate' the material to bring only the important information to your conscious mind." Yeah, right. Sorry folks, it just doesn't work that way. You have to read the old fashioned way to get any comprehension. I agree with another reviewer: if it worked like advertised, a reputable news source would have picked up the story by now.
Rating:
Summary: I was really hoping this method would work, but . . .
Review: Despite trying to photoread a variety of books, ranging from technical manuals, dictionaries, and novels, I have been unable to attain to "aha" feeling that was promised by Scheele in the "Photoreading Whole Mind System." The most difficult aspect of the photoreading whole mind system was trying to "state the purpose(s)" of what I was about to photoread and "what did I expect to gain." How can one come up with a purpose of reading a novel other than wanting to enjoy it? How can someone state the purpose of reading a textbook other than wanting to learn the materials for a course? How could one come up with a purpose of wanting to read an entire dictionary other than wanting to learn all of the words therein. To elicit the photoreading response, I tried meditating and really focused on the tangerine on the crown of my head. The only benefit of the photoreading session was a cool high I got when I was done, which was probably attributable to crossing my eyes for ten minutes. Alas, I did not receive the high that Scheele promised when I repeatedly realized that the photoreading sessions were utterly futile and did not improve my recall of the materials one iota. Like I said, I desperately wished this system would work and was terribly frustrated that it didn't. From what all of the spam and advertisements on the book indicate, it appears that the book is a mere marketing pamphlet for Scheele's much more expensive seminars and tape courses. Seldom have I seen an instructional book with so many advertisements embedded in it. By the way, the "single star" is for the marginal helpfulness of Scheele's skimming techniques.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent introduction to the method - just use it
Review: From our experience as PhotoReaders and PhotoReading Instructors we can testify that PhotoReading really works and the book is written in such a way that makes it an easy introduction to the technique. Some people find it difficult to learn PhotoReading from the book though. This is understandable because books are predominately valuable to visual learners. Our advice is to persevere and be patient. The key to success with PhotoReading is practice and application. Some PhotoReaders find that it starts to work for them after regular practice and photoreading 30-60 books. The benefits outweigh the initial, minimal effort in perfecting the method. Time is precious, stay ahead with PhotoReading.
Rating:
Summary: Waste Your Time Some Other Way........
Review: Hi there;) Being interested in the system I spent several months on the system and on reading message boards in @ photoreading.com's discussion forum. Without giving away any "secrets" the five overall steps to photoreading a book is basically this 1. Prepare - get relaxed and focused, 2.Preview - look at the covers, table of contents, etc, get a feel for it. 3. Photoread - cross your eyes and flip through the book more or less. 4. Superread - flip through the book again and only slow down for what seem to catch your eye. 5. Rapid Read - PICK UP THE BOOK YET AGAIN AND SPEED READ IT(as fast as you consciously can), I KID YOU NOT THIS IS THEIR LAST STEP. Except for the novelty of the PHOTOREADING step, this is what is usually called by more straightforward folk BROWSING (steps 1,2,4) and SKIMMING (step 5) a book. They have no comprehension tests to back up their claims other than True/False and Multiple Choice (with obvious answers) where they point to any test with above 50 score as your "other than conscious" mind at work (as opposed to the laws of probability). If you like still like the promise of the system (letting your "other than conscious mind" doing all the hard work for you) by all means buy it, it will probaly work as well as all those other wonderful systems touted through infomercials 3am in the morning. If your looking to improve you memory please look up on this fine web site "The Memory Book" by Harry Lorayne which is more intellectually honest and comes with everything but a brain willing to work hard supplied hopefully by the reader:)
Rating:
Summary: Reviews or Politics?
Review: I must say at the outset that I have not read Mr. Scheele's book; I have, however, encountered his techniques in Win Wenger's _The Einstein Factor_ (in fact, the photoreading techniques it was promised to contain were the main reason I bought Win's book). The reason I'm writing this review is simply to comment on some of the reviews I've encountered on this site--reviews which, if I were more impressionable, might have dissuaded me from buying _The Photoreading Whole Mind System_. First, in reference to the review by "A reader" from Bethlehem, PA, I can only wonder at the motives behind such an irresponsible use of this forum. It seems that "reader" assumes we will all acquiesce to his agenda-driven tirade, which, by the way, commits everyone's favorite informal logical fallacy--yep, you guessed it, The Argument from (lack of) Authority. "reader", you should know that your review was thorougly unhelpful; the only purpose it might have served is to harm Mr. Scheele's sales. (Oh ya, you might want to take it easy with the ill-formed ellipses). Second, as to the review by Mr. Jim Carnell, no-one is attempting to spit in the face of the findings of cognitive science, here. Mr. Scheele (so far as I know his techniques) is not attempting primarily to explain *how* photoreading works, but simply *that* it does work. There is a big difference. If, however, Mr. Scheele does make some claims that seem inconsonant with what we know about the workings of human vision, all this shows is that he has given the wrong explanatory account. This in no way impugns his findings concerning the effectiveness of photoreading techniques (one could just as easily give an account that makes little or no appeal to peripheral vision, e.g., an account that explains photoreading in terms of saccadic eye movements). Oh, and Jim, lay off the academic snobbery; it doesn't really persuade anyone with half a brain. (Notice how I didn't title my review "Logic" even though I'm a logician?) Lastly, I'd like to say three things: 1) I have tried some of Mr. Scheele's techniques (as described by Dr. Wenger in his book), and they seemed to work quite well, considering the minimal effort I put into mastering them. 2) I'd like to recommend Strunk and White's _The Elements of Style_ to the two above-disparaged reviewers. In future, please spare us the ungrammatical drivel. 3) "reader" you might want to look somewhere other than _CNN_ or _USA Today_ for late-breaking news of scientific discoveries. --Cheers
Rating:
Summary: Does it work?
Review: After reading all of the reviews... The two extremes... I would say that is very doubtful that it works. I search the web looking for some News report on the photoreading technique, but I was not able to find anything from a decent source such as CNN, USATODAY, etc. Which makes me think that if this was so good, why is not used on schools, etc. Until I see some realible source.. I can see my self wasting more of my time and money. If it sounds to good to be true...
Rating:
Summary: Cognitive Science
Review: You are reading this. The letters are about ~18" away from you. The photoreptors on the back of your eye (rods and cones) have a specific density (closeness together). Imagine a whole bunch of circles inside one another (like a target). The closer to the center the more dense. In other words you can't read out of the corner of your eyes because it is your peripheral vision. The density of the rods and cones is not dense enough to be able to read anything more than about ~3" inches away from the focal point of what you are reading (20/20 vision, font size=12, distance from source ~18"). It can't hit your subconscience because your senses can't even ascertain the detail needed to capture the details. Find legitimate scientific (empirical) studies and prove me wrong.
|
