Reading Speed - Dumb Question

[sidiosquiere]

This is a dumb question, but would you say that you are a fast reader? The reason I ask is because the only reason I am thinking of turning down one of the highly ranked schools to offer me admission is because I think of myself as a slow reader. By slow reader I mean I read 30 maybe 35 pgs an hr, and this isn't even theoretically-loaded-complicated readings - just your normal historical work with an argument and evidence. I just feel that this will put me in a huge disadvantage at a highly-ranked school where everyone got like near perfect verbal scores and 6's on their AW. I tried looking for reading strategies online, but they all just want to sell me stuff. So, I ask you all if you have any speed reading strategies OR if you think reading speed is important at all. Thanks!

[TransnationalHistory]

This is a dumb question, but would you say that you are a fast reader? The reason I ask is because the only reason I am thinking of turning down one of the highly ranked schools to offer me admission is because I think of myself as a slow reader. By slow reader I mean I read 30 maybe 35 pgs an hr, and this isn't even theoretically-loaded-complicated readings - just your normal historical work with an argument and evidence. I just feel that this will put me in a huge disadvantage at a highly-ranked school where everyone got like near perfect verbal scores and 6's on their AW. I tried looking for reading strategies online, but they all just want to sell me stuff. So, I ask you all if you have any speed reading strategies OR if you think reading speed is important at all. Thanks!

Hey, not a dumb question at all. I'm even slower! Or at least, my base level for moderately theoretically-loaded history is like 15 pgs an hour. That said, at my peak in undergrad I could get through 70-80 pgs an hour with taking notes/points to bring up in class discussion. From disuse I've lost it, but I'm not too worried about getting it back.

My undergrad was a small LAC that was geared toward preparing students for grad school. Upper-level history classes assigned around 250-400pgs a week...basically a book and few articles. But our professors, for the most part, made clear they did not expect a close reading of every page. The point was to assign more than we could read so we could learn how to deal with that situation. So yes, speed reading is an important skill.

My advice:

Always read the introduction and the conclusion closely. Most well-written books will clearly outline in the introduction what theoretical frameworks they are going to work with, and what they aim to do in each chapter. So basically, the introduction pretty much lays out all the main points of the book, and tells you where they are located in the text. The conclusion usually repeats these points, and then usually goes into more depth on why this is important to the historiography for the subject.

As for the bulk of the book, I would skim, using the first sentence last sentence trick. If a paragraph looked particularly interesting/weighty I might read the whole thing more carefully. I would make notes of what general topics/ideas are discussed on every page, making a general outline in my notebook. Then, when I was done reading I'd pick a few sections that seemed most important/interesting and read those again more in-depth, and comment on those sections in my response paper/class discussion.

As for really getting your speed up, it takes time. Like training for a race, you can't expect to run a quick mile the first time you try. That said, in undergrad I always picked a spot in the library right near a big clock. That way I could check my progress every ten minutes....if I saw my time was slacking I'd know to try and pick up the pace.

So yeah, don't refuse a top-ranked school just because of this, and don't assume that strong vocabulary = speed reader. Not to mention, while grad school does require a lot of reading, anyone can read. Not everyone can do interesting research and write craft a coherent argument in the space of a book, and your ability/promise to do this was clearly demonstrated by your writing sample or else you wouldn't have gotten accepted. So relax!

[sidiosquiere]

Thanks!

Hey, not a dumb question at all. I'm even slower! Or at least, my base level for moderately theoretically-loaded history is like 15 pgs an hour. That said, at my peak in undergrad I could get through 70-80 pgs an hour with taking notes/points to bring up in class discussion. From disuse I've lost it, but I'm not too worried about getting it back.

My undergrad was a small LAC that was geared toward preparing students for grad school. Upper-level history classes assigned around 250-400pgs a week...basically a book and few articles. But our professors, for the most part, made clear they did not expect a close reading of every page. The point was to assign more than we could read so we could learn how to deal with that situation. So yes, speed reading is an important skill.

My advice:

Always read the introduction and the conclusion closely. Most well-written books will clearly outline in the introduction what theoretical frameworks they are going to work with, and what they aim to do in each chapter. So basically, the introduction pretty much lays out all the main points of the book, and tells you where they are located in the text. The conclusion usually repeats these points, and then usually goes into more depth on why this is important to the historiography for the subject.

As for the bulk of the book, I would skim, using the first sentence last sentence trick. If a paragraph looked particularly interesting/weighty I might read the whole thing more carefully. I would make notes of what general topics/ideas are discussed on every page, making a general outline in my notebook. Then, when I was done reading I'd pick a few sections that seemed most important/interesting and read those again more in-depth, and comment on those sections in my response paper/class discussion.

As for really getting your speed up, it takes time. Like training for a race, you can't expect to run a quick mile the first time you try. That said, in undergrad I always picked a spot in the library right near a big clock. That way I could check my progress every ten minutes....if I saw my time was slacking I'd know to try and pick up the pace.

So yeah, don't refuse a top-ranked school just because of this, and don't assume that strong vocabulary = speed reader. Not to mention, while grad school does require a lot of reading, anyone can read. Not everyone can do interesting research and write craft a coherent argument in the space of a book, and your ability/promise to do this was clearly demonstrated by your writing sample or else you wouldn't have gotten accepted. So relax!

[NewEnglandNat]

I think the thing to understand is that reading in grad school is not like reading in undergrad. No one could possibly read closely the 1500-2000 pages a week that a full load in my masters program would call for. I wouldn't turn down a grad program because you didn't think you could read that much, everyone who is coming in from an undergrad will be in the same boat.

There are a number of tricks used, I don't particularly like the first and last sentence trick, I find it too choppy. I read the acknowledgements (always read them, they will sound like giberish at first but soon you'll pick up the feel of theoretical approach and people they studied under). I read the introduction and conclusion closely. I look through the notes to try and get a grasp of the kind of sources used. Than I go through the chapters and read two or three closely and skim the rest. Turn every page even if you aren't reading every word.

[TMP]

Dude, how did you get through your MA program then?

I consider myself to be a pretty fast reader (about 50-70 pgs an hour for a novel, even a bit dense one). But here's what I do:

1) If the book is REALLY interesting, then I skim/scan through as I please. Then I go back and read for arguments and points.

or

2) I do what this guy says: http://chronicle.com/forums/index.php/topic,75251.0.html and scroll down to "larryc".

[StrangeLight]

no wonder i'm always tired, sick, and getting grey hairs.

i read 20 pages an hour. i could go faster (30-35 pages) if i took notes right in the margins and underlined stuff, but i found that method of note-taking to be absolutely useful in terms of prepping for comps. so now i type all of my notes, which has slowed me down to 20 pages. it'll be way more useful in the long run, but with 3 books (300-400 pages) to read a week, ugh. i've also been told by a few of my professors to "read every word on every page, and read it carefully." and they're not joking. they will ask incredibly specific, precise questions, so skimming means you miss a lot. i find that i still can't finish the books in this time frame, though, so i make sure to at least read the intro and conclusion, the first body chapter and the last body chapter. after all, we're historians, looking for change over time, so knowing at least the beginning and ending can give you a decent guess at the middle.

on the rare occasion that an author writes an explicit conclusion to each chapter... money!!

i really don't like skimming or speed-reading. i find that i don't fully grasp the arguments without reading a book thoroughly. there just isn't time, however, and you can generally survive a seminar without knowing what's in chapter 3 or 6.

[StrangeLight]

2) I do what this guy says: http://chronicle.com/forums/index.php/topic,75251.0.html and scroll down to "larryc".

holy crap. just my opinion but i would not recommend reading every book that way. your grasp of argument will be shallow at best. in a pinch, i've done that with a few books (a couple reviews, intro, conclusion, table of contents, skim a chapter or two) but i find that i can only get away with that in certain weeks because i've clearly read the books carefully in other weeks. professors can tell when all you do is read a review. seminars are 2-3 hours long, with sometimes as few as 5 or 6 people in them. you need more than 10 minutes of things to say. you need a good poker face too, so when the prof brings up an argument or example you have no recollection of (but was the basis for an entire chapter) you don't look clueless.

i mean... you can definitely get away with reading a book like that. but they know.

[cranberry]

Not a history student here, but this caught my eye since I myself am a slow reader and consider this to be one of my biggest weaknesses. Anyway, my school had a speed-reading lecture one time which I attended and learned this skill: take your finger and as you skim zig zag it across the page, moving at a steady rate. I personally don't use my finger, but I have made my own variation on the technique. Of course, I try to read the material as closely as I can if I have the time, but when I'm in a pinch I do this and it works reasonably well. You don't necessarily remember the fine details, but you definitely get the big picture.

[TMP]

Oh I know, StrangeLight. That's why I read more interesting or difficult books in depth if I can. But doing that way at least gets me through the door and then I go back and pick a few chapters that I'm interested in reading in detail. Some weeks I just miss the target with what the professor wants to talk about. That's how I've come to appreciate those damned weekly responses posted on Blackboard (or something like that) so you can see what the class really wants to talk about. And then I'll use the night or morning before to catch up.

But you're right, for very smaller seminars, this skim advice just doesn't work too well. But for larger seminars, it works.

[truckbasket]

i read 20 pages an hour. i could go faster (30-35 pages) if i took notes right in the margins and underlined stuff, but i found that method of note-taking to be absolutely useful in terms of prepping for comps. so now i type all of my notes, which has slowed me down to 20 pages.

My reading strength seems to rise and fall, and right now it's at a lull -- but that's because I finished my BA in December and won't be starting my PhD until September so I'm intentionally taking somewhat of a reading break. My last couple of UG semesters averaged around 1000 - 1500 pages a week, which, with four classes in a variety of fields, proved to be do-able, but challenging. I know that grad will tougher, but I'm really looking forward to a similar amount of reading that is in one concentrated area.

I'm thinking about some new methods for note taking to improve efficiency to maximize reading time (I study lit). I've been experimenting with the Dragon Dictate voice recognition software, both on the desktop as well as the iPhone/iPad. Being able to simply apply one of those pointed stickies to the passage, then dictating the page number and notes into the iPhone (that will then be typed) seems like it would work great -- although I've yet to try it in practice.

In addition, I'm also looking into ways to create a reading note database for quals (comps) with topics that function on a meta-tag search to reference my notes. For example, say I get hit with "discuss political / economic frameworks that allowed for acceptance of Darwinist thought" I could maybe just run a search with some specific meta-tags from all three year's worth of reading to cross reference passages, themes and ideas. I'm not sure if any of this would work, or if it would be too difficult to maintain, but the combo of database and dictation software seems like it would be a good. It might also be beneficial for others in the same field who have similar reading lists to combine forces.

One concern I have with my own reading though (and I'm curious to see if anyone else has run into this) is distraction problems. I consider myself a strong reader, and can read for 8 to 10 hours at a time if needed, but I need complete silence -- and preferably no-one around. I've also found that I struggle to multi-task while reading. For example, I work as a writing tutor, and if I'm focusing on sentence-level mechanics, I have difficulty tracing the overall subject of the paper -- and vice-versa. Similarly, when listening to a song, if I'm focused on melody, the lyrics just pass me by. It's like my brain will only do one thing at a time, whereas I know plenty of people who can read while watching TV and chatting on the phone at the same time! I'm hoping it's not going to be a problem and that it will correct itself with practice. Anyone else experience anything like this?

[sidiosquiere]

Dude, how did you get through your MA program then?

I just paced myself - dividing the total number of pages of X book by seven, so that I can read the book little by little in small chunks. It worked, but it takes a long time, and I know that there has to be a more efficient way of reading so many books, so that's what I'm experimenting with right now - trying to read more efficiently but without sacrificing comprehension, which is what I seem to lose when I try to zip through a reading.

[paint]

Some books need to be read carefully, some don't.

The more you read, the more you'll find that it's the argument/interpretation that you need to glean. You know the basic contours of the history of the period/event/figure/issue so you don't need to read the particular version of it except for how it offers an interpretation of it. This is a gradual process. Reading gets quicker -- it's impossible to read every book well for prelims in the time you have, so you make decisions about which to read well and which not to. If you're lucky, you're professors will help steer this. Then when you're working on your dissertation, you'll go back to slower, more careful reading because at that point, it's specific info you need to help make your argument. In the end, the goal of the reading determines the pace of the reading.

[byjo0801]

People, you all left out what is the most important aid for the busy grad cramming in a ton of books...Read a couple book reviews of the book(if available). U cant base a criticial review of the book or even an entire discussion for a seminar class with this tactic (well I have but I dont recommend it!), but they (the good ones) outline the main points, put the book within the historiography, etc..

It is also not a dumb question. I myself read the intro twice, slow, and the rest as fast as I can while taking notes in the book(underline/margins). The goal of my notes is to be able to review the book using the notes in 30-45 minutes, so far it has not failed me. Reading slow is sort of pointless, because you are not going to remember every sentence you read...the faster the better for me!

Edited March 9, 2011 by byjo0801

[sidiosquiere]

Didn't realize that this post would generate much discussion! Thanks for the feedback everyone.

[qbtacoma]

People, you all left out what is the most important aid for the busy grad cramming in a ton of books...Read a couple book reviews of the book(if available). U cant base a criticial review of the book or even an entire discussion for a seminar class with this tactic (well I have but I dont recommend it!), but they (the good ones) outline the main points, put the book within the historiography, etc..

It is also not a dumb question. I myself read the intro twice, slow, and the rest as fast as I can while taking notes in the book(underline/margins). The goal of my notes is to be able to review the book using the notes in 30-45 minutes, so far it has not failed me. Reading slow is sort of pointless, because you are not going to remember every sentence you read...the faster the better for me!

Yes, I read at least two book reviews carefully as well as the intro and conclusion if I know the book is going to be skim-only. When skimming, I often choose to read the first sentence of each paragraph (rather than first and last) because I find it works better as a predictor of whether the paragraph is analysis I should read in-depth; if it is, then I'll read the last sentence of the paragraph to double-check.

[Jeppe]

Great topic and discussion!

As an interesting aside, the Skeptoid podcast had an episode on so-called speed reading courses. Entertaining reading, especially if you feel bad about your own reading speed. http://skeptoid.com/mobile/4229

[Riotbeard]

To the OP:

Go where you wanna go. You will learn tricks to make sure you get through books faster. The first lesson I learned in grad school is that I don't get to read each book as thoroughly as I would like and really less thoroughly than as an undergrad. I am better at reading though now and retain much more while doing less. You will have too much research for your seminars and for your independent stuff to read like you used to. I don't know anybody who reads every line of every book assigned closely. If you got in, you can probably do it.