Since our mention in Wired Magazine, we’ve had a lot of great feedback from users requesting changes to our reading interface. We had the whole gamut of  requests from different colors to different fonts, changing of font sizes, adding words to each cluster, subtracting words from each cluster.

These are all great suggestions and they seem pretty commonplace. One has to ask, why haven’t the guys at Spreed already implemented many of the requests?  To technically implement them is not that hard. What gives?

The answer is not simple.

The easy answer is that we are the first company entirely focused on reading enhancement. It is a new space with new challenges. Our goal is to become the experts in this field. We have developed some significant expertise and we try to use this when building in features. This means that we have a look at the existing sciences to justify a feature’s benefit in terms of reading efficiency.

The article Online Literacy is a Lesser Kind where Mark Bauerlein asks us to “restrain the digitizing of all liberal-arts classrooms” reminds me of one of the oldest jokes in the book.  You know the one – a man walks into a doctor’s office and raises his arm above his head and says “Doctor, Doctor, it hurts when I do this.”  The doctor, of course, says, “Well,don’t do that!” Not exactly helpful.

The problem with Bauerlein and so many like him is that he’s good at identifying a problem and poor at figuring out the solution.  With all due respect to Bauerlein, Nicholas Carr and the growing cadre of people (all much smarter and better educated than me) that claim that the greatest communication platform the world has ever seen is responsible for the dumbing-down of its users (and yes, I know that “dumbing” isn’t a word), I humbly suggest they jump off the bandwagon and look for a more practical solution.  Why?  Because people are not going to stop consuming copious quantities of written information via the internet any time soon. And because I have evidence that they’re wrong.

At Spreed Inc. we continue to believe in the power of the computer.  Rather than taking a step backward as the Luddite literati suggest, we understand that we’ve only just touched the surface, potential-wise, of computing and the internet.  There are issues to be sure. We continue to adhere to a medieval artifact when presenting written text on electronic devises, a mistake that Spreed has wagered would eventually be corrected.  But, in a relatively short period of time we’ve proven that speed and comprehension can be significantly improved (and improved over traditional paper-based, hard-copy reading) when delivering text to the user in the right format. Six young guys in an office over a one-year period accomplished this.  Imagine what some greater minds than us could accomplish here!

Other problems identified by Bauerlein may be worth discussion.  Is the internet leading to a bastardization of the English language and does it matter?  But he doesn’t address this and instead focuses on the absurd claim that the computer “conspires against certain intellectual habits requisite to liberal-arts learning”. Really? Nothing in here about how the internet allows for greater access to diverse ideas and more efficient and effective research?

There’s so much that is wrong with Bauerlein’s article, I’m not exactly sure what to criticize.  For someone blasting the academic capabilities of today’s youth, he sure takes some liberties with logic and fact.  I suggest he re-read Nielsen’s studies and look at the sorts of “reading” Nielsen was referring to (search pages, websites, etc. – not academic prose).  Of course they scan this material!  Furthermore, somehow “screen reading” (which he also cleverly changes to “fast scanning” and “screen scanning”) is responsible for 41% of professors labeling students “not well prepared”? How so? And what of the 48% labeled “somewhat well prepared”? Can we assume them all to be hard-copy reading Amish-folk who managed to make it to university having avoided the computer?  Finally, an academic of Bauerlein’s quality should know better than to cite 10 year old research on web reading when advances in content and the reading devices (flat panel monitors, iPhones, etc.) have rendered that research out of date.  I could go on.

Bauerlein is a Luddite with an apparent agenda to shock and sell books.  The title of his latest book The Dumbest Generation: How the Digital Age Stupefies Young Americans and Jeopardizes Our Future (Or, Don’t Trust Anyone Under 30) says it all.  Maybe we shouldn’t be surprised.  Historically, every generation hears these fear-mongering insults from previous generations, and I think history shows that each generation has proven to be better and more innovative than the last. Fortunately, access to quality content on the internet will improve and so will the ways we digest that information.  I’m doing my part to further that end and won’t allow Baurlein or Carr to stand in the way.
 

Motoko Rich of the New York Times recently released the first of what will be a series of articles addressing online reading and the movement away from traditional forms of reading (i.e. books, newspapers, journals). I won’t go into a huge rant here as the article is quite lengthy and very detailed. But to summarize the debate; our youth are moving towards reading online much more often than picking up books. Some people believe that this is in fact reducing attention spans, comprehension and is in effect having a negative impact on students grades at school. The other side of the debate states that the internet is actually a healthy source of reading material. Online readers are able to take in much more information from a wide array of sources and can engage in ‘conversations’ about content rather than being an empty vessle that is imparted knowledge. My personal belief is that online reading is actually making us smarter, but the key is to get to the right information and not get off track (which can happen very easily on the internet). What Spreed is trying to do is allow everyone to blast through the large amount of information found on the net, while at the same time increasing comprehension. I would not agree that comprehension necessarily is lower when reading a traditional book, but numerous studies have shown that the traditonal form factor is not conducive to ‘smart’ reading. New technologies, especially those found online can definitely overcome these barriers. I say, don’t be afraid to change the status quo, but always be weiry of where we are heading.

Motoko’s Article can be found here 

Below is a link to a fantastic article about Spreed written by Michael Tipper a professional speed reading coach based out of the UK. Michael sums up spreed perfectly and has put together an instructional video on how to read using clusters.

The educational component of Spreed is very important as it is a departure from the way we have all been taught to read. Although you may not get it the first time, the learning curve is very high and in no time you will begin realizing the advantages of reading at high speeds and comprehending/retaining more of the article. Here is an exerpt from his article.

Speed Reading Faster Comprehension Photo-Reading Memory | Michael Tipper MichaelonSpeedReading.com

This chunking or grouping of words is one of the fundamental principles of becoming a more effective reader (or speed reader) and this software does that automatically for you.

Now when you try this out for yourself you may find it feels a little strange.That is because you are not used to taking in words in this fashion, however with a little perserverence you will get used to it and you will start to reap the benefits immediately.

Here is the instructional video Michael put together:

The wording of Anthony’s title as an interrogative suggests an openness to the debate on the topic of speed reading. This is good news because there will be lots of differing views. However, at this time, instead of discussing the complexities of reading efficiencies and rate of reading text I want to turn attention to a more pragmatic value- add for Spreed technology.

For more than a quarter century I have been preoccupied with how to make the learning environment in higher education more accessible to students with great diversity in learning styles. And I have witnessed how technology has changed the learning landscape in universities. For example, within the past ten years students were encouraged to use laptop computers for taking notes in classrooms. Just in the past couple of years at least one American university (Duke) was handing out iPods for all freshman students. Courses were then made available as podcasts which students could download to their devices. Also within the past few years MIT has been busy trying to put all their course material online and available at no cost to the public. Perhaps more astonishingly, Google has embarked on a Project to digitize millions of university books to eventually be available online.

Given these recent developments, it is clear that technology is essential to what Jerome Brunner, the famous psychologist from Harvard described in 1966 as the Process of Education. New technologies and evolving soft ware applications have become imperative to students successfully participating in higher education. Spreed is just such an application which in my estimation has the potential to enable students to meet the challenge of rapidly perusing voluminous online or electronic material. “Smart” students are already looking for ways to expeditiously cover the enormous amount of electronic text. It is my view that students will readily opt for Spreed, that is reading faster, and as part of this process will decide for themselves what is an acceptable level of comprehension.

Posted by David Leitch