Try this test and the reading comprehension test after it. Or if you really must be lazy you could do this other test, but I think it's total bullshit in both the content and the fact that it lacks a comprehension test after it. I scored a moderate 250 (with 100% comp) on the first one, I wasn't really interested in flexing my 'reading penis' as much as I wanted to gauge as accurately as possible how quickly I normally read.

Also, I'm interested in your ideas of what a reasonable maximum average speed is for stuff that matters. Not like a newspaper, but say, something about this complex. This isn't Ulysses, but certainly if you compare it to most write ups it has more logical substance to take on, more explication than summarization. The above websites suggest it is possible to comprehend at rates over 1000 wpm. I'm almost certain that's impossible, but could you see someone getting 90%+ comprehension at 500 wpm?

mikeymoo

Canada7170 Posts

January 06 2009 01:12 GMT

My friend has 1100+, 90%+ iirc, and I'm something like 750, 94% comp.
I'll take the test in a bit and see if things have changed since then.

motbob

United States12546 Posts

January 06 2009 01:20 GMT

457 wpm, 90% reading comp. I didn't know James Baker's position. Apperantly he wasn't the national security advisor.

Reading speed and comprehension are the skills that will get you furthest in life.

yB.TeH

Germany417 Posts

January 06 2009 01:20 GMT

didnt look at the test, but i think its possible to comprehend 1000wpm, if the sentences are common and you read all day long. the people capable of doing this are reconstructing whole passages of text in their minds like normal people do with letters to words (you dont look at single letters but whole words)

Binky1842

United States2599 Posts

January 06 2009 01:22 GMT

736, 80%

b3h47pte

United States1317 Posts

January 06 2009 01:29 GMT

586, 70%
wow lmfao.

Klockan3

Sweden2866 Posts

January 06 2009 01:34 GMT

The questions were silly and rewards just glancing over the text. That is just something to promote their program, since most who reads faster really do lose reading comprehension it is just that this test is specifically tailored so that you don't lose any score since it only asks very general questions about the text.

bluemanrocks

United States304 Posts

January 06 2009 01:44 GMT

6700 50%

what can i say. im a speed demon. and by that i mean that i just guessed on all the questions.

Hippopotamus

1914 Posts

January 06 2009 01:50 GMT

On January 06 2009 10:34 Klockan3 wrote:
The questions were silly and rewards just glancing over the text. That is just something to promote their program, since most who reads faster really do lose reading comprehension it is just that this test is specifically tailored so that you don't lose any score since it only asks very general questions about the text.

Well, I wouldn't quite say that. I don't know how it's like over there in Sweden, but as somebody who has actually been through the American education system I can tell you that this is fairly standard in American high schools (and in intro classes at shitty colleges). You could say more-or-less the same about the difficulty of the SAT, which decides admission to American colleges.

Koiru

United States116 Posts

January 06 2009 01:56 GMT

#10

Your average reading speed over this passage was 28710 words per minute.

You scored 40% of the questions correct.

Raithed

China7078 Posts

January 06 2009 01:59 GMT

#11

On January 06 2009 10:56 Koiru wrote:
Your average reading speed over this passage was 28710 words per minute.

You scored 40% of the questions correct.

LOL mine is like 50% with that number.

naonao

United States847 Posts

January 06 2009 02:06 GMT

#12

Your average reading speed over this passage was 57420 words per minute.
You scored 70% of the questions correct.
Not too bad if I do say so myself.

Disregard

China10252 Posts

January 06 2009 02:10 GMT

#13

The comprehension questions are to easy... Most of them you dont even need to refer to the article.

IzzyCraft

United States4487 Posts

January 06 2009 02:12 GMT

#14

883words per a minute.
90% retention lol although it's kinda messed because i already knew some of that.

Hippopotamus

1914 Posts

January 06 2009 02:21 GMT

#15

Well you know, we can hold a discussion about reading speed and comprehension without limiting ourselves to just the test. Certainly, if you're not trying to inflate your e-penis, you can intuitively read the article at the rate you read most articles. So if you think there is value in knowing your usual reading speed, there you have it. The comprehension test is less useful for assessing performance at reading rates closer to your real one, but it's not really the highlight of what I'd like to discuss.

meegrean

Thailand7699 Posts

January 06 2009 02:37 GMT

#16

600? I skipped a lot cuz it was boring. 70% comprehension.

Yogurt

United States4258 Posts

January 06 2009 02:38 GMT

#17

meh not really worried about how fast i read, i don't see it as that important of a skill

Divinek

Canada4045 Posts

January 06 2009 02:54 GMT

#18

On January 06 2009 10:20 Qeet wrote:
didnt look at the test, but i think its possible to comprehend 1000wpm, if the sentences are common and you read all day long. the people capable of doing this are reconstructing whole passages of text in their minds like normal people do with letters to words (you dont look at single letters but whole words)

It certainly is and you're pretty much wrong. I read around 1150 wpm~ on average with 100% recall, and most of it has to do with using peripheral vision. Has nothing to do with the sentences being common or reading alot though.

qrs

United States3637 Posts

January 06 2009 02:59 GMT

#19

668 wpm, 80%. Like others have mentioned, though, the questions were mostly easy ones, most of which didn't require reading more than the first few lines and/or common sense.

As for the speed, of course I read/skimmed it as fast as I could, certainly not at my normal reading pace. Didn't everyone?

qrs

United States3637 Posts

January 06 2009 03:05 GMT

#20

On January 06 2009 10:05 Hippopotamus wrote:
Also, I'm interested in your ideas of what a reasonable maximum average speed is for stuff that matters. Not like a newspaper, but say, something about this complex. This isn't Ulysses, but certainly if you compare it to most write ups it has more logical substance to take on, more explication than summarization. The above websites suggest it is possible to comprehend at rates over 1000 wpm. I'm almost certain that's impossible, but could you see someone getting 90%+ comprehension at 500 wpm?

I think that there are two separate things involved here. One is reading at a level that allows you to see and remember the things that you read. Another understanding something that may require some thought to assimilate. In your example encyclopedia article, it may well be that some extra thinking time is required to understand what you are reading. It may also be that without spending those extra minutes, your retention will suffer because you don't understand it as well, but this doesn't mean that the extra time should be reckoned as part of the cost of reading.

IMO, the paradigmatic test of reading speed should be anything where the details are important (i.e. it can't be skimmed without losing something) but where no thinking is required to actually understand those details. It's hard to entirely separate the two though.