A couple days ago I started reading a book by photographer Dane Sanders called Fast Track Photographer. The book attempts to help photographers better grasp the current climate of the photography industry.

While discussing education, especially as it applies to photography, he had this to say:

“In the era that’s quickly vanishing in our rear-view mirror, most of us defined professionalism based largely on time—how much time you spent paying your dues (historical time) and how much time you currently spend working [as a professional] (present time). Time was the defining element, and time used to be a reasonable measuring stick. But it isn’t anymore. Again, learning curves have flattened, due to new [technology] new software and new learning opportunities, among other things. It doesn’t take as long to go pro as it used to.”

Of course, Sanders is talking about going from amateur to professional photographer. As he describes, what it takes to become a professional is not what it used to be. Not necessarily less, just different.

But photography is based heavily on technology. It becomes an industry right on the edge of change. Among industries that change dramatically with technology, photography is high on that list. But as history has shown us, there is virtually no industry that is untouched by the technological advances of the last 30-40 years.

This has all gotten me thinking about the state of education and employment in general.

Photography, an industry that remains close to the cutting edge, has already almost completed an important shift: a photography degree doesn’t do too much for you as a pro. Many pros have no formal education at all. Learning mostly from the wealth of information on the internet, and their own hands-on experience.

The shift is starting to happen in other industries also. Hollywood has more “untrained” people than ever before. It’s also more more common for people to get hired as computer techs with no degree than it ever was before. Marketing, politics, sales, even religion, have an uncanny number of folk-professionals working in them.

It makes me wonder if the same shift that has happened in the photographic industry will happen in most other industries. In order to be hired, will mechanics need to go to trade school, or simply demonstrate the competency they gained from private learning? And, if things do pan out that way, what will that mean for our higher learning institutions? After all, with discipline and hard work, there’s virtually nothing to learn in a university that can’t be learned from lots of intuitive Google searches.

We live in an exciting time. It seems plausible to me that if technology keeps moving as fast as it has, there might be some folks with some very expensive, yet ultimately useless, degrees.

After a couple days of posting other things, I’m back to this topic. Stupidly Christianized stuff. Now, before everyone flips out, let me clarify something. I know that originally, most schools were a part of the religious institution (Of course, what wasn’t really?). Then it wasn’t until much later that they became a secularized system.

But, there isn’t anything intrinsically religious about education. Whether we obtain it formally or through a kind of osmosis, learning is something we all do. Christians and non-Christians alike. So, from my perspective, schools are something that are stupidly Christianized.

Schools

Obviously I haven’t taken survey of people all over the country (or world, for that matter), I only have a sampling from my own neighborhood. But, it would seem to me, that for all of the exasperating effort to keep Christian school kids in-line and/or in-the-faith, the results aren’t very impressive.

From small private grade schools, up through college, Christian education institutions are notorious for making a lot of bizarre rules aimed at keeping students from sin. Which in (at least) some cases are less about spiritual discipline and more about school pride.

When I was leading a small group of high school guys, I recall one student explaining that the school has a rule against students smoking cigarettes. Seems reasonable on school property, but this rule extended to all hours of every day. A student reported for smoking a cigarette would be suspended on the first strike and expelled on the second. But here’s the kicker, the principal explained the rationale—they don’t want parents of prospective students learning that there are smokers there.

Cha Ch’ing. The rule wasn’t there on spiritual grounds (something I would disagree with, but ultimately respect). It was there on financial grounds.

This is far from the most irrational of regulations though. Christian schools like to mandate all kinds of things. During a conversation a few weeks back, a student from an out-of-state Christian university explained that she wasn’t allowed to leave the campus, nor was she allowed to maintain friendships with the opposite sex. Some Christian schools even have rules about where men and women can walk in relation to each other (i.e., men and women must not walk side by side, but always one in front of the other).

Alcohol is another place Christian schools like place regulations. Some friends from down south were here visiting for a few days. We were sitting around a fire enjoying a conversation. Most of us were sipping wine or some other cocktails, but our guests had to decline because the school forbid the consumption of alcohol. Even in private, even in moderation. And again, the rationale was for the sake of school image.

Christian schools almost always include a Christian curriculum of some kind, but it’s usually far from adequate (or effective). I’ve met plenty of former Christian school students who only barely had a grasp on the Gospel, if at all.

To me, it all begs the question, “why?”

I understand some parents send their kids to Christian schools because it’s a superior education than their local public schools. But many Christian parents send their children to Christian schools for fear of the influence of public schools. Ironically, the students of Christian schools have a reputation for being even more wild then their public school counterparts.

The problem is that rules and regulations are not the Gospel’s method of sanctification. I can understand school-grounds rules. Such as proper grooming, uniforms or non-smoking rules. But many Christian schools extend their regulations into student’s personal lives. As if that was going to prevent students from sin. When in fact, creating many rules about things which students have the freedom in Christ  to do, only creates more opportunities to defile their conscience.

I find that it also begs the question of what is worse—students acting like they should, or students being what they should? Placing boundaries everywhere usually has only the effect of cleaning up the surface. But in a true Christian, freedom and grace coupled with Gospel truth, love, grace and accountability is more likely to affect the heart, producing real conviction. Sure, they may smoke cigarettes, but their heart might also burn for the lost—a thing for which they will have to trust God.

I also think that Christian schools are the source of some of the Church’s biggest criticisms. I have never spoken to a student of a Christian school who didn’t describe his or her classmates as “hypocrites” or “phonies” (although the wording varies). I speculate that this is a major source of contention for non-Christians. They went to a private Christian school growing up and discovered almost no one was real and hence, neither is the Church. Can you blame them, really?

For God’s people, Christian schools also seem to reinforce the false concept that we have to work for God’s favor. Even though the spoken and written teaching of the school may be different, the abundance of regulations drives this point home.

Finally, last but not least, Christian schools often fail to socialize students well. Entire parts of the church are left socially crippled and overly judgmental and sometimes awkward. A problem not impossible for God to overcome in their evangelism, but my hunch is that he allows their evangelism to suffer for it.

So, in conclusion…

I think that the idea of Christian schools, as we know them, isn’t such a great idea, often causing more harm than good. Although an educational institution run by Christians, aimed at spreading the Gospel and bringing about deep heart-seated transformation is another story. Although my bet is that these are few and far between—that is if they even exist.

I love to cook and among my favorite things to make is pizza at home.

When I was a kid there was a pizzeria that made the best pizza in town. It wasn’t anything like franchise pizza. It was lighter, bigger and had a taste all its own. I later came to learn that everyone’s favorite pizza place was making a fairly authentic New York style pizza. Very thin in the middle, with very puffy crust on the outside.

Well, a few years back, our favorite pizza joint closed down to make way for a new gigantic grocery store,  which needless to say, didn’t sell our favorite pizza. It was a tragic trade off.

For some months, former employees of the pizzeria went and worked at similar joint 5 or 10 miles away. But for whatever reason, the new place couldn’t keep afloat in the sinking economy and it was forced to close its doors too.

Now, our suburban area is stuck with franchise pizza. Dominoes, Papa Johns, Pizza Hut. Don’t get me wrong. They’re not bad per se, they’re just not as good as the New York pizza we’d all grown attached to.

So, today, having had enough, I decided I wanted to learn to replicate the extinct pizzerias food. This means rethinking sauce, cheese and most importantly, the basics of making dough at home. Research suggested that I was doing nearly everything wrong if I wanted to accomplish New York pizza. I was going to have to learn to toss the dough. This is actually just as difficult as it sounds.

Well, after eight wasted lumps of dough, I finally produced an acceptable pie. Granted it was smaller than I’d wanted and the sauce, while similar to my goal didn’t quite hit the mark.

But, as they say, practice makes perfect. Next time, I think I’ll get it. Once it’s perfect, I think I’ll share my research so the world can benefit.

A few things before I get started. I’ve disabled comments on this post. Not for fear of disagreement, but because the general sway of critics on this topic is to to respond with no first hand knowledge of the book in discussion here. My suggestion to all will be that they pick up this book and read it, but that is especially my suggestion to you who vehemently disagree with my praise of this book. Please read the book before emailing me with criticisms.

I recently finished Phillip E. Johnson’s Darwin on Trial. And I will state outright, that this book should be read by many who accept Darwinian evolution simply on the bases that it is “widely accepted” or from the limited exposure we have received in grade school.

Simply for his skepticism, most serious supporters of Darwinism will chalk Johnson off as a creationist fundamentalist bent on mind control, without giving very much heed to his own testimony. Johnson is a “philosophical theist and a Christian. [He believes] that a God exists who could create out of nothing if He wanted to do so, but who might have chosen to work through a natural evolutionary process instead.” Through the rest of his text, Johnson makes little reference to intelligent design of any kind, except where discussing the scientific communities own actions. However, he makes no argument for another theory at all, simply a criticism of the existing one.

In the conclusion of his first chapter, Johnson describes himself as “not a scientist,” he states, “but an academic lawyer by profession, with a specialty in analyzing the logic of arguments and identifying the assumptions that lie behind those arguments.” This is the skill most clearly employed through the course of his book. Beginning with a linguistic discussion of the word “science” and what exactly it means according to various official statements. Johnson makes a compelling argument about the legal setting of scientific terms which reveal a bias that actually limits scientific integrity more than supporting it.

Johnson doesn’t shy away from the very specific discussion of the evidence supporting Darwinism. He spends about the first half of his book discussing natural selection, fossil records, mutations, molecular evidence and more, peppered throughout. But the other half of the book begins a critique of the scientific community at large; with Darwinism as a centerpiece.

Some of Johnson’s most compelling discussion involves the difference between empirical science and philosophical science—Darwinism falls largely in the latter. However, we have a difference here that the general public knows nothing about and because of philosophical reasoning, shouldn’t know anything about.

Johnson writes clearly and effectively and so that everyone can understand. The book is divided into 154 pages and twelve chapters. That leaves each chapter short enough that you don’t need a great commitment to the book to work through it. Johnson has a manner of writing that, although he is discussion relatively dry material, we never find ourselves especially bored.

Most Americans view the scientific community remembering the scientific method from back in grade school. Remember? Problem, research, hypothesis, experimentation, hypothesis test, analysis, conclusions. This is not big science; it is sometimes, but not all the time, but we don’t see the difference—it all gets labeled science. Perhaps the populous shouldn’t rely so heavily on the science community for its truth.

Because the book speaks clearly for itself, and for fear of misrepresenting it, I’ve intentionally stayed away from Johnson’s specific critiques of the science community and of Darwinism. I recommend this book to all. It’s easy to read, easy to understand, and affordably priced.

Ten days ago I started following the day by day lesson plan of a little book called 10 Days to Faster Reading, by Abby Marks-Beale and the Princeton Language Institute. The original post can be found here. The purpose of the book is pretty well summed up in the title. Yesterday, I finished the program.

So, William, are you a faster reader now than you were before you started? The short answer is yes; significantly. The long answer is a bit more complicated.

The Book

I’m generally not a fan of books that make huge promises and claims in the title (i.e., Your Best Life Now). I always expect them to read like an inaudible infomercial. “In only fifteen-minutes a day, you could be on your way to so much money you’ll want to puke!” The cover of our current book, while modest in its design (purple, white and black), reads in a manner that’s difficult not to hear in the voice from the guy on the Oxy Clean commercials. If you can’t tell, self-help type books don’t generally sit well with me. However, despite my judging this book by its cover, it proved itself in its pages.

The book stays largely academic; something I appreciate. Where many books in its genre sound something like a hokey life coach speaking, this one sounds more like a patient, caring school teacher. The book is divided evenly into ten chapters. The chapters generally focus on breaking old habits and forming new ones. Each chapter includes a benchmark to test your speed and comprehension. Each day introduces you to some new techniques to help build speed and comprehension and encourages you to practice those techniques, then of course to try the techniques you’re comfortable with on the next benchmark.

The beginning of the book focuses mostly on the bad habits we form when we first learn to read. Marks-Beale gives some helpful advice for breaking those habits; advice which I will attest is surprisingly effective. Things such as not reading to yourself out loud or in your head; that one I found especially effective. As she presents some helpful hints for breaking those habits, she also offers some useful techniques to replace those habits. Pacers, key-wording, reading between the lines, are among them.

Toward the end of the book, she starts to move away a bit from the academic topic and more into, what feels sometimes, like out of place life advice. For example, how to prepare for a board meeting you weren’t ready for or how to determine what emails you should and shouldn’t read. Per Ms. Marks-Beale’s advice, I skipped these sections altogether.

My Experience

On day one, I was reading at 185 words per minute, at 70% comprehension (technically a slow reader). Newly aware of my bad habits and actively trying to implement good habits, by day two, I was up to 220 words per minute with 90% comprehension (just barely making the cut as an “average” reader.) Clearly by the second day I was seeing results. Throughout the program, I fluctuated with my speed and comprehension because of experimenting with different techniques, but finally I ended at 345 words per minute with 70% comprehension (finally a “good” reader). At nearly twice my original reading speed, I’d say that the program was a wild success.

Each chapter Marks-Beale shares a new “pacer” method to help speed up your reading. Of the many offered, I felt the most comfortable using the white card method. The idea is to use an index card to keep track of where you’re reading. The only difference here is instead of placing it, in the traditional way, under the words your reading, she suggests placing it above the words your reading. This helped stop me from rereading things I’d already read. It also helped stop me from day dreaming.

Another technique she suggested was to read between the lines. As ridiculous as it sounds, it ends up working shockingly well. Much of the idea of speed reading comes from the thought that we can read word chucks, not just words. Every time our eyes stop, our mind picks up information. The more information you can pick up on one stop, the faster you can read; it’s reading with your peripheral vision. Reading between the lines is literally just that. Instead of placing your eyes directly on the words you’re reading, look right above them at the white space. This helped me to stop focusing on specific words and pick up more information in one glance.

My eye span I think is my biggest problem. I don’t confidently pick up as much in my peripheral vision as I probably could. The solution to that? Exercise. Throughout the book, there are various eye exercises to help expand your eye span; helping you become better at picking up more information in one glance. One problem, however, was that the exercises weren’t really adequate. They were often too short and once I memorized them, I wasn’t really gaining much. However, this has not been a problem thanks to a great program, Ace Reader, which Marks-Beale suggests in one of the later chapters. The program is full of tests to help build speed and comprehension, but most helpful, I think, are the games to help expand your eye span. The program alone I think would be insufficient to dramatically increase reading speed. Ace Reader is available for 30 days free from their website; then $49.95 if you want to keep it.

As a whole, my reading clearly became faster in the ten day period. I definitely learned some great new techniques for reading faster, which will only open the roadway for me to continue to improve my speed and I became aware of some really bad habits that were blocking me from reading faster. I would say this book lives up to its title and anyone who will stick with this reading program will almost definitely experience an increase in speed and comprehension. You’ll have to stick with it though!

Kudos Abby Marks-Beale; you’ve written an effective and useful book!

10 Days to Faster Reading from Amazon.com
AceReader
Original Speed Reading Post

My whole life, I’ve not been much for reading. Maybe it’s because I’ve never been very good at it. It always feels like I’m calculating how much longer I’ll need to read in order to finish the amount of reading I’ve allotted to myself. Or sometimes my eyes keep reading, but my brain checks out and starts to think about other stuff. Then I have to go back and reread what I just read. Well, the past year that has all changed; not my poor skills in reading, but my desire to do so.  Now, for some reason, I find myself almost insatiably excited about reading different things.

Sometime last year my good friend, who I live with, received a book as a gift from his father: 10 Days to Faster Reading. I’m not certain if my friend finished the book or not, but regardless, he’s not reading it now. So last night I decided to pull it off his book shelf and check out the first chapter. To my surprise, it had some good stuff to say. It didn’t make gigantic promises, like some cliché infomercial. It got me thinking that maybe if I developed better reading habits, I would be able to enjoy even more literature.

Namely the book claims that with practice and some new techniques you can increase your reading speed, comprehension and information retention. So, that’s what I’m going to do. My plan is to spend the next nine days finishing this book to see if it really does improve my reading skills. Wish me luck!