Going through this was painful, but in the spirit of refining research here's a very opinionated reaction. The intention is not to offend, but to provide a differing opinion and hopefully lead to a moment of critical thinking.
Fragmenting interest into non correlating segments doesn't really do much in the way of improving comprehension. There are the pedagogical approaches (audio, visual, and tactile) to learning all of which rely on interest in a particular subject. Forcing a fragmented approach to try to generate interest with a pseudoscience approach will have about the same level of adoption of just demanding someone should like a thing without an emotional consideration.
Reading something you don't want to is going to stifle retention regardless of how you try and quantify it. Looking into human psychology regarding persuasion might serve as a more novel approach to reading comprehension.
For example, creating a relatable narrative prior to the reading might yield both a high level of retention and enjoyment. Pure conjecture, but might make a hypothesis worth exploring rather than a dictation of a process/procedure without a foundation.
_bramses•36m ago
Thanks for the feedback! I don’t agree with your assessment, since the slideshow is about books, not learning in general, but I’ll take those thoughts into consideration.
I agree with your point wrt fragmentation, but my point is to actually assess the underlying mechanisms and address them more directly.
> Reading something you don't want to is going to stifle retention regardless of how you try and quantify it.
I agree and in fact, I point that very thing out in the slide about bad habits of holding onto a book that is not serviceable.
As a meta point many of the things I would talk about are lost in the medium of cutting text for slides, and I apologize that the examples (like the Illustration sections) must be on the responsibility of the reader. It makes more sense when delivered alongside talking!
opscure•1h ago
Fragmenting interest into non correlating segments doesn't really do much in the way of improving comprehension. There are the pedagogical approaches (audio, visual, and tactile) to learning all of which rely on interest in a particular subject. Forcing a fragmented approach to try to generate interest with a pseudoscience approach will have about the same level of adoption of just demanding someone should like a thing without an emotional consideration.
Reading something you don't want to is going to stifle retention regardless of how you try and quantify it. Looking into human psychology regarding persuasion might serve as a more novel approach to reading comprehension.
For example, creating a relatable narrative prior to the reading might yield both a high level of retention and enjoyment. Pure conjecture, but might make a hypothesis worth exploring rather than a dictation of a process/procedure without a foundation.
_bramses•36m ago
I agree with your point wrt fragmentation, but my point is to actually assess the underlying mechanisms and address them more directly.
> Reading something you don't want to is going to stifle retention regardless of how you try and quantify it.
I agree and in fact, I point that very thing out in the slide about bad habits of holding onto a book that is not serviceable.
As a meta point many of the things I would talk about are lost in the medium of cutting text for slides, and I apologize that the examples (like the Illustration sections) must be on the responsibility of the reader. It makes more sense when delivered alongside talking!