Does it prove reading improvement?

No. Reading must be measured separately.

Why review several runs?

One layout or lucky run can dominate a single best time.

Should I force faster selections?

No. Preserve accuracy and use a comfortable interaction.

Interpretation guide

What Can Change with Schulte Table Practice?

Repeated runs may change completion time, errors, and search strategy on the grid. Those task changes should not be presented as proof of wider visual, reading, academic, or workplace benefits.

Changes the Page Can Actually Record

The implementation records completion time, wrong selections, grid size, direction, and completion status. If the same setup is repeated, a series can show whether recent runs are faster, slower, more accurate, or less accurate.

A best time is vulnerable to a favorable layout or anticipation. A small group of recent runs with error counts provides more context than one minimum value.

Why Task Performance May Improve

Users can learn a more systematic scan, become faster at selecting small cells, understand the rule without hesitation, and recognize their own error pattern. Each change belongs to the task situation and may depend on the same device.

Why Reading and Visual Transfer Need Separate Evidence

Reading involves language, comprehension, eye movements, prior knowledge, and the material itself. Visual-field assessment requires controlled stimuli and procedures. The ordered number grid includes neither a reading outcome nor a visual-field boundary, so its local time cannot establish those changes.

A Careful Way to Use the History

Choose one grid and mode, keep the input method and zoom fixed, complete several sessions without forcing speed, and review both time and errors. Stop if the task causes discomfort or no longer serves a purpose.