B
Skip to content
Student: “My writing is sloppy. I drop a lot and can't keep up.”
Teacher: “Great. I want you to practice at a speed 40 to 50 words per minute faster than you can write.”
Student: “Huh?”
Me: “Huh?”
The first exchange shows the familiar advice: respond to sloppy writing by adding speed. The second asks a more useful question: what part of the practice actually broke?
Student: “Notice where you practice: you struggled.”
Student: “Now you’re wondering if it’s you.”
Teacher: “Maybe it’s the practice.”
Teacher: “Practice the part that broke.”
In this scene, the student asks for help with sloppy writing, dropped words, and falling behind. The response adds speed. Nobody asks what is going wrong first.
Now imagine leaving another session with notes you cannot read. You worked hard. You still do not know what to change. After enough of those sessions, This practice isn't helping me can start to sound like Maybe I'm not cut out for this.
Before you accept that verdict, ask for a useful next step.
A higher practice speed, by itself, does not explain a missed stroke. You need to identify the trouble spot, try a specific adjustment, and check the next attempt. Otherwise, you can finish another hard session with the same problem waiting for you tomorrow.
The exchange above is mine. Here is Magnum's published recommendation:
Magnum's published speed-building FAQ recommends practicing 25–30% above its defined Top Speed. Its example sends a writer with a Top Speed of 200 WPM to practice at 250–260 WPM, calls for faster finger movement “even at the cost of accuracy,” and says the writer will not be able to read the notes at those practice speeds. It says control will improve through that practice and prescribes 30-second tests at lower speeds.
Source: Magnum Steno FAQ, accessed September 28, 2026.
If you're following that approach and still struggling, ask what your next session will help you identify and change. Which word broke down? What did your fingers actually write? What will you try differently?
Your effort deserves a next step you can act on.
BREVITY STENO · Hear the word. Write the word.
You need more than another hard practice session. You need to know what to change and how to check your next attempt.
BREVITY: The Theory teaches the writing, provides printed steno notes to compare, and gives you guidance on what to try when a new stroke comes out wrong.
See how BREVITY helps you learn
Already reporting? Explore ways to improve the writing you use.
I'm Tom Fernicola, a New York City realtime litigation reporter with 37 years of experience and the author of BREVITY. I wrote BREVITY: The Theory for people learning steno and BREVITY: Write Simply for people already reporting. For me, the payoff was cleaner realtime and rough drafts, less to fix, and more enjoyment of the work. Read why I changed my writing.
Learn what to write and how to check it.
Work on recurring trouble without starting over.
When the words keep coming
The answer keeps coming. You're still trying to get that one word down, and the words after it are already stacking up behind it.
Before you tell yourself to practice harder, ask another question: What is this way of writing asking you to do?
Witness: “Then the representative told me…”
Reporter, thinking: “Representative… I know that brief. Where is it?”
Witness: “…so we called the office, checked the order, and arranged another delivery.”
Reporter, thinking: “And I'm still on ‘representative.’”
The brief is short. The pause isn't. In this scene, the problem is recalling the outline while the next words keep coming. A form has to do more than save strokes on a page. You need to be able to recall it and write it in the sentence where it belongs.
When you miss a word, you need more than another try. You need to know what to change.
You try to write about. Your notes show and, then with.
You could do it again. And again. But what are you supposed to change?
BREVITY's “If it came out wrong” guidance explains one possible cause: your finger rolled across two keys instead of pressing them together. Compare your notes with the printed steno, then try the movement the lesson describes.
Now you have a specific adjustment to try—and printed notes to check your next attempt. Your practice has a direction.
A wrong word becomes something you can work on.
An existing steno student using BREVITY's books and the Woodshedder described what they had been looking for:
“I needed something logical and purposeful that would actually impact my writing, not just more practicing to a checklist.”
R.D., Pomona, CA — from their account of working with BREVITY
That's one question to ask before you buy a theory: when a stroke comes out wrong, does the lesson help you figure out what to change?
See how BREVITY: The Theory teaches
The lesson gives you something specific to practice. Here is how to put that practice to work.
Choose a pace you can control. Write a short group of words, then the whole sentence. Hide the text, read your notes, and reveal the words to compare. The BREVITY Woodshedder keeps material you flag for more work.
Skip the readback, and you lose that chance to catch a missing key or a word you cannot read before the next pass. Check it now, and you have something specific to return to.
That gives your next attempt a focus: the word or passage that needs attention. You check your own notes; the tool does not read or grade your steno.
Try that process with a selected drill in the free seven-day trial.
A small suitcase can still be brutal to carry. Smaller doesn't tell you what's inside it.
“One stroke” is the same kind of label. It tells you how many times you stroke. It doesn't tell you which keys have to come together to do it.
Here's what that looks like in actual writing.
A stroke count calls every pair below a tie. Look at what it leaves out.
These are six examples from my paired 100-word lists. Abbreviations in both lists have been expanded so the outlines show the physical keys.
| Word | Magnum · keys | BREVITY · keys |
|---|---|---|
| time | TAOEUPL · 7 |
T-PL · 3 |
| exhibit | KPEUBT · 6 |
-BT · 2 |
| client | KHRAOEUPBT · 10 |
KHREU · 5 |
| different | TKEUFRPBT · 9 |
TKEUF · 5 |
| where | WR- · 2 |
W-R · 2 |
| believe | -BL · 2 |
PWHR-F · 5 |
A note about believe: In BREVITY, -BL writes maybe; Magnum uses it for believe. The row compares the keys used for believe. It does not assess how either system allocates its simplest outlines across the vocabulary you actually use.
Start with time. Both forms use T on the left and PL on the right. The Magnum form also uses all four vowel keys: A, O, E, U. BREVITY's form leaves those out.
Same word. Same one stroke. Four fewer keys.
Each time you use this outline for time, you leave out those four vowel presses. That gives you a specific change to try on a word that keeps coming back.
Then look at client: ten keys against five. Ten keys can fit inside the label “one stroke.” That little label is doing a lot of work.
Where asks a different question. Both forms use two keys. Magnum's WR- puts both on the left; BREVITY's W-R uses one on each side. Same count, different combination. The number alone doesn't show you that, either.
For believe, the supplied Magnum outline uses two keys; BREVITY's uses five. That's three fewer keys for Magnum on this word. BREVITY assigns the two-key -BL outline to maybe. The count for one word is only part of the decision: which word should get that easy combination in your writing?
These counts show what the forms ask you to press. Try the alternatives in your own writing to judge recall, translation, and how the combinations feel. A smaller number doesn't answer every question. Neither does “one stroke.”
See all 100 words, including ties and Magnum's advantages →
Source: Tom Fernicola's paired Magnum and BREVITY 100-word working lists, with his notation corrections. These are the particular forms supplied for comparison, rather than a check of every available outline or a measurement of speed, accuracy, or fatigue.
Here are three more examples from Chapter 13 of The Science of Steno. They show a tradeoff that a stroke total alone would miss:
| Phrase | Magnum: strokes / total keys | BREVITY: strokes / total keys |
|---|---|---|
| so that we don't | 1 / 15 | 4 / 6 |
| and I have this | 1 / 11 | 3 / 6 |
| so that you wouldn't have been | 1 / 12 | 5 / 9 |
In the first comparison, one method puts 15 keys into a single stroke. The other uses six key presses spread over four strokes.
One wins the stroke count. The other uses fewer keys. Calling the first “shorter” doesn't finish the discussion.
Fifteen keys at once. But look—we saved strokes.
Picture trying a phrase brief that keeps tripping you up. You know what you meant to write. The keys don't land together. While you're trying to recover, the speaker has already moved on. The next time the phrase comes around, you're bracing for it.
A brief can look like a shortcut and still be the place where you get stuck. Before you blame your effort, examine the combination you're practicing.
Magnum's website says, “Fewer strokes means greater speed.” The comparison above gives you another question to take with you: what has to come together inside those strokes—and can you write it reliably in context?
Source: Magnum Steno homepage, accessed September 28, 2026.
In all three examples, BREVITY takes the trade in the other direction: more strokes and fewer total key presses. The chapter's summary makes that choice visible.
When you consider an alternative outline, examine the actual keys and try it in connected writing: which combinations you land cleanly, which form comes readily, and what happens in translation.
You don't have to pack every phrase into one crowded stroke. In this example, BREVITY spreads six key presses across four strokes. You have an alternative to try when getting all fifteen keys down together is the part that trips you up.
Source: The Science of Steno, Chapter 13, p. 213. These are the book's reported stroke and key totals; its separate difficulty scores are not shown here.
You have a limited supply of simple key combinations. What should get the best ones?
The believe/maybe example shows why allocation matters. To evaluate the writing as a whole, you also need to know which words you use and how often you use them.
Which use of a simple combination earns its place across the words you actually write?
That is why frequency belongs in the conversation. A change to a word you use repeatedly deserves a different level of attention from a clever brief you almost never need.
Look through your own work. What keeps coming back? What keeps causing trouble? Start there. Give your next practice session one job: work on a recurring trouble spot, then try the new form in the sentences where you need it.
The allocation principle is discussed in The Science of Steno, Chapter 13, pp. 210–212. The 100-word lists do not include word frequencies; they do not establish frequency-weighted savings.
Tom Fernicola · Why I changed my writing
I wanted to make my job easier to manage. That was the point.
The better I wrote, the less there was to fix. My realtime and rough drafts were cleaner, and my finals could be scoped faster.
What I didn't expect was how much fun writing could be when it got easier.
Capturing the testimony is still demanding. I've made my writing easier, and I enjoy it more because of that.
You have invested real time in the writing you use. BREVITY: Write Simply offers outlines and techniques you can incorporate gradually.
Keep what works. Pick a recurring word or phrase that deserves a closer look. Study the alternative, practice it in context, and decide whether it belongs in your writing.
One working reporter put it this way in the introduction to BREVITY: Write Simply:
“What I love about BREVITY is it's something you can add gradually. You could start with one single phrase that repeats in a deposition. It's not all or nothing.”
A Washington State reporter, quoted in BREVITY: Write Simply, introduction, p. 5
Another reader described the enjoyment of finding alternatives:
“Writing is FUN again!”
“I cannot stop coming up with new, simpler ways to write things!”
GW, Seattle — excerpts from his July 2026 account of using BREVITY: Write Simply
Those are their experiences. You can begin with one recurring word or phrase, practice the change, and keep it if it works for you. You have room to improve without throwing away the writing you already rely on.
The witness doesn't know what you've memorized.
A word you've never heard. At full speed. Naturally.
You still have to write it. Before you choose a theory, ask how it prepares you for that moment—and how it helps you learn from the words you get wrong.
BREVITY: The Theory starts with your first keys. It introduces familiar forms, develops writing unfamiliar words from sound, and provides drills with printed steno notes to check your work.
For each word and phrase introduced in a lesson, you get one taught form and its explanation. You study it, write it, read your notes, and compare. When the vocabulary is unfamiliar, the book teaches sound construction using the combinations already introduced; a new word does not have to be a memorized brief.
You can use more than one stroke. If you expect to hear the word again, look it up afterward. You have a method to turn to when the next word goes beyond the forms you have memorized.
You don't have to replace years of writing all at once. Start with a few changes that are worth making.
The adjustment depends partly on how comfortable you are changing your writing. I change mine regularly. Someone who has used the same forms for years may need more time to make new ones feel natural.
But experienced reporters already adapt. If you're writing Microsoft or Samsung all day, you might make Microsoft M-S and Samsung SAM. You create a useful outline, practice it, and put it to work. Making selective changes to your everyday writing follows the same principle.
Keep what works. Choose a few common words or phrases that keep giving you trouble, and practice the alternatives in different sentences. Give them time to settle before adding more.
One useful change you can rely on is worth more than twenty you struggle to remember. The question is: Does this change earn its place in my writing?
When you find one that does, the next question comes naturally: What else could I simplify?
Start with what you're trying to improve. Let that determine the practice.
Learning a new outline calls for slow, deliberate practice. Write it in different sentences and combinations so you learn to use it where it belongs. I don't personally practice speed; I focus on the writing itself and on changes I want to make reliable.
There isn't one daily number that fits everyone. Choose an amount you can sustain while still paying attention. If you're rushing, guessing, or repeating the same mistake, more minutes won't necessarily help. Slow down, check your notes, and work out what needs to change.
Years on the job don't automatically improve your writing. You can carry the same awkward outline through an entire career. Improvement takes a plan and consistent effort.
Reporters are busy. Practice is easy to postpone when work fills the calendar. Give it a specific purpose and a place in your day, even if you're working on only a few outlines.
Don't judge a session only by how long you practiced. Ask: What am I getting better at, and can I see it in my writing?
Put them to BREVITY. Put them to Magnum. Put them to any writing approach you're considering.
You are the one who will sit at the machine and use it. You should be able to examine what you are buying.
You can begin with your first keys, a recurring word that gives you trouble, or a practice session that needs a clearer purpose.
Learning from the beginning: BREVITY: The Theory — learn a form, understand why it is taught, and check your writing against printed notes. Build a method for approaching unfamiliar words as you learn.
Improving the writing you already use: BREVITY: Write Simply — keep the writing you rely on while you work on words and phrases that keep giving you trouble. Start with a change you can practice and put to use.
Want the full argument behind these comparisons? The Science of Steno examines the writing and the author's measurement framework in depth. Chapter 13 develops the Magnum analysis and the phrase comparisons shown here.
Want help choosing what to work on? Explore a consultation about your writing.
Ready to work on a passage? Try the Woodshedder free for seven days and practice writing, reading back, and checking a selected drill.
Not sure where to start? Put one of your transcripts into the BREVITY Analyzer and see how many keys you could save. It's free.
Is any of this proven?
How do you respond to claims that BREVITY lacks independent validation or peer review?
By pointing to what's documented and naming what's still open.
The documented record is public. A Texas academy's records, obtained through a formal public-records request: 620 students enrolled over 14 years, 44 finished. NCRA's own Annual School Reports: a 14.4% average graduation rate, which NCRA itself calls "extremely low."
Federal education data: court reporting graduates fell from 747 in 2000 to 287 in 2022. Every source is cited on our completion-rates page, and the underlying documents are there to download. And the math behind BREVITY is published — the formulas that measure what every outline costs to write, with the work shown, so any reader can rerun the numbers or challenge them.
What's still open: no outside researcher has yet run a controlled study comparing completion rates across theories. That study should exist. The profession has never once tested whether theory design affects who finishes — its own best-practices research examined every variable except this one. We'd welcome that study, and our methodology is public precisely so it can be tested.
That's the standard we hold ourselves to, and it's the standard worth asking of any theory: what can you verify before you pay?
