有些领域变化非常快，在有人写书之前，博客有时是唯一的信息来源。Stable diffusion 模型出现后的第二天，人们就已经在写博客了，书籍永远不会那么快。

而且，博客往往是免费的，而书籍和论文则被锁定在付费墙之后。因此，你可以这么认为，博客获取灵感，书籍获取知识。

我想强调一个关于知识/学术研究的诀窍。

生命太短暂，不能花在那些不值得阅读的内容上面。

就算你是一个很爱读书的人，活到 70 岁最多大概能阅读 15000 本书，这只占世界最大图书馆美国国会图书馆 3800 万册藏书的 0.04%。

我们一生中能够阅读的书籍其实很少。因此，诀窍不是多读，而是跳过那些不值得读的内容。

Anzaldua uses a metaphor to describe the part of her that refuses to take orders from outside authorities and hates any kind of limitations. She personifies her rebellion as a powerful and uncontrollable force within her.

The word choice and setting here work together to create a vivid image of poverty and tradition. The use of "bean tacos" emphasizes the cultural roots of the community, while the mention of "2 peaceful generations removed" emphasizes how long it has been since the revolution that inspired those roots.

reply to u/m_t_rv_s__n at https://www.reddit.com/r/Zettelkasten/comments/11bxjms/am_i_taking_too_long_to_finish_notes/

Some of it depends on what you're reading for and what you're trying to get out of the reading. On a recent 26 page journal article, I spent several hours over a couple of days (months apart) reading and taking notes in a relatively thorough fashion. I spent another hour or so refining them further and filing them and another 15 minutes noting out references for follow up. It was in an area I'm generally very familiar with, so it wasn't difficult or dense, but has lots of material I specifically know I'll be using in the near future for some very specific writing. Because I know it's something of specific interest to me and several overlapping projects, I had a much deeper "conversation with the text" than I otherwise might have.

Because it was done digitally, you can see the actual highlights and annotations and even check the timestamps if you like (you'll have to click through individual notes to get these timestamps): https://hypothes.is/users/chrisaldrich?q=url%3Aurn%3Ax-pdf%3A6053dd751da0fa870cad9a71a28882ba Some of it is basic data I'll use for a variety of purposes on several already well-defined projects. A few are for more slowly developing projects further out on the horizon. It's relatively easy to see the 10 or 15 permanent notes that I'll pull out of this group of about 74 notes. Since writing them, I've already referenced two of the more fleeting notes/highlights by searching for related tags on other reading which look like they may actually develop further.

Had this been something less targeted to my specific area, say for a master's level course of general interest, I'd probably have spent far less time on it and likely not gone over about 15 or so notes. Sometimes for these, I'll just read the abstract and conclusions and scan the references. Reading lots of these in your area of interest gives you some idea of the space and types of questions you might be asking. As you hone in on a thesis, you'll begin asking more and more questions and delve more deeply into material, and if something you read in the past becomes more specific to your project then you'll likely go back to re-read it at a deeper level, but you'll still have your prior work at your fingertips as a potential guide.

Once you know what your particular thesis is going to be your reading becomes more dense and targeted. Some things you'll read several times and go through with fine-toothed combs while others you'll skim to get the gist/context and only excerpt small specific pieces which you need and then move on.

(If you need it, remember that you only need one or two good permanent notes per day to make some serious progress.)

I've done something like this when I think a particular reference(s) can answer a question related to a train of thought. But I keep cards of unread sources at the front of my sources section so that it's easier to pull it out frequently to prioritize and decide what I should be reading or working on next. These will then have links to the open questions I've noted, so that I can go back to those sections either as I'm reading/writing or to add those ideas into the appropriate folgezettel. These sorts of small amounts of work documented briefly can add up quickly over time. Source cards with indications of multiple open questions that might be answered is sometimes a good measure of desire to read, though other factors can also be at play.

That to-read pile of bibliographic source notes (a mini antilibrary) is akin to walking into a party and surveying a room. I may be aware of some of the people I haven't met yet and the conversations we might have, but if there are interesting questions I know I want to ask of specific ones or conversations I already know I want to have, it can be more productive to visit those first.

This sort of practice has been particularly helpful for times when I want to double check someone's sources or an original context, but don't have the time to do it immediately, don't want to break another extended train of thought, have to wait on materials, or may have to make a trip to consult physical materials that are singular or rare. For quick consultative reading, this can be a boon when I know I don't want or need to read an entire work, but skimming a chapter or a few pages for a close reading of a particular passage. I'll often keep a pile of these sorts of sources at hand so that I can make a short trip to a library, pick them up, find what I need and move on without having to recreate large portions of context to get the thing done because I've already laid most of the groundwork.

reply https://forum.zettelkasten.de/discussion/comment/16622/#Comment_16622

Adler has an excellent primer on this subject that covers a lot of the basics in reasonable depth: - Adler, Mortimer J. “How to Mark a Book.” Saturday Review of Literature, July 6, 1940. (https://stevenson.ucsc.edu/academics/stevenson-college-core-courses/how-to-mark-a-book-1.pdf)

Marking books can be useful not only to the original reader, but future academics and historians studying material culture (eg: https://apps.lib.umich.edu/online-exhibits/exhibits/show/marks-in-books), and as @GeoEng51 indicates they might be shared by friends, family, romantic interests, or even perhaps all of the above (see: https://newcriterion.com/issues/2017/4/mrs-custers-tennyson).

For those interested in annotation marks and symbols (like @ctietze's "bolt" ↯) I outlined a few ideas this last month at: https://www.reddit.com/r/Zettelkasten/comments/10qw4l5/comment/j6vxn6a/?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=web2x&context=3

Mrs. Custer’s Tennyson April 2017<br /> by William Logan

This emphasizes the importance of the designer understanding how their work ties into how people determine their level as designers.

The values that this style presented were impactful enough to reach the U.S thus foreshadowing it's importance.

This can relate to their approaches to design and how they may relate to our approaches.

This will be important to keep in mind for later in the reading.

1. background
2. methods
3. results
4. discussion/conclusion

reply to u/m_t_rv_s__n at https://www.reddit.com/r/Zettelkasten/comments/112k929/how_long_do_you_spend_in_a_single_notetaking/

Quite often my sessions can be in small 5-10 minute blocks doing one or more individual tasks that compose reading, writing, or filing/linking things together. Usually I don't go over a couple of hours without at least a small break or two.

Like Luhmann “I only do what is easy. I only write when I immediately know how to do it. If I falter for a moment, I put the matter aside and do something else.” Incidentally by "easy" here, I think Luhmann also includes the ideas of fun, interesting, pleasurable, and (Csikszentmihalyi's) flow.

For my lowest level reading I'll only quickly log what I've read along with a few index terms and a short note or two, if at all. For deeper analytical reading (as defined by Adler & van Doren) those sessions are more intense and I aim to have a direct "conversation with the text". Notes made there can sometimes be 2 - 10 minutes in length. I can often average about 50 annotations in a given day of which maybe 2 or 3 will be longer, fileable zettels. Most of my notes start as digital public annotations which one can view at https://hypothes.is/users/chrisaldrich if they like. On the topic of notes per day, I have a collection for that, some of which is given as a synopsis with some caveats here: https://boffosocko.com/2023/01/14/s-d-goiteins-card-index-or-zettelkasten/#Notes%20per%20day%20comparison.

Lesen lernen<br /> by Daniel Lüdecke

For newer non-surveillance capitalist alternatives to Goodreads:

• Bookrastinating
• LibraryThing
• The StoryGraph

This idea is closely related to "talking rocks" and seems a very apt parallel.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incremental_reading

Incremental reading is spaced parallel reading of multiple sources with note taking and spaced repetition.

It's not far from how I read and take notes myself, though I place less emphasis on the spaced repetition piece as I tend to run across things naturally within my note collection anyway.

One of the major potential benefits of incremental reading (not mentioned in the Wikipedia article; is it in Wozniak's work?) is the increase of combinatorial creativity created by mixing a variety of topics simultaneously.

There is also likely a useful diffuse thinking effect happening between reading sessions.

Yes, I would like to read more on this topic.

—u/IamOkei https://www.reddit.com/r/antinet/comments/10qpphw/given_that_you_do_analog_notemaking_do_you/

link to John Water's quote: https://hypothes.is/a/E6wDpPfVEey88SclTBoJPQ

https://polygloss.app/posts/how-to-learn-languages-through-reading/

Because reading, annotating/note taking, and occasional outlining and writing can be broken down into small, concrete building blocks, each part of the process can be done separately and discretely with relatively easy ability to shift from one part of the process to another.

Importantly, one can be working on multiple different high level projects (content production: writing, audio, video, etc.) simultaneously in a way which doesn't break the flow of one's immediate reading. While a particular note within a piece may not come to fruition within a current imagined project, it may spark an idea for a future as yet unimagined project.

Aside: It would seem that Ryan Holiday's descriptions of his process are discrete with respect to each individual project. He's never mentioned using or reusing notes from past projects for current or future projects. He's even gone to the level that he creates custom note cards for his current project which have a title pre-printed on them.

Does this pre-titling help to provide him with more singular focus for his specific workflow? Some who may be prone to being side-tracked or with specific ADHD issues may need or be helped by these visual and workflow cues to stay on task, and as a result be helped by them. For others it may hinder their workflows and creativity.

This process may be different for beginning students or single project writers versus career writers (academics, journalists, fiction and non-fiction writers).

As a concrete example of the above, I personally made a note here about Darwin and Lamarck for a separate interest in evolution which falls outside of my immediate area of interest with respect to note taking and writing output.

I've been heavily focused on note making while reading to the detriment of the different form of note making for lectures.

https://debugger.medium.com/a-search-engine-that-finds-you-weird-old-books-3a74fbb5f3d4

Weird Old Book Finder: http://weird-old-book-finder.glitch.me/

After Ahrens' book I see an awful lot of people talking about "processing" books. There are too many assumptions about what this can mean and this hides many levels of inherent work involved in analyzing and synthesizing knowledge. I would suggest that we're better off talking about reading them, annotating, excerpting, and thinking about them, or maybe writing about and combining them with other knowledge than "processing" them.

https://dice.camp/@brennenreece/109622279965144935

example of someone "processing" a book and doing so in the context of having read Ahrens

Read this paper

"Romances" or more what we'd call adventure stories perhaps today. What he does read is relevant to his job and he's much more well read than Harriet

Historians, sociologists, anthropologists, and surely other researchers must often "read against the grain" which historian Keith Thomas defines as reading a text, not so much for what the author was explicitly trying to directly communicate to the reader, but for the small tidbits that the author through the text "incidentally or unintentionally reveals."

https://kimberlyhirsh.com/2022/12/02/my-reading-year.html

https://web.archive.org/web/20221202202544/https://www.edsurge.com/news/2022-11-25-press-play-isn-t-a-teaching-strategy-why-educators-need-new-methods-for-video

I’ve read this advice in several articles now. It’s time I put this into practice. This means, no more highlights in Hypothes.is, only annotations from now on.

61 Mortimer Jerome Adler and Charles Van Doren, How to Read a Book, Rev. and updated ed (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1972), 45.

I see some of the sense of this footnote, which helps to establish some ethos by calling to mind Adler/Van Doren's classic, but this particular page in their text is really about paying enough attention not to fall asleep and thus doesn't underline Scheper's point as well as references to other portions of their book about goals and active reading.

https://readwriterespond.com/2022/11/commonplace-book-a-verb-or-a-noun/

Sometimes the root question is "what to I want to do this for?" Having an underlying reason can be hugely motivating.

Are you collecting examples of things for students? (seeing examples can be incredibly powerful, especially for defining spaces) for yourself? Are you using them for exploring a particular space? To clarify your thinking/thought process? To think more critically? To write an article, blog, or book? To make videos or other content?

Your own website is a version of many of these things in itself. You read, you collect, you write, you interlink ideas and expand on them. You're doing it much more naturally than you think.

I find that having an idea of the broader space, what various practices look like, and use cases for them provides me a lot more flexibility for what may work or not work for my particular use case. I can then pick and choose for what suits me best, knowing that I don't have to spend as much time and effort experimenting to invent a system from scratch but can evolve something pre-existing to suit my current needs best.

It's like learning to cook. There are thousands of methods (not even counting cuisine specific portions) for cooking a variety of meals. Knowing what these are and their outcomes can be incredibly helpful for creatively coming up with new meals. By analogy students are often only learning to heat water to boil an egg, but with some additional techniques they can bake complicated French pâtissier. Often if you know a handful of cooking methods you can go much further and farther using combinations of techniques and ingredients.

What I'm looking for in the reading, note taking, and creation space is a baseline version of Peter Hertzmann's 50 Ways to Cook a Carrot combined with Michael Ruhlman's Ratio: The Simple Codes Behind the Craft of Everyday Cooking. Generally cooking is seen as an overly complex and difficult topic, something that is emphasized on most aspirational cooking shows. But cooking schools break the material down into small pieces which makes the processes much easier and more broadly applicable. Once you've got these building blocks mastered, you can be much more creative with what you can create.

How can we combine these small building blocks of reading and note taking practices for students in the 4th - 8th grades so that they can begin to leverage them in high school and certainly by college? Is there a way to frame them within teaching rhetoric and critical thinking to improve not only learning outcomes, but to improve lifelong learning and thinking?

also:

Full ownership of a book only comes when you have made it a part of yourself, and the best way to make yourself a part of it—which comes to the same thing—is by writing in it. —Adler, Mortimer J., and Charles Van Doren. How to Read a Book. Revised and Updated edition. 1940. Reprint, New York: Simon & Schuster, 1972.

They also suggest that due to the relative low cost of books, it's easier to justify writing in them, though they carve out an exception for the barbarism of scribbling in library books.

Reading is suggested to be potentially waning, maybe becoming more elite or even obsolete. It seems to disregard its counterpart: writing. For every thing that can be read, writing has preceded it. Writing, other than direct transcription, is not just creating text it is a practice, that also creates effects/affordances for the writer. Also thinking of Rheingold's definition of literacy as a skill plus community in which that skill is widely present. Writing/reading started out as bookkeeping, and I assume professional classes will remain text focused (although AR is an 'oral' path here too)

We don't talk about the art of reading or the art of note making often enough as a goal to which students might aspire. It's too often framed as a set of rules and an mechanical process rather than a road to producing interesting, inspiring, or insightful content that can change humanity.

Dialectical notes are made at the level of syntopical reading and entail creating a conversation not only between the reader and the author, but create a conversation of questions and answers between and among many texts and the reader.

Conceptual notes are made during the analytical reading of a book and "give answers to questions about the truth and significance of the book."

Adler and Van Doren define structural note making as the sorts of questions one might ask at the level of inspectional reading including: - what kind of book is it? - what is it about? - what is the overall structure with respect to the argument the author intends to make?

Adler and Van Doren indicate that outlining the arguments and structure of a book on its endpapers is a better and higher measurement of one's ownership of a text compared to a bookplate which only indicates the lower level of "financial" ownership.

Active reading is thinking, and thinking requires expression which can come in many forms including both spoken and written ones.

I like that he acknowledges that expression (and thus thinking) can be done in both oral or written forms.

This reminds me of the purpose of reading at CAA. If you tell no one about it, then it wasn't worth the effort. What new did you learn and how did you pass that on to improve your friends, colleagues, and society?

also includes opening oneself up to open questions one might either ask themselves or those which the author proposes.

The authors don't cover it, but the skimming portion of inspectional reading helps one to build some of the context which the author is attempting to relay. Preloading some of this context will decrease one's mental burden when more deeply and actively attempting to consume a text.

https://library.harvard.edu/collections/reading-harvard-views-readers-readership-and-reading-history

Reading: Harvard Views of Readers, Readership, and Reading History<br /> Exploring the intellectual, cultural, and political history of reading as reflected in the historical holdings of the Harvard's libraries.

3/ Champion your competition’s work<br><br>With his reading list email, on podcasts, in his bookstore, Ryan promotes other books more than his own.<br><br>When asked, he’ll say:<br><br>“Authors think they’re competing with other authors. They’re not. They’re competing with people not reading.”

— Billy Oppenheimer (@bpoppenheimer) August 24, 2022

source?

Where is the origin of this reading analogy?

-I will download this full article through EBSCO

-This article will provide me with teaching strategies that use technology in elementary reading lessons.

-rating 8/10

McDermott, P., & Gormley, K. A. (2016). Teachers’ use of technology in elementary reading lessons. Reading Psychology, 37(1), 121-146.

relatable to: https://hypothes.is/a/wIyvtm0oEeyNypNtc--Clw

The mainstream is seen as the standard while the underground is seen as a copy or replica.

Sometimes art and ideas can be considered as less than what already is accepted, as a result of things becoming more simplified and easier, resulting these neglected or irrelevant ideas one day becoming crucial to the future.

This was a great statement because it sparks curiosity in how the world around us is greatly influenced by the past and this which can result in what can be considered "Theft" and copyright infringement when considering how simple it has become to succeed commercially.

For her online book clubs, Maggie Delano defines four broad types of notes as a template for users to have a common language: - terms - propositions (arguments, claims) - questions - sources (references which support the above three types)

I'm fairly sure in a separate context, I've heard that these were broadly lifted from her reading of Mortimer J. Adler's How to Read a book. (reference? an early session of Dan Allosso's Obsidian Book club?)

These become the backbone of breaking down a book and using them to have a conversation with the author.

https://www.supermemo.com/en/archives1990-2015/help/read

via

Inspired by @cicatriz's Fractal Inquiry and SuperMemo's Incremental Reading, I imported into @RoamResearch a paper I was very impressed (but also overwhelmed) by a few years ago: The Knowledge‐Learning‐Instruction Framework by @koedinger et al. pic.twitter.com/oeJzyjPGbk

— Stian Håklev (@houshuang) December 16, 2020

Experimentation was something that became increasingly important even though it wasn't supported much at times.

This was revised in 1972, but this statement is sadly still broadly true today in 2022.

What other advanced reading teaching is broadly available outside of this particular text?

Just as predictive means may be used on the level of letters, words, and even whole sentences within information theory at the level of specific languages, does early orality sophistication in children help them to become predictive readers at earlier ages?

How could one go about testing this, particularly in a broad, neurodiverse group?

Hence, researchers are very active at the present time, and their work has resulted in numerous new approaches to reading instruction. Among the more important new programs are the so-called eclectic approach, the individualized reading approach, the language-experience approach, the various approaches based on linguistic principles, and others based more or less closely on some kind of programmed instruction. In addition, new mediums such as the Initial Teaching Alphabet ( i.t.a. ) have been employed, and sometimes these involve new methods as well. Still other devices and programs are the "total immersion method," the "foreign-language-school

Have we ultimately come to the conclusion that neurodiversity means there is no one-size-fits all solution? Should we also be placing some focus on orality and memory methods to allow those to flourish as well? Where is the literature on "orality pedagogy"? Is it a thing? It should be...

This would seem to indicate that reading's primary importance was to fuel capitalism and production. It certainly says a lot about American culture, particularly in a book that wants to focus on syntopical reading.

Did this approach have a categorical name?

When did phonics start as a practice historically? Presumably after Mortimer J. Adler's note here?

The great vowel shift and the variety of admixtures of languages comprising English make it significantly harder to learn to read compared to other languages whose orthography and sound systems (example: Japanese hiragana) are far simpler and more straightforward.

note that they're incorrectly capitalizing these types of reading to indicate their importance.

There are three goals of most reading: education, information, and understanding.

Are there others we're missing here?

Here is a dramatic reading of the whole poem, it is very compelling. https://youtu.be/qDsTELEAL3A

Barbara Tuchman recommended using the smallest sized index cards possible to force one only to "extract the strictly relevant" because copying by hand can be both "a chore and a bore".

In the same address in 1963, she encourages "distill[ing] from the very beginning, to pass the material through the grinder of one's own mind, so to speak." This practice is similar to modern day pedagogues who encourage this practice, but with the benefit of psychology research to back up the practice.

This advice is two-fold in terms of filtering out the useless material for an author, but the grinder metaphor indicates placing multiple types of material in to to a processor to see what new combinations of products come out the other end. This touches more subtly on the idea of combinatorial creativity encouraged by Raymond Llull, Matt Ridley, et al. or the serendipity described by Niklas Luhmann and others.

When did the writing for understanding idea begin within the tradition? Was it through experience in part and then underlined with psychology research? Visit Ahrens' references on this for particular papers to read.

Link to modality shift research.

This list is a great framework for showing students what they don't know, so they can actively work and practice at becoming better at their craft.

I feel like actively annotating and "reading with a pen in hand" has been a great way to practice many of these points. Questioning texts, marking open problems, etc. goes a long way toward practicing these methods.

Historically the vast majority of zettelkasten didn't have the sort of structure and design of Luhmann's, though with indexing they certainly create a network of notes and excerpts. These examples are just subsets or excerpts of someone's reading of these books and surely anyone else reading any book is going to have a unique set of notes on them. These sets were specifically honed and curated for a particular purpose.

The interesting pattern here is that someone is selling a subset of their work/notes as a set of cards rather than as a book. Doing this allows different sorts of reading and uses than a "traditional" book would.

I'm curious what other sort of experimental things people might come up with? The "novel" Cain's Jawbone, for example, could be considered a "Zettelkasten mystery" or "Zettelkasten puzzle". There's also the subset of cards from Roland Barthes' fichier boîte (French for zettelkasten), which was published posthumously as Mourning Diary.

In the attention economy, social media is the equivalent of fast food. Just like going out for fine dining or even healthier gourmet cooking at home, we need to make the time and effort to consume higher quality information sources. Books, journal articles, and longer forms of content with more editorial and review which take time and effort to produce are better choices.

This relates to the increasing difficulty of being originial with the rapid advances in productivity today.

This relates to sticking to past foundations that are somewhat indispensable.

Today, this is foundational since there are constantly advances in works of typography making documentation and research important to giving future credit.

Clarity becomes less important due the focus on the composition being centralized as it relates to improving the visual appeal of the artistic, "arrangement."

The central axis in art relates to a somewhat balanced distribution of space on an art piece.

“ARTTALK Chapter 10 Balance - Ppt Google Img.” SlidePlayer, https://slideplayer.com/slide/10709291/.

This emphasizes that having clear communication is made crucially important due to the difficulty of communicating to those who are surrounded by countless other "prints."

What specifically does she define "writing" to be? What exactly is she writing, and how much? What does her process look like?

One might also consider the idea of active reading and writing notes. I may not "write" daily in the way she means, but my note writing, is cumulative and beneficial in the ways she describes in her list. I might further posit that the amount of work/effort it takes me to do my writing is far more fruitful and productive than her writing.

When I say writing, I mean focused note taking (either excerpting, rephrasing, or original small ideas which can be stitched together later). I don't think this is her same definition.

I'm curious how her process of writing generates new ideas and creativity specifically?

One might analogize the idea of active reading with a pen in hand as a sort of Einsteinian space-time. Many view reading and writing as to separate and distinct practices. What if they're melded together the way Einstein reconceptualized the space time continuum? The writing advice provided by those who write about commonplace books, zettelkasten, and general note taking combines an active reading practice with a focused writing practice that moves one toward not only more output, but higher quality output without the deleterious effects seen in other methods.

Joseph Harris uses a mélange of materials to make his writing including books, papers, magazines, from which he is copying sections out, writing in margins, making notes on index cards and then moving those pieces of text and pieces of paper (the index cards, and possibly Post-it notes) around to create his output.

He doesn't delineate a specific process for his excerpting or note taking practice. How does he organize his notes? Is he just pulling them from piles around him? Is there a sense of organization at all?

Courtney, Jennifer Pooler. “A Review of Rewriting: How to Do Things with Texts.” The Journal of Effective Teaching 7, no. 1 (2007): 74–77.

Review of: Harris, Joseph. Rewriting: How To Do Things With Texts. Logan: Utah State University Press, 2006. https://muse.jhu.edu/book/9248.

https://web.archive.org/web/20060309154747/http://www.levenger.com/PAGETEMPLATES/PRODUCT/Product.asp?Params=Category=17-722|PageID=4035|Level=2-3

https://web.archive.org/web/20050525173720/http://www.levenger.com/PAGETEMPLATES/NAVIGATION/PRDPREVIEW.ASP?Params=category=17-722|level=2-3|pageid=4209|CatID=17-722|Lvl=2-3|Special=featured

https://mleddy.blogspot.com/2005/05/tools-for-serious-readers.html

Interesting (now discontinued) reading list product from Levenger that in previous generations may have been covered by a commonplace book but was quickly replaced by digital social products (bookmark applications or things like Goodreads.com or LibraryThing.com).

Presently I keep a lot of this sort of data digitally myself using either/both: Calibre or Zotero.

Bjorn, Genevive A., Laura Quaynor, and Adam J. Burgasser. “Reading Research for Writing: Co-Constructing Core Skills Using Primary Literature.” Impacting Education: Journal on Transforming Professional Practice 7, no. 1 (January 14, 2022): 47–58. https://doi.org/10.5195/ie.2022.237

Found via:

#AcademicTwitter I survived crushing reading loads in grad school by creating a straightforward method for analyzing primary literature, called #CERIC. Saved my sanity and improved my focus. @PhDVoice. Here’s the free paper - https://t.co/YehbLQNEqJ

— Genevive Bjorn (@GeneviveBjorn) September 11, 2022

I'm curious how this is similar to the traditions of commonplace books and zettelkasten from a historical perspective.

Not well defined. What do they mean specifically by categorical reading methods? CERIC may be one, but what are others? Are they standardized?

Here's some justification for the prior statement on equity, but it comes after instead of before. (see: https://hypothes.is/a/SHEFJjM6Ee2Gru-y0d_1lg)

While there is some foundation to the claim given, it would need more support. The sage on the stage may be becoming outmoded with other potential models, but removing it altogether does remove some pieces which may help to support neurodiverse learners who work better via oral transmission rather than using literate modes (eg. dyslexia).

Who is to say that it's "just" sage on the stage lecturing and regurgitation? Why couldn't these same analytical practices be aimed at lectures, interviews, or other oral modes of presentation which will occur during thesis research? (Think anthropology and sociology research which may have much more significant oral aspects.)

Certainly some of these methods can create new levels of agency on the part of the learner/researcher. Has anyone designed experiments to measure this sort of agency growth?

Are some of the critical reading methods they're framing here similar to or some of the type found at Project Zero (https://pz.harvard.edu/thinking-routines)?

This appears to be the closed definition in the paper for the idea of categorical reading methods. They only provide one example without any comparison or contrast for better contextualization.

What is a more concrete idea for this particular term?

Du Boulay, 1999; Saltmarsh & Saltmarsh, 2008<br /> Noticing that they've left these references off of the end of the paper.

If we measure what we care about, why don't we do more grading and assessment of students' evidence of reading in addition to their writing? If we looked more closely at note taking and understanding first and foremost, would the ultimate analysis sort itself out? Instead we look only at the end products instead of the process. Focus more on the process and first class work here and the results will take care of themselves.

cross reference:

take care of the pennies and the pounds will take care of themselves (see: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/take_care_of_the_pennies_and_the_pounds_will_take_care_of_themselves)

The Tolumin model is an evidence based method of teaching argumentation.

CREATE - Consider - Read - Elucidate hypotheses - Analyze and interpret data - Think of the next - Experiment

Evaluating Scientific Research Literature (ESRL) is a method for teaching students how to navigate and understand primary literature. (typically undergraduates)

More effective than what? Just highlighting? What does Ahmad show? Is there a hierarchy of strategies that have been cross tested with larger groups? What effect does a depth and breadth of neurodiverse subjects show, for example?

This is the my first encounter with REAP.

REAP is an acronym for Read, Encode, Annotate, Ponder.

Has anyone done direct research on commonplacing or zettelkasten techniques to show concrete data to compare them with other currently more popular techniques like Cornell notes or REAP?

Read for potential methods and set up for a potential meta study: Ahmad, S. Z. (2019). Impact of Cornell Notes vs. REAP on EFL secondary school students’ critical reading skills. International Education Studies, 12(10), 60-74

What results do Brown et al show exactly? How do they dovetail with the citations and material in Ahrens2017 on these topics?

Brown, P. C., Roediger, H. L., & McDaniel, M. A. (2014). Make it stick: The science of successful learning. The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/jhu/detail.action?docID=3301452

Ahrens, doesn't provide a full citation of Brown, but does quote it for the same broad purpose (see: https://hypothes.is/a/8ewTno3pEeydaHscXVaIzw) specifically with respect to the idea that highlighting doesn't help in the learning process, yet students still actively do it.

Hypothes.is “Are Your Students Doing the Reading? Seven Strategies for Motivating Students to Complete the Course Reading.” Hypothes.is, August 22, 2022. https://docdrop.org/pdf/Are-Your-Students-Doing-the-Rea---Hypothes.is-gaulj.pdf/

Minzetanu, Andrei. “Reading to Quote or Ars Legendi as Ars Excerpendi.” Litterature, December 1, 2012, 31. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/290606505_Reading_to_Quote_or_Ars_Legendi_as_Ars_Excerpendi

What a fantastic question.

Useful and likely human written texts show the richness of the context it results from, by showing and linking. Not just to/with 1) other texts, but also 2) other actions (things created, data gathering, experiments, tools adapted) and 3) people (that provided input, you look at, interact with outside the text). Even if such things were generated following up those leads should show its inauthenticity.

A text is a result of work, next to itself being work to write it. A text that does not show any of the work that led to writing a text is suspect. Does a text reflect an exploration that it annotates? Does it show social connections, include data points, external examples, artefacts created alongside the text (e.g. lists), references to the wider context/system of what the text discusses, experimental actions.

Relevant links in a text are a sign of the context the text emerged from, and the conversation it is situated in. Lack of such links or references is a potential sign of inauthentic texts (generated or not)

Highlighted portion is a quote from Kuehn sub-quoting David Lodge, Deaf Sentence (New York: Viking 2008)

Ownership is certainly a factor here, but given how inexpensive many books are now, if you own it, why not mark it up? See also: Mortimer J. Adler's position on this.

Marking up library books is a barbarism; not marking up your own books is a worse sin.

https://web.archive.org/web/20170429050031/http://takingnotenow.blogspot.com/2013/08/underlining-in-library-books.html

https://zettelkasten.de/posts/making-proper-marks-in-books/

https://www.reddit.com/r/books/comments/wue2ex/looking_for_books_with_wider_margins_for/

Not long after I posted this it had about 3 upvotes, including my automatic 1. It's now at 0, and there are several responses about not writing in books at all. It seems like this particular book community is morally opposed to writing in one's books! 🤣

Why though? There's a tremendously long tradition of writing in books, and probably more so when they were far more expensive! Now they're incredibly inexpensive commodities, so why should we be less inclined to write in them, particularly when there's reasonable evidence of the value of doing so?

I might understand not writing in library books as part of their value within the commons, but https://booktraces.org/ indicates that almost 12% or more of the books they've tracked prior to 1924 have some sort of mark, writing, or evidence that it was actively read.

Given what I know of the second hand markets, it's highly unlikely that my books (marked up or not) will ever be read by another person.

There's so much more to say here, but I just haven't the time today...

https://jhiblog.org/reading-lists/

Dutcher suggest that there are three "purposes in reading": information, thought, and style.

• When given choice what to read students are more motivated to read.
• Also, give students choice in how they demonstrate their comprehension of the text.
• Have faith in students ability to tackle "hard" texts. Help them by explaining what they are getting into and how they might deal with it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gT1EExZkzMM

Quick outline of how Holiday reads, annotates, and then processes the ideas from books into his index card-based commonplace book.