Thread by @raulpacheco

Micro-thread on highlighting and scribbling. One critique of highlighting is that people (students?) tend to highlight EVERYTHING. Sure.

One reason why I colour-code highlights and marginalia is to avoid this. I change colors as I go deeper into the argument sequence.

I came back from Paris w/ 2 sets of highlighters (neon & pastel) so now I combine them and I feel I can be clearer

Combining neon + pastel in my nested, 6 colours scheme allows me to see points that are MOST RELEVANT (neon), relevant (pastel) sequenced

On to scribbling: I do a combination of summaries of ideas AND I link to other authors, my own research. My scribbles are a convo w/MYSELF.

My students ask me “how do I triage? How do I know which article/book chapter I should read more in-depth”. I use several heuristics. This specific paper by @DavidLSwitzer is on the ethics of bottled water (I saw an earlier version at WPSA San Diego IIRC, glad to see in print!)

I study the politics of bottled water, I have a chapter in Sultana and Loftus’ forthcoming book on ethics and HRW and BW, I’m working on a book w @christyzen on this, I have a chapter in my own book. Kind of absolutely crucial for me to engage with this paper. On top of it...

... beyond the substance, it’s important for me to cite and highlight the work of emerging, early career scholars. David is a new assistant professor at Missouri and his work is great so it’s important to connect his work to our larger community and scholarly ecosystem. So...

My scribbles on page 3 are a combo: red fineliner notes indicate basically “wow this is exactly what I discuss in my chapter and I wish I had had the final version of this paper so I could have cited it there!” So now that I have read it I’ll cite it in future publications.

I have written about the AIC skim read process (Abstract, Introduction, Conclusion) and why, even though it’s great to get the gist of a paper, it’s not a substitute for deep engagement. Experience will give you new and improved reading heuristics. Something I do with my own ...

... students and RAs is that I tell them where to skim and which articles I think they should read more deeply

“read Ch 1, 6 and the conclusion of Zenner’s book in depth, skim the rest, read Jepson et al 2017 and Wutich et al 2017, and go from there.” Or for example..

“Out of these 4 readings I would focus on X and Y for methods, Z for theory and skim W for application of methods to education policy”.

I strongly believe that those who are at earlier stages should always ask for guidance. My students do. My RAs too.

After a while YOU decide

</end thread>

ADDENDUM: Links to posts I mention:
1) AIC quick skim raulpacheco.org/2017/01/findin…
2) CSED (my "Excel Dump" method) raulpacheco.org/2016/06/synthe…
3) To avoid reading overload, I recommend that their #2ThingsADay raulpacheco.org/2018/04/the-ac… include 1 AIC+ 1 CSED row raulpacheco.org/2017/12/carvin…

The last point is vital: I tell my students and RAs to make reading part of their daily workflow. My classes are reading-heavy, so if they think they can get away with reading everything the night before they're going to be exhausted and will probably end up skimming everything.

Reading one article a day, writing one CSED row is feasible to me. I know not everyone can make this commitment, but I think RAs and graduate students can, and probably should? But again, to each their own. if you're going to devote one day to reading, that also works too.

As long as you can find a way to make the time you devote to your reading worthwhile. Which leaves me with the last point of this thread: I sometimes live-tweet my reading, particularly for didactic purposes (for my students). BUT I very, very, very strongly recommend that...

... you avoid all distractions as possible when you read. I do it too (which is why I wake up at Ungodly O'Clock). I am coming back to the Switzer paper, and a few others that I have on queue, but those will be done without live-tweeting.

</end thread for realz this time>