In a previous thread I indicated that in the same way that we need a repertoire of reading strategies, we also need to recognize the different types of articles, book chapters and books we read.
In this thread I’ll showcase several types.
1) this piece about shadowing of political elites is one of my favourites - it’s in @polanalysis (a rather quantitative journal), focuses on a qualitative method (shadowing) and is by one of my favourite political scientists (@jenniferbussell)
I started with the Abstract.
Reading the first page took me just a few minutes and I can gain a lot of insight already.
I marked sentences that I’d like to quote directly (definition of shadowing, how it works). These direct quotations can go in a Cornell Note, CSED row or Everything Notebook or index card
As I have argued in other twitter threads and on my blog, I don’t think methods pieces should be *just* AIC’d. We need to read them in more depth. My argument is simple: someone took the time to give you an overview of a method. This requires a lot of thinking, analysis/synthesis
Therefore, I would recommend (when reading methods papers) using what I call "Deep Engagement" raulpacheco.org/2017/02/readin…
Can students do a quick AIC and once they've read that, determine if they want to do Deep Engagement? Of course they can.
That's the point of "triaging".
Triaging (selecting which articles to read more in-depth, and in which sequence) raulpacheco.org/2019/08/triagi… and learning how to do a Second Round of In-Depth Reading raulpacheco.org/2019/11/on-ski… are both key components of a broad repertoire of reading strategies.
As I've stated before, I think we need to teach students how to read, take notes, systematize their notes and then write. raulpacheco.org/2020/12/on-the…
Ok, I’ve reached the paragraph in the introduction that describes the paper’s structure. This process (reading, highlighting and annotating) took me in total 10 minutes.
I tell my students to write as much as possible of a CSED entry when they finish papers’ Abstract + Intro
Should I (or my students) write an Index Card, some notes in their Everything Notebook or a Cornell Note? Whatever they (or I) choose to do, I ALWAYS write a CSED row for every single paper I read. I can then go back to the full paper whenever I book the time to do so.
I use Bussell’s “paper structure” paragraph as a guide for everything I expect to know about the method by the time I am done. These paragraphs are often overlooked by readers, but they provide excellent signposting to discern exactly what we can expect from articles/chapters.
My students always ask me: “professor, why don’t you just do digital or analog?”
I don’t think we should tie ourselves to just one technique or method or physical or digital support.
There are 3 reasons why I do a combination of digital and analog note-taking. I’ll explain.
Physical supports have varying degrees of searchability. Digital materials can (potentially) work better for searchability.
3) I also believe in complementarity. Writing by hand helps me absorb material
I tell my students and research assistants to ALWAYS keep a master Conceptual Synthesis Excel Dump (CSED or Excel Dump) or a series, too raulpacheco.org/2016/06/synthe…
This is a master digital file where they can dump all their notes (be it drawn from applying AIC or larger memoranda)
For example, I started a CSED row for the Bussell 2020 article. Doing a quick AIC skim won’t give me all the great things Dr. Bussell writes in her piece, BUT it works as a placeholder. If a colleague or a student asks me “have you read about shadowing”, I have where to search.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
THREAD: Teaching students how to differentiate among various types of reading materials is important, not only for students but also for those of us who are educators.
For example, these papers are specific to “methods”: they describe a method (or a type of innovation to make a method work)
I always tell my students to avoid doing an AIC with methods papers. Instead do a meso-level or medium-level read: look for major themes, ideas, concepts.
These are “empirical” papers: authors apply or develop a new method which then is implemented in a case study, comparative examination or dataset.
Empirical papers, in my view, can be first quickly read using AIC and LATER, do a second round of in-depth reading.
THREAD: On a strategy to skim articles (for undergraduates).
Several fellow professors (@drheather_smith@EJMcCann among others) have told me that they find my Reading Strategies resource page slightly advanced for undergraduates. This might be the case (and may apply to ESL)
The above said, I DO have a page with Reading Strategies that is specific for Undergraduate Students (see here - raulpacheco.org/resources/reso…)
When I teach how to read (whether it is to my own undergrad and grad students, or to my research assistants), I always recommend (undergrad or grad) doing a quick skim, THEN a second round.
DISCLOSURE: I paid for this book stand with my hard earned and very devalued Mexican pesos. I bought it for $499 Mexican pesos (circa $23 USD) at Costco but I looked for it this weekend and I couldn’t find them anymore (I should have bought 3. Two for my home offices, one FLACSO.
A couple of features will be intuitive like this flexible adjustment contraption in the back. This book stand comes without any instructions and there is only one YouTube video and it doesn’t give much explanation.
The feature that was NOT intuitive at all and took me a while to move from locked to unlocked and back was the adjustable base that holds books and papers. That takes a while to tinker with but once you get it, locking and unlocking is easy peasy breeze.
THREAD. On writing, note-taking, reading, and synthesizing information. This fall, I taught Research Design at the doctoral level, and a Masters' Research (Thesis) Seminar.
Because of the way I like teaching (research design, research methods and mechanics of research), ....
... I quickly realized that teaching Note-Taking Techniques, Reading Strategies, and Synthesis Methods was complicated. It's kind of a chicken and egg problem. What do students need to learn first, reading or taking notes? Teaching strategies for both is hard to do simultaneously
I tried the following sequence:
- Reading Strategies
- Note-Taking Techniques
- Synthesis Methods
- Writing Tips
Turns out that students are thrust into the "you need to read a lot to understand what I am teaching" model quite early during their programmes. This poses challenges
I have been thinking about writing a thread on how to link theory with research, which probably fits with the question that was asked by @PhDForum earlier today - how do we choose a theoretical framework.
I'm going to try to formulate this discussion as clearly as possible.
This discussion about how to link theory with research (and with the method) is one I have had with @salazar_elena and @gcaleman for a while now. How do we link all the theories we read into what we see in the empirical work?
I believe that there are three elements at play.
1) There are various types and levels of theory (grand theory, meso-level theory, micro-level theory), etc.
2) We (scholars, students, practitioners) need to read very broadly to be able to discern across theories.
3) We need to learn how to establish THEORETICAL EXPECTATIONS