Years ago, I made notes on a brief article by Jason Fried, in which he described a writing class he’d like to teach:
Every assignment would be delivered in five versions: A three page version, a one page version, a three paragraph version, a one paragraph version, and a one sentence version.
I thought this was a neat idea I’d like to execute someday, but until my MA started, I never really had the chance (or I never really cared that much about what I was learning in a way I am here, or I didn’t need that level of summarizing to work with the topic, etc. etc.).
For two of our readings so far, I combined Fried’s idea with the keyword method of note-taking I’d read about in a research paper (which I unfortunately cannot find). As far as I can remember, the class was divided into pairs/groups, and they were each allotted a paragraph from a reading. The students were supposed to discuss amongst themselves and come up with three keywords for the said paragraph. (Or perhaps they were supposed to come up with three keywords for each paragraph.) Later, they would explain why they chose the keywords they did.
For the purposes of this post, what I remembered was the “3 keywords per paragraph” part. While working on my readings, I found myself going for “3 bullets per paragraph”–so phrases would count too.
Caveat 1: Do note that summarizing is a skill that requires practice and training; it’s not as effective in helping you learn if you don’t know how to summarize well. Check out this research paper by John Dunlosky et al. (2013), or, for a simpler explanation, Dunlosky’s magazine article on the same, which describes other strategies that are more useful and effective. I also covered these strategies and their applications in an issue of The Metronome.
3 bullets per paragraph
We worked on the first reading as a group. The article had 11 paragraphs, so after reading it in its entirety for the first time, we read it again, focusing on one paragraph at a time, and extracted the three (never more) points that captured the gist of each paragraph. Some paragraphs had only one point, which was okay–the goal was to not get lost in the details, but to extract what was most important to understand and remember.
Some paragraphs had two points, with one of them having a couple of sub-points. This can be risky; things would get too detailed.
Once we had 3 bullets for each of the 11 paragraphs in the article, I went through them again and identified the most important point in each paragraph–when I did this, I found that some paragraphs were saying the same things, but with different examples. This allowed me to have an even shorter summary of 10-12 points (this wasn’t a criteria; I used as many as were required), with the redundant points removed. The next day we had to give a presentation on the article, so having the points helped me prepare succinct slides.
This was more than two weeks ago; I haven’t consulted the material since but I still remember a pretty large chunk of that reading–which was expected, given the variety of deep-processing methods that were used: summarizing (which required understanding and thinking about the material), discussing, and presenting (both of which required me to explain some concepts or relate examples).
The second time I did this activity, we were given a History chapter to summarize (this was a class on academic reading, writing, and studying) in about 90 minutes. Since we had a deadline and this was a graded activity, I lost some of my focus and forgot the “3 bullets only” rule, which led to my notes being anything but summarized. My first summary (which was supposed to be in paragraphs, not bullet points) was too detailed, so I stopped halfway and started afresh. This time, I went through the detailed notes and circled the most important points, and then proceeded from there. This one was much better.
Now that we’re getting readings everyday, this is how I’m applying what I’ve learned from these two experiences:
Caveat 2: I know that I recently wrote about the tyranny/fetishization of note-taking that I recently overcame. I’m using this strategy only for my studies; life’s too short to always be taking notes that you’ll never return to.
- Read the whole text in its entirety (stopping only to note doubts or look up words I don’t know). If it’s a long reading, go one section at a time.
- Read the text again, going one paragraph at a time, rereading it a couple of times if needed.
- Note, as succinctly as possible (use arrows, doodles, short forms, etc. ), the three main points of each paragraph.
- Go through the bullets again, extracting the gist from those three points (see Fried’s assignment above).
I have done this and will do this on paper; doodling and organizing is easier that way–not to mention there’s nothing to distract me.
Right now, I don’t have enough time to follow Fried’s five-version assignment for each text every day. My goal is to act on points 1-3 during my first study session with a text, and then act on point 4 at a later date, to encourage the effects of spaced retrieval practice.
Note also: Some texts are organized more systematically (such as a Psychology chapter describing human development over a lifespan) than others (such as an op-ed on a new entrance exam introduced in the country). For those, graphic organizers are a better idea–they’re more effective and empirically-supported.
It’s only the beginning of the semester and my degree; as expectations, assignments, and my understanding of foundational topics evolves, my methods might evolve too. For now, this is what’s working for me.