I have been experimenting with several different techniques for using this system for technical reading, particularly in the study of law.
As I mentioned in an earlier post, I was having trouble with the amount of studying vs. mindmapping. Additionally, I was not getting as much comprehension as I wanted. For what it's worth, my tips are below:
* My mindmapping was exactly how Tony Buzan's book, The Mind Map Book, said not to mindmap. (1996, p. 12). A mindmap is not just a series of connected circles. To correct this, I have (1) begun adding drawings and more colors to my mindmaps, but more significantly, (2) have made multiple, smaller mindmaps for the each topic instead of relying on one large mindmap. (I still have a general outline mindmap, but it only serves to give an overview and doesn't go into much detail.) The information in the mindmaps, of course, varies depending on the purpose.
* For added comprehension, I found that I needed to (1) articulate a more clear purpose; and (2) actually write down questions, beginning from broad questions and ending in more specific questions, based on my initial survey & trigger words. There is just too much information for me to try to remember without writing it down. I then base my mindmap off of the answers to the questions I have, and I also have a handy set of questions that I can use in class or at work as ready references. If I ask the right questions, they will be the same ones that the professor or client will ask. These questions lead to others, and my mind continues to be active.
[For example, here are a few questions that I had from one chapter (130 pages, entitled Habeas Corpus) of my textbook from the first survey. Note the questions' move from general to specific:
• What is Habeas Corpus?
• What authority entitles a person to file a writ of Habeas Corpus?
• Who is entitled to file a writ of Habeas Corpus?
• Under what circumstances would a person normally invoke Habeas Corpus?
• In which court would a person file a writ of Habeas Corpus? (Venue)
• Which courts (state & federal) have jurisdiction to hear writs of Habeas Corpus?
• At what point is a writ of Habeas Corpus timely?
• What type of review does a court conduct on a writ of Habeas Corpus?
• What, if any, difference exists in the way a court reviews a writ of Habeas Corpus from an inmate that has committed a capital offense versus that of an ordinary felony or misdemeanant?
• What role do state proceedings play in invoking Habeas Corpus?
• What effect, if any, did the referenced 1996 legislation have on the Habeas Corpus statute?
• Must an inmate plead not guilty or maintain his innocence in order to file an effective writ of Habeas Corpus?
• What Constitutional rights are often implicated in the Habeas Corpus proceedings? Specifically, which right or rights would an inmate typically allege that a prosecutor (or the defense counsel) violated?
• What are the main cases involving Habeas Corpus, and what are their holdings and facts?
• What role does harmless error play in the Habeas Corpus determinations?]
* As I activate, my mind guides me to other words and concepts in the text that I either missed when I first surveyed the book or couldn't understand because they built upon concepts that I had not yet uncovered. As long as I keep writing down the trigger words and formulating and writing questions at the end of one activiation session in preparation for the next one, my mind remains active and my desire to continue to activate stays with me. These methods require more time, but my comprehension is getting to be at a comfortable level.
I'm sure there are a lot of different ways to master technical reading. This just happens to be mine for what it's worth. Any comments?
