Thanks for the feedback!
I just wanted to pop back in to say that today I very successfully went through ten monographs, easily finding what was necessary in each one. In each case the necessary details could not simply be looked up. None of the books were straightforward self-help kinds of things, or business book re-hashes of often repeated advice.
So, I'm thrilled.
I would like to do more with real activation. If you could give me a lead on mind maps, I'd be interested. Two problems with mind maps come to, um,
mind (sorry!).
First, some data is always squee-hawed into an awkward space because one can't really plan in advance what areas are going to wind up being the most extensive. Not just squee-hawed, but sometimes hard to read, because handwriting is adjusted to deal with available space.
Second, the data on a mind map isn't digital. So it has to be put into the computer anyway. This means extra work. And once in the computer, the lines won't be preserved anyway. Why not just move the cursor around on the screen and build an outline that way? A linear outline on paper may look sloppy and be hard to coordinate, but on the screen, any area can be expanded, indented, bolded, or what-have-you, easily enough.
There's no hard rule about using mind maps, of course. I don't mean to imply a need for a debate about them.
If you want to tempt me into using them again, feel free. I think Alex has told me before that I might as well do what is working. Probably the main aspect of activation is moving through the text actively, with active purpose-based questions, dipping where my eye seems to want to rest. A book that hasn't been photoread looks more opaque, more blank. Once photoread, the passages of interest are spotted.
