Introduction
This post is an attempt to put together a standard framework for reviewing lessons. I’ve been to numerous workshops, master classes, tutorials and lectures and always take ad hoc notes that I generally re-write and re-organise afterwards. I hope to develop a clearer methodology for reviewing what I learnt in each lesson.
Context
-
When: Either just the date and time or include more context like the broader event such as a conference, season, public holidays.
-
Who: The presenter will give a bio at the start so make notes, especially to identify what disciplinary perspective they come from.
-
Where: Includes the address, city, lecture theatre. These are cues for memory.
-
Why: Both why is the presenter here talking and also why am I hear listening. It is important to critically reflect on what I want to get out of this lesson.
-
What: What is this lesson all about? This might start with a synopsis overview and will probably move on to a sequence of notes as the presenter’s narrative unfolds, and my thoughts on the topic evolve.
Three Stages: Thesis, Antithesis, Synthesis
A guiding principle I use for writing the ‘What’ section is the three stages: thesis, antithesis, synthesis. I am not a philosopher so I don’t know the proper use of these concepts in that discipline, but for me they are useful to structure my notes as I go through the process of a lesson. Here is how I think of these stages:
-
Thesis: This is where I might pick out the key topics that are being presented, and write down my prior knowledge and preconceptions about the topic.
-
Antithesis: What’s the main message(s) of the presenter? What are their priorities? What secondary (surrogate) topics emerge around the main points? If I bring questions to the lesson are they answered by the presenter? If not why?
-
Synthesis: My new understanding of the topic.
Other tools
Other things I use are:
- Mind maps: a central topic with a spiderweb of links extending out in a circle.
- TODO
