Category: Digital notes

Some knowledge workers (writers) offer descriptions of their writing process using titles such as “How I work”. The benefit, I assume, is to provide others insights regarding the flow or process used by the author that might result in a beneficial adjustment to the reader’s own activity. I will begin by offering a general overview of the process I use and then will explain how the system works when I write based on a specific type of source material. 

At the general level, I imagine what I am trying to do is to create bi-directional linkages between products. Those products include the original source material, stand-alone notes, and my original document that is intended to be shared with others. One additional goal in this process is important. I want to create sources in the process of writing that have value to me over time and not just for one project. By this, I mean I want the notes and original sources to be processed in such a way that I can easily use them to locate relevant information and to be more efficient to use for future projects. I make use of digital tools and digital information sources to achieve these goals.

Context

One concept that has proven useful in how I have come to think about and describe my workflow is that of context. The bi-directional linkages between products I have generated are constructed to maintain context. So, the original sources are highlighted and annotated when they are read. The highlights and notes exist within the context of the original sources.  Some of these notes and highlights are extracted from these original sources to generate smart notes using a different digital tool. However, this extraction process includes links back to the original sources to maintain context. So, at a later point in time, the link associated with a smart note can be used to return to the original document and the location within this document associated with a smart note.

By the way, the definition of a smart note is an idea that is understandable on its own. So these notes which were created based on information obtained elsewhere are written so that they do not require the original source for understanding. This stand-alone capability does not mean that reviewing such notes at a later time would not prompt a return to the original source perhaps for additional information or clarification. This review can be useful. Finally, I use the Smart notes typically generated from multiple original sources to write a product (typically a blog post at this stage of my career). 

Thinking about the sequence of written sources is kind of interesting. As one moves through the sequence, there is less reliance on the context of the previous source and a greater focus on my own interpretation and speculation. 

Example – pdfs as sources

Much of what I write is based on journal articles that I have access to as pdfs downloaded from my library. I work within an Apple environment and I make use of iCloud as online storage I can access from my iPad and desktop computer. Because of the time invested in accumulating many annotated pdfs and other products over time, the use of iCloud provides me some measure of security for the products I generate. I do create backups for added security.

I first read the source pdfs using a digital tool. I have used Zotero, but I prefer a product specific to Apple called Highlights because it is less complicated to use and just seems more consistent. I mostly highlight while I read, but I also annotate when I know I want to create a Smart note from what I am reading.

Highlighting and annotation are processes that involve context as both processes connect a personal addition at a specific location within the source text. Both Zotero and Highlights allow highlights and notes to be exported as a file separate from the original pdf. There are options for the format in which this file is created and one is markdown. A markdown file is a text file that includes a few reserved text symbols that allow the content of the file to appear with headings and subheadings, links, tags, and other such features when opened with a tool that interprets the reserved markdown symbols. Markdown uses such symbols in a way similar to the symbols used in an HTML file. One of the core benefits of a markdown text file is that it will not eventually age out of usefulness. It is a text file and not a proprietary format so there will always be a way to open a markdown file and one does not have to worry about investing years in a tool that creates a file type that may not be useful if the tool is discontinued. 

You get an idea of how Highlight works from the following image. The left-hand window shows the original pdf that has been highlighted. The highlights and notes that are added also appear in the right-hand panel and it is the content from this panel that is exported. The drop-down menu shows the various formats that can be used for export and you should find markdown near the top.

I use Obsidian to store the notes I create. Obsidian is a tool intended for organizing, cross-referencing, and tagging a large collection of notes for an extended period of time. It is a versatile tool, but I use it for storing citations and Smart notes. Obsidian works with markdown files and the content exported from Zotero or Highlights can be imported, manipulated, and stored in Obsidian. 

Here is the useful capability I take advantage of when using these tools on my desktop computer. Having everything on the same machine is essential. Both Zotero and Highlights embed information about the location of highlights and notes within the original document. So, when a note is stored in Obsidian exported from one of these highlighting and annotation tools, a link will be included that will allow the Obsidian user to Zotero or Highlights and show the original text in which the highlight or note was embedded. Zotero is more specific and takes you to the exact location. Highlights takes you to the page rather than the specific location on the page.

So, this is what a section of markdown might look like for a note (this from Highlights). 

#### [Page 248](highlights://chen2021#page=4)

> After class, students should review the notes to clarify any

> unclear ideas. During this stage, the students can compare their

> own notes to the textbooks or the notes of other students,

> retrieve the key ideas, concepts or items from the notes as

> recall clues, as well as summarize the content of the notes.

When displayed in Obsidian, the note looks like this (see following image). If you look closely, you will see the link to the original pdf stored on my computer (and in iCloud). I typically add some additional information to my Obsidian notes (perhaps the full citation associated with a note). The second image below is more what of my Smart Note looks like. In this image, you can see I have added a tag (#contextualization) that serves several functions including allowing me to find other notes tagged in the same way. 

As I write something like this blog post, I use mostly the notes I have saved in Obsidian. If I am using a specific source, I will include the citation for this source at the conclusion of a post and this citation would also allow me to work back through the sequence of products I have described to review both notes and locate the original document. 

114 total views

Personal Knowledge Management (PKM) and the focus on note-taking have generated many new applications. At this point, I think that significant advances in leveraging notes for personal productivity will come from AI, sharing, and a combination (AI identifying connections between personal notes and shared notes). I have written about AI applications in a previous post. 

My emphasis here is on some note-sharing services I have explored. I will first identify some of the issues I think are important in committing to a service and then will present several sharing services. It is not feasible to cover the many options for sharing, but the services I describe should serve as a starting point for others and should offer some issues to consider.

Issues

1. What content are you interested in using as sources for your notes? My personal situation involves web content, pdfs, Kindle books, and ideas that pop into my head. Services may not cover all of these sources. For example, I am a retired academic and as a consequence continue to read and use journal articles (research studies) in guiding my thinking and writing. At this point, I read journal articles by downloading pdfs from my University library. I want to highlight and annotate these pdf and then connect the ideas I discover. A similar source for me is digital books (Kindle). The point – the services I list differ in which of these sources they easily integrate. Some services, surprisingly, don’t allow you to just generate a note from scratch but are focused on saving content for existing sources. 

One side note – I have had interactions with developers related to sharing content from Kindle books (highlights). I wondered why you could view your own highlights within a service and yet not share these highlights. I thought it was about copyright concerns and they suggested this was true,. I suggested that if this was the case, they should at least allow notes taken to be shared. 

2. Social sharing requires social connections. How do you get from your personal involvement with a service to finding others with relevant information? Are you expected to find people outside of the service and talk them into joining and then connecting with you? This is kind of a “bring your own group” approach. This may be what you want. It is not what I need. I retired from my university job five years or so ago. My interests have changed since that time and I no longer have colleagues interested in these new topics I can encourage to interact with me through a social service. Does a service have a way to identify others with interests I can describe who might be willing to share with me? This is presently a big issue for me.

3. Cost – what are you willing to pay for a sharing service? Are you willing to pay anything? Would you be willing to pay after an opportunity to try a service and perhaps develop the connections necessary to make a service effective for you?

Examples (organized by the length of time I have used)

Diigo

I have used Diigo for a long time and pay $40 a year for the premium service. Most of my Diigo content is public so you can take a look. Diigo can be used as a browser extension to save highlights and notes from web pages. It can work with pdfs. Probably the most unique function allows the transfer of highlights and notes directly for the online storage of Kindle notes and highlights. A newer function allows the population of an outline by dragging content from annotations and notes. 

With the educational option of Diigo, I can create a group and share annotated bookmarks to that group. Google offers ways to find others with interests you may find relevant. I admit I have found these methods difficult to apply (try “search by sites”). 

MEMEX Go

Memex is under development and yes it is still a service I have used for the second most time. Memex uses a browser extension to allow highlighting and annotation of web content. It allows annotation of pdfs that are stored locally so what is available for social sharing are the highlights and notes only. Kindle annotations cannot be moved directly to Memex, but an intermediary such as Readwise can fill in this gap if important. This would require an additional paid subscription.

You can share individual notes or thematic collections (Spaces). The following image should the icon used to display a single note and the link that is then generated to share.

The notes from individual sources can be aggregated into Spaces. Think of a Space as a collection and this service’s alternative to a tag. A Space (collection) can be shared (see people icon in image indicating which Spaces have been declared public for sharing). When designating a Space for sharing the host differentiates whether those receiving the link to the Space can comment on existing resources or can have full access and add new resources.

Mem X 

Mem (and Mem X) are really more note storage platforms than bookmarking services. Mem includes a method for cutting and pasting content from other locations that is pretty handy (you don’t have to activate Mem when applying this technique so it transfers the “copied” content to the service automatically from other sources). I include Mem because it promotes the linkage of notes and it makes use of the AI suggestions to do this if you purchase the Mem X option. 

The social component allows AI discovery of connections within “teams” or with identified colleagues. Mem makes a good example of the challenge of connecting. You don’t have to make use of the formal “TEAM” tier that Mem sells and which would make sense for organizations with groups working together. You can connect with other individuals, but how do you find them? This is the classic network problem new social platforms face. The platform can offer better opportunities than existing services, but the inferior existing service has existing connections among individuals that are more valuable than the capabilities of the service itself. 

Mem X would be a great service if you had a way to bring a group to the service. A class of students or a series of classes taking the same course over a couple of years would be a perfect way to start a group with some common interests.

Mem is presently available at no cost so I still encourage those interested in note storage and the organization of stored notes (say an alternative to Obsidian) to investigate.

Glasp

Glasp is a developing “social web highlighting (their description”) service. The focus on web content highlight and annotation makes the service more limited than some of the services I have included here. You highlight/annotate web content and add tags if you want. The features I like allows search of public content highlighted by others using tags. Tags can be used to find the public content stored by others and finding these resources allows you to find others to follow. There is no need (or requirement if you see this as a problem) in negotiating whether someone will be a collaborator so the issue of creating a personal social network is a lot easier.

My video Glasp tutorial

Conclusion

I don’t see trying to rely on just one of these options. I pay for three and this would be unnecessary except I want to explore a couple of these services as they develop. If all are new to you, you should be able to try the free/trial options to see what you think.

152 total views

There seems to be a great deal of interest in note-taking. I say this from the perspective of an academic who has been interested in note-taking since the 1970s. The present interest seems to come from two distinct directions. Technology has played a role in both areas of interest. First, there is the focus on personal knowledge management (PKM). This focus recognizes the role knowledge plays in many occupations and proposes that technology can be used to store and organize ideas one encounters so that these ideas can contribute in the future. Associated with this perspective is the idea that technology can be used to build a second brain offloading the less-than-ideal efforts of memory to a technology-enabled environment that can be consulted when ideas and insights generated earlier might be useful. 

The second perspective comes from the educational perspective more familiar to me and questions whether notes and annotations related to learning experiences (listening to presentations and reading educational materials) are best processed via paper or screen. As a college learner, you likely took notes in class and highlighted and annotated your textbooks. Now that we carry laptops and tablets to class and read ebooks as an option to traditional textbooks, does it matter if we annotate and take notes on paper or screen?

Those seeking to guide note-taking given these options frequently reference existing research to offer advice. As someone who has reviewed the research in this general area for decades, I sometimes disagree with how the research findings are interpreted. By interpreted I mean that the results of studies are based on the data collected, but more importantly constrained by the methodologies that were used to generate the data and the topics that methodologies best address. Simple conclusions such as “notes taken in a notebook by hand are best” may accurately describe the result of a specific study but may be misleading if generalized to an applied setting that offers a different set of expectations and different options for behavior.

I have been trying to imagine how best to explain the complexities that are involved in translating the note research to applied settings. I have decided I can offer several questions that can be asked of the research and explain why the answers are likely to strongly influence how the results of research should be applied. 

 Will I be allowed to review my notes?

This may seem a silly question, but I include it because researchers may conduct research not allowing that the notes taken be reviewed because of the question the researchers are asking. Most of us take notes because we want to have something to review before we take an exam or before we take some other action requiring an assist to memory (e.g., what was I going to get at the store). Research on taking notes tends to be based on a theoretical model proposing two hypothetical benefits to taking notes. First, notes offer an external storage mechanism. We can review notes. This use is obvious. Second, taking notes may help us process information when the information is first encountered (while we listen or while we first read). Often called a generative function, the idea is that taking notes is an active way to pay attention or think about ideas as they are encountered and this focus or interpretation may not happen if note-taking was not involved. 

In most of the applied settings in which we take notes both generative and external storage benefits are probably involved, but researchers find value in using a methodology that isolates the potential benefits of each benefit. Often, the focus is on differences in how notes might be taken to maximize the generative effect. For example, because most of us can type faster than we can write by hand, notes taken using a keyboard tend to be more complete. This capability to record more complete notes using a keyboard leads to a surprising consequence. If a study compares what is remembered/understood after taking notes using laptops versus paper notebooks and no review is allowed, many results show that retention is better when taking notes by hand. The logic used to explain these results suggests that learners must think more carefully when they can record less information (handwritten notes) and this selectivity results in a more active type of processing generating better understanding/retention. 

Some use such results to conclude we should continue taking notes with pen and paper. Educators might not allow students to take notes using a laptop. However, does this really make sense? Most actual applications of note-taking involve the intent to have a quality set of notes to review/study. How often would we take notes and then discard the notes on the way out of the classroom assuming the benefit of the notes has been achieved? 

So, when research is offered arguing taking notes on paper is superior to taking notes using a computer, review the methodology to see if participants were allowed to study the notes they took. 

Who am I taking notes for?

There may be a better way to phrase this question, but my intent is to draw a distinction that involves who has decided what is important to know and retain. With PKM, notes are intended to serve a future purpose typically determined by the note taker. I take notes because I think the information may be useful in a future writing project. Others might take different notes on the same material because they foresee the notes serving a different purpose. 

The research focused on student study behavior involves a different situation. In such situations, the instructor will create some assessment approach and the learner is preparing as best they can for this assessment. They may try to predict what should be emphasized, but they are in a situation in which complete representation of the ideas in the content presented is the best strategy.  Hence research that demonstrates a given approach (keyboarding) allows a more complete record, might be the type of research that is of greatest value.

Can I control the pace of the input?

Taking notes from an audio or video presentation and from a static source such as a book or web page have several obvious differences. One that is particularly important is the pace of the input. A static source can be studied at whatever pace the reader applies. A source that changes requires that the viewer/listener keep up.

Human cognition has a built-in bottleneck that is important to recognize. Cognitive researchers refer to this bottleneck as short-term memory or working memory. Working memory has both capacity and duration limits. Translated this means each of us has the capacity to be aware of only so much at one time and what we are aware of will slip from awareness unless we concentrate our attention on this information. Both limitations come into play when the source for information is constantly changing. Activities such as thinking and note-taking both take time and require that we hold what we are thinking about and consume awareness in holding this information. Meanwhile, the input continues to roll along offering new information that is either ignored or substituted for the information that is presently being considered. Perhaps it is fair to conclude that taking notes from a static page and an ongoing lecture exert different demands and require different decisions. When you decide to record a note from a lecture you are risking missing something and this is not the case when you can return to a printed page when you want. 

The difference between taking notes from a dynamic and a static source interact with other variables I have already mentioned. For example, if recording notes from a keyboard is easier than with pen and paper, the decision to use a keyboard probably has greater consequences when listening/watching a dynamic input. 

Here is one related advantage of tech for note taking many do not realize exists. There are several apps that allow an input to be recorded while notes are being taken (see my review of SoundNote). Such apps link the notes to locations in the recorded sound. When reviewing such notes and encountering something that seems confusing, the linked audio can be replayed offering the note-taker a second chance. Other useful strategies can also be applied. For example, if you know while taking notes you do not understand or missed something you can simply enter a cue in your notes – perhaps ???? – and use this prompt to review the confusing audio at a later time. 

Is annotation of the source allowed?

This question applies to text inputs and typically to K12 settings. Often learners in this setting are not allowed to annotate/highlight the content they are asked to read. You are not allowed to mark up your textbook. Magically when you get to college and purchase your textbooks, study tactics are allowed you did not practice in high school. 

Again, technology changes this situation at all levels of education. eBooks can be annotated and highlighted because the ebook itself is not passed on from class to class. The eBook environment also allows a form of note-taking that is more flexible than that which can be added in the margins of a page. The amount of information that can be included in a note is greater and the note itself may contain elements such as web links that are not realistic additions in the margins.

Is there an activity assumed to happen between recording and application?

One final distinction between the types of note-taking that happen in experiments and the way notes can be used in applied situations concerns when and how frequently notes are reviewed after creation. Study skill experts sometimes recommend both multiple reviews of the notes taken and reviews designed to accomplish specific goals. For example, if a student reviews the notes taken soon after the initial exposure to the information that was presented, the student typically still has a memory for the context of the presentation and content not necessarily recorded in notes taken during class. Reviewing notes at this point in time allows an upgrade to the notes and the review itself positively impacts achievement when understanding must be demonstrated. 

There are related opportunities when note use is understood to allow more than simple review. For example, there has been great interest in collaborative notes or expert notes as a way to enhance the notes taken by individuals. Efforts by those developing technology-enhanced approaches to PKM are even exploring the use of artificial intelligence to identify notes on similar concepts generated by others. 

Conclusion

My goal in identifying the issues that appear above is to help readers understand that the note-taking and external knowledge representation field is more complicated and interesting than one might assume. It is easy to be misled if one seizes on the conclusions of single experiments if one does not carefully analyze the methodology that was used to generate the data leading to the conclusions of the researchers. 

161 total views

I have been reading content focused on the role technology can play in enhancing human productivity. Among the works I have reviewed is a 2012 book by Marc Prensky titled “Brain Gain”. Prensky is clearly a technology optimist and argues the need to counter all of the negativity one encounters from authors encouraging readers to focus on the negative (e.g., The Dumbest Generation; The Shallows; Alone Together). Prensky suggests that the negativity must be interpreted within a broader context (breadth of perspective) and with the understanding that it takes some time to learn how best to apply any new technology.

In an effort to apply these ideas myself and to update the application of these suggestions to a more recent controversy, I find myself thinking about the concerns of those who investigate the difference between reading from paper and the screen and the recommendation of these researchers for classroom practice. While there are a few researchers who push back and the mechanisms differentiating the two means of text processing have yet to be consistently identified, I think it fair to summarize the present position of “most” is that reading from a screen is inferior. I can generate all kinds of limitations I see in the existing research and assumptions associated with the findings, but such an analysis is not the focus of this post. I find Prensky’s recommendation that the breadth of perspective be considered useful and an interesting way to explain my general argument in support of digital reading.

My argument – A) Adults learn from reading from a device so educators should be preparing learners for this future and B) the type of learning adults do works better when reading with the benefit of technology. 

Most of the research I have reviewed compares screen and paper reading experiences within a very limited time frame and with a specific immediate dependent variable. In other words, learners read the same text either from paper or screen (or both in a within participants methodology) and then complete some assessment of understanding. Ignoring all uncontrolled variables that may be relevant, let’s just say that there is a benefit for reading from paper. 

Even in a school context past the early grade emphasis on learning to read, this is not really how reading text is applied. Learning to read morphs into reading to learn and learning implies the use of understanding at a later point in time. Various ways of describing this transition may be useful. One that is pretty straightforward is exposure versus study. Expanding the perspective on the use of newly acquired information really recognizes that exposure is not assumed to be the end of the process and students perhaps in interaction with the teacher and classmates will continue to process newly acquired information to assure understanding, retention, and application. A simple flow of processes might suggest – exposure, understanding, storage, retrieval, and processing for application. 

Paper vs. screen is not applied in evaluating which approach is better for this flow. Most adults engage while in the stage of exposure with additional processes such as highlighting and note-taking. Notes may be added in the margins or separately. Most K12 students are not allowed to highlight and generate marginalia even though adults commonly do this while reading from paper. If you have read other posts I have written, you probably realize where this is now going. Technology offers opportunities for storage, search, and exploration of ideas that cannot easily be duplicated with paper (even notebooks). Once you add in the life skills needed to accumulate personal content across long periods of time and to combine inputs from multiple sources sometimes needing to resolve inconsistencies, I hope you can see that the skills we are focusing on, certainly in k12 and perhaps even in higher education, ignore the power of the digital representation of what has been identified during exposure, the continued personalization of what has been identified as meaningful summarizes, the opportunity to store such personalizations and link them to personalized insights from other sources identified at other times, and the retrieval of individual insights and connections of insights when what has been learned can be useful. 

We may have yet to meet Prensky’s second goal (i.e., understand how best to apply new technological tools), but even our existing strategies (storage of information summaries and insights as notes) can easily be improved by taking digital notes while reading/listening and reviewing these notes (e.g., SoundNote for notes for listening). Refinements in how these digital tools will be used in education will require experience that will follow introduction to students and extended student use. My point – it is time to start exploring in classroom settings. 

My previous posts on digital notes.

Prensky, M. (2012). _Brain gain: Technology and the quest for digital wisdom_. St. Martin’s Press.

70 total views

Internet tools frequently allow social features such as resource sharing. This post focuses on Memex 2.0 (computer) and Memex Go (phone/tablet). These tools offer an environment for social note-taking and resource sharing. At this time, you can sign up for a free account with the expectation that when fully developed the service will be subscription based. When you explore the resource, you will be asked if you want to commit $150 to the project. This investment which I decided to make is to be applied to extend coverage once the subscription model applies. The explanation for this approach is described as avoiding the need to rely on venture capital which I assume is supposed to give the company greater flexibility in the long run.

Memex works great as a personal social bookmarking and annotation tool, but also allows control of social sharing allowing groups/teams to share resources. The tool also allows sharing publicly. After explaining how this tool works, I will share several collections of resources I have created. You don’t need to add Memex as an extension to view these resources. The capability to create collections (called Spaces in Memes) that can be viewed using any browser represents a convenience educators can apply to sharing with students. For students to collaborate, everyone would have to first add the extension before contributing to a group resource collection project. 

Using Memes 2.0

On a computer, Memex 2.0 is an extension you add to a browser. The icon to activate it appears in the icon bar at the top of your browser (see red box). When you select this icon, the drop-down shown below appears. “Search Memex” opens the view shown in the next image and allows access to the resources you have stored and the opportunity to find specific resources through search. If you are trying to add a new bookmark, you activate Memex when you have reached the page you want to bookmark on your browser. You then activate Memex with the Memex icon from the menubar and then select “Bookmark this page”.

With Memex activated, selecting a text within the content being viewed within a browser brings up the options for highlighting the selected text or adding a note.

The following page appears in your browser when you use the “Search Memex” option. At the top of this display, any text entered in the green box will display those stored resources containing the search term. The rest of the display consists of three columns. The column on the left contains general controls and the list of “spaces” you have created. Spaces are collections and any given resource can be assigned to multiple spaces. The collection of bookmarks associated with a Space is retrieved when selecting a Space listed in the left column.

The central column contains the stored bookmarks. A given bookmark allows access to the original page with any embedded highlights or annotations. Each bookmark indicates the Spaces to which a bookmark has been assigned.

The column on the right displays the highlights and annotations that are associated with a selected bookmark. The small speech bubble appearing within a given bookmark (see red box in the third bookmark) controls access to the display of the isolated highlights and annotations.

At the top of the third column is an icon that determines whether the isolated content is public or private and an icon that allows the isolated content to be exported.

Individual entries among those isolated can be exported in multiple formats (below). As an example, I sometimes enter a note in Memex that I know I want to add to Obsidian. I select the Markdown options so that the content will be exported with the format to incorporate a link that preserves the context for the note or highlight, the title. and the highlight or annotation. This content is copied when one of the markdown options is selected and then pasted into the desired location. In my case, I open a note in Obsidian and then paste this content. See what this looks like in the following image.

This is a note in Obsidian showing content pasted from Memex. Obsidian expects information added to make use of markdown.

Memex 2.0 is a social service. So content entered by one individual can be provided to others. Memex content can be shared directly to the Memex installed by someone else or in a format for public viewing within any browser. As I mentioned earlier, the approach intended for general viewing would be the approach I would expect an educator to use to share a collection of resources to colleagues or students. As a demonstration, I included the links to some of my own spaces.

Shared resource Spaces

Book Notes

Coding 

Mastery 

Note-taking 

School gardens 

137 total views