Learning Outcome 3
Learning Outcome 3: Employ techniques of active reading, critical reading, and informal reading responses for inquiry, learning, and thinking.
Annotating helps allow you to see what the issues and ideas present are. Susan Gilroy explains in her text, Interrogating Texts, how in a way it is sort of like a recording of what your encounter was like with the piece you are working with. Annotating has allowed me to write my thoughts and ideas down while being present in the material. It allows you to ask yourself questions as you go. In the text I annotated, Consider the Lobster by David Foster Wallace, I was able to pinpoint the main concerns. I showed this in his piece by asking myself why he was so focused on the idea of the lobster. By doing so I was able to ask myself “what does this really mean?”. I was able to ask myself why he really wanted us to reconsider the lobster. Pointing out these main ideas enables us to see the bigger picture, the main argument. It allows for us to make connections that we may not of even thought of if we didn’t take time to mark up the text. Annotating allows us to see the authors point of view, make it more clear. After reading Wallace’s piece for the first time, without annotating, I was completely lost. I have no clue really where Wallace stood. There is so much information in that text that without annotating it’s harder to interpret. Re-reading and annoating the text I was able to understand what Wallace was really saying. In Wallace’s piece I focused on highlighting the main points, which were hidden deep within the text, they were unique and interesting. These points were pinpointed out so that I could reference them later. I highlighted these points because I think they are support further discussion and help support an argument. Comparing journal 14 to journal 1, there are significant differences. Coming back to the piece with a fresh mind allowed me to interpret it in a whole other way. Journal 14 was more in-depth and had stronger, concrete ideas. Whereas journal 1 was very basic and not very conversation striking. Gilroy mentions how it is important to ask yourself how your thinking was altered by the text present. After thinking about Wallace’s peice again I was really able to comprehend the whole concept which allowed me to go into greater depth. Re-reading it changed the way of how I truly thought about about lobsters. Gilroy also raises the question of how it may have affected your overall responses. Has your thinking been altered by the reading? After reading Wallace’s piece the way I thought was altered. I never really took time to consider the lobsters life, it’s often a thing that is over looked.
Text annotations sample:
Journal comparisons:
