Or, since many of our students in higher ed will be entering the knowledge work sector, it's a fair question to ask: what do you want that sector to be like? Do you want those jobs to be more like the minder of intelligent machines? Or do you want it to be a place where the human in the loop is still a craftsman with agency?

inevitability is such an appropriate word here, because it captures a sort of techno-maximalist "any-benefit" mindset that sometimes pervades the ed-tech scene (and the position of many instructional designers and technologists)

✋ Yup, that's me. One thing that seems like a requirement for the note-taking practice I am now trying to build is that I want my more carefully considered, linked notes to live in the same place where I do the rest of my digital thinking. I'm a sucker for outliners, so that basically means Org Roam, Logseq, Roam, or Athens.

Of those two, Logseq and Roam have the best functionality and established communities, IMHO, with Logseq being enticing because maybe a slight edge in future-proofing / portability?

I would love to know more about what this actually looks like...how does one use their fleeting notes to turn Literature Notes into Permanent Notes?

For example, in Roam, does one have linked references for fleeting notes open in the sidebar and then filtered linked references for literature notes in the main window? And then you are looking for a connection or spark between a fleeting note and a literature note on one of the topics you are looking at?

Taken in stride with "Literature Notes should be written in your own words", I wonder if bullet points are sufficient.

Bullet point thoughts are the easiest point of entry in an outliner like Roam. But there is a cognitive benefit to putting things into complete sentences, and I could see that a re-usable, prose-ready literature note could be just as valuable as a permanent note (providing you can cite the lit note, of course).

This is why I think the Beau Haan Zettelkasten technique of creating a "thumbnail" summary on the parent block is a good fit with literature notes. You do all the messy "thinking through writing work" below, but leave the top block as something more cohesive.

See also the author's (Eva Keiffenheim) article on RoamBrain: THE COMPLETE GUIDE FOR BUILDING A ZETTELKASTEN WITH ROAM RESEARCH

So, if I interpret this correctly:

Expect to produce more, but don't expect it to be any easier.

Technology can definitely facilitate the work of a Zettelkasten and remove some of the friction that I paper version would have.

But, I do wonder if the abundance of tools (and the high visibility of folks sharing their Zettelkasten systems) makes new users prone to hopping from guru to guru (without taking the time to figure out why they want a Zettelkasten and to iterate an implementation that works for them.

Interesting. How often do students think about going back and actually updating they said in a previous module? In a previous class?

And if the answer is "rarely" (my suspicion), is that because it's not easy to do?

Once the class moves on, that comment is set in stone. There's no "changelog" for showing the evolution of thought...

Another affordance of digital reading - no one can see what you are reading and make a snap judgement about who you are, what you think what you agree with or disagree with in the text...

Further exploration here might be to check out the Algorithmic Justice League

which could be highly subjective from state to state or district to district

Like social media, the contest is asymmetrical

This reminds me of the difficulties with portability in individual note-taking / PKM tools. Markdown and plaintext seem to be the most future-proof, but sometimes the affordances of SaaS (software as a solution) are enticing enough to make a user sacrifice long-term capability.

Presumably this would be the "unanswered questions" HQ&A notes discussed in Part 1?

I like this suggestion a lot. Jamie might disagree, but I do think Zettelkasten has it's place (particularly the Beau Haan variant that places a premium on fleeting notes as a means of connecting the source material to our own personal experience).

But, if you stop every time you think something merits inspection, you might that a later point makes it moot or by the time you get to the end of the chapter, your original perception has changed.

Testing hypothesis commenting

I couldn't highlight the graphic, but maybe i can leave a page note?

What can we change or not change in Canvas?