UNIT 4

An analytical reading strategy that I find crucial for reading historical work is searching through primary and secondary sources for information instead of digesting the entire work. This allows for a more direct analysis of information that you are looking for instead of adding a bunch of filler information that you may not need in your research. This stands out to me in particular because I’d rather spend more time looking for good sources that have more information directly related to my project rather than waste time on looking for things I do not need. These strategies help me evaluate all of the 5 C’s of Historical thinking because I am able to use predatory reading strategies to support all of the 5C’s. Close analytical reading is important to historical thinking because it gives support to historical claims that may not be accepted yet and continues to support historical claims that we regard as the past.

In researching Lovell’s article, I struggled with trying to find the context he was writing from. The paragraph in the beginning helped give some background as to what was going on but if that was not present, I would have been lost. I used my predatory reading skills to analyze the document the document for the information that I needed, then cherry picked what I found useful. Other strategies that I can think of to help with reading critically are casual reading when not engaged with an assignment so as to help provide context to other historical study in the future.

I think Hypothesis is a great way to study online documents and articles for personal note taking. I also like how you can highlight sections of the text for going over later. I understand the intention for using Hypothesis in starting a conversation but in order to receive credit I am confused on if we are able to comment on others posts and receive credit for participation or do we have to create our own original annotations? Also is there a specific amount or do we just have to answer the questions in each module?