Write What You Want
I’m from Iowa, so let me start with a parable about planting crops:
One early spring day, a man didn’t know if he should plant corn or beans. So, he went to the village elder. He told the elder all of his thoughts on the weather, the heartiness of corn, the economy, and the price of beans. The elder answered, “Plant what you want—asking the question is enough.”
I am embarking on this class with an open and inquisitive mindset. I often think of stories and little illustrations. Let me share what I’ve been planting from the reading and my preparation for this course.
“The moment we stop making plans is the moment we start to learn.”[1] Ahrens points out that insight and expertise come from embodied experience. Dr. Clark told our cohort in D.C. that the goal is to produce doctorate-level work on our worst day. I’ve been considering how I will gain embodied experience that facilitates expertise. Ahrens says, “to become an expert, we need the freedom to make our own decisions and all the necessary mistakes that help us to learn.”[2] Paradoxically, I’ll know what to plant because I have planted before.
This week, I read Adler and Van Doren’s classic How to Read a Book, Ahrens’ Smart Notes, and Paul and Elder’s Miniature Guide to Critical Thinking. I want to share the rhythm I developed from these books.
This year, two of my wife’s brothers and I started doctoral programs: one in Education, one in Missiology, and me in this program. We sat down at a table together at Christmas and discussed our first semester. We asked each other about the best book we’d read so far. I named Adler and Van Doren’s How to Read a Book. I picked this book up and read it last August when Dr. Clark mentioned it in his opening Zoom call with us. It’s changed the way I read.
In my rhythm, I set an hour for myself with a book. In that hour, I do an inspectional read, making notes and symbols in the margin for key points and disagreements and folding down corners of key pages. I’m 50/50 so far on completing a book in an hour. Then, I switch to notetaking in Zotero using the knowledge I gained from Ahrens.
Ahrens provides an excellent book on notetaking. The book’s theme is that good notetaking and tracking systems can make writing significantly easier. I’ve started taking all my notes in Zotero. I categorize my notes into four areas: Theme, Research Uses, Concepts and Ideas, and Disagree.
Both tasks, Inspectional Reading and Notetaking, require critical thinking. Paul and Elder say critical thinking will “raise vital questions” and “gather and assess relevant information, using abstract ideas to interpret it effectively.”[3] When I Read Inspectionally, I look for vital questions and ideas. When I take notes, I’m trying to interpret how these fit into my research syntopically—in conversation with the other authors and sources I have.
Neither Ahrens, Paul and Elder, nor Adler and Van Doren provide expertise. Instead, they provide a tool that helps facilitate expertise. SQ3R, Zettel Kasten, and Inspectional reading are not expertise but tools that help us live embodied lives capable of critical thinking. Reading, notetaking, and writing are not difficult; thinking is. Going forward, I imagine critical thinking will be the most difficult thing I do.
Luhman, who developed the notetaking system around which Ahrens writes, says, “I only do what is easy. I only write when I immediately know how to do it.”[4] When we’ve established embodied patterns that facilitate reading, effective notetaking, critical thinking, and syntopical exploration, then writing flows. Let me share an example of what I’ve been planting recently. I wrote this after reading Ahrens:
Ahrens referenced Carol Dweck, who showed “that the most reliable predictor for long-term success is having a ‘growth mindset,'” that “actively seek[s] and welcome[s] feedback, be it positive or negative.”[5] As we embark on our time with Dr. Clark, I think about how I will receive and welcome feedback.
Andrew Haidt makes a similar point in The Anxious Generation, where he lays out Discovery Mode vs. Defend Mode. In Discovery Mode, we are poised emotionally to learn and try new skills, compared to Defend Mode, where we are poised to weariness and distrust.[6] Putting Dweck and Haidt together, when we can seek feedback, positive or negative, in that growth mindset, we are in the discovery mode, open to learning and trying new skills, hopefully leading to long-term success. This can further be connected to Daniel Goleman’s book Emotional Intelligence, where he showed hope as a better predictor of first-semester students than SAT scores.[7] Hope, which is the belief in better things in the future, coupled with a growth mindset that feedback is good and helpful, will empower me to be successful in the long run.
I can plant what I want because I’m getting feedback, am hopeful, and am poised to learn and try new skills. I’m looking forward to your feedback and growing in this process with all of you.
[1] Sönke Ahrens, How to Take Smart Notes: One Simple Technique to Boost Writing, Learning and Thinking: For Students, Academics and Nonfiction Book Writers (North Charleston, SC: CreateSpace, 2017). 64
[2] Ahrens, Smart Notes, 65
[3] Richard Paul and Linda Elder, The Miniature Guide to Critical Thinking: Concepts and Tools, 8th edition, Thinker’s Guide Library (Lanham, Md: Rowman and Littlefield, 2020). 9
[4] Ahrens, Smart Notes, 15
[5] Ahrens, 53
[6] Jonathan Haidt, The Anxious Generation: How the Great Rewiring of Childhood Is Causing an Epidemic of Mental Illness (New York: Penguin Press, 2024). 71
[7] Daniel Goleman, Emotional Intelligence: The Groundbreaking Book That Redefines What It Means to Be Smart; Why It Can Matter More than IQ, 10th Anniversary Ed. (New York: Bantam Books, 2006). 77
About the Author
Robert Radcliff
Hi! I'm Robert, and I'm seeking to understand who God is calling me to be in my community while helping others do the same. I enjoy reading, training for triathlons, and using exclamation points!5 responses to “Write What You Want”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Robert –
Thanks for your post!
I especially appreciated your brief but practical timeline for how you engage with inspectional reading and note-taking. As I seek to develop rhythms for reading, note-taking, and thinking, I’m grateful to peek in on how others make these systems work for them.
Your notes about feedback were also a great reminder. As a regular communicator, I remember the first time I was in an environment where the norm was to receive immediate, critical feedback from others on our teaching team as soon as the service was over. At first, I *hated* those conversations–they felt raw and way too vulnerable; something happened along the way, though, where now, when I don’t receive helpful, critical feedback after a message or talk, I feel like I’m missing something absolutely essential. It really does give a space to ‘plant what you want’ and lean into growth.
What are the most beneficial modes of feedback for you? What do you do to cultivate a receptive posture (and avoid a defensive one)?
Thanks again!
When I was in the Army, we were constantly doing AAR (After Action Review); any training or engagement was followed by an AAR. I’ve adopted that to help me review the things I do. Every sermon and Bible study, I always ask my wife and a few others three questions:
What went well?
What didn’t go well?
Where can I learn?
I think there’s something about a mindset that says, “Nobody here is rooting against me; they want me to succeed.” When we recognize this as the norm, receiving feedback is much easier.
Robert, Thank you for the one-hour inspectional reading followed by the note-taking. You provide a great tool in that, just as Ahrens, Paul, and Elder, and Adler and Van Doren do in their respective works.
I am intrigued by your Discovery vs. Defend thought from The Anxious Generation. You mentioned that when we were in DC, and it’s on my long-term reading list. It looks like it needs to move up on the list! It seems as though the “discovery” mindset ties in with what Jeremiah is touching on with feedback. I am working to move out of the “defend” mindset, but it’s helpful to have names tied to the two sides.
Do you feel the “discovery” is an easier link to an extroverted personality?
That’s an interesting thought: Is introversion/extroversion connected with discover/defend mode? I don’t have a good answer. I quickly looked back at the books I referenced and saw nothing like that.
Let me take a guess and tell me how it sounds to you. As I understand it, introverts regain energy by being alone. I think about the 14th-century monk Ignatius of Loyola, who developed the prayer of examen. He would reflect on his day and categorize events and things as consolations (leading him closer to God) and desolations (leading him further from God). I wonder, for my introverted friends, is there a space to develop an examination of your own day that might free up your own heart to enter into a discovery mode with the lord. Would receiving feedback from others be easier after you’ve had time to effectively process with the lord?
Robert, your replies to Darren and me are both well-thought-out and helpful. And Darren, I think this is a great question! I won’t respond for Darren (and am not seeking to hijack this great interaction). Still, as an “introvert who likes people,” I know the practice of examen has been an essential part of cultivating healthier relationships overall. As far as tying that to a proclivity for “defend” or “discovery,” I know I’m much more receptive and open when I have a sense of security and identity rooted in something beyond performance.
After every event or weekend gathering, my team has been doing a similar “after-action report” to what you noted in your comment to me. We ask, “What was RIGHT, what was WRONG, what was MISSING, what was CONFUSING… and what are we going to do about it?” I know if I am entering into those conversations defensively or tenderly, it’s an indicator I need to recalibrate where I’m finding value before participating in that kind of feedback.