Wednesday, August 29, 2007

Revised description of book system.

Earlier I described a system that I have devised for organizing my reading. Now I am extending it to other forms of media. I'm actually quite interested in this and when I have one established thread, I will post a mindmap of it so you can see how it works. :-)

Description of Personal Information Management System (PIMS)

I. What it is

A. A system for organizing what I read, what I listen to, what I watch, what websites I surf – in short, what media I access and how I access it.

B. A database of subjects to pursue and books to buy; this encourages the intake of different information that is wholly related.

II. Why?

A. Before my PIMS, I found that I was:

i. completely unorganized in my reading. I would haphazardly read many books at a time and buy even more, so that I never got around to pursuing the subjects that I really wanted to

ii. Finding all kinds of cool informative stuff in the iTunes podcasts and iTunes U, but never getting around to actually listening to those things

iii. Finding many interesting, informative websites with tons of content, but never actually reading that content

B. Due to this procrastination, excess, and lack of satisfaction, I decided that I needed a way to organize my media intake. This would also help me cut down on my excessive book-buying

C. I wanted a way to create webs of interconnected knowledge, all starting from one point

III. How it works

A. Time-centered media (TCM)

i. This is information which I take in on a chronological basis. It is timely, usually current events and news.

ii. Blogs at Google Reader

iii. Some of my podcasts in iTunes

B. Subject-centered media (SCM)

i. This is information which is usually timeless; current science, history, arts and humanities.

ii. SCM is organized into threads. Each one of these threads starts with a central meda (piece of media). I could start a thread with:

a) a book, movie, poem, essay, magazine article

b) a podcast or lecture on iTunes

c) a lecture on YouTube or the University Channel

d) a Wikipedia entry or an interesting website

e) something I learned in class

f) a TCM meda

iii. Continuing the thread

a) Once the first meda in a thread has been absorbed, I list related things to pursue:

· specific works. These can be from:

· reviews of the first meda, like book reviews

· recommended reading lists or bibliographies

· subjects or ideas. These can be pursued through:

· bookmarked websites in that field. For example, if I want to pursue a topic in math, I would go to mathworld or a similar website. General sites like Wikipedia are also good springboards for further study.

· Posting to a forum on livejournal.com or librarything.com, asking what some recommended books are.

· Search information aggregators of non-book form such as Youtube, iTunes U, article databases, and course pages online

iv. Characteristics of threads

a) Length: can be prechosen before beginning threads, or can be undetermined.

b) Subject specifity: Does my thread zoom in or zoom out? Or does it stay at the same zoom level?

v. “R” thread

a) Used for random medas. Any meda from here can be expanded into its own thread. This allows me to branch out in knowledge.

C. Interaction

i. TCM can be the start of a thread of SCM. All I need do is decide to research a topic more in-depthly

IV.Implementation

A. Computer

i. Create mindmap files with FreeMind detailing what is in each of my threads and how I branched off into different subjects.

B. Notebook

i. Carry with at all times. In it I list possible threads and books to buy.

V. Advantages and Disadvantages

A. Benefits

i. no time requirements, so can be kept up in summer and during school year

ii. synthesis of knowledge for better comprehension of the things that I learn. This also improves critical thinking and builds a factual background from different sources in a subject

B. Problems

i. If not careful I could get into narrow topics and never get out. This system is supposed to diversify and broaden my knowledge, not make it more specific

No comments: