Technical reading is a complex skill. It involves the ability to follow a complicated argument, often accompanied by equations, plots, and other analyses, and to put it in the context of the existing knowledge. The actual reading task can get constantly interrupted by switching between the text and accompanying comments and the need to consult other references. This leads to context shifting and, consequently, fatigue and concentration loss. This also makes reading much less enjoyable.

Questions about building and practicing this skill and getting better at it have been on my research list and motivated me to look for better ways to establish my own routines and systems around this type of work. I want to share the advice I collected on this topic and my personal learnings in this post.

In 1983, Katherine Schlick Noe published a report in the Journal of Reading, in which she summarizes her work on the technical reading technique (TRT). What caught my attention was how she broke this task into steps, which is in line with thinking of knowledge work in terms of systems, processes, and automation. This particular approach helps me make the seemingly vague endeavors manageable and gives me the feeling of being more connected to what I am doing daily. As usual, it is good to start with a why. In a research work context, the general purpose of technical reading is to absorb the information and use it to develop a personal view, find twists and lapses in authors’ thinking, and generate new ideas. To use K. Noe’s advice and get more specific, it can help to (i) know why you are reading what is in front of you, (ii) know what you want to learn from it, and (iii) what you want to do with what you learned, (iv) be aware of the general structure of the text and of information conveyed there, (v) have a mechanism to check your comprehension, identify “failures of understanding,” and, finally, (vi) have a mechanism to recover from disruptions, both related to the subject (e.g., the need to consult other references) and unrelated (external or internal).

K. Noe’s TRT strategy involves simple steps, which she groups into prereading checklist and post-reading analyses. I requote them below:

• Prereading checklist:

  • “Reflect. What do I already know about this topic?”
  • “Predict. What […] is this going to be about?”
  • “Skim the document and refine your prediction” (“cheater’s prediction”)
  • “Purpose setting. What am I supposed to get out of this document […]?”
  • “Action planning. […] what am I supposed to do with what I get out of this document?”

• Post-reading analyses:

  • “What did I add to what I already knew?”
  • “Was my purpose served?”
  • “Were there areas I didn’t understand that are still unclear?”
  • “Am I now ready to act on this document?”

I created a markdown template for my literature notes to put this advice into practice. This template is a part of my Zettelkasten-inspired system of note-taking that I’ve implemented in Obsidian (which I will write about in the next post). Other “helper” questions in this template are inspired by the How to Take Smart Notes book by Sönke Ahrens.

K. Noe’s protocol can be helpful to become more aware of how one reads a demanding text. I also believe it can snowball into better writing. The prereading checklist can easily make up for a good recipe for composing the abstract or introduction to a report or a publication. And the whole strategy can help authors develop a mindset of making their papers genuinely accessible.