1 |
New title and abstract |
Write a catchy, compelling alternative title to the reading and a very short 250 word abstract in your own words |
Redact sections of paper, collectively ideate, encourage risk and catchy alternatives |
2 |
Concept map |
Draw a Venn diagram, flowchart, or any type of visual that summarizes how the big ideas from the reading connect to one another |
Provide an example from your discipline or recent paper concept mapped out that you or your team have grappled with, or provide a conventional concept map for the reading and task students with transforming to Venn diagram or flowchart |
3 |
Cartoon summary |
Draw a fun cartoon summarizing the reading, infographics are also powerful heuristics and synthesis summary tools of salient points, choose a theme |
Numerous resources online for inspiration including https://phdcomics.com/ or xkcd.com and infographics are common in ecology, evolution, and the environmental sciences, if needed, many ten simple rules papers describing effective scientific communication principles |
4 |
Novel questions |
A good reading or paper should generate as many new questions as the ones it answers, list a few for the reading |
Ideate collectively, discuss a typology for scientific questions |
5 |
Made‐up data and predictive plotting |
Sketch a plot of data or relationship you would like to see supporting the main idea or hypothesis proposed in paper |
Discuss illustrative data and ideal scenarios as a starting point for support for hypotheses, sketch out specific predictions as stepping stones to support |
6 |
Experimental cartoon |
Sketch the experiment, schematic of methods described in paper |
Provide a sketch of the methods of a paper, how the work was done, not the outcomes |
7 |
Visual workflow |
Propose a next experiment to a paper as a simple workflow with logical steps connecting one another |
Query visual workflows online and explore images that inspire and link to the specific topic |
8 |
Pros‐cons table |
Make a short table summarizing the strengths and weaknesses of a paper |
Apply this approach to methods, results, and implications, encourage the view that there is no perfect experiment and reminders learners that science is a process |
9 |
Figure‐legend improv |
Provide a figure legend for data visualization from a paper, redacted or provided |
Provide only the figure, curate a small collection of examples for the topic, provide actual figure legends post hoc and discuss consilience |
10 |
Best‐sentence competition |
From a paper, select a single sentence that resonated with a reader or was novel and profound as a next step for the discipline |
Provide examples of sentences that shifted your view on a topic from papers, it can be funny, honest, transparent, transformative, profound, incorrect, or an implication |
11 |
Shark tank |
Run a debate or shark tank of a published paper, use a weighted Likert Scale list of evidence from a paper |
Split readers into groups, assign them to rank evidence on a Likert Scale in the strengths and weaknesses, consider a brief debate or tallying of scores to informally rank papers that would successfully secure funding for a next experiment |
12 |
KISS principle |
Keep it simple scientists, propose a simple, one‐factor, multilevel follow‐up experiment to confirm or replicate a key finding from a paper |
Science needs replication, including ecology and evolution, identify a main finding, then get creative and design simple experiments that can replicate the key finding |