I chose to take notes in a “mindmap style.” As I read, I wrote down main ideas and drew “branches” connecting each idea to supporting direct quotes. I used different colors to highlight specific parts of the quotes and noted my thoughts in matching colors. I used orange to represent figurative language/writing techniques, pink to represent specific ideas, blue to represent definitions of unfamiliar words, and green to represent possible research ideas or questions. If multiple main ideas related to each other, I connected them with a “branch.” 

Yes, I may use this source in one of my papers because it draws many connections between race/identity and other topics, which interests me. Kendi also gives lots of historical context and statistics, which could be useful when writing a paper. Kendi’s reflection on his faith growing up, “This new definition of Christian life became the creed that grounded my parents’ lives and the lives of their children,” made me wonder what factors determine the degree to which children follow or rebel against the faith of their parents (17). Another potential topic could be about the moral arguments of affirmative action, which relates to Kendi’s statement, “The only remedy to past discrimination is present discrimination. The only remedy to present discrimination is future discrimination” (18). I strongly agree with this statement. I’m also interested in researching how climate change disproportionately affects minorities and how medical research on minority populations is severely under-represented in the world. I believe that these topics are not focused on enough. 

I noticed that Kendi uses lots of figurative language to connect ideas and draw parallels. For example, he reinforces how students are standing up against the status quo created by the evangelical church in his opening line: “Afros that shot up like balled fists” (13). I also noticed his contrasting use of short/blunt diction following longer sentences to underline key points. 

Yes, I would take notes this way again. I really appreciate how the “mindmapping” style encouraged me to group different parts of the reading into certain ideas, which helped me better visualize and break down Kendi’s complex points. My system of colorcoding also helped me better organize my thoughts. I think that mindmapping worked particularly well for this excerpt because Kendi seemed to focus more on ideas and definitions rather than anything chronological. For a reading where chronology matters, I probably wouldn’t use mindmapping because it would be difficult to identify what order I wrote each note in. Also, formatting the “mindmap” style of note-taking is more difficult/tedious than writing traditional notes running down a page.

The note taking style I chose to use for this source was highlighting and writing marginal notes. I highlighted text that I thought was important or interesting, and I wrote my response through reactions, thoughts, or questions in the margins of the paper. 

I chose to take marginal notes and directly annotated the text. As I read, I used different colors to highlight parts that stood out to me and wrote my thoughts in corresponding colors. I used pink to represent general thoughts and clarifications, orange to represent figurative language and stylistic choices, blue to represent definitions, green to represent possible research and argumentative topics, and red to represent questions. 

Yes, I think I might use this source in one of my papers because it challenges and defines prejudice, discrimination, and racism in surprising ways. Before reading this source, I hadn’t thought deeply about the differences between the three terms. DiAngelo makes really clear distinctions between them, which I now comprehend and see in a different light than before. Before, I hadn’t thought of racism as inherently institutional and something that only emerges when a population has access to power and policymaking. I am also interested in how racism manifests in the entertainment industry and becomes further embedded in our culture: “Those who write and direct films are our cultural narrators; the stories they tell shape our worldviews” (31). This topic specifically made me think about recent film recreations such as The Little Mermaid and How to Train Your Dragon, where black actors were cast in traditionally white roles. Although these seem like efforts to diversify movies and increase black representation, I believe that they are lousy attempts. Replacing white characters with black actors merely alters appearances, but doesn’t take into account the context of the story and the external treatment of those characters as they were written. A better approach is to write whole new stories about black protagonists, written by black people. This way, the depiction of the character and their experiences would be much more accurate and representative. 

During the notetaking process, DiAngelo’s style of repetition stood out to me. Annotating directly beside the text made me realize how often I was highlighting words like “systemic,” “institution,” and “norm.” She constantly draws back to these words, underlining that racism makes up our institutions and establishes white people as the norm, while separating out black people as not the norm. 

Yes, I would take notes this way again because unlike mindmapping, it is easy to see the chronological order of my notes and what section of the text they correspond to. Directly highlighting the text also made it more convenient, However, marginal note-taking does not create as clear a visual as mindmapping when it comes to repeated ideas throughout the text since the notes are spread across multiple pages rather than condensed together onto a few pages. 

I chose to take a note format that was akin to building up a pyramid. The initial notes are broader, with general observations, and then it goes into depth later on with quotes, picking apart what I interpreted Kendi to be conveying with his words.

"Definitions" would be a source that I would definitely use in possible future papers. It takes on the effort to explain what we are too lazy to observe ourselves with statistics and word by word definitions, forcing readers to recognize the true face of racism. These components of 'teaching the reader' makes me wonder whether simplifying the process of sharing info-like one is teaching elementary schoolers-would help us remember information better. The takes he has on antiracism are not common (from what I have seen), but they are sound, so I would love to spread those ideologies further. Self-consciousness is something I believe to be undervalued, therefore encouraging it would fulfill my selfish interests.

My initial aversion to the idea of blacks still being marginalized to the extent of what Kendi described had made me uneasy. At surface value, I just thought they were not too bad off, because many of them rose to heights that were unprecedented in the past. Yet, I put more thought into it and realized that it should have been obvious that it was not that simple. When I was taking notes and placed more importance to Kendi's 'definitions', I saw more of the truth of blacks not starting at the same line as whites, whether it be for health, education, income, or expectations. It was not only about the statistics provided, or Kendi's definitions, but real-life observations of the stigma surrounding the black community, that I had dismissed as something normal. In reality, that was ignorant racism.

I would take notes like this again, although not every time, since I wish to explore more. I prefer writing down my own thoughts and then referring back to the actual text to see whether or not there were subtle patterns that gave me feedback of my understanding. This way, I could gain further insights from the author and myself as a person.

I took handwritten notes in a notebook because I find it easier to group my thoughts with quotes, topics, and sections. I had bullet points for each section of the chapter, with sub-points for the points I found fascinating, examples, and summarized ideas. I used arrows to connect chronologically and link my thought process throughout the reading.

I would use DiAngelo’s writing as a source because I think his diction is clear and his ideas are original. I appreciate his use of multiple examples throughout the piece, and think his perception of race is well supported by evidence. His reasoning is succinct and probes deeper questions about the institutionalized nature of racism. Broadening the issue away from individuals allows for there to be less offense on specific people, and can allow us to look at our government and other societal institutions more objectively, allowing for more incentive to seek changes. 

DiAngelo’s style of writing was more objective and calm than I would expect. Often discussions about race are more passionate, especially coming from individuals who are more impacted by racial prejudice, or those defending the institutions that perpetuate racism. DiAngelo’s arguments were rational and his examples were given to help the reader think more logically and empathetically.

I would take notes this way again, mostly because it is my primary method of taking notes for reading. It works well for me because I can focus on getting down only the most important points and thoughts I have instead of typing as much as I can. 

The approach to notetaking I chose was typing notes. I found using a split-screen to read the text and type notes was the fastest way to get down all of my ideas. I also found that it was the easiest way to go back and add additional thoughts into previous sections of notes. 

I think Kendi’s “Definitions” could be used as a source in one of my papers. Kendi has interesting points and examples about racism being present in several parts of life, especially in ways that I had never considered before. These points are also well explained and drawn out for the reader to understand and follow. For example, the point made about racial inequity in climate change surprised me, as I had never thought about how a struggle that seemed universal could affect a racial group more than another. These ideas highlight the deep-set nature of racism in our systems, and the need for more self-reflection and awareness to truly rebuild on the basis of equality. “Definitions” made me more interested in what other ways racism is rooted into our societies, and in what ways people can be more conscious about being an anti-racist. 

My notetaking method tends to be handwritten notes. I will read half a page and try to summarize what I understood up to that point. If at any point I find a quote that I connected with or I feel would be useful to use in the future, I will usually include those quotes in my notes as well. My method is less about the notes and more about testing my retention, as in how much I actually absorbed while reading. This is one reason why my notes tend to be very short in length.

Depending on the topic of my paper, I feel this would be a very useful source to use. It deals with a lot of controversial and complex themes that I feel a lot of authors tend to stay away from, such as the complexities of racial inequality and the historical understanding of race as a whole. I loved it when Kendi mentioned how Christianity has been reduced to a radical White form of belief in which Jesus' true teachings and depictions are distorted to fit a certain type of stereotype that may not benefit everyone, especially those who need that support the most. This is supported when Kendi mentions, "'any gospel that does not want to go where people are hungry and poverty-striven and set them free in the name of Jesus Christ-is not the gospel.'" This source would be great to use for papers that deal with race, historical inaccuracies, religious depictions/evolution, differences in demographics, etc.

During my notetaking process, I realized that Kendi used a mixture of 3rd point point-of-view and talking about his own experiences with racism. He also uses a lot of storytelling and figurative language to connect to controversial themes. Kendi is very careful to be precise in his message while also elaborating on the themes in a detailed manner, enough to get the reader thinking about complexities that he or she may not have realized earlier. One example of this would be the mention of climate change and the differences in demographics. Kendi explained how the underdeveloped Blacker South suffers the consequences of the more developed Whiter North. These contrasts are one example of how Kendi elaborates on his ideas while highlighting lesser-known thoughts about ideas.

I have been using this style of note-taking ever since I was in middle school, so I do not think I will be changing this method any time soon. This style of note-taking has almost always helped me retain the content I needed to learn for my classes while also helping me be more organized. The only other type of note-taking I have used in the past has been typing notes on Google Docs, for example. I use the same methodology, but the formatting changes slightly.

My approach to notetaking for this chapter is digital cornell notes/marginal notes on my iPad. This method makes it easy for the reader to see the points being made and the explanation/justification of the term on the right.

This could be a helpful source to use in one of my papers as it has lots of debates on racial equity/inequity as well as different perspectives on Jesus beliefs.

The author's writing stands out as they use many figurative language like metaphors and symbolism to highlight crucial ideas to the reader and further create imagery.

I think next time, I would highlight the chapter instead and annotate it to deepen my ideas and make it easier to follow with along the text.

I chose to take Cornell Notes. While reading, I wrote key words in the left column and corresponding ideas and definitions in the right column. I noted questions to recall the most central points I wrote on the right, as well as my own questions connecting one concept from the reading to another, or to ideas from separate books/articles I’ve read in the past. Also, I wrote down supporting quotes and statistics in the right column. At the end, I summarized the main points. 

No, I don’t think I will use this source in one of my papers. Bonilla-Silva explains the four frames very clearly and in detail through real interviews, so no points of argument or discrepancy came to mind. His statements and analyses of the case studies gave me a much better grasp of color-blind racism, but didn’t really provide any opinions I would argue against/disagree with. 

The way Bonilla-silva breaks down concepts and terms stood out to me. I found it really easy to comprehend the definitions, and he made very clear distinctions between similar terms with slight yet important differences. For example, he uses real statements from case studies to clearly illustrate how abstract liberalism is rooted in liberalist ideology, but utilizes vague and fabricated relationships between liberalist ideas and racially-motivated actions to justify them. I also noticed that the primary evidence being case-studies sparked many unanswered questions. The results of the case studies, especially the respondents’ attempts to justify their statements, constantly surprised me. I am very interested in the relationship between the government, both the development of modern government and how people make policy-related decisions today, and the four frames. I never realized how seemingly positive American principles, like equal opportunity and individualism, can be used to justify racism. I’m curious about what other seemingly positive principles in America and in other parts of the world are weaponized in this way. Through his use of case studies, Bonilla-silva connects the four frames to a wide range of debated topics like these. 

I would not take notes this way again. Cornell notes have been very useful for me when it comes to scientific or historical readings because they make it easier and more efficient to retain the information. However, I don’t think they are as effective for forming arguments based on a reading or for taking notes about style/figurative language. A note-taking method that involves directly annotating or highlighting text allows me to pay closer attention to an author’s use of language. Also, Cornell style note-taking places an emphasis on concise wording, whereas I like to write down lots of supporting direct quotes for main ideas. Next time, I will try sketchnotes or return to mindmapping or marginal note-taking. I think these styles push me to be more detailed and think more creatively about the text I’m engaging with, compared to Cornell notes/

The approach to notetaking I chose was handwritten notes. I find that physically writing in a notebook helps my understanding of topics, as I am forced to be concise and get to the point the author is trying to get across.

I think I might use Bonilla-Silva's "The Central Frames of Color-Blind Racism" in one of my papers because I appreciate the direct explanations and examples given. Bonilla-Silva outlines clear frames, with multiple quotes for each, along with analysis and direct reasoning. I think in an essay it would be helpful to have arguments regarding the justification of racist actions or racist ideology, and having different examples of defense mechanisms. I was intrigued by the inclusion of different demographics; people of all ages and genders used the same frameworks.

What stood out the most during my notetaking was the author's directness. I enjoyed the analysis because I felt that there was no fluff added for the sake of making a "fancier" argument. Bonilla-Silva remained objective, and focused on describing a) the frameworks of color-blind racism, b) the people that perpetuate New Racism, and c) the culmination of the four frames in a mix that proves detrimental to society's perspective and action towards racism.

I would take notes this way (handwritten in a notebook) again. I find it easier to keep my thoughts linked and focus on the major points being made. I find digital materials can become distracting and I think it's more difficult to keep my place in the reading when I'm jumping back and forth between tabs, or even in split screen. Overall, I think it's helpful to keep my notes concise and accessible.

I wanted to try taking notes differently this time, so I typed my notes on Google Docs. It was definitely easier and faster to take notes this way, probably because I can type at a relatively quick pace. I took all my notes as bullet points; however, I added sub-bullets if I wanted to expand on the quote or summary further. The sub-bullets acted as a way for me to include more in-depth comments and analysis points.

I added quite a few quotes in my notes this time because I felt this was a source that I might be able to use extensively in one of my papers. It touched upon a wide range of material and topics that are not only intriguing but also realistic at the same time. I was able to understand almost everything this source was attempting to elaborate on because it discussed the same arguments that occur in political debates (conservative vs. liberal), which I tend to watch often.

It was interesting to me how, although the author did not revolve his arguments around political ideology, he was still able to touch upon a lot of those topics. When I watch political debates between conservatives and liberals, it's interesting how both sides have such different views on the same issue. Bonilla-Silva simply gave the reasoning as to why this occurs and how, depending on the issue, political ideologies and philosophies are twisted to fit certain people's own standards and understandings regarding race. Silva's usage of real-world examples also stood out to me during my note-taking time. He, at first, gave political and racial explanations as to why certain people may say or do certain things, but he also goes into real-world examples to show this realistically. He gave examples from interviews of how, although people may not call themselves racist, their beliefs may not reflect those statements.

Experimenting with both hand-written and typed notes, I feel they are both really effective, but only at certain times. For example, if the article or chapter that I am reading is very long, I feel typed notes are a better option. If the reading material is brief or reasonably long, it is better to handwrite notes, so that I can absorb what I am reading effectively without spending an atrocious amount of time reading. The other benefit of having typed notes is that they can never truly get lost, as in the case of handwritten notes. All I have to do is search for the notes' name, and it will pop up for me to view.

For Keen's reading, I returned to my original way of note-taking. I noticed that Keen's writing style and vocabulary, and just the way he analyzes other authors' works, are very advanced and sometimes a little difficult to understand to a great extent. Since I saw this trend in Keen's writing style, I thought it would be better to take handwritten notes so that I could better comprehend his message. Usually, handwritten notes also tend to be a way for me to slow down my reading speed, which can be very useful for higher-level texts, such as Keen's. My note-taking method stayed relatively the same, with minor changes. I would summarize Keen's key messages or paraphrase his key quotes. If I felt further analysis was needed for the quotes, I would write down those notes underneath in a separate bullet point.

I do not think I would use this source in my paper, simply because it relates to topics that may not exactly match what I have in mind for my paper. This source, in particular, deals with how people transform their emotions based on literary works, not so much with our perceptions of race and the nuances of racial stereotypes. I would use this source if my paper's topic were about the psychological aspects of our methods of thinking about ideas of race, or of that nature.

During my notetaking process, I noticed the sheer amount of references that Keen utilizes in this source. He explicitly mentions a plethora of literary works and authors that he may or may not have agreed with in the past. Some authors are referenced to prove Keen's point that fiction reading does not transform someone's moral standards. Other authors, however, are mentioned to give the other side of the argument as well. This was most clear when he argued that there have been many times when people's lives have been changed by certain books and stories. He also mentions the great effect that literature can have on young children and how they view the world. Nevertheless, he still argues that fiction reading does not necessarily correlate with elevated stages of moral standards. He reasons that it is very difficult to separate literary works and the emotions they evoke from the real-world experiences we have had and the sociocultural frameworks we grew up in. I do have to disagree to a certain extent with Keen, however. Fiction reading may not totally transform one's moral standards, but other pieces of literature might, especially in non-fiction themes and/or religious texts. They have their own separate and much more ingrained effects that apply to even the most ordinary of people.

I would love to continue taking handwritten notes; however, I want to use other methods as well in the future. I was thinking about using a diagram and/or charts to categorize my notes, based on their respective themes.

I chose to take notes in a mindmap style. I drew bubbles around main ideas, authors such as McCloud and Frank Cioffi, or themes such as silence and voice, seeing/vision, and intergenerational trauma. I color coded recurring relationships in my notes; for example, the style/depiction of eyes heavily related many of my notes, so I highlighted those in pink. I drew branches to connect main ideas and wrote my own side-notes in orange, blue, and green, with orange representing notes about the drawing style, blue representing definitions and questions, and green representing notes related to writing style. 

Yes, I think I might use this source in one of my papers. This source explained many implications of Small’s “disjunctive image” style, which connected to and supports a lot of my previous ideas/interpretations about the text. I could use many parts of Larkin’s piece to support my analyses. For example, Larkin heavily discussed how Small uses the change in eye style to communicate the theme of seeing/blindness and truth, and to emphasize moments of character change. This gave me the idea to include the Rabbit Scene in my paper because I have many interpretations of that scene, although I’m still not sure what my main argument will be about. Larkin’s explanation of Small’s choice to draw realistic eyes in some scenes and blank eyes in others relates to my interpretation of the therapist rabbit because I believe that the rabbit’s hyperrealistic eyes, especially on the panel with only his and David’s eyes, symbolize David gaining the capability to see the truth of his past, facing the fact that his mother didn’t love him. 

During the notetaking process, what stood out to me the most was Larkin’s constant connection to the themes of survival, death, and self-preservation. While taking notes, I found myself frequently highlighting my notes in purple (corresponding to those themes). These themes connect especially to the depiction of body parts and the fetus, which Larkin revisited when discussing the ending. I also noticed that Larkin references multiple medical/psychoanalytical theories in her arguments, which I hadn’t thought about before. 

I would take notes this way again because the color-coding and branches/bubble format makes it easy to organize my thoughts and direct quotes from the text. The mindmap format is especially helpful for grouping themes together, which is heavily applicable to Stitches because it contains so many different yet related themes. Color coding my notes associated with pictures/drawings versus those associated with words also helps me get a sense of which one most of my ideas are related to, which I will keep in mind when choosing which parts of Stitches (mostly drawing, writing style, or both) I want to analyze in my essay.

Small’s Stitches starts as therapy - it shows childhood abuse through images more than just words.

His mom’s “little cough… slamming of kitchen doors” sounds calm, but the picture of her eyeless face makes it terrifying. 

• Text hides what the image exposes.

Her blank glasses mean she can’t see or be seen, representing denial, repression, and a lack of empathy.

Dad drawn with eyes closed - chooses not to see.

David and his brother have eyes; they still feel, but parents’ blindness isolates them.

“Mama had her little cough…” (p.15) shows how the tone of neutrality hides deep fear - he narrates pain without emotion.

Illness replaces speech.

• His body “talks” through sickness since no one else listens.

Eyes become symbols for connection, truth. Mirrors, headlights, whirlpools all look like eyes: seeing is everywhere but never safe.

X-ray scene: father’s “weapon” burns through him; light becomes violent. His face is reduced to a skull - seeing turns into annihilation.

The X-ray with the toy cowboy → links birth, death, and fear of what’s “inside.” He can’t name what he sees - the text cuts off with ellipses.

The fetus sequence repeats the same fear. Seeing the fetus = seeing death and his own “lost child” self.

“Her silent fury was like a black tidal wave” (p.46) - ellipsis shows fear too big for words; picture finishes what language can’t.

Mrs. Dillon's scene - first time he’s seen with care, turns to shame when she notices his tumor. Being seen becomes humiliation.

“Your mother doesn’t love you,” therapist (White Rabbit) finally names truth. Fantasy image (rabbit) makes pain bearable.

Last scene: he touches his mother’s face, sees her eyes, one tear falls - he finally sees her as human!!!

Returns to fetus in jar: small, powerless now. He can look without fear.

I chose to type my notes for Honeyman’s work because I felt it was the best method, especially considering the word length of this particular work. I chose to change the formatting of these types of notes just slightly this time. I listed all major points that I felt were most important to note during the reading process, and I also included individual examples provided in this reading. Whenever Honeyman provided examples from different authors’ texts, I would take extra time reading over different novel summaries and analyze what Honeyman wanted to take away from their specific formatting and themes. I also stuck to my previous formatting style by using sub-bullets along with my main points. 

This paper provided me with some initial ideas for what I could write about in my second paper; however, nothing concrete emerged. Despite this, I am considering using this work as a source in my paper because it goes very in-depth into some advanced aspects of morality, death, and overall illness. I was also considering how, since I need to use a couple of literary and scholarly works in my second paper, Honeyman fits into his role as someone who exposes the darker side of societal pressure and overshadowing. 

During my notetaking process, I realized that I was struggling just slightly in understanding Honeyman’s analysis and scholarly level of writing. I am not used to reading different scholarly work, and hence, it took me some time before I understood how to dissect the work into the most organized way possible. I also realized how common Honeyman’s conclusions were in the real world. I can remember countless situations from my own life when other people have tried to interrupt each other to avoid talking about a controversial or heartbreaking topic. This issue does not just have to be surrounding illness or death, either; any uncomfortable topic tends to be avoided by the majority of people. 

I would like to continue taking notes like this in the future, just because of its simplicity and straightforward pattern. If I ever needed to go back to reference a main point or understand one of the more important book references by Honeyman, this style of writing and note-taking is very effective. When I was writing paper one, I remember constantly going back to my bullet point notes and being able to quickly sort through the notes to find what I needed to include. For paper two, I would like to continue the quick reference method through this note-taking process.

For the reading notes on Kelley’s essay, “Mirrored Discourse in Alison Bechdel’s Fun Home”, I used a mix of highlighting and marginal notes as my approach. I did something similar in my other reading notes, but this time, the different colors from highlighting symbolize what text comes from which authors. For example, Kelley starts by mentioning Modern Fiction Studies’ and the points contributed from that reading. I highlighted those main points of contribution in red. For the information provided by Bechel’s actual memoir, I highlighted those in yellow and did a long yellow marginal line when Kelley is summarizing events in Bachel’s comics via words. As for the contributions from Kelley himself, I highlighted the key points he made in green. There was one instance where I highlighted in blue to indicate where Kelley explains what the “Stonewall incident” was, and another instance where I underlined text in dark red. Those indicate areas where I am especially confused or disagree with Kelley. 

I do not think I will be using this source in one of my papers because of all the other sources Kelley references within the essay. Personally, this essay seems to assume that the audience has a strong grasp of these other sources, which I do not have. While it did not give me any ideas about a potential paper argument, there were points when reading the essay where it seemed the author was seeing his argument in insignificant details. 

What stood out the most during my note-taking process was how many sources were referenced in the essay. It got to the point where I didn’t have enough colors for all the new sources being introduced. As for my reaction to his source, I found the writing system hard for me to grasp, with all the long sentences and descriptive terms used. Typically, when annotating, I like to change words I don’t understand to easier terms for myself. Within this text, there were so many that I could not change all the terms to ones I knew.

I would take notes like this again because it best resonates with how my mind works. When taking written or typed notes, I tend to overload on information, making it inefficient and useless when reviewing. By taking marginal notes, I can directly see what I'm referencing and review the text, making it time-efficient. I also like to have colors to contrast the heavy black and white chunks of text on the page.

For the reading notes on Kelly's essay, I jotted down all the important and key concepts that were discussed. Kelly separated her essay into different sections, and hence, I separated my notes into separate sections as well in order to stay more organized. I made sure to include any numerical values or key vocabulary that were included in Kelly's essay into my reading notes in order to be more detailed. I kept the overall style of my notes relatively the same by writing easy-to-understand notes and in a bulleted format, although no actual bullets this time. I also started each new section with an overall theme/topic statement, which was mentioned in Kelly's essay as well. I took notes in this way because I knew I would need to go back to these notes in the future, and having these topic statements will keep me more organized for my paper later this week.

I am definitely using this source in my upcoming paper because it touches on a lot of analysis points, which helped me understand the style and formatting techniques that graphic narratives tend to use. For example, Kelly touches upon the shared effect, the idea that both the daughter and father felt similarly, despite them not sharing their identity crises explicitly. These key topics and discoveries are exactly the type of information that I would like to add to my paper. It also gave me ideas about what topic or overarching question I might want to write about in Paper 2. Kelly's essay gave me ideas about gender identity, emotional distancing, and family structure separations.

What stood out the most to me during my note-taking process was the way that Kelly integrates and analyzes so many of the sources that were included in the actual essay. Also, since Kelly uses a lot of new vocabulary that I hadn't known before, I was forced to individually search and understand them, such as cross-discursiveness. This, however, is a very good thing in my opinion because it forced me to learn and actually understand the topics in Kelly's essay, rather than just mindlessly taking basic notes. Her advanced vocabulary also allowed me to make more organized notes.

I would like to take notes like this again because it's always been the way I have been taking notes. I like to sometimes change the bulleting formatting and overall structure of my notes, but generally, taking simple and organized typed notes works much better for me. Next time, I was planning on using marginal notes in my readings because I feel they work better with reading comprehension and overall just enjoying the readings, rather than trying to make my own notes. I also have not tried color-coding any of my notes, so that is also something that I would like to try.