Microcontent

Microcontent refers to short pieces of text which represent longer content. They include:

  • Titles
  • Headers and sub-headers
  • Hyperlink text
  • E-mail subject lines
  • ...

Microcontent is one kind of "summary", and must often function out of context to represent your content.

General guidelines

  • Use low-frequency words.
  • Avoid high-frequency words, e.g. the, and, some, interesting....
  • Use words unique to your content.
  • Avoid "click-bait".

Summarizing

Article about Baclofen

By yourself:

  • Read the article from Science magazine (jpeg image--blow it up).
  • Write on a piece of paper, a concise title for the article (*not* from Ameisen's point of view.) Use low-frequency English words, which are unique and specific!
  • Summarize the argument that Ameisen is making:
    • Use a bulleted list with no more than 4 points.
    • You *do not* have to write full sentences for each point.
    • You *may not* simply repeat something in the article: put it in your own words.
    • Write each bullet point from Ameisen's point of view. (Don't write..."Ameisen believes that..." each time).

Discussing a common reading (up to 10 minutes)

In your discussion groups:

Discuss your reactions and judgements about the article. Designate one person to write these down, and enter them into this google Doc: tiny.cc/baclofen

  • points of agreement
  • points of disagreement

Everyone else in the group must help him/her!

Here are some positive roles in a group discussion:

encouraging $\ \ \cdot\ \ $ stating uncertainties $\ \ \cdot\ \ $ pausing
listening $\ \ \cdot\ \ $ contrasting $\ \ \cdot\ \ $ summarizing
timekeeping

Discussion part 2 - summarizing and evaluating

Designate someone *else* to write down results for this part of things...and help them!

From the summary sentences I asked you to write...

  • Pick out only 3 for further evaluation. (Maybe some will be composites of several points suggested ahead of time.)
  • Paraphrase each point down to 4-7 words (*not* a full sentence).

Evaluating

For each of your 3 points, evaluate the strength of the evidence:

  • very solid
  • solid
  • suggestive
  • plausible
  • attractive
  • not unreasonable
  • improbable
  • highy unlikely


What's the overall strength of Ameisen's argument? Look at

  • Internal consistency
  • Were alternative explanations considered?
  • Overall probability
Link