On being a Luddite, or: How to survive writer's cramp and emerge with a decent bit of writing

On occasion, I have been known to my students as the "Footnote Nazi."  I come by such a name honestly and wear it with pride.  I believe it is integral to their college experience to teach them how to properly cite their papers and, as mostly political science majors, that means learning Chicago/Turabian citation.  Another part of writing papers is finding a system that makes sense to them for cataloging and organizing information.  This both enables them to gather a substantial amount of research without having to duplicate their efforts by looking at the same books multiple times.  I encourage them to ask all of their professors how they do it so they can throw several things at the wall and see what sticks.  I also warn them that I'm quite the Luddite when it comes to these things, but unapologetically so as it works for me and that's really the only thing that's important.  So without further adieu, here is one humble technologically averse approach to cataloging, compiling, and organizing research.

Step 1: The research itself

I still mostly use the old school approach many of us of a certain age learned for compiling research in high school.  That is to say, I start with a stack of lined 5x8 index cards.  I begin with a card denoting the source and listing all of the important citation material in both Chicago "Works Cited" format and Chicago "Footnote" format.  This idiot-proofs my footnoting process.  More on that later.  Each source is given a number, whatever the next number in sequence is.  The number is noted in the upper right hand corner of the note card.  The end result is this:

Each note card containing research from this source will likewise carry that number in the upper right hand corner.  I try to group research on note cards by topic.  This makes organization of the information easier later.  Each bit of information or quote has the page number noted.  Thus, note cards with research look like this:

I preserve all of my notes cards in two places: first, the cards themselves are kept in extra-large note card file boxes with third-cut tabs separating each source.  Second, I have an Excel spread sheet listed by source, author, and title.  It is thus searchable when a new project begins.  Once I've determined that I have sufficient research to begin the organization process, the real fun begins.

2. The Lego Method

I often describe my process as the Lego method of writing papers.  This is why.  Once all of the research is finished, I separate all of the bib. cards from the actual research and, keeping the bib. cards in numerical order, set them aside for fun at a later date.  Then I take the notes cards with all of their actual information, find a nice, comfy spot on the floor, and start sorting them into piles by topic (broadly).  The subject of each pile differs depending on the project at  hand, but these can be thematic, chronological, regarding primary sources, or some combination of all of the above.  Each pile is then organized into a seemingly logical stream of consciousness according to my vision for the project.  Each pile is then added to the stack, again in a (hopefully) logical order.  The final stack is often quite large and, at the outset, often intimidating.

3. The Outline

Once the stack is ready, I'm ready to start outlining the project.  I prefer top-bound spiral notebooks with college-ruled pages.  Yes, I'm picky, but there's something to be said for knowing what works. From here, the outline emerges much as you would expect (I., A., 1., a., i.).  The Roman numerals are often few, and the capital letters and Arabic numerals many.  Each bit of information recorded on the outline is accompanied by a number circled (the source number) and a page number.  This is the most time-consuming and tedious part of the whole process.  However, I've tried going from stack straight to computer and it actually took me quite a bit longer than the outline did.  And yes, for the record, I highly recommend caffeine to fuel this process.

Because of the level of detail in my outlines, they are often quite lengthy.  The outline for the first chapter of my dissertation was 19 pages long.  The chapter was 39 pages.  The writer's cramp is real with this step.  The final product makes the actual typing of the thing quite simple, however.

4. Typing (Yea, technology!)

Finally, some technological assistance.  I do love me some Microsoft Word.  Some...not all.  Ever. Now, we bring the bib. cards back to the party.  Remember, they are still in numerical order.  I create a cheat sheet for myself with each source's number and a quick hit for the author or author, short title: Anything so I know what's what.

This enables me to check off sources once I've used them initially since, after all, the initial footnote and subsequent footnotes are cited differently in Chicago style citation.  Once I have used the bib. card for an initial citation, it goes in a new stack, this one organized alphabetically as for a Works Cited section.  While the typing of the thing is (blessedly) done on Word, I do not use any citation software like Zotero or Refworks for my citations.  I insert footnotes in Word and type them myself. It's just not that hard or annoying to do them the old-fashioned way for me to want to bother with learning a new way.

5. Editing

Some things emerge into the world relatively decent and undeserving of the scorn of the person who wrote the thing.  And some things are complete crap and deserving of all of the scorn.  I number and track changes in Word files as you would software versions.  For example, the first draft of anything will be 1.0.  A mild revision will earn a new file name with the path 1.1.  However, in the event of total crap in need of a complete overhaul, the new designator of overhauled thing will be 2.0.  That allows me to track what changes were made and where and, if necessary undo them.

Is this an incredibly time-consuming method for cataloging information, organizing research, and writing papers?  Yes.  Absolutely.  I'll be the first person to admit it.  However, I do it this way for several reasons:

1. Given how my outlines are marked, I do not worry about plagiarism--ever.  It's simply too hard to inadvertently plagiarize when one is THIS obsessive-compulsive about citation.
2. I need the tactile, Lego-style sorting method to organize my thoughts.
3. I've simply never found a more technologically advanced method for doing all of this that makes sense to me or, more importantly, that I'm comfortable with.
4. For all of the front-end time required for this method, the back end of the process moves quickly.  When I'm in a groove, I can type up to 5 pages an hour.  The front-end organization makes that possible.

This method is, perhaps, not for the faint of heart.  If you love technology, you will likely not love this method of writing papers.  Most of my students, however appreciative of the process, find another way.  I understand, and I am never offended.  As I tell them, how you research, how you write has to make sense to you and no one else.  However, I have a system and many of them don't, so, if nothing else, I encourage them to start here and innovate from this point.