Today, reading a paper for the class I'm teaching, I was stunned to find a connection to a paper I'm currently working on on what I thought of as an entirely distinct topic. This highlighted for me the extent to which synthesis is central to scholarship. >>

And especially so in interdisciplinary fields. So much of what we can add as scholars comes from bringing together disparate perspectives and building on the results. >>

And in that context, I think it is important to be very intensional about what we read. We can do better and more impactful scholarship by being sure to read across a broad range of perspectives. >>

Not just different fields or schools within fields but also being sure to attend to the voices of people with very different lived experience, whether they be sharing their knowledge inside or outside the academy. >>

If we want our scholarship to have positive impact on the world, including reading that brings insight into real problems in society is key. We can't spark those connections without the input. >>

As something of an antidote to the discussion of 'scooping' and 'SOTA-chasing', I want to bring this tweet into this thread too: https://twitter.com/emilymbender/status/1194024938002210816

This is yet another reason to value 'slow science'. We need time to be able to read and sit with unfamiliar scholarship. It's a privilege to get to teach classes where I can read new things and one I'm very grateful for.