Folks like me and many I follow get all excited about the latest learning tactics and the research that investigates if and why the tactics work. Every once in a while I think back to some observations I made while lecturing to large groups of undergraduates who took Introductory and Educational Psychology.
After an introduction to the Cornell Note-Taking system, I asked if anyone recognized what I was describing from middle-school or high school. Typically, a third-or so of the students would raise their hands. I then would ask how many were using the Cornell system to take notes on my presentation. In doing this for many years, I think I may have found one or two students who were using the system. For the occasional ed psych prof who reads my posts, give these questions a try and see what you discover.
I often ask about this experience in my grad courses seeking an explanation. Nothing much ever emerges from this request, but I would often observe that more research should be focused on the barriers to the adoption of proven study tactics. The Cornell system is simple enough. It can’t be exposure since the Cornell system is introduced in K12 and college study skill programs. Maybe the younger students were required to show that they were using the system.
The one exception I can think of to my observation regarding college student application of study tactics is the use of flash cards. At least some students in fields that require the memory for lots of specifics (I tend to think of PT and OT students) I noticed breaking out their decks of cards while waiting for my classes to begin. So there is this interesting exception to investigate. Why flash cards and note Cornell notes?
I think of specialized note-taking tactics as approaches that go beyond the learner-controlled recording of text and maybe some basic sketches. These approaches involve some attempt to scaffold what I would describe as elaboration. I like to describe elaboration as a type of personalization that goes beyond recording information in a verbatim way involving summarization and/or the addition of examples or cross-references to other existing knowledge. A challenge here is the possible, working memory overload required to personalize the information input, and whether the circumstances of the presentation and capabilities of the individual learner allow the capacity for elaboration. The application of note taking while reading and listening to a presentation can be quite different because of differences in the opportunity to control the rate of input.
Popular examples of specialized tactics proposed for the K12 environment include Cornell notes, sketchnoting, and concept mapping. All involve either an extension or a rerepresentation of ideas from the content to be mastered. I will admit a bias in not being a strong advocate of any of these tactics with perhaps the most enthusiasm for the Cornell system. My reaction is mostly based on the increased demands on working memory these systems impose and whether the product generated in the case of sketch notes and concept maps is more useful longterm as a summarization.
For those wanting to investigate sketchnoting and the Cornell system here are some resources.
I use Evernote as an information archive. Evernote offers different templates and one is for Cornell Notes. The template offers a way to explain what I mean by a scaffold for personalization.
I have come to see note-taking as best understood as a three stage process (see references that follow). From this template, you can see how the middle stage – the after class or revision stage – would be applied. After taking notes and after class, you can generate a summary (bottom box) and generate questions (above the middle box). Developing a summary (something like Ahern’s Smart Notes) could involve elaboration. The questions could improve the effectiveness of review (study).
One final observation – I find it strange that there are so many carefully controlled research studies comparing taking notes by hand versus by a digital device and so few directly comparing these specialized note taking systems and traditional note taking.
References:
Chen, P. H. (2021). In-class and after-class lecture note-taking strategies. Active Learning in Higher Education, 22(3), 245-260.
Luo, L., Kiewra, K. A., & Samuelson, L. (2016). Revising lecture notes: how revision, pauses, and partners affect note taking and achievement. Instructional Science, 44(1), 45-67.
V. Paepcke-Hjeltness, M. Mina and A. Cyamani, “Sketchnoting: A new approach to developing visual communication ability, improving critical thinking and creative confidence for engineering and design students,” 2017 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE), 2017, pp. 1-5, doi: 10.1109/FIE.2017.8190659.
Back to a time when our expectations of social media were more optimistic. This interview Howard Rheingold conducts with Andy Clark claims the internet does not have to make us stupid. This discussion focuses on what habits make the difference. The notion that unproductive uses of online services are a habit rather than say a change in brain structure or an unchangeable requirement of a medium suggests the potential for learning or scaffolding.
I have come to this perspective after considering what some see as a problem with keyboard notetaking. The capacity to enter text faster via a keyboard in comparison to what most do with a pen would somehow seem to be an opportunity and not a liability. Why would this opportunity have to be utilized to enter verbatim rather than elaborated notes? It would seem an approach closer to transcription when notetaking with a keyboarding is a choice we make.
I have decided that it is time to diversify my posts as many who read what I write here may not be that interested in notes and notetaking. My personal interest will require that I post on this topic from time to time. I will leave this topic for the time being with a recommendation.
A history prof from Bemidji State (my area of the woods) has an interest in this same topic and has hosted a book study group that meets regularly. The group is presently considering Ahrens’ book Smart Notes. The group has great discussions I cannot participate in because of the time difference (I am wintering in Kauai), but the content is available on YouTube.
When I see many online references to something I am interested in, I sometimes wonder whether I have caught an early wave or my online interest has been noticed by some algorithm feeding me more of what I view.
ISTE (International Society for Technology in Education) had a recent article on notetaking strategies for children. The strategies are not new, but fit with present interest which involves strategies for a “processing” stage between original exposure and use. Sketch noting would make a great example of when this is necessary. The extra time required would not be practical in real time during exposure to information
Here is a second example. A post to Hacker news which seems an unusual outlet for consideration of notetaking. The focus on digital apps makes some sense. Read the interaction in response to the original comment about notetaking apps. The issue of committing to a specific app and not being attracted by every shiny new thing is a legitimate concern.
I came across a study on notetaking behavior that I thought might be a missing link in the other notetaking ideas I have been reading lately. Kiewra is a name that comes up repeatedly in thois area of research. I am guessing one of his students (Luo), Kiewra and Samuelson published a study in 2017 proposing that storage and review may not be an adequate way to engage in product note use. Perhaps a three stage approach would be more productive. Rather than just recording and review, effective notetaking might benefit from an intermediate stage – revision.
Luo, et al. (2016) investigate revision during pauses in a presentation or for the same amount of time immediately after the presentation. They speculate about benefits mostly from the increase in content added as notes or a type of retrieval practice explanation for later achievement gains.
I admit that this seems different from what I would describe as a generative effect. A three stage model makes some sense. For example, the Cornell notetaking system was developed to encourage a revision process and this additional activity was about more than just adding content that had been missed. Aherns book on Smart Notes proposed several types of notes generated over time:
Make fleeting notes.
Make literature notes.
Make permanent notes
Perhaps the focus on preparing for an exam is different than the Smart Note notion for long-term storage and personalized understanding. Whether for more meaningful use at a later date or to improve personal understanding, revision might make the most sense if was more what Ahrens had in mind.
Ahrens, S. (2017). How to Take Smart Notes: One Simple Technique to Boost Writing, Learning and Thinking–for Students, Academics and Nonfiction Book Writers. Sönke Ahrens.
Luo, L., Kiewra, K. A., & Samuelson, L. (2016). Revising lecture notes: how revision, pauses, and partners affect note taking and achievement. Instructional Science, 44(1), 45-67.
I have some interest in note-taking for K12 students. Learning to take notes has to start at some point. I doubt most students ever receive instruction in how to take notes and what type of notes might be best suited to different situations. This goes for longhand or keyboard notes. What follows is somewhat speculative, but I hope to offer at least one idea.
As I have become more interested in what I have taken to calling smart notes, I have begun thinking how this approach might be developed over time. My understanding of the basics of smart notes, suggests that such notes should:
Be personalized or at least a summary rather than a verbatim copy of important ideas or concepts
Be linkable in some way so that the learner could consider how individual notes could be built into something larger
Be shareable for the purpose of feedback or collaboration
Be saved in a format that would allow usefulness over a long period of time
Once students reach high school and perhaps a bit earlier, I would suggest use of the same tools I might use now. What about younger learners? Here is more of a concept that would take some effort to implement. One caveat – one limitation to consider is access to a recommended tool or service if a student is younger than 13. Some tools of this time can be created by the teacher and shared with students or in the use case I have in mind individual students. This makes the process somewhat cumbersome, but my point here is to propose an approach.
I hit on this idea while reading about tactics for introducing students to note-taking. The focus of these suggestions was on paper rather than digital strategies, but in exploring some of the suggestions I flashed on a category of digital multimedia tools I thought would offer both power and flexibility. It was easier than I expected to locate note-taking ideas for K12 by searching online. I have included a couple of resources at the end of this post.
I thought that what my wife and I described as embellished documents in our textbook might offer a way to explore note-taking with some (but not all) of the features of smart notes I listed above. My demonstration here makes use of Padlet and the Canvas templet, but Wakelet or Glogster might offer similar capabilities. The Canvas template is important with Padlet because it allows individual notes to be linked within the same embellished document.
If you are unfamiliar with this type of tool, think digital cork board with the opportunity to add notecards or photos and maybe explore different links among the different elements of content. The most important point about Smart Notes for younger students is probably to identify specific ideas or concepts from external sources and then write a personal summary of each idea. In traditional note-taking one might just record these ideas one after the other. Even thus would be an improvement over verbatim transcriptions and personalizing notes as summaries or interpretations based on personal experiences is what makes just the taking of notes a learning experience.
I have developed tutorials for both Padlet and Glogster previously so there is no real need to duplicate the basics of using these tools here.
The following are few images specific to the activity I am proposing. First, the Canvas template adds a capability to link different elements added to a padlet. Once individual idea notes have been created, they can be moved about on a padlet and then connected to show relationships. Doing this is a little tricky unless you understand that you have to use Shift/Right Click on one element to create a link to another element (see the images that follow).
I have created an example padlet with ideas suited to an adult audience to offer an example of how ideas might be generated and then linked.
As I said, it is valuable to be able to share padlets for the purposes of feedback or collaboration. You can view the actual padlet you see above using this link. It is very possible this link will stop working at some point. I don’t really have a use for a paid version of Padlet. The free account allows me to create and recreate up to 3 padlets. It is possible I will delete the one you see here some time in the future to stay within this limit.
Padlets can be shared and developed collaboratively. What I am suggesting here would require a teacher to create a padlet for each student and then share the padlet with that student. This would then technically be a collaborative arrangement under the ultimate control of the teacher. I understand this would be cumbersome, but Padlet accounts are not appropriately available to individual users under the age of 13. The cost for a classroom account allowing unlimited padlets is $8 a month. Padlet is a very versatile tool and what I describe here is just one of many possible classroom uses. Obviously, multiple students could collaboratively generate notes on a topic.
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Functional
Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
You must be logged in to post a comment.