One advantage I see in using a technology device instead of a paper notebook is the opportunity comes from added capabilities of technology. When it comes to taking notes, I would propose that the simultaneous recording of audio linked to personal notes is a great advantage over taking notes on paper. The addition of the linked audio allows the note taker to revisit the audio in a precise way when notes are confusing or incomplete. A more complete and personalized representation of key information can then be generated after the presentation.
There are several different applications for doing this. The demonstration that follows makes use of Notability on a tablet.
My way of exploring what I know of cognitive psychology to the selection of effective learning tasks is captured in the phrase – external tasks to influence internal tasks. Learners must accomplish learners themselves, but educators can provide experiences to learn from (exposure to information) and propose activities that potentially influence how learners process these experiences. The word potential is important here because the educator is assuming that the learner will apply the external task in a way that engages important cognitive tasks and the external task does not complete more effective cognitive activity learners might have applied on their own (i.e. busy work). When applied to a group which is most commonly how assignments are made, these caveats are probably both violated for certain individual students.
This analysis may sound obvious but as is usually the case the devil is in the details. There must be some understanding of what cognitive behaviors produce learning and which of these cognitive behaviors might be engaged by the assignment of an external task. Both requirements have been addressed by great numbers of research studies.
Many cognitive psychologists use the phrase generative learning to refer to the approach I have described in my own way. To move this presentation toward application it would be useful to read a 2016 paper by Fiorella and Mayer. These authors identify general categories of activities that have shown to have effective generative capabilities. The paper references multiple studies that evaluate examples of the application of each type of task.
This specific article identified eight learning strategies that promote generative learning and provides a review of research relevant to each strategy.
As a way of simplifying what these generative tasks ask of learners consider the following two ways of simplifying what the tasks require.
The first four strategies (summarizing, mapping, drawing, and imagining) involve changing the input into a different form of representation.
The final four strategies (self-testing, self-explaining, teaching, and answering practice questions) require additional elaboration.
Just example of how this type of consolidation of research might be applied consider how the list might be applied to note-taking another of the topics I have been addressing lately. The Cornell note template is popular with educators. The template asks that learners use two items from this list in the full application of the Cornell method. The template includes an area for summarization and encourages the use of the column that normally appears to the left of the area for taking notes for questions.
Fiorella, L., & Mayer, R. E. (2016). Eight ways to promote generative learning. Educational Psychology Review, 28(4), 717-741.
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.
Manage Consent
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.