Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-9pm4c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T13:34:26.124Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

13 - Note-Taking

from Part III - Reading and Writing

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 February 2019

By
Stephen T. Peverly  and
Amie D. Wolf
Edited by
John Dunlosky  and
Katherine A. Rawson
John Dunlosky
Affiliation:
Kent State University, Ohio
Katherine A. Rawson
Affiliation:
Kent State University, Ohio
Get access

Summary

In this chapter, we describe note-taking and its importance to student achievement. We include data from a new survey that reveals when students take notes and how they use them, and review the literature pertaining to whether taking notes improves student performance as well as individual differences in note-taking quantity and quality.
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Cognition and Education , pp. 320 - 355
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aguilar-Roca, N. M., Williams, A. E., & O’Dowd, D. K. (2012). The impact of laptop-free zones on student performance and attitudes in large lectures. Computers and Education, 59, 1300–1308.Google Scholar
Aiken, G. A., Thomas, G. S., & Shennum, W. A. (1975). Memory for lecture: Effects of notes, lecture rate, and informational density. Journal of Educational Psychology, 67, 439–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Amer, A. A. (1994). The effect of knowledge-map and underlining training on the reading comprehension of scientific texts. English for Specific Purposes, 13, 35–45.Google Scholar
Anderson, T. H. & Anderson, B. B. (1984). Studying. In Pearson, P. D. (ed.), Handbook of reading research (pp. 657–679). New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Annis, L. & Davis, J. K. (1975). The effect of encoding and an external memory device on note taking. Journal of Experimental Education, 44, 44–46.Google Scholar
Armbruster, B. (2009). Notetaking from lectures. In Flippo, R. F., & Caverly, D. C. (eds.), Handbook of college reading and study strategy research, 2nd edn. (pp. 220–248). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Arnold, K. M. Umanath, S., Thio, K. et al. (2017). Understanding the cognitive processes involved in writing to learn. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 23, 115–127.Google Scholar
Austin, J., Lee, M., & Carr, J. (2004). The effects of guided notes on undergraduate students’ recording of lecture content. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 31, 314–320.Google Scholar
Bahr, G. S. & Dansereau, D. F. (2001). Bilingual knowledge maps (BiK-Maps) in second-language vocabulary learning. The Journal of Experimental Education, 70, 5–24.Google Scholar
Bahr, G. S. & Dansereau, D. F. (2005). Bilingual knowledge maps (BiK-Maps) as a presentation format: Delayed recall and training effects. The Journal of Experimental Education, 73, 101–118.Google Scholar
Barnett, J. E., DiVesta, F. J., & Rogozinski, J. T. (1981). What is learned in note taking? Journal of Educational Psychology, 73, 181–192.Google Scholar
Benton, S. L., Kiewra, K. A., Whitfill, J. M., & Dennison, R. (1993). Encoding and external-storage effects on writing processes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85, 267–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bereiter, C. & Scardamalia, M. (1982). From conversation to composition: The role of instruction in a developmental process. In Glaser, R. (ed.), Advances in instruction, Vol. 2 (pp. 1–64). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Bereiter, C. & Scardamalia, M. (1987). The psychology of written composition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Berninger, V. (2012). Past, present, and future contributions of cognitive writing research to cognitive psychology. New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Berninger, V. W., Abbott, R. D., Jones, J., Wolf, B. J., Gould, L., Anderson-Youngstrom, M., Shimada, S., & Apel, K. (2006). Early development of language by hand: Composing-, reading-, listening-, and speaking- connections, three letter writing modes, and fast mapping in spelling. Developmental Neuropsychology, 29, 61–92.Google Scholar
Berninger, V. W. & Richards, T. L. (2012). The writing brain: Coordinating sensory/motor, language, and cognitive systems in working memory. In Berninger, V. W. (ed.), Past, present, and future contributions of cognitive writing research to cognitive psychology. London: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Berninger, V. W. & Swanson, H. L. (1994). Modifying Hayes and Flower’s model of skilled writing to explain beginning and developing writing. In Butterfield, E. (ed.), Children’s writing: Toward a process theory of the development of skilled writing (pp. 57–81). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.Google Scholar
Blair, A. (2004). Note taking as an art of transmission. Critical Inquiry, 31, 85–107.Google Scholar
Bouwmeester, S. & Verkoeijen, P. P. J. L. (2011). Why do some children benefit more from testing than others? Gist trace processing to explain the testing effect. Journal of Memory and Language, 65(1), 32–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2011.02.005Google Scholar
Boyle, J. R. (2010a). Note-taking skills of middle school students with and without learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 43 (6), 530–540.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Boyle, J. R. (2010b). Strategic note-taking for middle-school students with learning disabilities in science classes. Learning Disability Quarterly, 33, 93–109.Google Scholar
Boyle, J. R. (2012). Note-taking and students with learning disabilities: Challenges and solutions. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 27, 90–101. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540–5826.2012.00354.x.Google Scholar
Boyle, J. R. (2013). Strategic note-taking for inclusive middle school science classrooms. Remedial and Special Education, 34(2), 78–90.Google Scholar
Boyle, J. R. & Rivera, T. Z. (2012). Note-taking techniques for students with disabilities: A systematic review of the research. Learning Disability Quarterly, 35, 131–143. https://doi.org/10.1177/0731948711435794Google Scholar
Boyle, J. R. & Weishaar, M. (2001). The effects of a strategic note-taking technique on the comprehension and long term recall of lecture information for high school students with LD. LD Research and Practice, 16, 125–133.Google Scholar
Bretzing, B. H., Kulhavy, R. W., & Caterino, L. C. (1987). Notetaking by junior high students. Journal of Educational Research, 80, 359–362.Google Scholar
Brown, A. L. & Day, J. D. (1983). Macrorules for summarizing text: The development of expertise. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 22, 1–14.Google Scholar
Brown, A. L., Day, J. D., & Jones, R. S. (1983). The development of plans for summarizing text. Child Development, 54, 968–979.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, P. C., Roediger, H. L., & McDaniel, M. A., (2014). Make it stick: The science of successful learning. New York: Belknap Press.Google Scholar
Brown, A. L. & Smiley, S. S. (1977). Rating the importance of structural units of prose passages: A problem of metacognitive development. Child Development, 48, 1–8.Google Scholar
Brown, A. L. & Smiley, S. S. (1978). The development of strategies for studying. Child Development, 49, 1076–1088.Google Scholar
Brown, A. L., Smiley, S. S., & Lawton, S. Q. C. (1978). The effects of experience on the selection of suitable retrieval cues for studying texts. Child Development, 49, 829–835.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bui, D. C. & Myerson, J. (2014). The role of working memory abilities in lecture note-taking. Learning and Individual Differences, 33, 12–22.Google Scholar
Bui, D. C., Myerson, J., & Hale, S. (2013). Note-taking with computers: Exploring alternative strategies for improved recall. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105, 299–309. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0030367CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Butler, A. C. (2010). Repeated testing produces superior transfer of learning relative to repeated studying. Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition, 36, 1118–33. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019902Google Scholar
Butler, A. C., Marsh, E. J., Goode, M. K., & Roediger, H. L. (2006). When additional multiple-choice lures aid versus hinder later memory. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 20, 941–956. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1239Google Scholar
Chmielewski, T. L. & Dansereau, D. F. (1998). Enhancing the recall of text: Knowledge mapping training promotes implicit transfer. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 407–413.Google Scholar
Cohn, E., Cohn, S., & Bradley, J. (1995). Notetaking, working memory, and learning in principles of economics. Research in Economic Education, 26, 291–307.Google Scholar
Crawford, C. C. (1925). The correlation between lecture notes and quiz papers. Journal of Educational Research, 12, 282–291.Google Scholar
Dahlstrom, E., Walker, J. D., & Dziuban, C. (2013). ECAR study of undergraduate students and information technology, 2012. Boulder, CO: Educause Center for Applied Research.Google Scholar
Dansereau, D. F. & Simpson, D. D. (2009). A picture is worth a thousand words: The case for graphic representations. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 40, 104–110.Google Scholar
Dempster, F. N. (1988). The spacing effect: A case study in the failure to apply the results of psychological research. American Psychologist, 43, 627–634.Google Scholar
DiCecco, V. M. & Gleason, M. M. ( 2002 ). Using graphic organizers to attain relational knowledge from expository text. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 35, 306–320.Google Scholar
DiVesta, F. J. & Gray, G. S. (1972). Listening and note taking. Journal of Educational Psychology, 64, 321–325.Google Scholar
Dunkel, P. & Davy, S. (1989). The heuristic of lecture notetaking: Perceptions of American and international students regarding the value and practice of notetaking. English for Specific Purposes, 8, 33–50.Google Scholar
Dunlosky, J., Rawson, K. A., Marsh, E. J., Nathan, M. J., & Willingham, D. T. (2013). Improving students’ learning with effective learning techniques: Promising directions from cognitive and educational psychology, Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 14, 4–58.Google Scholar
Fisher, J. L. & Harris, M. B. (1973). Effect of note-taking and review on recall. Journal of Educational Psychology, 65, 321–325.Google Scholar
Fitzgerald, J. M. (2000). Younger and older jurors: The influence of environmental supports on memory performance and decision making in complex trials. The Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 55, 323–331. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/55.6.P323Google Scholar
ForsterLee, L. & Horowitz, I. A. (1997). Enhancing juror competence in a complex trial. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 11, 305–319. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-0720(199708)11:4%3C305::AID-ACP457%3E3.0.CO;2-JGoogle Scholar
ForsterLee, L., Horowitz, I. A., & Bourgeois, M. (1994). Effects of notetaking on verdicts and evidence processing in a civil trial. Law and Human Behavior, 18, 567–578.Google Scholar
ForsterLee, L., Kent, L., & Horowitz, I. A. (2005). The cognitive effects of jury aids on decision‐making in complex civil litigation. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 19, 867–884. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1124Google Scholar
Frank, B. M. (1984). Effect of field independence-dependence and study technique on learning from lecture. American Educational Research Journal, 21, 669–678.Google Scholar
Frank, B. M., Garlinger, D. K., & Kiewra, K. A. (1989). Use of embedded heading and intact online with videotaped instruction. Journal of Educational Research, 82, 277–281.Google Scholar
Fried, C. B. (2008). In-class laptop use and its effects on student learning. Computers and Education, 50(3),906–914.Google Scholar
Gates, A. I. (1917). Recitation as a factor in memorizing. Archives of Psychology, 40th edn. (pp. 1–104). New York: The Science Press. Retrieved from http://books.google.com/books/download/Recitation_as_a_factor_in_memorizing.pdf?id=YinQhb3ZS8YC&output=pdf&sig=ACfU3U0dCJ-oJYvoQ6ESH62kUpQQVGL2vQGoogle Scholar
Geary, D. C. (2011). Cognitive predictors of achievement growth in mathematics: A 5-year longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 47, 1539–1552. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0025510Google Scholar
Gleason, J. (2012). An investigation of the lecture note-taking skills of adolescents with and without attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder: An extension of previous research. Teachers College, Columbia University, New York City.Google Scholar
Glover, J. A. (1989). The “testing” phenomenon: Not gone but nearly forgotten. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 392–399. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022–0663.81.3.392Google Scholar
Grabe, M., Christopherson, K., & Douglas, J. (2005). Providing introductory psychology students access to on-line notes: The relationship of note use to performance and class attendance. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 33, 295–308.Google Scholar
Greene, E. B. (1928). The relative effectiveness of lecture and individual reading as methods of college teaching, Genetic Psychology Monographs, 4, 459–563.Google Scholar
Hadwin, A. F., Kirby, J. R., & Woodhouse, R. A. (1999). Individual differences in notetaking, summarization, and learning from lectures. The Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 45, 1–17.Google Scholar
Hamaker, C. (1986). The effects of adjunct questions on prose learning. Review of Educational Research, 56, 212–242.Google Scholar
Hamilton, S. L., Seibert, M. A., Gardner, R., & Talbert-Johnson, C. (2000). Using guided notes to improve the academic achievement of incarcerated adolescents with learning and behavior problems. Remedial and Special Education, 21, 133–140.Google Scholar
Hartley, J. (2002). Notetaking in non-academic settings: a review. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 16, 559–574.Google Scholar
Hartley, J. & Cameron, A. (1967). Some observations on the efficiency of lecturing. Educational Review, 20, 30–37.Google Scholar
Hartley, J. & Davies, I. K. (1978). Note-taking: A critical review. Programmed Learning and Educational Technology, 15, 207–224.Google Scholar
Hayes, J. R. (1996). A new framework for understanding cognition and affect in writing. In Levy, C. M., & Ransdell, S. (eds.), The science of writing (pp. 1–27). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Hembrooke, H. & Gay, G. (2003). The laptop and the lecture: The effects of multitasking in learning. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 15, 46–64.Google Scholar
Heuer, L. & Penrod, S. (1988). Increasing jurors’ participation in trials: A field experiment with jury notetaking and question asking. Law and Human Behavior, 12, 231–262.Google Scholar
Heuer, L. & Penrod, S. (1994). Juror notetaking and question asking during trials. Law and Human Behavior 18, 121–150.Google Scholar
Hope, L., Eales, N., & Mirashi, A. (2014). Assisting jurors: Promoting recall of trial information through the use of a trial‐ordered notebook. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 99, 316–331. https://doi.org/10.1111/lcrp.12003Google Scholar
Horowitz, I. A. & Bordens, K. S. (2002). The effects of jury size, evidence complexity, and note taking on jury process and performance in a civil trial. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 121–130. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021–9010.87.1.121Google Scholar
Horowitz, I. A. & ForsterLee, L. (2001). The effects of note-taking and trial transcript access on mock jury decisions in a complex civil trial. Law and Human Behavior, 25, 373–391.Google Scholar
Horton, S. V., Lovitt, T. C., & Bergerud, D. (1990). The effectiveness of graphic organizers for three classifications of secondary students in content area classes. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 23, 12–22.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
Horton, S. V., Lovitt, T. C., & Bergerud, D. (1975). Taking notes and human learning. Bulletin of the British Psychological Society, 28, 158–161.Google Scholar
Hughes, C. A. & Suritsky, S. K. (1994). Note-taking skills of university students with and without learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 27, 20–24.Google Scholar
Hulme, C. & Snowling, M. J. (2011). Children’s reading comprehension difficulties: Nature, causes, and treatments. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 20, 139–142.Google Scholar
Jing, H. G., Szpunar, K. K., & Schacter, D. L. (2016). Interpolated testing influences focused attention and improves integration of information during a video-recorded lecture. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 22, 305–318.Google Scholar
Kane, M. J., Smeekens, B. A., von Bastian, C. C. et al. (2017). A combined experimental and individual-differences investigation into mind wandering during a video lecture. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 146, 1649–1647.Google Scholar
Kang, S. H. K., McDermott, K. B., & Roediger, H. L. (2007). Test format and corrective feedback modify the effect of testing on long-term retention. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 19, 528–558. https://doi.org/10.1080/09541440601056620Google Scholar
Karpicke, J. D. & Blunt, J. R. (2011). Retrieval practice produces more learning than elaborative studying with concept mapping. Science, 331(6018), 772–775. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1199327Google Scholar
Karpicke, J. D., Butler, A. C., & Roediger, H. L. (2009). Metacognitive strategies in student learning: Do students practice retrieval when they study on their own? Memory, 17, 471–9. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658210802647009Google Scholar
Kaufman, D. F., Zhao, R., & Yang, Y-S. (2011). Effects of online note taking formats and self-monitoring prompts on learning from online text: Using technology to enhance self-regulated learning. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36, 313–322.Google Scholar
Kay, R. H. & Lauricella, S. (2011). Unstructured vs. structured use of laptops in higher education. Journal of Information Technology Education, 10, 33–42.Google Scholar
Kay, R. H. & Lauricella, S. (2014). Investigating the Benefits and Challenges of Using Laptop Computers in Higher Education Classrooms. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 40, 1–25.Google Scholar
Kiewra, K. A (1983). The process of review: A levels of processing approach. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 8, 366–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kiewra, K. A (1985a). Investigating note-taking and review: A depth of processing alternative. Educational Psychologist, 20, 23–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kiewra, K. A (1985b). A review of note-taking: The encoding-storage paradigm and beyond. Educational Psychology Review, 1, 147–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kiewra, K. A (1985c). Students’ notetaking behaviors and the efficacy of providing the instructor’s notes for review. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 10, 378–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kiewra, K. A (1985d). Learning from a lecture: An investigation of notetaking, review, and attendance at a lecture. Human Learning, 4, 73–77.Google Scholar
Kiewra, K. A (1987). Notetaking and review: The research and its implications. Instructional Science, 16, 233–249.Google Scholar
Kiewra, K. A (1989). A review of note-taking: The encoding-storage paradigm and beyond. Educational Psychology Review, 1, 147–172.Google Scholar
Kiewra, K. A (1991). Aids to lecture learning. Educational Psychologist, 26, 37–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kiewra, K. A (2016). Note taking on trial: A legal application of note-taking research. Educational Psychology Review, 28, 377–384. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-015–9353-zGoogle Scholar
Kiewra, K. A. & Benton, S. L. (1988). The relationship between information processing ability and notetaking. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 13, 33–44.Google Scholar
Kiewra, K. A., Benton, S. L., Kim, S.-I., Risch, N., & Christensen, M. (1995). Effects of note-taking format and study technique on recall and relational performance. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 13, 33–44.Google Scholar
Kiewra, K. A., Benton, S. L., & Lewis, L. B. (1987). Qualitative aspects of notetaking and their relationship with information-processing ability and academic achievement. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 14, 110–117.Google Scholar
Kiewra, K. A., DuBois, N. F., Christensen, M., Kim, S.-I., & Lindberg, N. (1989). A more equitable account of the note-taking functions in learning from lecture and from text. Instructional Sciences, 18, 217–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kiewra, K. A., DuBois, N. F., Christian, D., & McShane, A. (1988). Providing study notes: Comparison of three types of notes for review. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 595–597.Google Scholar
Kiewra, K. A., DuBois, N. F., Christian, D. et al. (1991). Note-taking functions and techniques. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 240–245.Google Scholar
Kiewra, K. A. & Fletcher, H. J. (1984). The relationship between levels of note-taking and achievement. Human Learning, 3, 273–280.Google Scholar
Kiewra, K. A. & Frank, B. M. (1988). Encoding and external-storage effects of personal lecture notes, skeletal notes, and detailed notes for field-independent and field-dependent learners. Journal of Educational Research, 81, 143–148.Google Scholar
Kiewra, K. A. & Mayer, R. E. (1997). Effects of advanced organizers and repeated presentations on students learning. Journal of Experimental Education, 65, 147–159.Google Scholar
Kiewra, K. A., Mayer, R. E., Christensen, M., Kim, S., & Risch, N. (1991). Effects of repetition on recall and note-taking: Strategies for learning from lectures. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 120–123.Google Scholar
King, A. (1992). Comparison of self-questioning, summarizing, and notetaking-review as strategies for learning from lectures. American Educational Research Journal, 29, 303–323.Google Scholar
Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kintsch, W. J. & Vipond, D. (1979). Reading comprehension and readability in educational practice and psychological theory. In Nilsson, L. (Ed.), Perspectives on memory search (pp. 325–366). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Knight, L. J. & McKelvie, S. J. (1986). Effects of attendance, note taking and review on memory for a lecture: Encoding vs. external storage function of notes. Canadian Journal of Behavioral Science, 18, 52–61.Google Scholar
Kobayashi, K. (2005). What limit the encoding effect of note-taking? A meta-analytic examination. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 30, 242–262.Google Scholar
Kobayashi, K. (2006). Combined effects of notetaking/‐reviewing on learning and the enhancement through interventions: A meta‐analytic review. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 26, 459–477.Google Scholar
Kraushaar, J. M. & Novak, D. C. (2010). Examining the effects of student multitasking with laptops during the lecture. Journal of Information Systems Education, 21, 241–251.Google Scholar
Landrum, R. E. (2010). Faculty and student perceptions of providing instructor lecture notes to students: Match or mismatch? Journal of Instructional Psychology, 37, 216–221.Google Scholar
Lazarus, B. D. (1993). Guided notes: Effects with secondary and post secondary students with mild disabilities. Education and Treatment of Children, 16, 272–289.Google Scholar
Locke, E. A. (1977). An empirical study of lecture notetaking among college students. Journal of Educational Research, 77, 93–99.Google Scholar
Maddox, H. & Hoole, E. (1975). Performance decrement in the lecture. Educational Review, 28, 17–30.Google Scholar
Maqsud, M. (1980). Effects of personal lecture notes and teacher-notes on recall of university students. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 50, 289–294.Google Scholar
McCutchen, D. (2000). Knowledge, processing, and working memory: Implications for a theory of writing. Educational Psychologist, 35, 13–23.Google Scholar
McCutchen, D. (2012). Phonological, orthographic, and morphological word-level skills supporting multiple levels of the writing process. In Berninger, V. (ed.), Past, present, and future contributions of cognitive writing research to cognitive psychology. New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
McCutchen, D., Covill, A., Hoyne, S. H., & Mildes, K. (1994). Individual differences in writing: Implications of translating fluency. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86, 256–266.Google Scholar
McDaniel, M. A., Agarwal, P. K., Huelser, B. J., McDermott, K. B., & Roediger, H. L. III (2011). Test-enhanced learning in a middle school science classroom: The effects of quiz frequency and placement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103, 399–414. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0021782Google Scholar
McDaniel, M. A., Anderson, J. L., Derbish, M. H., & Morrisette, N. (2007). Testing the testing effect in the classroom. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 19, 494–513.Google Scholar
McIntyre, S. (1992). Lecture notetaking, information processing, and academic achievement. Journal of College Reading and Learning, 25, 7–17.Google Scholar
Moore, D. W. & Readence, J. E. (1984). A quantitative and qualitative review of graphic organizer research. Journal of Educational Research, 78,11–17.Google Scholar
Moos, D. C. & Azevedo, R. (2008). Self-regulated learning with hypermedia: The role of prior domain knowledge. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33, 270–298.Google Scholar
Morgan, C. H., Lilly, J. D., & Boreham, N. C. (1988). Learning from lectures: The effect of varying detail in lecture handouts to note-taking and recall. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 2, 115–122.Google Scholar
Mueller, P. A. & Oppenheimer, D. M. (2014). The pen is mightier than the keyboard: Advantages of longhand over laptop note taking. Psychological Science, 25, 1159–1168.Google Scholar
Mulcahy‐Ernt, P. I. & Caverly, D. C. (2009). Strategic study‐reading. In Flippo, R. F., & Caverly, D. C. (eds.), Handbook of college reading and study strategy research, 2nd edn (pp. 177–198). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Neef, N. A., McCord, B. E., & Ferreri, S. J. (2006). Effects of guided notes versus completed notes during lectures on college students’ quiz performance. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 39, 123–130.Google Scholar
Nesbit, J. C. & Adesope, O. O. (2006). Learning with concept and knowledge maps: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 76, 413–448.Google Scholar
Nye, P. (1978). Student variables in relations to note-taking during a lecture. Programmed Learning and Educational Technology, 15, 196–200.Google Scholar
Oefinger, L. M. (2014). The lecture note-taking skills of adolescents with and without a learning disabilities. Teachers College, Columbia University, New York City.Google Scholar
O’Donnell, A. M. & Adenwalla, D. (1991). Using cooperative learning and concept maps with deaf college students. In Martin, D. S. (ed.), Advances in cognition, learning, and deafness (pp. 348–355). Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.Google Scholar
O’Donnell, A. M., Dansereau, D. F., & Hall, R. H. (2002). Knowledge maps as scaffolds for cognitive processing. Educational Psychology Review, 14, 71–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olive, T., Alves, R. A., & Castro, S. L. (2009). Cognitive processes in writing during pauses and execution periods. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 21, 758–785.Google Scholar
Olive, T. & Kellogg, R. T. (2002). Concurrent activation of high- and low-level production processes in written composition. Memory and Cognition, 30, 594–600.Google Scholar
Palmatier, R. A. & Bennett, J. M. (1974). Notetaking habits of college students. Journal of Reading, 18, 215–218.Google Scholar
Patterson, M. E., Dansereau, D. F., & Newbern, D. (1992). Effects of communication aids and strategies on cooperative teaching. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 453–461.Google Scholar
Peper, R. J. & Mayer, R. E. (1978). Note taking as a generative activity. Journal of Educational Psychology, 70, 514–522. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022–0663.70.4.514Google Scholar
Peper, R. J. & Mayer, R. E. (1986). Generative effects of note-taking during science lectures. Journal of Educational Psychology, 78, 34–38. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022–0663.78.1.34Google Scholar
Peverly, S. T. (2006). The Importance of handwriting speed in adult writing. Developmental Neuropsychology, 29, 197–216.Google Scholar
Peverly, S. T., Brobst, K., Graham, M., & Shaw, R. (2003). College adults are not good at self-regulation: A study on the relationship of self-regulation, note-taking, and test-taking. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 335–346.Google Scholar
Peverly, S. T., Garner, J. K., & Vekaria, P. C. (2014). Both handwriting speed and selective attention are important to lecture note-taking. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 27, 1–30. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-013–9431-xGoogle Scholar
Peverly, S. T., Ramaswamy, V., Brown, C. et al. (2007). What predicts skill in lecture note taking? Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 167–180.Google Scholar
Peverly, S. T. & Sumowski, J. F. (2012).What variables predict quality of text notes and are text notes related to performance on different types of tests? Applied Cognitive Psychology, 26: 104–117. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1802.Google Scholar
Peverly, S. T., Vekaria, P. C., Reddington, L. A. Sumowski, J. F. Johnson, K. R., & Ramsay, C. M. (2013). The relationship of handwriting speed, working memory, language comprehension and outlines to lecture Note-taking and Test-taking among college students. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 27, 115–126. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.2881Google Scholar
Peverly, S. T. & Wood, R. (2001). The effects of adjunct questions and feedback on improving the reading comprehension skills of learning-disabled adolescents. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 26, 25–43.Google Scholar
Piolat, A., Olive, T., & Kellogg, R. T. (2005). Cognitive effort during note taking. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 19, 291–312.Google Scholar
Pyc, M. A. & Rawson, K. A. (2010). Why testing improves memory: Mediator effectiveness hypothesis. Science, 330(6002), 335. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1191465Google Scholar
Rayner, K., Foorman, B. R., Perfetti, C. A., Pesetsky, D., & Seidenberg, M. S. (2001). How psychological science informs the teaching of reading. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 2, 31–74.Google Scholar
Reddington, L. A., Peverly, S. T., & Block, C. J. (2015). An examination of some of the cognitive and motivation variables related to gender differences in lecture note-taking. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 28, 1155–1185. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-015–9566-zGoogle Scholar
Reimer, J. R., Brimhall, E., Cao, C., & O’Reilly, K. (2009). Empirical user studies inform the design of an e-notetaking and information assimilation system for students in higher education. Computers and Education, 52, 893–913.Google Scholar
Rickards, J. P. & Friedman, F. (1978). The encoding versus the external storage hypothesis in note taking. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 3, 136–143.Google Scholar
Richards, T., Peverly, S., Wolf, A., Abbott, R., Tanimoto, S., Thompson, R., Nagy, W., & Berninger, V. (2016). Idea units in notes and summaries for read texts by keyboard and pencil in middle childhood students with specific learning disabilities: Cognitive and brain findings. Trends in Neuroscience and Education, 5, 146–155. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tine.2016.07.005Google Scholar
Robinson, D. H. (1998). Graphic organizers as aids to text learning. Reading Research and Instruction, 37, 85–105.Google Scholar
Roediger, H. L., Agarwal, P. K., McDaniel, M. A., & McDermott, K. B. (2011). Test-enhanced learning in the classroom: long-term improvements from quizzing. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Applied, 17, 382–95. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026252Google Scholar
Roediger, H. L. & Karpicke, J. D. (2006a). The power of testing memory. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 17, 181–210. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745–6916.2006.00012.xGoogle Scholar
Roediger, H. L. & Karpicke, J. D. (2006b). Test-enhanced learning: taking memory tests improves long-term retention. Psychological Science, 17, 249–55. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467–9280.2006.01693.xGoogle Scholar
Rohwer, W. D. (1984). An invitation to a developmental psychology of studying. In Morrison, F. J., Lord, C. A., & Keating, D. P. (eds.), Advances in applied developmental psychology, Vol. 1 (pp. 1–57). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Rosenhan, D. L., Eisner, S. L., & Robinson, R. J. (1994). Notetaking can aid juror recall. Law and Human Behavior, 18, 53–61.Google Scholar
Rosenshine, B., Meister, C., & Chapman, S. (1996). Teaching students to generate questions: A review of the intervention studies. Review of Educational Research, 66, 181–221.Google Scholar
Rothkopf, E. Z. (1996). Control of mathemagenic activities. In Jonassen, D. H. (ed.), Handbook of research for educational communications and technology (pp. 879–896). New York: Simon & Schuster and Macmillan.Google Scholar
Ruhl, K. L. (1996). Does nature of student activity during lecture pauses affect notes and immediate recall of college students with learning disabilities? Journal of Postsecondary education and Disability, 12, 16–27.Google Scholar
Ruhl, K. L., Hughes, C. A., & Gajar, A. H. (1990). Efficacy of the pause procedure for enhancing learning disabled and nondisabled college students’ long- and short-term recall of facts presented through lecture. Learning Disability Quarterly, 13, 55–64.Google Scholar
Ruhl, K. L., Hughes, C. A., & Schloss, P. J. (1987). Using the pause procedure to enhance lecture recall, Teacher Education and Special Education, 10, 14–18.Google Scholar
Ruhl, K. L. & Suritsky, S. (1995). The pause procedure and/or an outline: Effect on Immediate free recall and lecture notes taken by college students with disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 18, 2–11.Google Scholar
Rummer, R, Schweppe, J., Gerst, K., & Wagner, S. (2017). Is testing a more effective strategy than note-taking? Journal of Experimental Psychology, 23, 293–300.Google Scholar
Samuels, S. J. & Farstrup, A. E. (eds.) (2011). What research has to say about reading instruction. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.Google Scholar
Sana, F., Weston, T., & Cepeda, N. J. (2013). Laptop multitasking hinders classroom learning for both users and nearby peers. Computers and Education, 62, 24–31.Google Scholar
Schacter, D. L. & Szpunar, K. K. (2015). Enhancing attention and memory during video-recorded lectures. Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Psychology, 1, 60–71.Google Scholar
Shernoff, D. J., Csikszentmihalyi, M., Schneider, B., & Shernoff, E. S. (2003). Student engagement in high school classrooms from the perspective of flow theory. School Psychology Quarterly, 18, 158–176. http://dx.doi.org/10.1521/scpq.18.2.158.21860Google Scholar
Shimmerlick, S. M. & Nolan, J. D. (1976). Organization and the recall of prose. Journal of Educational Psychology, 68, 779–786.Google Scholar
Snow, C. (2002). (ed.) Reading for understanding: Toward an R & D program in reading comprehension. Santa Monica, CA: Rand.Google Scholar
Spitzer, H. F. (1939). Studies in retention. Journal of Educational Psychology, 30, 641–656.Google Scholar
Stanovich, K. E. (1986). Matthew effects in reading: Some consequences of individual differences in the acquisition of literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 21, 360–407.Google Scholar
Stull, A. T. & Mayer, R. E. (2007). Learning by doing versus learning by viewing: Three experimental comparisons of learner-generated versus author-provided graphic organizers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 808–820.Google Scholar
Summers, J. & Catarro, F. (2003). Assessment of handwriting speed and factors influencing written output of university students in examinations. Australian Occupational Therapy Journal, 50, 148–157.Google Scholar
Szpunar, K. K., Jing, H. G., & Schacter, D. L. (2014). Overcoming overconfidence in learning from video-recorded lectures: Implications for online education. Journal of Applied Research in Memory & Cognition, 3, 161–164. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jarmac.2014.02.001Google Scholar
Szpunar, K. K., Khan, N. Y., & Schacter, D. L. (2013). Interpolated memory tests reduce mind wandering and improve learning of online lectures. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 110, 6313–6317. http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1221764110Google Scholar
Thomas, G. S. (1978). Use of students notes and lecture summaries as study guides for recall. Journal of Educational Research, 71, 316–319.Google Scholar
Thomas, J. W., Iventosch, L., Rohwer, W. D. (1987). Relationships among student characteristics, study activities, and achievement as a function of course characteristics. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 12, 344–364.Google Scholar
Thorley, C., Baxter, R.E., & Lorek, J. (2016). The impact of note taking style and note availability at retrieval on mock jurors’ recall and recognition of trial information. Memory, 24, 560–574.Google Scholar
Titsworth, B. (2004). Students’ notetaking: The effects of teacher immediacy and clarity. Communication Education, 53, 305–320.Google Scholar
Titsworth, B. S. & Kiewra, K. A. (2004). Spoken organizational lecture cures and student notetaking as facilitators of student learning. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29, 447–461.Google Scholar
Titsworth, S. (2001). The effects of teacher immediacy, use of organizational lecture cues, and students’ notetaking on cognitive learning. Communication Education, 50, 283–297.Google Scholar
Tomes, J. L., Wasylkiw, L., & Mockler, B. (2011). Studying for success: Diaries of students’ study behaviours. Educational Research and Evaluation, 17, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1080/13803611.2011.563087Google Scholar
Trevors, G., Duffy, M., & Azevedo, R. (2014). Note-taking within MetaTutor: Interaction between an intelligent tutoring system and prior knowledge on note-taking and learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 62, 507–528.Google Scholar
Van Etten, S., Freebern, G., & Pressley, M. (1997). College students’ beliefs about exam preparation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 22, 192–212.Google Scholar
Van Meter, P., Yokoi, L., & Pressley, M. (1994). College students’ theory of note taking derived from their perceptions of note taking. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86, 323–338.Google Scholar
Vekaria, P. C. & Peverly, S. T. (2018). Lecture note-taking in postsecondary students with self-reported attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal. 31, 1551–1573, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-018-9849-2Google Scholar
Vellutino, F. R., Fletcher, J. M., Snowling, M. J., & Scanlon, D. M. (2004). Specific reading disability (dyslexia): What have we learned in the past four decades? Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 45, 2–40.Google Scholar
Vogler, K. (2006). Impact of a high school graduation examination on Tennessee science teachers’ instructional practices. American Secondary Education, 35, 35–57.Google Scholar
Weinstein, Y., McDermott, K. B., & Roediger, H. L. (2010). A comparison of study strategies for passages: rereading, answering questions, and generating questions. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Applied, 16, 308–16. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0020992Google Scholar
Wiegmann, D. A., Dansereau, D. F., & McCagg, E. C., Rewey, K. L., & Pitre, U. (1992). Effects of knowledge map characteristics on information processing. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 17, 136–155.Google Scholar
Winne, P. H. & Hadwin, A. F. (2009). Studying as self-regulation. In Hacker, D. J., Dunlosky, J., & Graesser, A. C. (eds.), Metacognition in educational theory and practice (pp. 277–304). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Witkin, H. A. (1959). The perception of the upright. Scientific American, 200, 50–56Google Scholar
Wurst, C., Smarkola, C., & Gaffney, M. A. (2008). Ubiquitous laptop usage in higher education: Effects on student achievement, student satisfaction, and constructivist measures in honors and traditional class-rooms. Computers & Education, 51(4), 1766–1783. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.05.006Google Scholar
Yamamoto, K. (2007). Banning laptops in the classroom: Is it worth the hassle? Journal of Legal Education, 57, 477–520.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×