Factors Influencing the Effectiveness of Note Taking on Computer-Based Graphic Organizers

Abstract

Previous research on graphic organizer (GO) note taking has shown that this method is most effective when the GO is presented to the student partially complete with provided notes. This study extended prior research by investigating the effects of provided note type (summary vs. verbatim) and GO bite size (large vs. small) on the transfer performance and note taking behavior of college students working with a set of partially complete computer-based GOs. As hypothesized, a note-type by bite size interaction occurred on transfer performance. Large-bites GOs were optimal when containing summary notes, but not when containing verbatim notes. In contrast, small-bites GOs were optimal when containing verbatim notes, but not summary notes. Additionally, the type of notes provided to students affected the quality of their notes taken. The findings are explained from the perspective of cognitive load theory and the map shock hypothesis.The proliferation of Web-based learning coupled with the demand for more interactive instruction has created a need for more research-based principles that can be used to develop online courses that require more than just reading from a computer screen. To date, relatively few research studies have focused on ways to make the reading of on-screen text an active experience. This paucity of 369 Ó 2007, Baywood Publishing Co., Inc.Note: Note quantity = the amount of words participants entered into the blank cells of their GOs.

Note-taking and science inquiry in an open-ended learning environment

“…Many of these studies predate the rapid advancement of educational technology and the increasing use of computers in science education ( Higgins & Spitulnik, 2008 ) and instead focus on the analysis of paper-based note-taking (e.g., Weiss et al, 2001 ). As more and more learning is happening through computer-based learning environments, researchers have begun to investigate the effects that computers have on students’ note-taking strategies and learning (e.g., Bauer and Koedinger, 2006 , Bui et al, 2013 , Crooks et al, 2007 , Igo et al, 2005 , McQuiggan et al, 2008 , Mueller and Oppenheimer, 2014 , Robinson et al, 2006 ). However, no study we are aware of has systematically and comprehensively investigated note-taking in science open-ended learning environments (OELEs) for middle school learners.…”

Effectiveness of Interactive Computer-Based Instruction: A Review of Studies Published Between 1995 and 2007

“…All three studies favored requiring users to compose a response (fill-in-the-blank) rather than select a response (multiple choice). One study compared the effects of requiring users to compose original note summaries versus requiring users to copy and paste text to create notes while using large and small graphical organizers (Crooks, White, & Barnard, 2007). This study found no significant main effects between conditions, although a significant interaction was found.…”

Cognitive load of critical thinking strategies

“…However, graphic organizers were not only used in reading comprehension (Kim et al, 2001) but they have been also used in many different lines of research such as scientific research (Rulea, Baldwin & Schell, 2008), web-based research (Crooks, White & Barnard, 2007), note taking with both print-based (Robinson et al, 2006), and computerbased instruction (Katayama & Grooks, 2003;Katayama, Shambaugh, & Tasneem, 2005). Furthermore, diagrams facilitate and organize thinking.…”

“…Graphic organizers can also facilitate managing cognitive load by lightening the working memory demands and freeing up space to focus on the requirements of a task rather than investing efforts for understanding the content of the text (e.g. Crooks, White & Barnard, 2007;Larkin & Simon, 1987;Stull & Mayer, 2007). Graphic organizers may help relational learning and integrated writing (Robinson & Kiewra,1995), allowing students to learn relations easily (Robinson & Schraw, 1994) and helping effective processing of relational information (Bera & Robinson, 2004).…”

“…Stull and Mayer (2007) theorized that graphic organizers' scaffolding helps learners to save their valuable cognitive capacity without wasting it on extraneous processing. Crooks, White and Barnard (2007) mention that such extraneous processing can occur when learners use working memory resources in ways unrelated to schema development. Accordingly, utilizing graphic organizers is assumed to reduce cognitive load and to free up processing capacity for essential cognitive processing (Stull & Mayer, 2007).…”