How Do High-Achieving Students Approach Web-Based, Copy and Paste Note Taking? Selective Pasting and Related Learning Outcomes

Abstract

Previous research has indicated that most students copy and paste notes from Internet sources in a mindless way; they typically paste large sections of text into their notes and then later can recall little of what they have stored. However, supplying students with a note-taking framework that restricts the amount of text that may be pasted can prompt them to engage in more selective pasting, and this seems to result in greater learning. But the extant research has not specifically addressed copy and paste note-taking behaviors of high-achieving students. The high-achieving high school and college students in the present study used a note-taking tool on the computer that consisted of an electronic matrix to cue students to note certain types of information. In one condition, the number of words that could be included in each cell was restricted, whereas in the other group, the students’ cells were unrestricted. After the note-taking sessions, all students completed assessments to document the amount of information they learned. High-achieving students in both conditions learned the same amount through the note-taking process. These results were inconsistent with the previous research. Follow-up analyses of students’ notes indicated that although the high-achieving students in the unrestricted note-taking group were not limited in the number of words they copied, many of them selectively chose which information they pasted into the grid. The relationship between text-pasting selectivity and learning remained: High-achieving students were more selective in their note taking, and they also were more successful on the posttests.

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

“…Compared with the substantial literature on traditional paper-based note-taking that mostly predates the introduction of computers to science classrooms, computer-based note-taking is an emerging area of research with a growing number of studies ( Bauer, 2008 , Bauer and Koedinger, 2006 , Crooks et al, 2007 , Igo et al, 2005 , Igo and Kiewra, 2007 , Mueller and Oppenheimer, 2014 , Robinson et al, 2006 ). Computer-based note-taking is different from traditional paper-based note-taking partly because typing speed on computers is typically faster than handwriting speed ( Brown, 1988 ), probably resulting in a greater amount of information being recorded on computers.…”

“…A few researchers investigated the effect of computers on student note-taking from lectures compared to paper-based note-taking ( Bui et al, 2013 , Mueller and Oppenheimer, 2014 ). Other researchers have studied note-taking of computer-based text content with online tools such as computer-based graphic organizers ( Crooks et al, 2007 , Igo et al, 2005 , Igo and Kiewra, 2007 , Igo et al, 2008 , Katayama and Crooks, 2003 , Robinson et al, 2006 ). Many of these studies involve exploring the effects of different designs of graphic organizers on learning and note-taking.…”

“…Many of these studies involve exploring the effects of different designs of graphic organizers on learning and note-taking. For example, Igo et al, 2005 , Igo and Kiewra, 2007 , Igo et al, 2008 investigated how graphic organizers that allow different levels of copy-and-paste note-taking, which they claim link to different levels of cognitive processing, influence the learning of web-based text for different populations. Other studies ( Katayama and Crooks, 2003 , Robinson et al, 2006 ) found that the graphic organizers that provide partially complete information on instructional content and require learners to complete the remaining sections by note-taking are more effective than other graphic organizers in facilitating learning.…”

What makes a matrix so effective? An empirical test of the relative benefits of signaling, extraction, and localization

“…Last, we joined other investigators who examined students' attitudes toward the displays (e.g., Igo et al 2009;Igo and Kiewra 2007;Kauffman 2004). Students liking and valuing a display seems important in motivating them to use displays on their own.…”

“…First, we used a lengthy and factual text. With a few exceptions (Igo and Kiewra 2007;Kiewra et al 1999;Kiewra et al 1995;Kiewra et al 1994;Robinson et al 2006;Robinson and Kiewra 1995), many of the previous display studies used relatively short text often containing fictitious information. The present study used a 2,000-word text containing factual information about six species of wildcats.…”