Providing study notes: Comparison of three types of notes for review.

Abstract

College students viewed a 19-min videotaped lecture and were not allowed to take notes. One week later, these students were provided with one of three different forms of study notes for review: a complete text, a linear outline, or a matrix. Students in a control group were given no notes and reviewed mentally. After review, all students completed three different performance tests. Results from all three tests indicated that reviewing any of the three forms of provided notes significantly raised performance beyond that of the no-notes control group. This finding confirmed the importance of the external storage function of note taking for various forms of provided notes. In addition, the outline and matrix notes generally produced higher recall performance than did the text notes, but only the matrix notes produced higher transfer performance than did the text notes. These differences were explained in relation to the forming of internal connections in memory.

A review of note-taking: The encoding-storage paradigm and beyond

“…A summary of the ideas presented in this article suggests that notes can be made more effective in any of three ways: they can be made more complete (e.g., Fisher and Harris, 1973); they can specify internal connections or relationships among existing lecture ideas (e.g., Kiewra et al,1988a); and they can connect lecture information to previously acquired knowledge (e.g., Peper and Mayer, 1986). This last function is what Peper and Mayer (1986) call generative note-taking or the forming of external connections.…”

“…One study that has investigated the structure of provided notes was conducted by Kiewra et al (1988a). In that study, students listened to a lecture without taking notes.…”

Graphic Organizers as a Reading Strategy: Research Findings and Issues

“…Matrix was firstly investigated by Schwartz and his colleagues (Schwartz & Fattaleh, 1972) and was later advanced by Kiewra and his colleagues (Kiewra, DuBois, Christian, & McShane, 1988;Kiewra et al, 1991). It is a kind of input Story map (Idol, 1987).…”

Optimal presentation of graphic organizers and text: A case for large bites?

“…Of the adjuncts that contain mostly words, spatial adjuncts (e.g., GOs and knowledge maps) are more effective than linear adjuncts (e.g., outlines and lists) for assisting students in learning concept relations (e.g., Alvermann, 1980Alvermann, , 1981Hall, Dansereau, & Skaggs, 1992;Hall & Sidio-Hall, 1994a;Hall & Sidio-Hall, 1994b;Kiewra, Dubois, Christian, & McShane, 1988;Kiewra, Kauffman, Robinson, Dubois, & Staley, 1999;Lambiotte & Dansereau, 1992;Rewey, Dansereau, Dees, Skaggs, & Pitre, 1992;Robinson & Kiewra, 1995;Robinson & Schraw, 1994;Wallace, West, Ware, & Dansereau, 1998;Wiegmann, Dansereau, McCagg, Rewey, & Pitre, 1992). Of the spatial text adjuncts that contain mostly words, there is some evidence that GOs are more effective than knowledge maps when students' goal is to learn concept relations rather than facts (Katayama, Robinson, Kiewra, Dubois, & Jonassen, 2001;Robinson, Robinson, & Katayama, 1999).…”