Search

Many college students believe that typing lecture notes on computers produces better notes and higher achievement than handwritten lecture notes on paper. The few studies investigating computer versus longhand note taking yielded mixed note-taking and achievement findings. The present study investigated computer versus longhand note taking but permitted note takers to revise or recopy notes during pauses interspersed throughout the lecture. Moreover, the present study analyzed notes recorded while a lecture was ongoing and following revision pauses to determine if lecture ideas and images were recorded completely or partially. Findings did not support the belief that computers aid note taking and achievement and, instead, favored longhand note taking and revision. Computer and longhand note takers recorded a comparable number of complete and partial ideas in notes while the lecture was ongoing, but longhand note takers recorded more lecture images. Among note revisers, longhand note takers added three-times-as-many complete ideas to their notes during revision as computer note takers--an important finding because note completeness predicted achievement. Achievement results showed that longhand note takers who revised notes scored more than half a letter grade higher on a lecture posttest than computer note takers who revised notes. Present findings suggest that college instructors should provide students with revision pauses to improve note taking and achievement and encourage students to record and revise notes using the longhand method. Finally, regarding the computer versus longhand note-taking debate, the need to investigate further the interplay between note-taking medium and lesson material is discussed.

Laptop computers allow students to type lecture notes instead of relying on the traditional longhand (i.e. paper-pencil) method. The present research compared laptop and longhand note-taking methods by investigating how the quality (i.e. complete versus incomplete idea units) and quantity (i.e. total words and total idea units) of typed and handwritten notes differed when students did or did not reply to text messages during a simulated lecture. Accounting for the presence of text messaging while participants took notes situated the present study within the reality facing many students in today's digital age. Findings indicated that a considerable proportion of the idea units captured in participants' notes were incomplete, regardless of note-taking method or exposure to distraction during the simulated lecture. However, only the total number of complete idea units stored in student notes meaningfully predicted lecture learning. Furthermore, the presence of digital distraction was particularly disruptive to the quality and quantity of laptop users' lecture notes relative to longhand note takers. Finally, digital distraction emerged as a more meaningful predictor of lecture learning than note-taking method. Recommendations for improving the quality of student lecture notes are discussed and avenues for future research into note-taking completeness and the interplay between digital distraction and note-taking method are proposed.

There has been a shift in college classrooms from students recording lecture notes using a longhand pencil-paper medium to using laptops. The present study investigated whether note-taking medium (laptop, longhand) influenced note taking and achievement when notes were recorded but not reviewed (note taking's process function) and when notes were recorded and reviewed (note taking's product function). One unique aspect of the study was determining how laptop and longhand note taking influence the recording of lecture images in notes and image-related achievement. Note-taking results showed that laptop note takers recorded more notes (idea units and words) and more verbatim lecture strings than did longhand note takers who, in turn, recorded more visual notes (signals and images) than did laptop note takers. Achievement results showed that when taking laptop notes, the process function of note taking was more beneficial than the product function of note taking (i.e., better image-related learning and similar text-related learning). When taking longhand notes, the product function of note taking was more beneficial than the process function of note taking (i.e., better text-related learning and similar image-related learning). Achievement findings suggest that the optimal note-taking medium depends on the nature of the lecture and whether notes are reviewed.