Search

Many college students prefer to type their lecture notes rather than write them by hand. As a result, the number of experimental and quasi-experimental studies comparing these two note-taking mediums has flourished over the past decade. The present meta-analytic research sought to uncover trends in the existing studies comparing achievement and note-taking outcomes among college students. Results from 24 separate studies across 21 articles revealed that taking and reviewing handwritten notes leads to higher achievement (Hedges’ g = 0.248; p < 0.001), even though typing notes benefits note-taking volume (Hedges’ g = 0.919; p < 0.001), among college students. Furthermore, our binomial effect size display shows that taking handwritten lecture notes is expected to produce higher course grades than typing notes among college students. We conclude that handwritten notes are more useful for studying and committing to memory than typed notes, ultimately contributing to higher achievement for college students. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Undergraduate student misuse of mobile technology (e.g., smartphones, laptops, tablets) for non-class purposes (e.g., texting, scrolling social media, playing games) has become ubiquitous in college classrooms across the globe. In addition, research has suggested that these digital distractions can negatively impact learning and performance. The prevalence and negative consequences of student digital distraction in the classroom require college instructors to proactively regulate student use of digital devices to protect the integrity of the learning environment. The present article aims to provide college instructors with a framework of strategies to curb student digital distraction. Specifically, the present article draws from the tenets of Self-Determination Theory (SDT) to illustrate how and why common policies and strategies intended to curb student digital distraction can inadvertently threaten students’ basic psychological needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness in the classroom and, subsequently, alienate students against instructors. The article concludes by presenting evidence-based digital distraction prevention strategies that can buffer against student digital distraction without threatening students’ basic psychological needs or alienating students against their instructors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study updates and extends prior work on institutional and individual productivity in educational psychology journals (Cognition and Instruction, Contemporary Educational Psychology, Educational Psychologist, Educational Psychology Review, Journal of Educational Psychology) from 2015 to 2021. As in previous studies, the University of Maryland, College Park, was the top-producing institution. Several universities (e.g., University of Tübingen) emerged as highly productive compared to previous time periods. Using two approaches to measure individual productivity, we found that Richard Mayer, Ulrich Trautwein, Fred Paas, Patricia Alexander, and Logan Fiorella claimed the top spots. We also identified productive early career scholars and, for some, recognized connections to productive doctoral advisors. Overall, compared to prior years, authors of educational psychology journal articles were increasingly working from non-US institutions and in larger teams (higher mean number of authors per article). A discussion of these trends and future directions for research are included. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Through training - which is provided within the pages of this book - and deliberate application of the SOAR method, Kiewra convincingly contends in Chapter 1 that all readers can achieve success. Kiewra ([15]), written by educational psychologist Kenneth Kiewra, provides such instruction to help students succeed academically and in the real world beyond their classrooms. It has just 10 chapters with most of them addressing the components of the SOAR learning method Kiewra developed (Kiewra, [14]). Similar findings from three additional studies, where SOAR-trained students outperformed students who were trained in the SQ3R method (Jairam et al., [11]) or who relied on their own preferred study strategies (Jairam & Kiewra, [9], [10]), were also summarized for readers. [Extracted from the article]

The purpose of this study was to determine how graphic organizer completeness (complete, partial, or no organizer) and note-taking medium (longhand or computer) affect note-taking quantity and quality and affect computer-based learning. College students were presented with a computer-based PowerPoint lesson accompanied by complete, partial, or no graphic organizers. Throughout the lesson, students recorded notes using either longhand or computer mediums. Students were tested immediately following the lesson and again two days later following a review period during which graphic organizers and notes were studied. Finally, students completed a survey. Results revealed that organizer completeness affected achievement. Those given complete organizers generally achieved more than those with partial or no organizers across fact-, relationship-, concept-, and skill-based test items. Note-taking medium did not affect achievement differentially, but there were important note-taking findings. Longhand note takers recorded more lesson ideas in notes and had fewer verbatim strings in notes (reflective of more generative processing) compared to computer note takers. Moreover, longhand note takers reported more positive attitudes about their note-taking medium than did computer note takers. Results suggested that complete organizers aid germane load more than partial organizers and that longhand note taking results in deeper processing than does computer note taking. Therefore, instructors should provide complete organizers to promote student learning and should encourage students to take longhand notes when they learn in a computer-based learning environment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Four of the scholars spent 4 years in their doctoral programs (Collie, Fiorella, Lombardi, and Wang), the others spent 5 (Patall) or 6 (Neugebauer) years. In terms of research focus, three of the scholars study motivation topics (Collie, Patall, and Wang), two study learning and cognition topics (Fiorella and Lombardi), and one studies language and literacy development (Neugebauer). The scholars were recognized for their early contributions by AERA Division C (Collie and Neugebauer), APA Division 15 (Wang), or both (Fiorella, Lombardi, and Patall), as well as other organizations. The scholars teach two (Collie and Wang), three (Lombardi and Patall), or four (Fiorella and Neugebauer) courses a year. Fiorella, Neugebauer, Patall, Wang, and Collie all mentioned that their families valued education and hard work, which influenced their eventual work ethic. [Extracted from the article]

Previous studies have investigated the characteristics, influencing factors, and working strategies of highly successful educational psychologists. These studies, however, have focused mainly on male scholars. Consequently, little is known about how successful female educational psychologists go about their work and are so productive. In the present study, we addressed this gap by interviewing five leading female educational psychologists (Patricia Alexander, Carol Dweck, Jacquelynne Eccles, Mareike Kunter, and Tamara van Gog) about factors that have aided their success and about their gender-related experiences. The five female scholars revealed their trademark characteristics, the important people and places that influenced their careers, and their time- and research-management strategies. They also provided unique insights about their experiences and perspectives as women in the field of educational psychology. Findings offer guidance for budding scholars, particularly women. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Today’s traditional-aged college students are avid users of mobile technology. Commonly referred to as the Net Generation, today’s college students spend several hours each day using their smart phones, iPads, and laptops. Although some scholars initially opined that the Net Generation would grow into technologically savvy digital natives who would leverage their unprecedented access to technology for professional and academic betterment, contemporary research has rejected the digital native myth. Instead, college students frequently use mobile technology for off-task purposes while attending classroom lectures or doing schoolwork outside of class—a phenomenon known as cyber-slacking. This article provides college educators with an overview of the frequency and consequences of cyber-slacking inside and outside the classroom and seven instructional implications for curbing cyber-slacking. Proposed strategies for curbing cyber-slacking include rejecting the digital native myth, adopting and enforcing technology policies, consciousness raising, motivating students to relinquish their devices, incorporating active learning in the classroom, using mobile technology as a teaching tool, teaching students to be self-regulated learners, and motivating students to delay gratification from their mobile devices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Previous research (Kiewra & Creswell, Educational Psychology Review 12(1):135–161, 2000; Patterson-Hazley & Kiewra, Educational Psychology Review 25(1):19–45, 2013) has investigated the characteristics and work habits of highly productive educational psychologists. These investigations have focused exclusively on American scholars who were trained and employed at various universities and have ignored international scholars and scholars with a shared academic lineage. The present study sought to fill these gaps by investigating, through qualitative methods, how a cohort of four German educational psychologists (Heinz Mandl, Alexander Renkl, Hans Gruber, and Frank Fischer) with a shared academic background became productive scholars. Interview responses suggested that the German scholars’ shared experiences during the early years of their careers shaped their career paths and productivity. Additionally, interviews with each scholar revealed several commonalities (i.e., long and focused research career, trademark characteristic, scholarly influencers, effective time-management practices, and research-management strategies) between this contingent of productive German scholars and their productive American counterparts. Finally, the present study also identified several differences (e.g., educational training, funding opportunities, sabbaticals, administrative responsibilities, and research traditions) between the American and German research environments that influence productivity. Practical implications from this investigation include advice for emerging scholars. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The online version of the original article can be found at https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-021-09619-4 A Correction to this paper has been published: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-021-09619-4 B Correction to: Educational Psychology Review b https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-021-09619-4 The originally published version of this article contained the following mistakes: Some of the entries in Table 1 were misaligned in the PDF version. The Publisher regrets the errors to the published version of this article. [Extracted from the article]