Note-Taking: Coordination - Revision history

Abauer at 14:44, 21 April 2008

2008-04-21T14:44:50Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:44, 21 April 2008
Line 2:		Line 2:

	Aaron Bauer, Ken Koedinger		Aaron Bauer, Ken Koedinger
	*PI: Aaron ~~bauer~~		*PI: Aaron Bauer
	*Key faculty: Ken Koedinger		*Key faculty: Ken Koedinger
	*Studies: 1 complete		*Studies: 1 complete

Abauer at 14:41, 21 April 2008

2008-04-21T14:41:24Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:41, 21 April 2008
Line 6:		Line 6:
	*Studies: 1 complete		*Studies: 1 complete
	{\| border="1" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="5" style="text-align: left;"		{\| border="1" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="5" style="text-align: left;"
	\| '''Study Start Date''' \|\| March 1, ~~2009~~		\| '''Study Start Date''' \|\| March 1, 2008
	\|-		\|-
	\| '''Study End Date''' \|\| March 27, 2008		\| '''Study End Date''' \|\| March 27, 2008

Abauer at 14:40, 21 April 2008

2008-04-21T14:40:45Z

Show changes

Koedinger: /* Dependent Variables */

2007-04-14T23:30:52Z

Dependent Variables

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:30, 14 April 2007
Line 56:		Line 56:
	[[Note:]] all tests include both multiple choice and free response questions. The multiple choice questions all involve solving problems (for example, given a response structure, which variables are direct causes of an effect, or which interact to produce an effect). In addition, some free response questions ask students to explain terminology used in the module.		[[Note:]] all tests include both multiple choice and free response questions. The multiple choice questions all involve solving problems (for example, given a response structure, which variables are direct causes of an effect, or which interact to produce an effect). In addition, some free response questions ask students to explain terminology used in the module.

	''Normal ~~Learning, immediate~~:'' Students are given a test immediately after studying the material.		''[[Normal post-test]]:'' Students are given a test immediately after studying the material.

	''[[Long-term retention]]:'' Students return a week following the treatment (which lasts between 30 and 90 minutes) to take this test.		''[[Long-term retention]]:'' Students return a week following the treatment (which lasts between 30 and 90 minutes) to take this test.

Koedinger: /* Dependent Variables */

2007-04-14T23:22:45Z

Dependent Variables

@@ Line 51: / Line 51: @@
 == Dependent Variables ==
 '''Behavior'''
@@ Line 63: / Line 75: @@
 ''Experience:'' After taking the final test, students are given a survey which solicits their reaction to the tool they used. They are asked to identify their most and least favorite features of the tools, and how they believe the tool affected their note-taking behavior.
 == Independent Variables ==

Abauer at 18:05, 13 April 2007

2007-04-13T18:05:54Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:05, 13 April 2007
Line 1:		Line 1:
			=== Summary Table ===
			{\| border="1" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="5" style="text-align: left;"
			\| '''PIs''' \|\| Aaron Bauer & Kenneth R. Koedinger
			\|-
			\| '''Other Contributers''' \|\|
			\|-
			\| '''Study Start Date''' \|\| Aug 1, 2007
			\|-
			\| '''Study End Date''' \|\| Sept 31, 2007
			\|-
			\| '''Laboratory Study''' \|\|
			\|-
			\| '''LearnLab Course''' \|\| Causal and Statistical Reasoning (OLI)
			\|-
			\| '''Number of Students''' \|\| 60 (expected)
			\|-
			\| '''Total Participant Hours''' \|\| 180 (expected)
			\|-
			\| '''DataShop''' \|\| Not collected. Expected Fall 2007
			\|}
			<br>

	== Abstract ==		== Abstract ==
	Note-taking has been found to be an effective learning activity, though it is unclear why this may be. One hypothesis we are pursuing is that note-taking requires students to actively coordinate multiple versions of the same material. Previous research has found that simultaneously coordinating multiple sources facilitates learning (Wiley 2001). Note-taking often involves the creation of a separate representation of the learning material, which remains available for review while the student is learning new material. If the availability of multiple sources is responsible for positive learning outcomes, then note-taking methods such as highlighting, which does not produce a separate copy of the learning materials, should not produce similar learning results to copy-paste. This is a [[Coordinative Learning]] hypothesis of note-taking.		Note-taking has been found to be an effective learning activity, though it is unclear why this may be. One hypothesis we are pursuing is that note-taking requires students to actively coordinate multiple versions of the same material. Previous research has found that simultaneously coordinating multiple sources facilitates learning (Wiley 2001). Note-taking often involves the creation of a separate representation of the learning material, which remains available for review while the student is learning new material. If the availability of multiple sources is responsible for positive learning outcomes, then note-taking methods such as highlighting, which does not produce a separate copy of the learning materials, should not produce similar learning results to copy-paste. This is a [[Coordinative Learning]] hypothesis of note-taking.

Abauer: /* Descendents */

2007-03-30T00:27:05Z

Descendents

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:27, 30 March 2007
Line 79:		Line 79:
	== Descendents ==		== Descendents ==

	~~None at this time~~		[[Note-Taking_Technologies\|Note-taking project page]]

	== Further Information ==		== Further Information ==
	# Peper, R.J., Mayer, R.E., Generative Effects of Note taking During Science Lectures. Journal of Educational Psychology 78, 1 34-38		# Peper, R.J., Mayer, R.E., Generative Effects of Note taking During Science Lectures. Journal of Educational Psychology 78, 1 34-38
	# Wiley, J. (2001) Supporting understanding through task and browser design. Proceedings of the Twenty-third annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, (pp. 1136-1143). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.		# Wiley, J. (2001) Supporting understanding through task and browser design. Proceedings of the Twenty-third annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, (pp. 1136-1143). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Abauer: /* Further Information */

2007-03-30T00:26:33Z

Further Information

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:26, 30 March 2007
Line 82:		Line 82:

	== Further Information ==		== Further Information ==
			# Peper, R.J., Mayer, R.E., Generative Effects of Note taking During Science Lectures. Journal of Educational Psychology 78, 1 34-38
	Wiley, J. (2001) Supporting understanding through task and browser design. Proceedings of the Twenty-third annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, (pp. 1136-1143). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.		# Wiley, J. (2001) Supporting understanding through task and browser design. Proceedings of the Twenty-third annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, (pp. 1136-1143). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Abauer: /* Background/Significance */

2007-03-30T00:26:08Z

Background/Significance

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:26, 30 March 2007
Line 22:		Line 22:
	== Background/Significance ==		== Background/Significance ==

	~~Note~~-taking ~~research has shown that the process of taking notes can have a positive impact~~ on ~~long-term retention~~. ~~Our preliminary studies have provided strong evidence that the features included in online~~ note-taking ~~applications impact how~~ students ~~take notes. We have also found that these differences can affect~~ learning ~~in several ways~~. ~~These differences provide an opportunity~~ to ~~learn more about note-taking~~. ~~Our main research question regards how and when note-taking increases long-term retention~~. ~~By addressing this question~~, ~~we have the opportunity to develop~~ note-~~taking applications that encourage active processing~~ and ~~retention~~.		There is a long history of research connecting note-taking with increased performance on learning outcomes. While some researchers believe note-taking gains are achieved when students connect learning materials with prior knowledge, there is little behavioral data to support such a thesis. Students' notes rarely show indications of material external to what they are learning. In fact, notes are often recorded verbatim. Still, there is evidence that note-takers perform better on tests addressing robust learning measures (Peper and Mayer, 1986), which should derive from such connective behavior.

	~~There is extensive research on note-taking in both the educational psychology and educational technology fields. About half~~ of ~~note-taking studies have shown the process~~ of ~~note-taking to be beneficial to learning~~. ~~Three-fourths of studies find~~ that ~~notes are~~ a ~~valuable resource when they can be reviewed (Kiewra, 1991)~~. The ~~cause of~~ note-taking ~~benefits is unclear~~, ~~however. It has been attributed~~ to ~~rewording or summarizing, but experimental results~~ are ~~equivocal~~.		It may be that generation effects are due to a process of coordinating multiple sources of information. Jennifer Wiley's work shows that students able to easily transition between multiple documents write better essays than students who view one page or document at a time. The notepad involved in note-taking may serve a similar purpose, allowing students to easily coordinate what they are learning with what they have already learned.

	~~Note-taking technology provides new ways of studying note-taking, and provides investigators with more control over the note-taking process.~~ This ~~gives us the opportunity to~~ study note-taking ~~in further depth~~, ~~perhaps elucidating the circumstances in~~ which ~~note-taking is beneficial~~. ~~Unfortunately, few researchers have taken advantage of this opportunity. Most note-taking technology~~ is ~~developed to simply mimic paper-based practices~~, ~~or provide new ways of taking notes.~~		This study evaluates this hypothesis by comparing two note-taking tools, one (copy-paste) which uses a notepad with one (highlighting) that does not. If the coordination hypothesis is correct, students using the copy-paste tool should perform better on learning outcomes than students using the highlighting tool.

	~~These new devices have been shown to change the way~~ students ~~take notes, reinforcing~~ the ~~need to study how note~~-~~taking practices affect~~ learning~~, if at all. Our investigations our a first step in doing so~~.

	== Dependent Variables ==		== Dependent Variables ==

Abauer: /* Abstract */

2007-03-30T00:11:43Z

Abstract

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:11, 30 March 2007
Line 1:		Line 1:
	== Abstract ==		== Abstract ==
	Note-taking has been found to be an effective learning activity, though it is unclear why this may be. One hypothesis we are pursuing is that note-taking requires students to actively coordinate multiple versions of the same material. Previous research has found that simultaneously coordinating multiple sources facilitates learning (Wiley 2001). Note-taking often involves the creation of a separate representation of the learning material, which remains available for review while the student is learning new material. If the availability of multiple sources is responsible for positive learning outcomes, then note-taking methods such as highlighting, which does not produce a separate copy of the learning materials, should not produce similar learning results to copy-paste. This is a [[~~coordinative learning~~]] hypothesis of note-taking.		Note-taking has been found to be an effective learning activity, though it is unclear why this may be. One hypothesis we are pursuing is that note-taking requires students to actively coordinate multiple versions of the same material. Previous research has found that simultaneously coordinating multiple sources facilitates learning (Wiley 2001). Note-taking often involves the creation of a separate representation of the learning material, which remains available for review while the student is learning new material. If the availability of multiple sources is responsible for positive learning outcomes, then note-taking methods such as highlighting, which does not produce a separate copy of the learning materials, should not produce similar learning results to copy-paste. This is a [[Coordinative Learning]] hypothesis of note-taking.

	The study described here will compare two forms of note-taking, copy-paste and highlighting. They share a similar selection-based interaction. In both conditions, to record a note students select the important material with the cursor. In the copy-paste condition, students then copy the selection to a notepad. In the highlighting condition, students highlight the note, which changes its background. Notes are thus not available in subsequent pages.		The study described here will compare two forms of note-taking, copy-paste and highlighting. They share a similar selection-based interaction. In both conditions, to record a note students select the important material with the cursor. In the copy-paste condition, students then copy the selection to a notepad. In the highlighting condition, students highlight the note, which changes its background. Notes are thus not available in subsequent pages.