Education and Information Technologies

, Volume 14, Issue 3, pp 255–283 | Cite as

Requirements for electronic note taking systems: A field study of note taking in university classrooms

  • Kibum Kim
  • Scott A. Turner
  • Manuel A. Pérez-Quiñones
Article

Abstract

Note taking is the core activity for students in a classroom. There has been a large amount of research conducted, both from industry and from academia, into facilitating the note-taking process. There is evidence that shows that note taking can be beneficial for the students’ educational growth. There are also many available systems for taking notes electronically (e.g. Tablet PCs, PDAs). However, what has not been given as much attention is how these electronic devices affect (or support) the note taking task. In this paper, we study university students’ current note taking behavior and the changes caused by the use of electronic systems for this activity. The goal of our work is to identify issues that should be considered when evaluating electronic note taking systems and to formulate requirements for future electronic note-taking systems. Our findings show that while the technological support for writing with pens on electronic surfaces is quite advanced, the task of note taking in the classroom is not well supported. We identify the limitations of typical note taking systems and discuss the implications for the design of future note taking systems. Our work consisted of three parts: a survey of current note-taking practices, an observational study in a classroom environment, and a semester long case study of students using electronic note-taking devices. All of these activities took place at a large 4-year university. We found that the people reacted to note-taking devices very differently and that their current practices were not always well supported. The users all wanted to input information as fast as possible, in the manner they wanted but they were not always able to achieve that. Hardware limitations (i.e. screen size, responsiveness) added to this issue. We also found that the features that are well supported in an electronic medium (i.e. modification, reorganizing, multiple pen colors/styles, handwriting recognition, sharing) were not commonly used or wanted.

Keywords

Note taking Multiplatform devices Context University students Higher education 

References

  1. Abowd, G. D., Atkeson, C. G., Feinstein, A., Hmelo, C., Kooper, R., Long, S., Sawhney, N., et al. (1997). Teaching and learning as multimedia authoring: the classroom 2000 project. In Proceedings of the fourth ACM international conference on Multimedia (pp. 187–198).Google Scholar
  2. Anderson, R., Anderson, R., Simon, B., Wolfman, S. A., VanDeGrift, T., & Yasuhara, K. (2004a). Experiences with a tablet PC based lecture presentation system in computer science courses. In Proceedings of the 35th SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (pp. 56–60). New York, NY: SIGCSE’04 ACM.Google Scholar
  3. Anderson, R. J., Hoyer, C., Wolfman, S. A., & Anderson, R. (2004b). A study of digital ink in lecture presentation. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Vienna, Austria, April 24–29, 2004) (pp. 567–574). New York, NY: CHI’04. ACM.Google Scholar
  4. Anderson, R., Anderson, R., Davis, K. M., Linnell, N., Prince, C., & Razmov, V. (2007). Supporting active learning and example based instruction with classroom technology. In Proceedings of the 38th SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (Covington, Kentucky, USA, March 07–11, 2007) (pp. 69–73). New York, NY: SIGCSE ’07 ACM.Google Scholar
  5. Bauer, A., & Koedinger, K. (2006). Evaluating the effect of technology on note-taking and learning. CHI ’06 extended abstracts on Human factors in computing systems. Montreal, Quebec, Canada: ACM.Google Scholar
  6. Brotherton, J. A., & Abowd, G. D. (2004). Lessons learned from eClass: assessing automated capture and access in the classroom. June 2004 ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI), 11(2), 121–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chiu, P., Kapuskar, A., Reitmeier, S., & Wilcox, L. (1999). NoteLook: taking notes in meetings with digital video and ink. October 1999 Proceedings of the seventh ACM international conference on Multimedia (Part 1) (pp. 149–158).Google Scholar
  8. Davis, R. C., Lin, J., Brotherton, J. A., Landay, J. A., Price, M. N., & Schilit, B. N. (1998). A framework for sharing handwritten notes. November 1998 Proceedings of the 11th annual ACM symposium on User interface software and technology (pp. 119–120).Google Scholar
  9. Davis, R. C., Landay, J. A., Chen, V., Huang, J., Lee, R. B., Li, F. C., et al. (1999). NotePals: Lightweight note sharing by the group, for the group. May 1999 Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems: the CHI is the limit (pp. 338–345).Google Scholar
  10. Dourish, P. (2001). Where the action is: The foundations of embodied interaction. Cambridge, MA: MIT.Google Scholar
  11. Grabe, M. (2005). Voluntary use of online lecture notes: correlates of note use and note use as alternative to class attendance. Computers & Education, 44, 409–421. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2004.04.005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hong, J. I., & Landay, J. A. (2001). A context/communication information agent. January 2001 Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 5(1), 78–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Intons-Peterson, M. J., & Fournier, J. (1986). External and internal memory aids: when and how often do we use them? Journal of Experimental psychology: General, 115(3), 267–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Lin, M., Lutters, W. G., & Kim, T. S. (2004). Understanding the micronote lifecycle: improving mobile support for informal note taking. April 2004 Proceedings of the 2004 conference on Human factors in computing systems (pp. 687–694).Google Scholar
  15. Live Classroom (2005). http://www.wimba.com/products/liveclassroom/# (reviewed as Silicon Chalk).
  16. Nardi, B. A. (1996). Context and consciousness: Activity theory and human computer interaction. Cambridge, MA: MIT.Google Scholar
  17. Spoerri, A. (2002). Souvenir: Flexible note-taking tool to pinpoint and share media in digital libraries. July 2002 Proceedings of the second ACM/IEEE-CS joint conference on Digital libraries (p. 383).Google Scholar
  18. Truong, K. N., Abowd, G. D. (1999). StuPad: Integrating student notes with class lectures. May 1999, CHI ’99 extended abstracts on Human factors in computing systems (pp. 208–209).Google Scholar
  19. Truong, K. N., Abowd, G. D., & Brotherton, J. A. (1999). Personalizing the capture of public experiences. November 1999, Proceedings of the 12th annual ACM symposium on User interface software and technology (pp. 121–130).Google Scholar
  20. Ward, N., & Tatsukawa, H. (2003). A tool for taking class notes. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 59(6), 959–981. doi:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2003.07.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Wirth, M. A. (2003).E-notes: Using electronic lecture notes to support active learning in computer science. June 2003 ACM. SIGCSE Bulletin (Vol. 35 Issue 2, pp. 57–60).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kibum Kim
    • 1
  • Scott A. Turner
    • 2
  • Manuel A. Pérez-Quiñones
    • 2
  1. 1.Applied Research and Technology CenterMotorola LabsSchaumburgUSA
  2. 2.Computer Science DepartmentVirginia TechBlacksburgUSA

Personalised recommendations