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

Abstract

This review article investigates the encoding and storage functions of note-taking. The encoding function suggests that the process of taking notes, which are not reviewed, is facilitative. Research specifying optimal note-taking behaviors is discussed as are several means for facilitating note-taking, such as viewing a lecture multiple times, note-taking on a provided framework, or generative note-taking activities. The storage function suggests that the review of notes also is facilitative. Research addressing particular review behaviors, such as organization and elaboration, is discussed as are the advantages of reviewing provided notes, borrowed notes, or notes organized in a matrix form. In addition, cognitive factors related to note-taking and review are discussed. The article concludes with an alternative means for defining and investigating the functions of note-taking, and with implications for education and for research.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

References

  1. Aiken, E. G., Thomas, G. S., and Shennum, W. A. (1975). Memory for a lecture: Effects of notes, lecture rate, and informational density.J. Educat. Psychol. 67: 439–444.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Anderson, T. H., and Armbruster, B. (1989). The value of taking notes during lecture. Submitted for publication.

  3. Annis, L. F., and Annis, D. B. (1987). Does practice make perfect? The effects of repetition on student learning. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Washington, D.C., April 1987.

  4. Annis, L. F., and Davis, J. K. (1975). Effect of encoding and an external memory device on notetaking.J. Exper. Educat. 44: 4–6.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Barnett, J. E., DiVesta, F. J., and Rogozinski, J. T. (1981). What is learned in notetaking?J. Educat. Psychol. 73: 181–192.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Barnett, J. E., and Freud, D. (1985). Prior knowledge and the generative theory of notetaking. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, Illinois, April 1985.

  7. Benton, S. L., and Kiewra, K. A. (1989). The effect of information acquisition on measures of writing performance. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, California, April 1989.

  8. Berliner, D. C. (1969). Effects of test-like events and notetaking on learning from lecture instruction. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Psychological Association, Washington, D.C., August 1969.

  9. Berliner, D. C. (1971). Aptitude-treatment interactions in two studies of learning from lecture instruction. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York, New York, April 1971.

  10. Bromage, B. K., and Mayer, R. E. (1986). Quantitative and qualitative effects of repetition on learning from technical text.J. Educat. Psychol. 78: 271–278.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Carter, J. F., and Van Matre, N. H. (1975). Notetaking versus note having.J. Educat. Psychol. 67: 900–904.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Collingwood, V., and Hughes, D. C. (1978). Effects of three types of university lecture notes on student achievement.J. Educat. Psychol. 70: 175–179.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Cook, L. K., and Mayer, R. E. (1983). Reading strategies training for meaningful learning from prose. In Pressley, M., Levin, J. R. (eds.),Cognitive Strategy Research: Educational Applications Springer-Verlag, New York, pp. 87–126.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Crawford, C. C. (1925). The correlation between lecture notes and quiz papers.J. Educat. Res. 12: 379–386.

    Google Scholar 

  15. DiVesta, F. J., and Gray, S. G. (1972). Listening and notetaking.J. Educat. Psychol. 63: 8–14.

    Google Scholar 

  16. DiVesta, F. J., and Gray, S. G. (1973). Listening and notetaking II.J. Educat. Psychol. 64: 278–287.

    Google Scholar 

  17. DuBois, N. F., and Kiewra, K. A. (1989). The development of a multi-level research program to evaluate the effects of strategy training on study behaviors. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, California, April 1989.

  18. DuBois, N. F., Kiewra, K. A., and Fraley, J. (1988). Differential effects of a learning strategy course. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, Louisiana, April 1988.

  19. Einstein, G. O., Morris, J., and Smith, S. (1985). Note-taking, individual differences, and memory for lecture information.J. Educat. Psychol. 77: 522–532.

    Google Scholar 

  20. English, H. B., Welborn, E. L., and Killian, C. D. (1934). Studies in substance memorization.J. Gen. Psychol. 11: 233–260.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Fisher, J. L., and Harris, M. B. (1973). Effect of note taking and review on recall.J. Educat. Psychol. 65: 321–325.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Fisher, J. L., and Harris, M. B. (1974). Effect of notetaking preference and type of notes taken on memory.Psychol. Rep. 35: 384–385.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Flexser, A. J., and Tulving, E. (1978). Retrieval independence in recognition and recall.Psychol. Rev. 85: 153–171.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Frank, B. M. (1984). Effect of field independence-dependence and study technique on learning from a lecture.Am. Educat. Res. J. 21: 669–678.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Hartley, J. (1983). Notetaking research: Resetting the scoreboard.Bull. Brit. Psychol. Sic. 36: 13–14.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Hartley, J., and Cameron, A. (1967). Some observations on the efficiency of lecturing.Educat. Rev. 20: 3–7.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Hartley, J., and Fuller, H. (1971). The use of slides in lectures: An exploratory study.Vis. Educat. August/September, 39–41.

  28. Hartley, J., and Marshall, S. (1974). On notes and notetaking.Univer. Quart. 28: 225–235.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Howe, M. J. (1970a). Using students' notes to examine the role of the individual learner in acquiring meaningful subject matter.J. Educat. Res. 64: 61–63.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Howe, M. J. (1970b). Notetaking strategy, review and long-term retention of verbal information.J. Educat. Res. 63: 285.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Kardash, C. M., and Kroeker, T. L. (1988). Effects of time of review and test expectancy on learning from text. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, Louisiana, April 1988.

  32. Kiewra, K. A. (1983). The process of review: A levels of processing approach.Contemp. Educat. Psychol. 8: 366–374.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Kiewra, K. A. (1984a). The relationship between notetaking over an extended period and actual course-related achievement.Col. Stud. J. 17: 381–385.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Kiewra, K. A. (1984b). Acquiring effective notetaking skills: An alternative to professional notetaking.J. Read. 27: 299–302.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Kiewra, K. A. (1984c). Implications for notetaking based on relationships between notetaking variables and achievement measures.Read. Improv. 21: 145–149.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Kiewra, K. A. (1985a). Investigating notetaking and review: A depth of processing alternative.Educat. Psychol. 20: 23–32.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Kiewra, K. A. (1985b). The examination of the encoding and external storage functions of notetaking for factual and higher-order performance.Col. Stud. J. 19: 394–397.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Kiewra, K. A. (1985c). Students' notetaking behaviors and the efficacy of providing the instructor's notes for review.Contemp. Educat. Psychol. 10: 378–386.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Kiewra, K. A. (1985d). Learning from a lecture: An investigation of notetaking, review, and attendance at a lecture.Hum. Learn. 4: 73–77.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Kiewra, K. A. (1987). Notetaking and review: The research and its implications.Instruct. Sci. 16: 233–249.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Kiewra, K. A. (1988). Cognitive aspects of autonomous notetaking: Control processes, learning strategies and prior knowledge.Educat. Psychol. 23: 39–56.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Kiewra, K. A., and Benton, S. L. (1988). The relationship between information-processing ability and notetaking.Contemp. Educat. Psychol. 13: 33–44.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Kiewra, K. A., Benton, S. L., Christensen, M., Kim, S., and Lindberg, N. (1989a). The effects of note-taking format and study technique and performance. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, California, April 1989.

  44. Kiewra, K. A., Benton, S. L., and Lewis, L. B. (1987). Qualitative aspects of notetaking and their relationship with information processing ability.J. Instruct. Psychol. 14: 110–117.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Kiewra, K. A., DuBois, N. F., Chritensen, M., Kim, S., and Lindberg, N. (1989b). A more equitable account of the note-taking functions. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, California, April 1989.

  46. Kiewra, K. A., DuBois, N. F., Christian, D., and McShane, A. (1988a). Providing study notes: A comparison of three types of notes for review.J. Educat. Psychol. 80: 595–597.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Kiewra, K. A., DuBois, N. F., Christian, D., McShane, A., Meyerhoffer, M., and Roskelley, D. (1988b). Theoretical and practical aspects of taking, reviewing and borrowing conventional, skeletal and matrix lecture notes. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, Louisiana, April 1988.

  48. Kiewra, K. A., and Fletcher, H. J. (1984). The relationship between notetaking variables and achievement measures.Hum. Learn. 3: 273–280.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Kiewra, K. A., and Frank, B. M. (1986). Cognitive style: Effects of structure at acquisition and testing.Contemp. Educat. Psychol. 11: 253–263.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Kiewra, K. A., Mayer, R. E., Christian, D., Dyreson, M., and McShane, A. (1988c). Quantitative and qualitative effects of repetition and note-taking on learning from videotaped instruction. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, Louisiana, April 1988.

  51. Kiewra, K. A., Mayer, R. E., Christensen, M., Kim, S., Roskelley, D., and Lindberg, N. (1989c). The effects of structured and unstructured repetition of videotaped instruction. Submitted for publication.

  52. Klemm, W. R. (1976). Efficiency of handout “skeleton” notes in student learning.Improv. Col. Univers. Tech. 24: 10–12.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Knight, L. J., and McKelvie, S. J. (1986). Effects of attendance, note-taking and review on memory for a lecture: Encoding vs. external storage function of notes.Canad. J. Behav. Sci. 18: 52–61.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Locke, E. A. (1977). An empirical study of lecture notetaking among college students.J. Educat. Res. 77: 93–99.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Maddox, H., and Hoole, E. (1975). Performance decrement in the lecture.Educat. Rev. 28: 17–30.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Maqsud, M. (1980). Effects of personal lecture notes and teacher notes on recall of university students.Birt. j. Educat. Psychol. 50: 289–294.

    Google Scholar 

  57. Mayer, R. E. (1984). Aids to text comprehension.Educat. Psychol. 19: 30–42.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Mayer, R. E. (1987). Techniques that foster active reading strategies. In Rohwer, W. D. (chair),Toward a Model of Autonomous Learning. Symposium presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Washington, D.C., April 1987.

  59. Moore, J. C. (1968). Cueing for selective notetaking.J. Exp. Educat. 36: 69–72.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Palmatier, R. A., and Bennett, J. M. (1974). Notetaking habits of college students.J. Read. 18: 215–218.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Peper, R. J., and Mayer, R. E. (1978). Note-taking as a generative activity.J. Educat. Psychol. 70: 514–522.

    Google Scholar 

  62. Peper, R. J., and Mayer, R. E. (1986). Generative effects of note-taking during science lectures.J. Educat. Psychol. 78: 34–38.

    Google Scholar 

  63. Peters, D. L. (1972). Effects of notetaking and rate of presentation on short-term objective test performance.J. Educat. Psychol. 63: 276–280.

    Google Scholar 

  64. Peterson, H. A., Ellis, M., Toohill, N., and Kloess, P. (1952). Some measurements of the effects of reviews.J. Educat. Psychol. 26: 65–72.

    Google Scholar 

  65. Pressley, M., Borkowski, J. G., and O'Sullivan, J. T. (1985). Children's metamemory and the teaching of memory strategies. In Forrest, D. L., Pressley, M., MacKinnon, G. E., and Waller, T. G. (eds.),Metacognition, Cognition and Human Performance: Vol. 1, Theoretical Perspectives Academic, New York, pp. 111–153.

    Google Scholar 

  66. Pressley, M., Borkowski, J. G., and Schneider, W. (1989). Cognitive strategies: Good strategy users coordinate metacognition and knowledge. In Vasta, R., and Whitehurst, (eds.),Annals of Child Development, Vol. 4, JAI, Greenwich, Connecticut.

    Google Scholar 

  67. Rickards, J. P., and Friedman, F. (1978). The encoding versus the external storage hypothesis in notetaking.Contemp. Educat. Psychol. 3: 136–143.

    Google Scholar 

  68. Robin, A., Fox, R. M., Martello, J., and Archable, C. (1977). Teaching notetaking skills to under-achieving college students.J. Educat. Res. 71: 81–85.

    Google Scholar 

  69. Shimmerlick, S. M., and Nolan, J. D. (1976). Organization and the recall of prose.J. Educat. Psychol. 68: 779–786.

    Google Scholar 

  70. Thomas, G. S. (1978). Use of students' notes and lecture summaries as study guides for recall.J. Educat. Res. 71: 316–319.

    Google Scholar 

  71. Thompson, D. M., and Tulving, E. (1970). Associate encoding and retrieval: Weak and strong cues.J. Exp. Psychol. 86: 255–262.

    Google Scholar 

  72. Witkin, H. A., Moore, C. A., Goodenough, D. R., and Cox, P. W. (1977). Field-independent cognitive styles and their educational implications.Rev. Educat. Res. 47: 1–64.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kiewra, K.A. A review of note-taking: The encoding-storage paradigm and beyond. Educ Psychol Rev 1, 147–172 (1989). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01326640

Download citation

Key words

  • notetaking
  • studying
  • academic performance