Note-Taking/Note-Making¶

Strategy · All strategies
Evidence · 1 claim (1 mixed) · 5 studies (3 review, 1 causal, 1 theoretical), q1–q3 · 0 of 5 report an effect size

Description¶

Note-taking is the process of recording key points during a lesson or from a text; note-making is the generative follow-up in which learners transform those records into their own words, questions, summaries, and connections. The distinction matters because the two activities engage different cognitive processes: taking captures information, while making requires learners to restructure and elaborate it. Structured formats such as the Cornell method build note-making in as a dedicated stage (cue column and summary), rather than leaving it to chance.

Design Implications¶

Note-taking supports learning through two mechanisms: external storage for later review and encoding that occurs during generation itself [~M]. The encoding benefit depends on learners actively transforming material rather than transcribing it verbatim — verbatim transcription yields weaker learning than generative summarizing [~S]. Note-making activities are a form of Active Learning: the learner must select, organize, and integrate ideas rather than passively receive them.

Context¶

Requirements¶

• Source material (lecture, text, video) with a discernible structure worth capturing
• Explicit instruction in note-taking technique — students do not intuitively know how to select main ideas [~M]
• A dedicated note-making stage: cues, questions, summaries, or personal connections, as in the Cornell cue and summary columns
• Opportunities to use the notes (review, discussion, drafting), since notes that are never revisited contribute mainly their encoding benefit

Constraints¶

• Heavy transcription demands during fast, dense lectures consume working memory and reduce encoding [-M] — the more verbatim the notes, the weaker the learning benefit
• Providing full notes or slides can reduce note-taking engagement; learners given instructor notes often review instead of encoding [~M]
• Learners with weak prior knowledge struggle to distinguish main ideas from detail, producing poor notes regardless of format [-M]
• Reviewing notes is only effective when it involves active reconstruction; passive rereading of notes yields limited benefit [-S]

Implementation Variability¶

• Cornell format — page divided into cues, notes, and summary; forces a note-making pass after the lesson
• Guided notes — instructor provides a skeleton with blanks; reduces transcription load for novices [~M]
• Sketchnoting / visual notes — combines words and images, leveraging dual coding
• Collaborative notes — shared documents where groups co-construct and compare records
• Post-hoc note-making — students annotate or restructure raw notes a day later as a spaced retrieval and elaboration activity

Target Learners¶

• Secondary and post-secondary students encountering content-dense material
• Novices benefit from guided note structures that offload selection decisions [~M]; as expertise grows, external structure should fade Expertise reverses the benefit of high-support formats. [~M]
• Students with slow handwriting or processing-speed challenges benefit from guided notes or instructor-provided partial notes [~M]

Target Learning Goals¶

• Factual and conceptual retention from lectures and texts
• Comprehension monitoring — the note-making stage surfaces gaps and confusions
• Study-skill development: selecting, organizing, and integrating information as a transferable skill

Instructions¶

1. Prepare learners with an Advance Organizer so they know what structure to listen for.
2. During the lesson, students take notes — recording key points in their own words where possible; teach selection explicitly rather than assuming it.
3. After the lesson, students make notes: write cue questions, a summary, and personal connections (Cornell cue/summary columns, or a structured prompt).
4. Have students use the notes within days — Practice via retrieval, discussion, or drafting — rather than rereading passively.
5. Model the process with a Think-Aloud showing how an expert decides what to record and how to condense it.

Related Strategies¶

• Annotating — note-making applied directly to a text rather than a separate page
• Summarization — the core generative act within note-making
• Retrieval Practice — converting notes into cue questions turns review into retrieval

Examples¶

• Cornell note-taking system (Pauk & Owens, How to Study in College) — the canonical two-column format with a mandatory summary stage; widely adopted in AVID college-readiness programs (https://www.avid.org).
• Guided lecture notes in introductory biology — instructor-provided skeletons with blanks and embedded concept questions, letting novices attend to explanation rather than transcription.
• Sketchnoting in history classes — students combine spatial layout, icons, and text to restructure a lecture's argument visually.

Key Sources¶

• Peper, R. J., & Mayer, R. E. (1978). Note taking as a generative activity. Journal of Educational Psychology, 70(4), 514–522. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.70.4.514
• Kiewra, K. A. (1989). A review of note-taking: The encoding-storage paradigm and beyond. Educational Psychology Review, 1(2), 147–172. doi:10.1007/bf01326640
• Mueller, P. A., & Oppenheimer, D. M. (2014). The pen is mightier than the keyboard: Advantages of longhand over laptop note taking. Psychological Science, 25(6), 1159–1168. doi:10.1177/0956797614524581
• Bohay, M., Blakely, D., Tamplin, A., & Radvansky, G. A. (2011). Note taking, review, memory, and comprehension. The American Journal of Psychology, 124(1), 63–73. doi:10.5406/amerjpsyc.124.1.0063
• Pauk, W., & Owens, R. J. Q. (2010). How to Study in College (10th ed.). Wadsworth.