See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/254350486

The Process of Note Taking: Implications for Students with Mild Disabilities

Article  in  The Clearing House · May 2007

DOI: 10.3200/TCHS.80.5.227-232

CITATIONS READS

12 3,884

1 author:

Joseph R. Boyle
Temple University
29 PUBLICATIONS   457 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Argumentative app View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Joseph R. Boyle on 19 June 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 The Process of Note Taking:
Implications for Students with
Mild Disabilities
JOSEPH R. BOYLE
Abstract: Students with mild disabilities have a difficult time
recording notes from lectures. Accurate note taking is impor-
tant because it helps students understand the content from
lectures and notes serve as a document for later review. In
this article, the author describes what teachers can do before,
during, and after the lecture to help students become better
note takers.
Keywords: lectures, lecture cues, mild disabilities, notes, note
taking
D espite evidence that secondary students who
record notes perform better on recall measures
and tests (Barnett 2003; DiVesta and Gray 1973; Kiewra
1985), most students are not explicitly taught how to
record notes. Few, if any, students are given instruction
on note-taking techniques and effective note-taking skills
to enhance their own learning (Suritsky and Hughes
1996). In addition, the classroom environment or lec-
ture may not prompt students to record and produce
complete notes (Austin, Lee, and Carr 2004). These
findings are troubling because research has shown that
notes serve as the primary means of capturing lecture
content (Suritsky and Hughes 1991) and that lecture
information is directly linked to teacher-made tests,
which often compose half of the student’s grade (Put-
nam, Deshler, and Schumaker 1993). Those students
who are effective note takers or who are trained in note
taking will more likely perform better on classroom tests
than those students not trained or those students who
used conventional note taking (Boyle 1996; Boyle and
Weishaar 2001; Horton, Lovitt, and Christensen 1991;
Lazarus 1991; Saski, Swicegood, and Carter 1983).
Joseph R. Boyle, PhD, is an associate professor at Rutgers University, Newark, New
Jersey. His research interests include cognitive organizers, reading strategies, and note-
taking techniques. Copyright © 2007 Heldref Publications
227
The Process of Note Taking
The note-taking process is a complex set of tasks.
During a lecture, note taking can be quite challenging
for most students because it involves using listening,
processing, and writing skills simultaneously or shifting
back and forth between these skills. For students with
mild disabilities (MD) (e.g., learning disabilities [LD],
mental retardation [MR], or emotional/behavioral dis-
abilities [E/BD]), note taking can become overwhelm-
ing (Rowe 1976). When Suritsky (1992) interviewed
students with disabilities about their note-taking skills,
she found multiple problems. In her study, these stu-
dents reported that they had difficulty deciding which
important lecture points to record, recording notes
quickly enough to keep up with the teacher, and main-
taining attention to the lecture. These problems come
as no surprise and illustrate the point that students,
particularly those with MD, should be given explicit
training in note taking to learn these skills and strate-
gies and practice to integrate the coordination of these
skills. Note taking is viewed as a process that begins
prior to the lecture and ends after students review their
notes. Understanding this process can help teachers
and parents better prepare students for note taking.
Preparing Students to Learn
Prior to the start of the lecture, students should pre-
pare to learn. As they enter the classroom, they should
find a seat with a good view of the teacher and black-
board. If they have visual problems or difficulty copy-
ing information off the board or overhead, they should
sit close to the front of the room. As they prepare to
record notes, they should mark the current date and the
228 The Clearing House
topic of discussion on the page. Noting the date and
topic are key aspects of preparation because they will
help students locate information more easily. If time
permits, students may want to jot down some informa-
tion about the topic to activate prior knowledge. For
some students, the topic itself stimulates thoughts and
memories. For example, if the topic is frogs, many stu-
dents have already begun recalling thoughts from prior
knowledge and their experiences, good and bad, with
frogs. Whether they are thinking about the frog they
caught at camp or the one they recently dissected in
science class, because their thoughts are on the current
topic, these ideas will personalize their notes for the
day. Finally, part of the preparation process involves
making sure that students have sufficient writing uten-
sils and paper available so that they do not have to
interrupt learning by searching for more.
During the Lecture
Once the lecture begins, students must use listening
skills to attend to the important points of the lecture
and then relate, or assign meaning, to them (Kiewra
1985; Suritsky and Hughes 1996). By assigning mean-
ing, students have to initially concentrate on and
understand the main points of the lecture. Focus (i.e.,
on both the teacher and topic) is a key aspect of the lis-
tening process and involves using selective attention to
receive the visual (the teacher and the notes on board
or overhead) and auditory cues (the teacher’s voice).
Attention to the teacher allows the student to listen to
relevant lecture points. Moreover, by having students
add details as they record notes, the content becomes
more meaningful to them (Kiewra 1985). Those notes
must be meaningful and understandable for students
to effectively review them for an upcoming test or quiz.
If not, they will have to spend additional time refining
the notes through clarification, organization, or elabo-
ration. More about this topic is in the following review
stage of note taking.
As students hear lecture information, they begin to
process the information to make it understandable
and personalized. Paraphrasing is the most common
method of personalization, whereby students record
lecture notes in their own words (Suritsky and Hughes
1991). This technique involves using an abbreviation
method that can help them record more complete
notes (Hughes and Suritsky 1994). However, some
students frequently use other deeper processing tech-
niques (Bretzing and Kulhavy 1979) to help them
understand content or concepts, including elaboration
and relating new information with prior knowledge
(Craik and Lockhart 1972). Students should not try to
record notes verbatim because this method is the least
effective and most detrimental to learning (Hughes
and Suritsky 1994). Instead, the key to becoming an
effective note taker involves recording important lec-
May/June 2007
ture points in an organized manner as completely as
possible (Kiewra 1985).
Cognitive processing of the information begins prior
to the actual lecture as students set up and prepare
to take notes. In most cases, they have already begun
thinking about the topic. Cognitive processing involves
distinguishing between essential and nonessential
lecture information, determining foreign terms or
unknown vocabulary, storing bits of lecture informa-
tion in short-term memory long enough to accurately
record it, and paraphrasing and elaborating on the
main points (Kiewra et al. 1991). For many students,
difficulty with any of these steps results in fewer or
less complete lecture points recorded (Aiken, Thomas,
and Shennum 1975). The ability to pick and choose
only the important ideas, and then supplement them
with details, is one key to processing notes efficiently
(Kiewra 1985). For students with MD, determining
these points is one of the most difficult aspects of the
note-taking process (Suritsky 1992); however, teachers
can improve this area by using cued lecture points. This
technique is effective because students are more likely
to record cued points than noncued points (Hughes
and Suritsky 1994).
As students process the information from the lec-
ture, they must also accurately record it. Writing notes
involves recording information in a succinct, yet usable
format. When notes are too sparse, the information
may not be understandable later: if the have too much
detail, the student may miss other relevant lecture
points because they are too busy recording previous
information. Recording important lecture points at
a reasonably fast rate to keep up with the lecturer is
key (Kiewra 1985). Using shorthand or abbreviations
is a plus to recording notes efficiently, as is organiza-
tion. This skill should be taught to students with MD
because research has shown that they use far fewer
abbreviations than their nondisabled peers (Hughes
and Suritsky 1994)
After the Lecture
The last step in the note-taking process, which is
often overlooked, is a review of notes after the lecture.
Whether it occurs immediately after class or when
studying notes for a test, the review process is an
important one (Lazarus 1991; Suritsky and Hughes
1996). However, for some students, this task can have
pitfalls. Research has shown that some students with
MD are not aware that they should review notes; oth-
ers are aware but simply do not review their notes
(Suritsky and Hughes 1996). Reviewing notes often
means looking over them immediately after class to
fill in gaps, clarify poorly understood concepts, or cor-
rect spelling and handwriting legibility. For many stu-
dents, reviewing notes is often the step missing from
their note-taking repertoire. Yet, this step could allow
Vol. 80, No. 5 The Process of Note Taking
poor note takers to compensate for their inadequacies
(Suritsky and Hughes 1996). The key during this step is
to review notes immediately after class. The topic is still
fresh and the review then becomes part of a routine for
students. For example, students could compare their
notes to fill in the gaps and complete various lecture
points. They could also use their textbook to elaborate
or expand class information. In doing so, students can
add examples from the textbook to concepts in their
notes. This technique will also enhance their under-
standing of the information they read in the textbook.
In other cases, they could use a review activity that
links parts of notes to headings (Porte 2001).
In summary, there are several keys to multitask-
ing during the note-taking process. Initially, students
should prepare by locating a seat where they can see
the board and teacher and recording the date and topic
on their notes. During the listening stage, they should
focus on the topic and be given cued lecture points (or
other attention-getting techniques such as question-
ing) to help them maintain this attention. During the
cognitive process stage, students should record relevant
information and then add details to personalize the
content. Being able to recognize the instructor’s cues
is an important skill for students trying to determine
relevant lecture points. These cues vary from teacher
to teacher and may be the reason why some students
take better notes in certain classes. During note taking,
students should be able to write the relevant lecture
points at a sufficiently fast pace and in an organized
manner. If the information is initially presented in an
organized manner, they can simply record the notes in
a chronological or hierarchical order. Finally, imme-
diately after the lecture, students should review their
notes for gaps or areas of misunderstanding. If teachers
allot five minutes for this task prior to the end of class,
it could become part of a daily routine.
Teachers Helping Students
Because recording notes presents multiple oppor-
tunities to learn the information (e.g., once in class
and later as they review or study their notes for a test),
teachers should try to maximize these opportunities.
The more that teachers do to present the crucial infor-
mation in a clearly organized manner, the easier it will
be for students to understand it and record notes.
During the listening and cognitive processing phases,
teachers should present information in a way that gets
students to focus on the important aspects of the
lecture, which will help them record more notes. For
example, simply writing important lecture points on
the board can increase the likelihood that the same
information will be found in students’ notes. In one
study, students recorded up to 88 percent of the lecture
information when it was written on the board (Locke
1977). Verbal signposts or lecture cues have also been
229
shown to result in a greater number of notes recorded
by students. Signposts (or lecture cues) are those state-
ments used to alert students to important points. For
example, “an important point to remember is” or
“there are six parts to a cell.” This lecture cue alerts
students that there will be six parts mentioned and
that they should label their notes one to six. Because
students with MD tend to record more cued lecture
points than noncued points (Hughes and Suritsky
1994), teachers should use them to ensure that stu-
dents record essential information. These cued points
have resulted in students recording a greater number
of notes and higher achievement (Maddox and Hoole
1975). Pausing or changing verbal intonation can also
signal an important lecture point to students. Typi-
cally, the lecturer’s pause indicates to students that they
should be writing down the information.
In terms of helping students during the cognitive
processing phase, organizing information and relating
it to previously learned content helps them understand
the information in their notes. A number of studies
(Howe 1974; Schultz and DiVesta 1972) have shown
that organization aids students in recording clearer
and a greater number of notes. In addition, researchers
have found organized notes result in greater student
achievement. Although some students may be able
to organize information presented in a disorganized
form, if teachers organize information prior to the pre-
sentation, they can be assured that students will spend
more time recording notes and less time organizing
information. Other organizational techniques include
cognitive organizers, study guides, strategic note tak-
ing, PowerPoint slides, and guided notes (Austin, Lee,
and Carr 2004; Boyle 1996, 2001; Boyle and Weishaar
2001; Boyle and Yeager 1997; Lazarus 1991).
Many strategies can help students record more notes.
Teachers can use abbreviations and teach students
shorthand to help them write faster. These techniques
will help students record more notes (Hughes and
Suritsky 1994). Slowing down the rate of the lecture
is another technique that can aid students. Placing
pauses in lectures also allows them to catch up and
record more (Ruhl, Hughes, and Gajar 1990; Ruhl,
Hughes, and Schloss 1987; Ruhl and Suritsky 1995).
Researchers (Aiken, Thomas, and Shennum 1975) have
conducted studies in which the instructor alternated
sections of their lecture between listening (students
simply listened to the lecture) and note taking. This
method can reduce the pace of a lecture and, in the
process, allow students to take more and higher-quality
notes. Using designated pauses during the lecture also
allows students to review their notes with another
student. Typically, in the pause procedure, students are
paired together and, at natural breaks in the lecture,
are given a two-minute break to discuss main points
in their notes with a partner. Research indicates that
230 The Clearing House
students whose teachers used the pause procedure
increased their recall and comprehension of lecture
information (Ruhl, Hughes, and Gajar 1990; Ruhl and
Suritsky 1995).
Incorporating a review of notes allows students to
fill in gaps and helps them understand information.
Reviewing notes immediately after recording them has
also been shown to be effective at increasing compre-
hension. For example, Lazarus (1991) had a review
period following student use of guided notes. This
condition produced the greatest comprehension of
the lecture. Regardless of the procedure used, research
has shown that reviewing notes results in greater gains
(Hartley 1983; Kiewra 1985).
In conclusion, although note taking is a complex
process, teachers can help students become better note
takers through a number of lecture modifications and
explicit training. By helping students attend to impor-
tant lecture information, students will record more
notes. Through cues or signposts, teachers can high-
light those points that students need to record. By pre-
organizing lecture information into categories, teachers
can help students see the logical sequence and con-
nections between lecture ideas and content. By using
abbreviations and teaching students how to abbreviate,
teachers can help them record more notes. Finally, by
stressing the importance of reviewing notes, teachers
can help students create accurate and complete notes
that can later assist them during study periods.
REFERENCES
Aiken, E. G., G. S. Thomas, and W. A. Shennum. 1975. Memory for
a lecture: Effects of notes, lecture rate, and informational density.
Journal of Educational Psychology 67 (3): 439–44.
Austin, J. L., M. Lee, and J. E. Carr. 2004. The effects of guided notes
on undergraduate students’ recording of lecture content. Journal of
Instructional Psychology 31 (4): 91–96.
Barnett, J. 2003. Do instructor-provided on-line notes facilitate student
learning? Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American
Educational Research Association, Chicago.
Boyle, J. R. 1996. Thinking while notetaking: Teaching college
students to use strategic notetaking during lectures. In Innovative
learning strategies: Twelfth yearbook, ed. B.G. Grown, 9–18. Newark,
DE: International Reading Association.
Boyle, J. R. 2001. Enhancing the note-taking skills of students with
mild disabilities. Intervention in School and Clinic 36 (4): 221–24.
Boyle, J. R., and M. Weishaar. 2001. The effects of a strategic note-
taking technique on the comprehension and long term recall of
lecture information for high school students with LD. LD Research
and Practice 16 (3): 125–33.
Boyle, J. R., and N. Yeager. 1997. Blueprints for learning: Using
cognitive frameworks for understanding. TEACHING Exceptional
Children 29 (4): 26–31.
Bretzing, B. H., and R. W. Kulhavy. 1979. Notetaking and depth of
processing. Contemporary Educational Psychology 4 (2): 145–53.
Craik, F. I., and R. S. Lockhart. 1972. Levels of processing: A frame-
May/June 2007
work for memory research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal
Behavior 11 (6): 671–84.
DiVesta, F. J., and G. S. Gray. 1973. Listening and note-taking: II.
Immediate and delayed recall as a function of variations in the-
matic continuity, note taking, and length of listening-review inter-
vals. Journal of Educational Psychology 64 (3): 278–87.
Hartley, J. 1983. Notetaking research: Resetting the scoreboard. Bul-
letin of the British Psychology Society 36 (1): 13–14.
Horton, S. V., T. C. Lovitt, and C. C. Christensen. 1991. Notetaking
from textbooks: Effects of a columnar format on three categories
of secondary students. Exceptionality 2 (1): 19–40.
Howe, M. J. 1974. Taking notes and human learning. Educational
Researcher 16 (3): 222–27.
Hughes, C. A. 1996. Memory and test-taking strategies. In Teaching
adolescents with learning disabilities, 2nd ed. ed. D. D. Deshler, E. S.
Ellis and B. K. Lenz, 209–66. Denver, CO: Love Publishing.
Hughes, C. A., and S. K. Suritsky. 1994. Note-taking skills of uni-
versity students with and without learning disabilities. Journal of
Learning Disabilities 27 (1): 20–24.
Kiewra, K. A. 1985. Investigating notetaking and review: A depth of
processing alternative. Educational Psychologist 20 (1): 23–32.
Kiewra, K. A., N. F. DuBois, D. Christian, A. McShane, M. Meyerhof-
fer, and D. Roskelley. 1991. Note-taking functions and techniques.
Journal of Educational Psychology 83 (2): 240–45.
Lazarus, B. D. 1991. Guided notes, review, and achievement of sec-
ondary students with learning disabilities in mainstream content
courses. Education and Treatment of Children 14 (2): 112–27.
Locke, E. A. 1977. An empirical study of lecture note taking among
college students. Journal of Educational Research 71 (2): 93–9.
Maddox, H., and E. Hoole. 1975. Performance decrement in the
lecture. Educational Review 1 (1): 17–30.
Porte, L. 2001. Cut and paste 101. TEACHING Exceptional Children
34 (2): 14–20.
Putnam, M. L., D. D. Deshler, and J. S. Schumaker. 1993. The inves-
tigation of setting demands: A missing link in learning strategy
instruction. In Strategy assessment and instruction for students with
learning disabilities, ed. L. S. Meltzer, 325–54. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
Rowe, M. E. 1976. The pausing principle—two invitations to inquiry.
Journal of College Science Teaching 5 (4): 258–59.
Ruhl, K. L., C. A. Hughes, and A. H. Gajar. 1990. Efficacy of the pause
procedure for enhancing learning disabled college students’ long
and short-term recall of facts presented through lecture. Learning
Disabilities Quarterly 13 (1): 55–64.
Ruhl, K. L., C. A. Hughes, and P. J. Schloss. 1987. Using the pause
procedure to enhance lecture recall. Teacher Education and Special
Education 10 (1): 14–18.
Ruhl, K. L., and S. Suritsky. 1995. The pause procedure and/or an
outline: Effect on immediate free recall and lecture notes taken
by college students with learning disabilities. Learning Disability
Quarterly 18 (1): 2–11.
Saski, J., P. Swicegood, and J. Carter. 1983. Notetaking formats for
learning disabled adolescents. Learning Disability Quarterly 6 (3):
265–72.
Schultz, C. B., and F. J. DiVesta. 1972. Effects of passage organiza-
tion and note-taking on the selection of clustering strategies and
on recall of textual materials. Journal of Educational Psychology 63
(3): 244–52.
Suritsky, S. K. 1992. Notetaking approaches and specific areas of dif-
ficulty reported by university students with learning disabilities.
Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability 10 (1): 3–10.
Suritsky, S. K., and C. A. Hughes. 1991. Benefits of notetaking: Impli-
cations for secondary and postsecondary students with learning
disabilities. Learning Disabilities Quarterly 14 (1): 7–18.
Suritsky, S. K., and C. A. Hughes. 1996. Notetaking strategy instruc-
tion. In Teaching adolescents with learning disabilities, 2nd. ed., ed.
D. D. Deshler, E. S. Ellis, and B. K. Lenz, 267–312. Denver, CO:
Love Publishing.
 DIRECTIONS
FOR CONTRIBUTORS
SCOPE

THE CLEARING HOUSE, a peer-reviewed journal, publishes material of interest to

middle level and high school teachers and administrators, as well as postsecondary edu-
cation faculty members and their students. The journal contains articles reporting on
useful practices, research findings, and experiments. We also publish a limited number
of first-person accounts and opinion pieces on controversial issues.
Consideration is given to articles dealing with educational trends and philosophy;
preservice and inservice education; effective schools; curriculum; learning styles; dis-
cipline; guidance and counseling; community involvement; education of students
with disabilities; teaching and learning climate; gifted and talented programs; inter-
national education; instructional leadership; instructional techniques; teaching with
computers; testing and measurement; and school law.
1. We prefer manuscripts that do not exceed by incorporating their content in the text. For
3,500 words. We also accept short pieces of essential notes, identify them with consecu-
roughly 600 words. tive superscripts and list them in a separate
section titled NOTES at the end of the text.
2. Contributors should visit http://mc.manu
scriptcentral.com/heldref/tch for submis- 5. References should be listed alphabetically
sion information and guidelines. according to the author’s last name at the
end of the manuscript. In the text, reference
3. The Chicago Manual of Style, 15th ed., Univer-
citations should be in parentheses: (author,
sity of Chicago Press 2003, should be used as
date) or (date).
a style reference in preparing contributions
that require documentation. (For example, 6. Accepted contributions normally are pub-
a book reference would be in this format: lished within six months of acceptance.
Slavin, R. E. 1990. Cooperative learning: The- Authors receive two complimentary copies
ory, research, and practice. Englewood Cliffs, of the issue in which their article appears
NJ: Prentice Hall. A journal article would be and permission to reproduce additional
listed this way: Kapland, J. L., and E. D. Luck. copies of that article. Reprints are available
1977. The dropout phenomenon as a social through the journal.
problem. Educational Forum 47 (5): 41–56.)
7. We reserve the right to edit for content,
4. Avoid explanatory notes whenever possible grammar, and style.

Submit manuscripts to:

http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/heldref/tch
Phone (202) 296-6267 • Fax (202) 296-5149
www.heldref.org
View publication stats