~~

Republic of the Philippines

Department of Education

Region VIII

SAMAR NATIONAL PILOT OPPORTUNITY SCHOOL OF AGRICULTURE

SAN POLICARPO, EASTERN SAMAR

Lecture note-taking and Level of Attention Span of Grade 12 Students of

Samar National Pilot Opportunity School of Agriculture

For School Year 2022-2023

______________________________________

A Research Study

Presented to the

Faculty of the Senior High School Department

Samar National Pilot Opportunity School of Agriculture

San Policarpo, Eastern Samar

________________________________________

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements in

INQUIRIES, INVESTIGATION AND IMMERSION

Student Researchers:

Ravas, Ralph Jay M. | Obon, Maria Magdalena T. | Rauces, Jomar C. | Orque,

Judelyn N. | Sumallo, Eunice L. | Operario, Janna Paulene D. | | Fordaliza, John

Kerlie M.| Verana, Jubert N. | Rosario, Reynaldo B. | Orgasan, Mary Rose N.| Mugar,

Nicole Shane S. | Ortinez, Zaira J. | Porton, Glydel M. | Orque, Jonel N. |

12 Humanities and Social Sciences Mayer

MARLON ABUDA CELIS

June 2023

1
 Chapter I

INTRODUCTION

Background of the Study

As the world keeps advancing into modernity, education evolves

continuously. While adapting the progress of technology, changes and shifts

became prevalent. However, regardless such changes there remain a

significant practice in many academic fields, note-taking. Note-taking has

been a staple activity of academic life particularly in lecture courses, for

decades. In a survey conducted in 2019 reported that 88% of students found

taking notes “necessary for effective learning” (Morehead et al.,2019). Despite

its widespread use and essentiality, why does both instructors and students

take this practice for granted? This concern has fueled the interest of various

researchers on discerning the benefits of note-taking. Note-taking is the

practice of writing down or otherwise recording key points of information

(Nordaquist,2019).

Furthermore, Sakurai (2018) asserts that actively taking note during

lectures helps students focus and better understand the main concepts of

lecture or discussion. Note-group students’ attention and retention of

information were strengthened by the act of taking notes, which led to the

better score in the immediate recall test after the lecture.

However, due to the continuous progression of technology, such

progress and innovation have been adapted and associated in the teaching

and learning process with the use of computerized systems. Therefore,

traditional handwriting has become increasingly uncommon as the use of

2
electronic devices increases. Computers are part of the work routines of a

large number of professions, and electronic devices are used at all stages of

the education style as learning tools for academic purposes (to study to, to

complete assignments, to take classroom notes and search for information)

(Garcia et al., 2016).

Consequently, Microsoft (2015) points out that the

concentration/attention span of an average human has decreased from 12

seconds (in 2000) to 8.25 seconds in (in 2015) due to the effects of an

increasingly digitalized lifestyle on the brain. This is below the 9 seconds

average attention span of a goldfish. According to Good Therapy (2016),

attention span is a measure of the amount of time a person can stay focused

on a particular task, thought or conversation without being distracted.

Moreover, due to the external distractions during class which mainly

caused by gadgets and devices, attention lapses are therefore created.

Cheyne (2010) states that attention lapses are failures of sustained attention.

The lapses referred to are usually defined as temporary and often

brief shifts on conscious attention away from some primary tasks to unrelated

internal information processing.

Finally, as presented in the following literature review section, most

studies have been content to the benefits of note taking and its effect to the

academic performance of students. However, few of studies have attempted

to examine the association and relation of taking notes using the Traditional

(handwritten) and modern(typed) during lecture and the attention span of

senior high school (SHS) students. Hence, the purpose of this study is to

investigate the relationship between the mode of note taking and the attention

3
span of Grade 12 Students of Samar National Pilot Opportunity School of

Agriculture (SNPOSA).

Statement of the Problem

This study aims to explore and understand further the different modes

of note-taking on the Grade 12 Senior High School students of SNPOSA and

determine whether those methods have an association with their attention

span.

Specifically, it seeks to answer the following questions:

1.) What is the most efficient mode of taking notes used by the students in

terms of;

1.1) Traditional Note-taking (Handwritten)

1.2) Modern Note-taking (Smartphone typing)

2.) What is the level of attention span of the students?

3.) Is there a significant relationship between the mode of lecture note-

taking and the level of attention span of the students?

Research Hypotheses

H0: There is a significant relationship between lecture note-taking and

the attention span of Senior High School students.

H1: There is no significant relationship between lecture note-taking and

attention span of the Senior High School students

4
Scope and Delimitation

This study is a descriptive-correlational research focusing on the

association between the mode of lecture note-taking and the attention span of

the Grade 12 Students of Samar National Pilot Opportunity School of

Agriculture (SNPOSA) of the academic year 2022-2023.

Furthermore, the study delimits itself to the use of various modes of

note-taking, specifically the traditional and modern mode of taking notes and

did not attempt to measure this variable in other environment. Hence, it

excluded other variables which are not covered by the study.

Significance of the Study

The outcome of this study can be used as a reference whether the

note-taking modes plays a significant association with the attention span of

students. This will be beneficial to both students and teachers due to the fact

that by improving the attention span of the learners the discussion/class

lectures become more comprehensive, interactive, and productive.

Specifically, this study is beneficial to the following:

To the students. This study could be an aid to students in determining

the note-taking mode that is beneficial and suits their preference during class

lectures. Furthermore, the results of this study will benefit the learners by

giving them information and awareness on how taking notes during lecture

can improve their attention span in class.

Teachers. The results of this study will benefit the teachers for it will

serve as an eye opener for the teachers in realizing the effectiveness of the

different note-taking method during lectures in enhancing the attention span of

5
their students. Moreover, this study may assist them in encouraging the

learners in practicing note-taking as a means of not just improving the

attention span of the students but also helps them in understanding the

discussion better.

School. This study will serve as an instrument for the school on how

they can be effective in aiding the student’s learning and uplifting the student’s

academic achievement through lecture note-taking. The findings of this study

will help the school to distinguish the efficient mode of taking notes during

lecture for the students. So that they can utilize it in enhancing the attention

span of Senior High School students.

Future Researchers. The result of this study will provide relevant data

to other researchers to help the progression of their respective studies by

incorporating information related to lecture note-taking and attention span of

students.

Definition of Terms

This study delineated terminologies to achieve clarity of essential

concepts as applied in the study. For a better understanding of this study the

following terms are given definition.

Attention. Is the ability to actively process specific information in the

environment while tuning out other details (Cherry,2021). Also defined as

concentration of awareness on some phenomenon to the exclusion of other

stimuli (Britannica). In this study, it is the students’ focus or the concentration

of the mind of the students on the lecture and as well on the note-taking

process.

6
 Attention Lapses. Are failures of sustained attention (Cheyne, 2010).

In this study, these are the interval/gap of when students’ attention are

disengaged from the lecture and discussion

Attention Span. Is a measure of the amount of time someone can stay

focused on a particular task, thought, or conversation without being distracted

(GoodTherapy,2016). As used in this study, it is the length of time students

can concentrate their attention on the lecture.

Note-taking. The practice of writing down or otherwise recording key

points of information (Nordquist,2019). In this study, it captures the student’s

attention and improves his/her comprehension.

Retention. Is the continued use or possession of something or

someone (Cambridge Dictionary). As used in this study, it is the ability of the

students to retain collected information in the lecture and later use it in the

assessment.

Shift. Is a change in something or adjust in the way something is done

(Vocabulary.com) In this study, it is the transition of traditional to modern

mode of taking notes during lecture.

7
 Chapter II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURES AND STUDIES

This chapter provided literatures and studies taken from various

authors that are connected to our study. Thus, providing more information and

giving an in-depth explication to our study. These would support our study to

make it solidly reliable.

Related Literatures

Lecture Note-taking

Note-taking is a skill that is used by individuals almost every day and in

different situations. Writing down information helps individuals to remember

information and serves as a permanent record or external memory. It aids

students' learning by allowing individuals to process and retain large amounts

of information. Note-taking influences learning by helping students to attend to

information and allows them to personalize the information they learn. Also,

note-taking during lectures increases students’ attention and facilitates

encoding of information to long-term memory. Several studies have shown

that review is an important function of note-taking and aids in recall of lecture

content. Note-taking is closely linked with one’s cognitive abilities, such as

working memory, and facilitates learning and growth. Note-taking is often first

introduced as a tool for learning in the academic setting and can be

generalized in both personal and professional pursuits. Due to disparities in

8
development and learning, note-taking is not an innate ability and may need

to be explicitly taught (Boyle & Forchelli, 2020).

Furthermore, note-taking is the act of selecting and cryptically and

idiosyncratically transcribing important information that can be used as a

personal memory aid for later reference, review, and/or memorization by the

note-taker. Notes can contain information abstracted from the environment

(e.g., from teachers, judges, lawyers, textbooks, or other documents, or

otherwise present in the environment such as diagrams and other visuospatial

information) and personal reflections (e.g., ideas impressions, opinions,

hypotheses). Further, note-taking can be a very time-constrained and

cognitively challenging activity, especially in the case of lecture note-taking.

Lectures are typically fast paced and the information presented is often new,

frequently very dense, and disappears quickly. Finally, notes are related to

different goals. In school, note-taking is a critical part of “studying”, an

isolated, self-directed activity initiated by the student that involves setting

goals, planning, searching for and integrating relevant information, enacting

strategies for understanding, remembering and time management, and

monitoring progress often for the purpose of performing well academically

(Peverly & Wolf,2019). Hence, note-taking may be regarded as cognitive aid

and an external store of the brain that enhance organization of information

and prevents the brain from running out of cognitive resources (Lee,2017).

Moreover, according to Peverly & Wolf (2019), in note-taking, students

must hold lecture information in verbal working memory (a limited capacity

store for retaining information for a brief period while doing something else),

use cognitive resources such as verbal ability and/or background knowledge

9
to select, construct, and/or transform the information, transcribe it (via writing

or typing) before the information in working memory is forgotten, and attend to

the lecture over long periods of time. Research has found that note-taking is

comparable in difficulty to the process of translating, planning, and revising

during writing and more effortful than reading or engaging in intentional or

incidental learning tasks. Thus, note-taking skill may be related to several

variables: handwriting speed, working memory, verbal ability, background

knowledge, and the ability to attend, among others. Inadequate lecture notes

could result from a breakdown in any one of these variables.

Additionally, researchers have identified two primary ways in which

classroom note-taking is beneficial: encoding and external storage (Di Vesta

& Gray, 1972; Kiewra,1985). The encoding benefit (also termed the process

benefit) refers to the learning that results from the act of taking notes, as the

information which was perceived is then being produced by the learner.

Sometimes called the generation effect, it has been suggested that

information that has been produced is more likely to be remembered, due to

the notion that production necessarily requires recall, planning, and encoding

(Rosner et al., 2013), whereas the external storage benefit (also termed the

product benefit) refers to the benefit that comes from studying the notes, it is

the second feature thought to make note-taking superior to passive listening,

as each instance of exposure serves to shore up the representation of

semantic memory in the brain. Also, the educational psychology literature

suggests note-taking affects academic performance through an “encoding

function “, the process of generalizing personalized, non-verbatim notes.

Encoding requires inference, integration and structuring of material being

10
presented. Learning occurs because students engage in the process of

selecting important information and summarizing it, all while still actively

listening to the lecture (Beck,2014).

Finally, Umejima et al. (2021) asserts that effective note-taking method

may vary based on individual differences, such as typing speed, note-taking

preference, and ability to disregard distraction. Specifically, research on the

cognitive and demographic characteristics of good lecture notetakers has

found skills that are positively, significantly, and relatively consistently related

to the quantity and quality of lecture notes: (1) handwriting speed

(Gleason,2012; Peverly et al., 2013; Peverly, Garner, & Vekaria, 2014); (2)

verbal ability (Gleason, 2012; Peverly et al., 2013; Reddington, Peverly, &

Block, 2015; Vekaria & Peverly, 2018); (3) sustained attention (Gleason,

2012; Peverly et al., 2014; Schacter & Szpunar, 2015; Vekaria & Peverly,

2018); (4) field-independence/field dependence and (5) gender, where

females have been found to be better note-takers than males (Reddington, et

al., 2015).

Traditional Note-taking (Handwritten)

Handwritten notes are a powerful tool for encrypting embodied

cognition and in turn supporting the brain’s capacity for retrieval of

information. And secondly, when you take notes by hand, your hands create a

robust external memory storage: your notebook. Furthermore, taking notes by

hand involves cognitive engagement in summarizing, paraphrasing,

organizing, concept, and vocabulary mapping — in short, manipulating and

11
transforming information that leads to deeper understanding

(Roessingh,2020).

However, O’ Malley et al. (2017) states that taking notes by hand

requires greater efforts than taking them electronically. Also, for handwritten

forms of note-taking, there is an inherent division of attention (i.e., split

between attending to the presented material and engaging in a recording

task) may render note-taking less useful than if the instructor were to provide

summaries of the lecture content.

Conversely, some studies cited the following advantages of taking

notes by hand over keyboard: (1) Taking notes by hand through the use of

pencil and paper enable users to summarize and reframe it into their own

words while encoding, ensuring deeper and more solid encoding via the

active process of making notes; (2) longhand note-taking enhances the

performance of students on recognition of memorized words; (3) superiority of

longhand note-taking for conceptual understanding is related to the use of

paper for writing/reading since a behavioral study reported the superiority of

paper to computer screens in terms of reading comprehension which

indicated the importance of visual and tactile cues for perceiving constant

physical sizes and spatial locations, because ‘‘the material substrate of paper

provides physical, tactile, spatiotemporally fixed cues to the length of the text’’

(Mangen et al., 2013).

Modern Note-taking (Smartphone Typing)

12
 Some studies highlighted the cognitive processes associated with

digital writing, such as working memory (Bui & Myerson,2014), and the qwerty

effect (Jasmin & Casasanto,2012). The qwerty effect refers to the influence of

the position of letters on the keyboard and the meaning of words. Taking

notes in classroom facilitates learning and a positive correlation exists

between the amount of classroom notes taken and the amount of information

encoded during the class (Bui, Myerson & Hale, 2013). This advantage can

be explained by the word generation effect which indicates that when

information is re-elaborated by a student it is more easily remembered than

when it is only heard or read. In contrast, Roessingh (2020) states that note-

taking associated with keyboarding involves taking notes verbatim in a way

that does not involve processing information, and so have called this “non-

generative” note-taking.

Furthermore, Stacy and Cain (2015) enumerated the 3 positive

attributes of digital note-taking namely; speed, legibility and searchability.

Tablet computers have farther hastened the transition toward digital note-

taking. One benefit of tablets for note-taking is the ability to hand write notes,

add drawings, and highlight text while still retaining the digital format. In

addition, tablet computers may reduce or eliminate the cost of printing, reduce

the amount of paper one has to carry, decrease the need to transport a

heavier and more cumbersome laptop and support the organization of notes.

Meanwhile, Lee (2021) argues that it is inaccurate to assume that

smartphone input is synonymous with computer typing, as there are several

key distinctions which affect the cognitive processes required for both. While

smartphones mimic the abilities of personal computers in most respects (e.g.,

13
most popular apps are available in PC or mobile form, including productivity

apps like messaging and word processing suites), the two pieces of

technology are distinct in several ways. Apart from processing power, which is

irrelevant in the scope of the current study, the difference in size is the most

obvious difference with direct consequences to note-taking. In cognitive

psychology terms, writing is called a unified activity in that a writer’s visual

focus (i.e., the visual space) is on the tip of the pen as it flows across the page

(i.e., the motor space). In the case of a fluent typist, however, the visual and

motor spaces are disparate; the writer views the monitor while the hands

operate the keyboard out of view. It is unclear where a smartphone lands on

this spectrum, as the compact size reduces the distance between the visual

and motor spaces. In addition, even people who are fluent typists on

computers can not apply this skill to the tiny keypad of a smartphone, often

being forced to look at their fingers while they tap out the letters. Tapping

techniques also vary widely, with users using one or both thumbs, an index

finger for tapping, or gesture keyboard entry (e.g., swipe-to-type) which allows

the typist to continuously slide from one letter to the next without releasing

contact from the screen (see also Palin et al., 2019).

Attention Span

MacMillan et al. (2018) states that attention failures occur when

attention is shifted from task at hand by distractors from the environment or

internal thoughts, at the expense of failures in intended actions.

Furthermore, Georgiou (2015), enumerated the factors affecting a

person’s continuous attention: (1) Reliance on technological devices; (2)

Continuous-partial attention (CPA); (3) increased stress and (4) information

14
overload. CPA is “where children and adults devote less-concentrated

attention to two or more tasks that are attempted simultaneously without one’s

full attention committed to any single one of those endeavors”. One of the

outcomes of CPA is the loss in performance that can even cause

‘performance-paralysis’. ‘Performance paralysis’ is when either of the tasks

can be done instinctively, without “actively and consciously thinking about

each step in the process of execution”, before the other task can be effectively

carried out (Wesson, 2011).

Unfortunately, digital distraction has become a chronic behavior

problem for university students that interferes with their attention and learning

within personalized learning environment. For example, while studying,

students may be attracted to social media notifications or may have lingering

thoughts that friends might respond to their messages (Wu and Xie,2018).

Moreover, (Wu and Xie,2018) states that when we faced with more

than one source of information or task that need processing, we are required

to exert both selective attention and divided attention Selective attention is the

ability to process only one specific stimulus while ignoring other stimuli, as in

the early selection theory of attention (Broadbent, 1958). Divided attention, in

turn, refers to the ability to divide attention resources and process multiple

tasks simultaneously when faced with multiple stimuli (Kahneman,1973).

Multitasking can be viewed as a kind of divided attention. Defined as

attending to different sources of information and switching tasks across

multiple media forms (Ophir, Nass, & Wagner, 2009), multitasking may or may

not impair performance.

15
Related Studies

A study of Singh et al. (2011), “Evaluating the readability of privacy

policies in mobile environments”, suggests that while the reduced size of

smartphones thus affects the way we input text, they reported that reading on

the smaller screens is also qualitatively different from computer’s wide screen.

Reading comprehension has been suggested to be significantly lower when

text is provided on mobile devices as compared to desktop monitors. The

authors suggest that due to the limited amount of information able to be

viewed at once, memory and attention must be diverted to understand things

not currently being displayed. Scrolling back and forth to review previous

sections also hampers concentration and thus, comprehension (Nyugaku et

al., 2017).

In a study conducted by Bui and Myerson (2013), “Note-taking with

Computers: Exploring Alternative Strategies for Improved Recall”, investigated

the effectiveness of laptops in the classroom, wherein the researchers

compared computer-based note-taking to handwritten note-taking with respect

to recall performance. Participants listened to an 11-minute passage from a

non-fiction book about 1930’s popular film, which showed three varying

manifestations in three experiments conducted. Experiment 1 revealed that

when students took notes by hand and were tested immediately after the

lecture, both strategies (organized and transcribe) were equally effective for

recall. When students took notes using computer, however, trying to

transcribe the lecture resulted in better test performance than taking

organized notes better, in fact, than using either strategy but taking notes by

hand. The results of Experiment 2 revealed that if participants did not study

16
their notes after taking them, the initial advantage that came from use of the

transcription strategy with computer was gone 24 hours later and those who

took organized did significantly better. This is because transcribing

information involves shallow processing, whereas organizing information

involves deeper, semantic processing, which promotes long-term retention.

Lastly, for participants in Experiment 3 who briefly studied their notes shortly

after the lecture and who were tested 24 hour later, transcription was once

again the most effective strategy. Because using this strategy with a computer

resulted in greater note-quantity than organized note-taking strategy. Overall,

results suggested that computerized note-taking produces better recall

performance than handwritten note-taking. Also, when brief study time is

allowed, verbatim note-taking is more beneficial for delayed.

On the contrary, in a study of Mueller and Oppenheimer (2014), “The

Pen is Mightier than Keyboard: Advantages of Longhand over Laptop Note

Taking”, in a series of three laboratory experiments, they found that electronic

note-taking resulted in reduced performance in answering conceptual

questions than those who did note-taking by hand though there was no

difference when comparing results on factual questions. They reported that,

“whereas taking more notes can be beneficial, laptop note-taker’s tendency to

transcribe lectures verbatim, rather than processing information and reframing

it in their own words, is detrimental to learning”. Meanwhile, in a study “Laptop

versus longhand note taking: effects on lecture notes and achievement”,

conducted by Luo et al. (2018) showed no significant difference in outcomes

when examining students in a laboratory setting, paying specific attention to

student recording of images versus verbal content.

17
 Moreover, in a study, “Comparing factual recall of tapped vs.

handwritten text”, conducted by Lee (2021) which investigated the relative

transcription speed and rate of factual recall of 136 Japanese college-level

students grouped into longhand writers and smartphone typists. The results

suggested that writing on paper was significantly faster than smartphone entry

for English (the L2 of the participants). Moreover, longhand writers also had

significantly greater rates of information recall than their smartphone

counterparts to a medium effect size, contradicting previous studies which

compared handwriting to computer typing and found either an advantage for

typists (e.g., Bui et al., 2013) or no statistical difference in factual recall

(e.g.,Mueller & Oppenheimer, 2014).

Equally, in a study by Umejima et al. (2021), “Paper Notebook vs.

Mobile Devices: Brain Activation Differences during Memory Retrieval”,

demonstrated that brain activations related to memory, visual imagery, and

language during the retrieval of specific information, as well as the deeper

encoding of that information, were stronger in participants using a paper

notebook than in those using electronic devices. Also, the significant

superiority in both accuracy and activations for the Note group suggested that

the use of a paper notebook promoted the acquisition of rich encoding

information and/or spatial information of real papers and that this information

could be utilized as effective retrieval clues, leading to higher activations in

these specific regions.

Explicitly, in a study of Peverly and Sumoski (2013), “The relationship

of handwriting speed, working memory, language comprehension and outlines

to lecture note-taking and test-taking among college students”, found that

18
handwriting speed and verbal ability were significantly associated with the

quantity and quality of text notes. Collectively, this data suggests that student

who write faster have higher level of verbal skill and sustained attention, are

female and (possibly) have higher levels of field-independence take better

notes.

On the other hand, according to research posted on the USA’s National

Center for Biotechnology Information, the average continuous attention span

of Americans focusing on an Internet site in 2013 was eight seconds, a

decrease in four seconds from 2000. Their research also revealed that 25% of

teens forget major details of close friends and relatives, that an office worker

checks their email inbox an average number of 30 times per hour and only 4%

of people spent longer than 10 minutes on a single webpage (Attention Span

Statistics, 2015). On the contrary, in the study of McCall (2014), “8-Second

Attention Span?”, Dukette and Cornish states that, “Attention spans in

children may be 3 to 5 minutes, increasing as we age to adults being about 20

minutes".

Furthermore, in a study of GDC Team (2014), “Why Daydreaming is

Critical to Effective Learning”, reported that Continuous Partial Attention

(CPA) is a scientific proof that the brain finds it very difficult to multi-task

(which is really just fast switching your attention between two or more tasks).

“The brain doesn’t multitask,” said Daniel Levitin, author and professor of

psychology, behavioral neuroscience and music at McGill University on

KQED’s Forum program. “It engages in sequential tasking or unitasking,

where we are shifting rapidly from one thing to another without realizing it”.

The brain is actually fracturing time into ever-smaller parts and focusing on

19
each thing individually. This is known to be detrimental to productivity and

creativity.

Moreover, in a study of Hollinsworth (2014), “The Goldfish Effect: How

Short Attention Spans are Killing your Productivity”, reported that when a

person is stressed, the stress takes a lot of resources from the brain and

interferes with the capacity to encode any new information.

Accordingly, in a study, “Brains Overloaded Daily with more Info than a

Laptop can Handle”, conducted by news.com.au (2015), revealed that the

average person is bombarded with around 100,500 words a day. That is 23

words per second! Roger Bohn, co-author of the study How Much Information,

said: “Our attention is being chopped into shorter intervals and that is

probably not good for thinking deeper thoughts”. This has only increased over

time with the amount of electronic devices that are throwing information our

way and often simultaneously. Our ability to think deeply or creatively has

been compromised.

We deconstructed this problem by narrowly focusing on pencil-and-

paper versus mobile phone note-taking, employing a within-subject and

correlational design in the classroom. We will not consider how students use

their notes nor what they include in them. Hence the originality of our study is

that it compares handwriting to smartphone typing, a companion that has

been greatly overlooked in the literature.

Theoretical Framework

This study is anchored from Pavlov’s Theory of Classical Conditioning.

This theory of Classical Conditioning was first proposed by Ivan Petrovich

20
Pavlov, a Russian physiologist in his paper in 1928, where he broadens that

behaviors are learned by connecting a neutral stimulus with a positive one

(Beard,2021). This theory proposes classical conditioning, which is define as

learning by association, whereby a neutral stimulus, by virtue of its occurrence

in close time and space with a natural stimulus that gives rise to a natural

response, becomes capable of eliciting that natural response, even in

absence of the natural stimulus. Classical conditioning is applicable only for

reflexive and spontaneous responses, and not for voluntary responses. This

theory suggested that, when the dog was exposed to new stimuli (food) the

salivation was a learned response. Pavlov's dog subjects were responding to

the sight of the research assistants' white lab coats, which the animals had

come to associate with the presentation of food (Cherry,2022).

Moreover, during the phases of Classical Conditioning learning

process, it undergoes four essential elements; (1) Unconditioned stimulus

(UCS): The natural stimulus that elicits a natural response. In Pavlov’s

experiment, the meat powder was the UCS; (2) Unconditioned response

(UCR): The natural response elicited to the natural stimulus. In Pavlov’s

experiment, the salivation was the UCR; (3) Conditioned stimulus (CS): The

neutral stimulus that does not naturally elicit the target response but may do

so after being associated with the UCS for a number of times. In Pavlov’s

experiment, the light or the sound of the bell was the CS; (4) Conditioned

response (CR): The target response similar to the UCR that originally

occurred to the UCS only, but after conditioning occurred to CS, even in

absence of the UCS. In Pavlov’s experiment, the salivation that occurred in

21
response to the light or bell was the CR. You must remember here that the

UCR and the CR are similar but not the same. Pavlov noticed that the amount

of salivation was less in response to the light / bell in comparison to the

original salivation in response to meat powder.

On the context of note-taking and attention span of the students, the

lecture/discussion undertaken within the class may serve as unconditional

stimulus and the quality and quantity of notes taken using the two modes of

taking notes during lectures (Handwritten and Typed) may serve as the

unconditional response. On the other hand, the possible distracting factors

during the conduct of note-taking (e.g. Facebook Notifications, Messenger

Chats etc. (Typed) and misspelled words that needed to be corrected

(Handwritten) may serve as the conditional stimulus meanwhile the process of

solving such minor technicalities/difficulties without being distracted from the

primary task or the source material (lecture) may serve as the conditional

response of the students.

22
Conceptual Framework

Lecture Note-taking

a.) Traditional

(Handwritten) Level of Attention Span

b.) Modern (Smartphone

Typing)
23
Figure 1. This figure shows the relationship between Modes of Lecture Note-
taking and the Level Attention Span of the Senior High School students.

Chapter III

METHODOLOGY

This chapter described and discussed how the researchers gathered

the data and information that is used in the study. It described the

respondents and focus of research. It also discussed the instruments that is

utilized, research design, research setting, research instruments, validation of

the instruments, data collection procedure and data analysis.

Research Design

This study utilized descriptive-correlational research design in which

the researchers is interested in describing relationships among variables,

without seeking to establish causal connection (Creswell,2012). The purpose

24
of conducting this type of research is to determine the relationship between

two closely related woven entities and to understand how one entity

influences the other. Through the use of this method, naturally occurring

relationship between two entities is analyzed. Before correlating the modes of

lecture note-taking and the attention span of the Senior High School students,

the two variables have been described individually. Hence, the researchers

utilized descriptive-correlation design.

Research Locale

The study is conducted at Samar National Pilot Opportunity School of

Agriculture (SNPOSA), located at Barangay Baras San Policarpo, Eastern

Samar. This study is exclusive only in students in Grade 12. The researchers

chose this research locale to determine whether lecture note-taking has any

significant relationship with the attention span of Senior High School student

from Samar National Pilot Opportunity School of Agriculture (SNPOSA).

Figure 2. This figure shows the map of San Policarpo showing Samar

National Pilot Opportunity School of Agriculture, the research locale of the

study.

25
Respondents of the Study

The respondents of this study are the Grade 12 Senior High School

student in Samar National Pilot Opportunity School of Agriculture (SNPOSA)

namely, Humanities and Social Sciences (HUMSS), Accountancy Business

Management (ABM), General Academic Strand (GAS) and Technical

Vocational Strand (TVL) which are Automotive Servicing, Animal & Crop

Production, Beauty Care, Hairdressing & Tailoring and Cookery enrolled for

the academic year 2022-2023, the total number of population is 265.

However, there are only 160 in total to be considered as the respondents of

the conduct of this research based on the result from the Slovin’s formula: n =

N/(1+Ne2). The respondents of the study are determined through stratified

random sampling technique.

Strata Population Sample

HUMSS 1 - Descartes 40 24
HUMSS 2 - Euclid 38 23
HUMSS 3 - Mayer 43 26
ABM - Archimedes 13 8
GAS - Aristotle 30 18
Automotive – 34 21
Pythagoras & Ptolemy
Animal & Crop 32 19
Production – Pascal &
Plato
Food and Beverages 35 21
Services, Tailoring,
Beauty Care &
Hairdressing,
Total 265 160
Table 1. Table showing the strata’s respective population and sample size.

Sampling Technique

26
 The researchers utilized stratified random sampling in obtaining the

number of respondents. In this type of sampling, researchers divided a

population into homogenous subpopulations referred to as strata (the plural of

stratum) based on specific characteristics where every member of the

population being studied belong to the exactly one stratum. Furthermore,

each stratum is sampled using another probability sampling method

specifically simple random sampling, allowing researchers to estimate

statistical measures for each subpopulation (Thomas,2022). Stratified random

sampling ensure that every characteristic is properly represented in the

sample. Thus, increasing the validity of the study, as well as avoiding

research biases like under coverage bias. In generating samples, the

researchers acquired a complete list of the total population from the research

locale and chose 160 respondents systematically.

Instrument of the Study

The researchers utilized a survey questionnaire to correlate lecture

note-taking to the level of attention span of the Grade 12 students. The

questionnaire that is utilized is adapted and modified from a study and a

scale. Primary, the questionnaire that is utilized for the lecture note-taking is

the research entitled An Investigation in Note-Taking Strategies for High

School Biology Students by Smith (2017). Subsequently, the Moss Attention

Rating Scale (Whyte & Hart, n.d.) is a self-report that measures the attention

span of individuals, it is utilized in several studies that tackle cognitive function

studies. MARS was a more viable scale for this study because of the low

question count and accurate attention span measurement.

27
 The survey questionnaire encompasses three varying parts. Primarily,

it contains queries concerning the demographic profile of the respondents.

The second part are twenty (20) statements with regards to the respondents’

mode of taking notes during lectures which they will answer using the

following scales: (5) strongly agree, (4) agree, (3) neutral, (2) disagree, and

(1) strongly disagree. The said statements are divided into two groups,

traditional and modern/digital note-taking. The third and last part of the

questionnaire includes ten (10) statements that revolves around the level of

attention span of the students. The respondents checked the description

based on the frequency that suits them using the following scales: (5)

definitely true, (4) true, for the most part, (3) sometimes, true, sometimes false

(2) false for the most part, and (1) definitely false.

Ethical Consideration

The researchers gave the utmost importance and respect to its

respondents. For the fluid progress of the study, voluntary participation of the

participants was vital and was the researchers’ priority. Furthermore, the

participants had the will to withdraw from the study at any moment of time if

they wish to do so. This was done by creating a written consent form if they

do wish to participate or not after giving a brief explanation of the study. The

researchers also highlighted the respondents’ privacy and secrecy were of the

highest importance, sole reason why respondent’s name was not included in

28
the questionnaire. Lastly, the researchers assured that the gathered data

were only for research and academic purposes.

Data Gathering Procedure

After the approval of the panelist of the research proposal, the

researchers asked for approval letter from the principal through a formal

communication letter. The researchers also asked for consent of the

respondents for their willingness to be part of the conduct of the study. After

the approval of the respondents, the researchers informed the respondents

about the study and the direction the survey. Afterwards, the researchers

distributed the questionnaire to the selected respondents. After the collection

of data, the researchers expressed their gratitude for the participants’

responses. Subsequently, the researchers organized the collected data. The

researchers are not allowed to disclose the information that is gathered from

their respondents. Lastly, the researchers applied data analysis.

Measurement of Variables

To facilitate the computation of data, the following scales are used and

its corresponding interpretation. For the lecture note-taking and attention

span, the researchers adapted the 5 point – Likert Scale. A Likert scale is the

most widely used psychometric approach to ask the audience about their

opinion or feeling in survey research using usually 5 or 7 answer options

range. Respondents can give a negative, neutral, or positive response to a

statement. They are usually used to gauge agreement, importance, or

likelihood. A Likert scale assumes that the strength/intensity of an attitude is

29
linear, i.e., on a continuum from strongly agree to strongly disagree, and

makes assumption that attitudes can be measured. Likert scales allow

quantitative data to be collected hence they can be analyzed more easily

(Solmaz ,2020).

Traditional Lecture Note-taking. This variable was scaled as follows.

Code Mean Description

Interpretation

5 4.21 – 5.00 Strongly Agree Very High

Acquired

4 3.41 – 4.20 Agree High Acquired

3 2.61 – 3.40 Neutral Moderately

Acquired

2 1.81 – 2.60 Disagree Low Acquired

1 1.00 – 1.80 Strongly Disagree Very Low

Acquired

Modern/Digital Lecture Note-taking. This variable was scaled as follows.

Code Mean Description

Interpretation

5 4.21 – 5.00 Strongly Agree Very High

Acquired

30
 4 3.41 – 4.20 Agree High Acquired

3 2.61 – 3.40 Neutral Moderately

Acquired

2 1.81 – 2.60 Disagree Low Acquired

1 1.00 – 1.80 Strongly Disagree Very Low

Acquired

Attention Span. This variable was scaled as follows.

Code Mean Description Interpretation

5 4.21 – 5.00 Definitely true Very High Acquired

4 3.41 – 4.20 True, for the most part High Acquired

3 2.61 – 3.40 Sometimes true, Moderately

Acquired

sometimes false

2 1.81 – 2.60 False, for the most part Low Acquired

1 1.00 – 1.80 Definitely False Very Low Acquired

Analysis of Data

The data is analyzed through identifying the weighted mean, frequency

counts and percentage using the Pearson’s-r correlation in determining the

relationship between the mode of lecture note-taking and the level of attention

span of the Grade 12 students.

Weighted Mean equation is a statistical method which calculates the

average by multiplying the weights with its respective mean and taking its

sum. It is a type of average in which weights are assigned to individual values

31
in order to determine the relative importance of each observation (Keni,

2021). Frequency statistics simply count the number of times that each

variable occurs, such as the number of males and females within the sample.

Frequency and percentage statistics is used to represent most personal

information (Korb,2013).

Person’s correlation coefficient is the test statistics that measures the

statistical relationship between two continuous variables. It is known as the

best method of measuring the association between variables of interest for it

is based on the method of covariance. It gives information about the

magnitude of the association, or correlation, as well as the direction of the

relationship (Statistic Solutions,2022).

In order to determine how strong, the relationship is between lecture

note-taking and attention span, a formula must be followed to produce what is

referred to as the coefficient value. The coefficient value can range between -

1.00 and 1.00. If the coefficient value is in the negative range, then the

relationship between the variables is negatively correlated, or as one value

increases, the other decreases. If the value is in the positive range, that

means the relationship between the variables is positively correlated, or both

values increase or decrease together.

32
 Chapter IV

PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

This chapter presents the data gathered, the results of the statistical

analysis done and interpretation of the findings. These are presented in

tabular presentations following the sequence of the enumerated research

problem regarding the Lecture Note-taking and Level of Attention Span of

Senior High School Students of Samar National Pilot Opportunity School of

Agriculture.

I. Lecture Note-taking

1.1 Traditional Note-taking (Handwritten)

Table 2 indicates the respondents’ responses with regards to traditional

note-taking. It can be derived from the table that among the 10 statements,

item 1 “I find this method effective in remembering and understanding the

concept of the lesson” got the highest mean of 4.2 and further interpreted as

High Acquired. Moreover, Item 6 “Notes that I took using pen and paper

helped me review and study for tests/quizzes.” achieved the second highest

mean of 4.08 and is also interpreted as High Acquired. Item 9 “Taking notes

using pen and paper was more convenient for me” got the third highest mean

of 3.89 and is interpreted as high acquired. Item 10, “I am more engaged in

the lecture when I take notes using pen and paper”, achieved the fourth

highest mean of 3.85 and is interpreted as high acquired. Item 3, “taking notes

using pen and paper helped me pay attention in this class”, achieved the fifth

highest mean with 3.80 and is interpreted as high acquired. Item 5, “taking

notes using pen and paper helped me remember information, even if I didn’t

33
 study the notes.” got the sixth highest mean of 3.73 which interpreted as high

acquired. Item number 7, “while taking notes using pen and paper, I

developed my good handwriting skills.” achieved the seventh highest mean of

3.69 and is interpreted as high acquired. Item 2, “I didn’t mind taking notes in

class using this mode of note-taking.” got the eighth highest mean of 2.98 and

is interpreted as moderately acquired. Item 4, “taking notes using pen and

paper was stressful for me”, got the ninth highest mean of 2.61 and is

interpreted as moderately acquired. On the contrary, item 8, “taking notes

using pen and paper distracted me from paying close attention to the

information presented in the lectures.” achieved the lowest mean of 2.8 and is

interpreted as moderately acquired. Overall, it obtained a grand mean of 3.64

interpreted as high acquired.

Table 2. Traditional Note-taking of the Respondents

Traditional Note-taking Mean Description Interpretation

1.) I find this method effective in

remembering and 4.2 Agree High Acquired
understanding the concept of
the lesson.
2.) I didn’t mind taking notes in 2.98 Neutral Moderately Acquired
class using this mode of note-
taking.
3.) Taking notes using pen and 3.80
paper helped me pay attention Agree High Acquired
in this class.
4.) Taking notes using pen and 2.61 Neutral Moderately Acquired
paper was stressful for me.
5.) Taking notes using pen and
paper helped me remember 3.73 Agree High Acquired
information, even if I didn’t
study the notes.
6.) Notes that I took using pen and 4.08
paper helped me review and Agree High Acquired
study for tests/quizzes.
7.) While taking notes using pen 3.69 Agree High Acquired

34
 and paper, I developed my
good handwriting skills.
8.) Taking notes using pen and 2.8 Moderately Acquired
paper distracted me from Neutral
paying close attention to the
information presented in the
lectures.
9.) Taking notes using pen and 3.89 Agree High Acquired
paper was more convenient for
me.
10.) I am more engaged in
the lecture when I take notes 3.85 Agree High Acquired
using pen and paper.

Grand Mean 3.64 Agree High Acquired

Given the result from overall mean, which is 3.64, this clearly implies

that the respondents experienced and recognize the benefits and advantages

of using traditional mode of note-taking during lecture. Moreover, as shown in

the item with highest mean this indicates that they find this method effective in

remembering and understanding the concept of the lesson.

In a study of Aguilar-Roca, Williams, and O’Dowd (2012) found that

about 50 percent of students prefer to consistently take notes on paper; about

22 percent preferred laptop. Furthermore, the benefits of note-taking in 

academic contexts have been widely recognized among L1 learners. Notes 

serve as an external memory, which  can  be  useful  for  reviewing,  test 

preparation,  and  other tasks （Hartley,  2002;  Kiewra,  Benton,  Kim,  Risch, 

&  Christensen,  1995; Laidlaw, Skok, & McLaughlin, 1993; Williams et al., 

2013). In addition, Mueller and Oppenheimer (2014) found that those who

took longhand notes wrote significantly fewer words (Study 1, d = 1.4; Study

2, d = 1.11) than those in the laptop group but wrote a greater percentage of

their notes in their own words (Study 1, d = 0.94; Study 2, d = 1.12),4 which is

typically related to better understanding. There were no differences between

35
groups on factual test questions but those who took longhand notes

performed significantly better on conceptual application.

1.2 Modern/Digital Note-taking (Smartphone Typing)

Table 3 denotes the respondents’ responses with regards to modern or

digital note-taking. It is evident in the table that among the 10 statements, item

1, “I find this method effective in remembering and understanding the concept

of the lesson.” got the highest mean of 3.90 and further interpreted as High

Acquired. Moreover, Item 6 “Notes that I took by typing helped me review and

study for tests/quizzes.” achieved the second highest mean of 3.56 and is

also interpreted as High Acquired. Item 8 “Taking notes using my smartphone

distracted me from paying close attention to the information presented in the

lectures” got the third highest mean of 3.43 and is interpreted as high

acquired. Item 5, “Taking notes using my smartphone helped me remember

information, even if I didn’t study the notes”, achieved the fourth highest mean

of 3.42 and is interpreted as high acquired. Item 7, “While taking notes using

my smartphone, I developed my digital writing skills”, achieved the fifth

highest mean with 3.28 and is interpreted as moderately acquired. Item 10, “I

am more engaged in the lecture when I take notes using my smartphone.” got

the sixth highest mean of 3.28 which interpreted as moderately acquired. Item

9, “Taking notes by typing was more convenient for me.” achieved the

seventh highest mean of 3.25 and is interpreted as moderately acquired. Item

2, “I didn’t mind taking notes in class using this mode of note-taking.” got the

eighth highest mean of 3.13 and is interpreted as moderately acquired. Item

3, “Taking notes by typing/ using my smartphone helped me pay attention in

36
 class.” got the ninth highest mean of 3.05 and is interpreted as moderately

acquired. On the contrary, item 4, “Taking notes by typing was stressful for

me.” achieved the lowest mean of 2.95 and is interpreted as moderately

acquired. Overall, it obtained a grand mean of 3.43 which is interpreted as

high acquired.

Table. 3 Modern/Digital Note-taking of the Respondents

Modern Note-taking Mean Description Interpretation

1.) I find this method effective in
remembering and understanding 3.90 Agree High Acquired
the concept of the lesson.
2.) I didn’t mind taking notes in class 3.13 Neutral Moderately Acquired
using this mode of note-taking.
3.) Taking notes by typing/ using my
smartphone helped me pay 3.05 Neutral Moderately Acquired
attention in class.
4.) Taking notes by typing was 2.95 Neutral Moderately Acquired
stressful for me.
5.) Taking notes using my smartphone
helped me remember information, 3.42 Agree High Acquired
even if I didn’t study the notes.
6.) Notes that I took by typing helped
me review and study for 3.56 Agree High Acquired
tests/quizzes.
7.) While taking notes using my
smartphone, I developed my digital 3.28 Neutral Moderately Acquired
writing skills.
8.) Taking notes using my smartphone
distracted me from paying close
attention to the information 3.43 Agree High Acquired
presented in the lectures.
9.) Taking notes by typing was more 3.25 Neutral Moderately Acquired
convenient for me.
10.) I am more engaged in the
lecture when I take notes using my 3.28 Neutral Moderately Acquired
smartphone.

Grand Mean 3.43 Agree High Acquired

Based on the overall mean, which is 3.43, this implies that the

respondents also experienced and recognized the advantages of using digital

37
note-taking during lecture. Furthermore, as indicated in the item with the

highest mean this shows respondents also found this method effective in

remembering and understanding the concept of the lesson. Moreover, as

followed by the item with second highest mean which signifies that notes

taken by typing helped them review and study for tests/quizzes. In support to

that, Bui(2013) found notes taken digitally contained more idea units than

notes taken by longhand (η² = 0.19) and students who took notes by

computer performed better on tests (free recall; short answer) than those who

took notes by longhand (η² = 0.08 for free recall).

II. Level of Attention Span

Table 4 indicates the responses with regards to the level of attention

span of the students. It can be gleaned in the table that among the 10

statements, item 5, “Persists at a task or conversation for several minutes

without stopping or drifting-off.” got the highest mean of 3.58 and further

interpreted as High Acquired. Moreover, Item 2, Stops performing a task when

given something else to do or think about” achieved the second highest mean

of 3.48 and is also interpreted as High Acquired. Item 3 “Fails to return to a

task after an interruption unless prompted to do so.” got the third highest

mean of 3.45 and is interpreted as high acquired. Item 9, “Fails to notice

situations affecting current performance (e.g. wheel chair hitting against

table).”, achieved the fourth highest mean of 3.38 and is interpreted as

moderately acquired. Item 1, “Sustains a conversation without interjecting

irrelevant or off-topic comments”, achieved the fifth highest mean with 3.38

and is interpreted as moderately acquired. Item 7, “Speed or accuracy

38
deteriorates over several minutes on a task, but improves after a break.” got

the sixth highest mean of 3.28 which is interpreted as moderately acquired.

Item 4, “Persists with an activity or response after being told to stop.”

achieved the seventh highest mean of 3.25 and is interpreted as moderately

acquired. Item 6, “Attends to nearby conversations rather than the current

task or conversation.” got the eighth highest mean of 3.23 and is interpreted

as moderately acquired. Item 8, ”Performance of comparable activities is

inconsistent from one day to the next.” got the ninth highest mean of 3.23 and

is interpreted as moderately acquired. On the contrary, item 10, “Reacts to

objects being directed toward him/her.” achieved the lowest mean of 3.15 and

is interpreted as moderately acquired. Overall, it obtained a grand mean of

3.23 which is interpreted as moderately acquired.

39
 Table 4. Level of Attention Span of the Respondents

Level of Attention Span Mean Description Interpretation

1.) Sustains a
conversation without 3.38 Sometimes true, sometimes Moderately Acquired
interjecting irrelevant or false.
off-topic comments.
2.) Stops performing a
task when given 3.48 True, for the most part High Acquired
something else to do or
think about.
3.) Fails to return to a
task after an interruption 3.45 True, for the most part High Acquired
unless prompted to do
so.
4.) Persists with an
activity or response after 3.25 Sometimes true, sometimes Moderately Acquired
being told to stop. false
5.) Persists at a task or
conversation for several 3.58 True, for the most part High Acquired
minutes without stopping
or “drifting off”
6.) Attends to nearby
conversations rather than 3.23 Sometimes true, sometimes false Moderately Acquired
the current task or
conversation.
7.) Speed or accuracy
deteriorates over several 3.28 Sometimes true, sometimes false Moderately Acquired
minutes on a task, but
improves after a break.
8.) Performance of
comparable activities is 3.23 Sometimes true, sometimes false Moderately Acquired
inconsistent from one day
to the next.
9.) Fails to notice
situations affecting 3.38 Sometimes true, sometimes false Moderately Acquired
current performance (e.g.
wheel chair hitting
against table).
10.)Reacts to objects
being directed toward him 3.15 Sometimes true, sometimes Moderately Acquired
/her false

40
Grand Mean 3.23 Sometimes true, Moderately
sometimes false Acquired

Based on the embedded grand mean, which is 3.23, this indicates that

the respondents have moderate level of attention span. However, as shown in

the item with the highest mean, it signifies that they persists at a task or

conversation for several minutes without stopping or “drifting off”.

The result is higher than the, conducted by Apilan (2017) where in out

of 1, 628 students, there were 1,461 (89.7%) students having low attention

span, 166 (10.2%) had moderate attention span and 1(0.1%) had a high

attention span. Approximately 90% of high school students in Cabancalan

National High School had low attention span. In Cicekci & Sadik’s (2019)

study, they indicated that the issues with the lack of attention among the

students stemmed from within the student body itself. The teachers reported

that due to the failure to accomplish academic tasks, it negatively impacted

the students’ attention span, though other external and emotional variables

were key factors in the decrease of the students’ attention span. However, the

teachers are also expected to produce alternatives for them to grasp the

students’ diminishing attention span as this is a problem in both physical and

online learning environments (Bunce et al., 2010; Cummings Hlas et al., 2017;

Wang, 2015; Weimer, 2014).

IV. Relationship between Lecture Note-taking and Level of Attention

Span

The table 5 and 6 shows the relationship between lecture note-taking

and the level of attention span of the Grade 12 students. The independent

41
 variable which is the two modes of note-taking namely; traditional and digital

note-taking was correlated to the dependent variable which is the level of

attention span.

Table 5. Relationship between Traditional Note-taking and Level of

Attention Span

Correlation Interpretatio
Variable 1 Variable 2 p-value Interpretation
coefficient n
Level of
Traditional Low
Attention .165* .037 Significant
Note-taking Correlation
Span

Based on the presented data, a correlation coefficient of .165*

interpreted as low correlation with p-value<.05 indicates that traditional note-

taking is significantly related to the level of attention span.

This result implies that traditional mode of note-taking has an impact

when it comes to the respondents’ level of attention span. Moreover,

traditional note-taking not only affects the learning process but also affect the

student’s attention span. The act of notetaking itself can also enhance 

learning by fostering retention, attention, and comprehension(Carrier, 1983; 

Kiewra,1985). Umejima et al. (2021), suggested that the use of a paper

notebook promoted the acquisition of rich encoding information and spatial

information of real paper. Moreover, this information could be utilized as

effective retrieval clues, leading to higher activations in these specific regions.

Thus, it is clear that traditional note-taking does affects the students’ level of

attention span.

42
 Table 6. Relationship between Modern/Digital Note-taking and Level of
Attention Span

Correlation Interpretatio
Variable 1 Variable 2 p-value Interpretation
coefficient n
Level of
Digital Moderate
Attention .459* .000 Significant
Note-taking Correlation
Span

Based on the presented data, a correlation coefficient of .459*

interpreted as moderate correlation with p-value<.05 indicates that digital

note-taking is significantly related to the level of attention span.

This result implies that digital mode of note-taking has a huge impact

when it comes to the respondents’ level of attention span. This finding can be

supported Konrad, Joseph, & Eveleigh (2009) where in they found that the

majority of students (90%) reported in the post implementation survey that

they agreed they were more attentive to class lectures with the aid of devices

because they were less anxious about recording all of the details presented.

These findings are similar to those by Anderson-Inman (2009) in the use of

digital texts—the students could explore the embedded details.

Moreover, digital note-taking possesses several advantages over the

traditional handwriting. Hartman & Sherman (2013) suggest that the use of

digital pens can increase the quality of student notes and note-taking

strategies in the areas of content and selectivity. Their findings further

43
explicated that use of the digital pens was helpful for many of the students,

particularly those who were able to take more concise notes or who used the

playback mode to listen to a lecture and then refine their notes.

However, this contradicts the study of Risko (2013) where in results

demonstrated a significant cost of engaging in computer mediated non-lecture

related activities to both attention and retention of lecture material, a reduction

in the frequency of mind wandering during the lecture, and evidence for

difficulty coordinating attention in lectures with distractions present. Kirschner

and Karpinski (2010) speculate that students who are more susceptible to

distraction, as well as students with lower impulse control, may be more likely

to choose to take notes on the computer; the same students are also more

likely to do poorly in the course, even when controlling for other factors.

Thus, with the given implications it is evident that in the context of

attention span indeed students finds digital note-taking more efficient than the

traditional one.

In combination with previous studies, this study may lay the

groundwork for more enhanced research on the utility of this technology for

tiered accommodations in a response to intervention model. In line with this

Meghji ,2018) found that student class performance is directly influenced by

the attention given to a lecture, proper note-taking and the tendency to self-

solve assignments. However, not all teachers give visual prompts while

teaching, particularly at the postsecondary level (Hartmann & Sherman,

2013). Teachers in primary and secondary level still focused on the

conventional teaching method or those with no aid of technology thus they

lack a more clear and elaborated visual presentations. Kennedy, & Deshler

44
(2010) suggest that educators need to have opportunities to experiment with

these types of technologies in order to create meaningful interventions.

Chapter V

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This chapter presents the summary, conclusion, and the

recommendations of the study.

Summary

This research study was entitled “Lecture Note-taking and Level of

Attention Span of the Senior High School Students in Samar National Pilot

Opportunity School of Agriculture” aimed to investigate the relationship

between the modes of lecture note-taking and the level of attention span of

the Grade 12 students.

Specifically, this sought to answer the following question:

1. What is the most efficient mode of taking notes used by the students

in terms of;

1.1 Traditional Note-taking (Handwritten)

1.2 Modern Note-taking (Smartphone typing)

2. What is the level of attention span of the students?

3. Is there a significant relationship between the mode of lecture note-

taking and the level of attention span of the students?

45
 This research study used a descriptive-correlational design method.

This was conducted in Samar National Pilot Opportunity School of Agriculture

with a total of 160 respondents who were the Grade 12 senior high school

students from Samar National Pilot Opportunity School of Agriculture. A

stratified random sampling was used as a sampling design as it ensures that

every characteristics and manifestations from the respondents are properly

represented thus increasing the validity of the study. A survey questionnaire

was used to gather data from the respondents but before administering the

questionnaire they made a communication letter to the School Principal and

the Senior High Advisers. A 5-point Likert-type Scale was adapted in

interpreting the data, while percentage, frequency count, weighted mean and

Pearson r Correlation was used as statistical treatment.

There were 6 students aging 15-16 years old, 126 aging 17-18 years

old, 26 aging 19-20 years old and 2 students aging 21 and above. Among

these students, 87 were females, and 73 students were males. Thus, mostly

of the respondents are females.

Based on the answers of the respondents pertaining to the Traditional

note-taking which arrived a grand mean of 3.64 and interpreted as high

acquired; in level of attention span however the grand mean is 3.23 and

interpreted as moderately acquired.

In terms of the modern or digital note-taking based on the answers of

the respondents, digital note-taking arrived a grand mean of 3.43 and

interpreted as high acquired; in the level of attention span the grand mean

which is 3.23 and interpreted as moderately acquired.

46
 Data gathered from the traditional note-taking and level of attention

span obtained low correlation coefficient of .165* and p-value of .037 which is

interpreted that the two variables have significant relationship. It means that

traditional note-taking and the level of attention span has a significant

relationship to each other. In particular, the process of writing notes by hand is

thought to be closely associated with encoding and thus, hand-written notes

are generally believed to be associated with better recall than notes taken on

a computer or other device (Olive and Barbier 2017; Patterson and Patterson

2017). Fiorella and Mayer (2017) document that students who take notes on

paper tend to use more spatial note-taking strategies such as mapping or

drawing images. These students also had better learning outcomes.

Moreover, data gathered from the modern or digital note-taking

obtained a moderate correlation coefficient of .459* and p-value of .000 which

is interpreted that the two variables also have significant relationship. It means

that modern or digital note-taking and the level of attention span has a

significant relationship to each other. Bui, Myerson, and Hale (2013) find

taking notes on a laptop was superior to taking notes on paper in laboratory

experiments examining the link between different note-taking strategies and

recall.

Conclusion

Based on the data and results above the study concludes that Grade

12 students of Samar National Pilot Opportunity School of Agriculture have

high level of acquisition in both traditional and digital note-taking. This implies

that they are proficient in taking notes using traditional pen and paper method

47
and as well as adept at using digital devices or tools to take notes. However,

as the data revealed, they only have moderate level of attention span.

Moreover, the study revealed that both traditional and digital note-

taking methods are both associated with a significant relationship to the level

of attention span among the Grade 12 students. This suggests that

encouraging students to actively engage in note-taking, regardless of the

method used can positively impact their attention span during lectures.

Attention and learning occur because students engage in the process of

selecting important information and summarizing it, all while still actively

listening to the lecture (Beck 2014).

However, it is important to note that the digital note-taking method

resulted to higher level of attention span compared to the traditional mode of

note-taking. This indicates that the conveniency that taking notes using

smartphones contributed to an improved attention span of the students. This

is because of the special features that is present in digital devices such as

easy deletion of error and faster typing speed.

To sum up, lecture note-taking has an evident and significant

association to the level of attention span of the Grade 12 students of Samar

National Pilot Opportunity School of Agriculture.

Recommendations

After finding out the relationship between lecture note-taking and the

level of attention span, the following recommendations were drawn.

1. To the Students should use the note-taking medium that best

engages their willingness and ability to learn. Furthermore, they

48
 must involve or indulge themselves in practicing note-taking

preferably the digital note-taking using their own smartphones.

They can use varying applications that is already present on their

devices like Notepad and Google Keep – Notes and Lists. They

can also download other applications found in Google and Apple

Playstore for further exploration ( e.i Microsoft OneNote: Save

Notes and Note iOS 16). Since it has already proven that digital

mode of taking-notes increases level of attention span better than

the traditional one, students should start digitally take notes during

their class lectures for more convenient and efficient learning to

happen.

2. To the Teachers. They must encourage their students to practice

the once forgotten, the act of taking notes during lectures. They

must also adapt the use of gadgets and be a role model perhaps a

pioneer in encouraging their learners to take notes using their

smartphones. With that, they should be digitally literate for them to

be able to effectively teach their students the processes that is

needed in taking notes using smartphones. Instructors can suggest

software applications that allow students to transform a tablet

computer into computerized paper, or alternatively suggest using a

digital pen on a tablet in courses with high visual content. In line

with that, during lecture they must set restrictions on apps

unrelated to note-taking to avoid distractions and ensure

continuous attention of the students. Teachers should lecture

students about the proper use of note-taking applications and give

49
 orientations to the actual process of digital note-taking this includes

the words input, making sure it is less verbatim. They should

introduce students to different creativity tools for them to create

visual notes so that it will be easier to understand once reviewed.

3. To the school. The school should give awareness to the students

on the importance of note-taking not just as a means of improving

their attention span but also as a means of enhancing their

academic performance. In relation with this, the school should

adapt the new mode of taking notes which is digital note-taking.

The school in collaboration with the teachers should encourage

students onto the practice of note-taking by conducting seminars or

daily reminders. In this technology-literate society and rapidly-

changing learning environments, the institution of education

together with the school should guide students toward managing

their current and future learning needs.

4. To the future researchers. This study’s data was gathered using

survey, where the participants answered statements which

measured their note-taking ability and their level of attention span,

it would be wise that future researchers take a more direct

approach, for example observing an actual class, may it be

physical or an online class, so that the study may yield more

accurate results. It is believed that several factors in the classroom

affect the attention span of the students. With the direct approach,

an observation can be conducted and factors such as the delivery

of the lecture, the ambience of the classroom, external factors that

50
 may affect the variables (lecture presentation, voice modulation of

the teacher, flexibility of the teacher, etc.). Future research on note

taking mediums should consider such new technologies. These

technologies may allow students to benefit from the cognitive

process of handwriting while still being able to take advantage of a

computer for lecture-engagement or sharing notes. In addition, the

researchers highly suggest that they venture out and catechize the

difference between the attention span of students engaged in

traditional and modern note-taking. The researchers also suggest

to utilize appropriate statistical treatment of data to further validate

the result because the current study revealed only the general

relationship between modes of lecture note-taking and the

student’s attention span. Moreover, they may utilize this research

paper as reference and conduct similar study that may uplift the

reliability and result of the study. They may improve things that

need to be improved. Future researchers may develop the

research paper to be more concise and critical to the field of the

study.

REFERENCES

Aguilar-Roca, N.A. Wiiliams, D. O’Dowd.2012. The Impact of laptop-free

zones on students performance and attitudes in large lectures.
Computers & Education 59: 1300-1308.

51
Beck, K.M. 2014. Note-Taking effectiveness in the modern classroom.
The Compass 1:1-14.

Brady, K. 2009. The shove without a nudge: Banning the Internet in

college classrooms. Boston College Intellectual Property and
Technology forum. https://nudges.org/tag/internet/

Broadbent, D. E. (1958). Perception and communication. London, UK:

Pergamon Press.
Brown, C. M. (1998). Comparison of typing and handwriting in “two-
finger typists”. Proceedings of the Human Factors Society, USA,
32. (pp. 381-385).
Brown, J. (1958). Some tests of the decay theory of immediate memory.
Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,10,12-21.
Bui, D. C., Myerson, J., & Hale, S. (2013). Note-taking with computers:
Exploring alternative strategies for improved recall. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 105,299-309.
Cain J, Bird ER, Jones, MK. Mobile computing initiatives within
pharmacy education. Am J Pharm Educ. 2008;72(4):Article 76
Calderwood, C., Ackerman, P.L., & CONKLIN, E.M. (2014). What else
do college students “do’ while studying? An investigation of
multitasking. Computers and Education, 75, 19-29.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.02.004.
Carrier, L. M., Rosen, L.D., Cheever, N.A., & LIM, A.F. (2015). Causes,
effects, and practicalities of everyday multitasking. Developmental
Review, 35, 64-78.
Cheyne, J.A. (2010, January). Attention Lapses. Retrieved October 31,
2022, from

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/319587558_Attention_L
apeses
Computers & Education, 67, 168-177.
DiVesta, F. J & Gray, G. S (1973Listening and note taking; II.
Immediate and delayed recall as function of variations in thematic
continuity, note taking, and length of listening-review intervals.
Journal of Education Psychology, 64, 278-287. ).
DiVesta, F. J & Gray, G. S (1972). Listening and note taking. Journal of
Education Psychology, 63, 8-14.
Gausby, A. (2015). Attention Spans. Retrieved October 31, 2022, from
https://dl.motamem.org/microsoft-attention-spans-
research-report.pdf
Gausby, A. (2015). Attention Spans. Retrieved October 31, 2022, From
Gleason, J. (2012). An investigation of the lecture note-taking skills of
adoloescents with and without attention deficit/hyperactivity
disorder: An extension of previous research. Teachers College,
Columbia University, Newyork City.
Gur, T., Coskun,, I., & Delican,, B. (2013). The impact of note-taking
while listening on listening comprehension in a higher education
context internation Journal of Academic Research, 5(1), 93-97.
hhtps://doi.org/10.7813/2075- 4124.2013/5-1/B.16

52
 https://dl.motanem.org/microsoft-attention-spans-
research-report.pdf
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.03.001.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2017.1372483
Kiewra, K. A. & Benton, S. L. (1988). The relationship between
information processing ability and notetaking. Contemporary
Educational Psychology, 13, 33-44
Kiewra, K. A. & S. L, Kim S.,, Risch, N. & Christensen, M. (1995). Effects
of notetaking format and study technique on recall and relational
performance. Contemporary Educational Psycholog, 20,172-187.
Kiewra, K. A. (1985). Investigating note-taking and review: A depth of
processing alternative. Educational Psychologist, 20, 23-32
Kobayashi, K. (2005). Whats limits the encoding effect of note-taking? A
metanalytic examination. Contemporary Educational Psychology,
30, 242-262.
Kobayashi, K. (2006). Combined effects of note-taking/reviewing on
learning and the enhancement through enhancement through
interventions: A meta-analytic review. Educational Psychology,26,
459-477.
Lee, Y H., & WU, J-Y (2013). The indirect effects of online social
entertainment and information seeking activities on reading
literacy
Lee, Y. H. (2017). Scripting to enhance university students’ critical
thinking in flipped learning: implications of the delayed effect on
science reading literacy. Interactive Learning
Environment
Lee, Y. H., & WU, J- Y. (2012). The effect of individual differences in the
inner and outer states of ICT on engagement in online reading
activities and PISA 2009 Reading literacy: Exploring the
relationship between the old and new reading literacy. Learning
and Individual Differences, 22(3),336-342
Lee, Y.H. (2015). Facilitating critical thinking using the C-QRAC
collaboration script Enhancing science reading literacy in a
computer-supported collaborative learning environment
Computers & Education, 88, 182191.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.05.004
Lou, L, K.A. Kiewra, A.E. Flanigan, and M.S. Pereanetz 2018. Laptop
versus longhand note taking: effects on lecture notes and
achievement. Instructional Science 46: 947-971
Mangen, A, Anda, L. G., Oxborough, G.H..,Bronnick, K. (2015).
Handwriting versus keyboard witing: Effect on word recall. Journal
of writing Research, 7(2), 227-247 .
https://www.jowr.org/Ccount/click.php?id=97
Miller, R. L. Economics today. Reading, MA: Addison-wesley.
Morehead, K, J. Dulosky, and K. A Rawson. 2019. Howmuch mightier is
the pen than the keyboard for note-taking? A replication and
extension of Mueller and open Oppenheimer (2014). Educational
Psychology review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-019-09468-2
Morehead, K, J. Dulosky, K. A. Rawson, R. Blasiman, and R. B. Hollis.
2019. Note-taking habits of 21st Century college students:

53
 implication for student learning, memory, and achievement.
Memory. 27: 807-819
Mueller, P., and D Oppenheimer. 2014. The pen is mightier than the
keyboard: advantages of longhand over laptop note-taking.
Psychological Science 25; 1159- 1168.
Nordquist, R, (2019, September 11) How to make better notes During
Lectures, Discussions, and Interviews. ThoughtCo. Retrieved
October 31, 2022, From https://www.thoughtco.com/note-taking-
research-1691352
Nordquist, R. (2019, September 11) How to Take Better Notes During
Lectures, Discussions, and Interviews. ThoughtCo. Retrieved
October 31, 2022, from https://www.thoughtco.com/note-
taking-research-1691352
Olive, T. and M. Barbier. 2017. Processing time and cognitive effort of
longhand note-taking when reading and summarizing a structured
or linear text Written Communication 34: 224-246
Patterson, R. W, and R. M. Patterson. (2017). Computers and
productivity: Evidence from laptop use in the college classroom.
Economics of Education Review 57: 66-79
Peverly, S. T . & Wolf, A, D. (2019). Note-taking. In (J. Donlusky&. K.A.
Rawson, Eds.) The Cambridge Handbook of Education).
Peverly, S.T., Vekaria, P. C., Reddington, L.A, Sumowski, J. F.,
Johnson, K. R, & Ramsay, C. M. (2013) The relationship of
handwriting speed, working memory, language comprehension
and outlines to lecture note-taking and test-taking among college
students. Applied cognitive Psychology, 27, 115-126.
Peverly, S.T., Rawaswamy, V., Brown, C. Sumowsky, J., Alidoos, M., &
Garner, J. (2007). What predicts skill in lecture note taking?
Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 167-180.
Reddington, L.A., Peverly, S. T., & Block, C. J. (2015). An examination
of some of the cognitive and motivation variables related to
gender differences in lecture Note-taking. Reading and Writing:
An Interdisciplinary Journal, 28, 1155-1185.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-015-9566-z
Richards, T., Peverly, S., Wolf, A., Abbott, R., Tanimoto, S., Thompson,
R., Nagy, W., & Berninger, V. (2016). Idea units in notes and
summaries for read texts by keyboard and pencil in middle
childhood students with specific learning disabilities: Cognitive
and brain findings. Trends in Neuroscience and Education, 5,
146-155. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tine.2016.07.005
Rosner, Z. A., Elman, J.A. & Shimamura, A.P. (2013). The generation
effect: Activating Broad neural circuits during memory encoding.
Cortex, 49(7), 1901-1909.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2012.09.009
Vekaria, P.C. & Peverly, S.T. (2018). Lecture note-taking in
postsecondary students with self-reported attention
deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Reading and Writing: An
Interdisciplinary Journal. 31, 1551-1573,
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-018-9849-2

54
Wu, J. Y. (2014). Gender differences in online reading engagement,
metacognitive strategies, navigation skills and reading literacy.
Journal of Computer Assisted Leaning, 30(3), 252-271.
https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12054
Wu, J.Y. (2015). University students’ Motivated Attention and use of
regulation strategies on social media. Computers & Education,
89, 75-90.
Wu, J.Y. (2017). The indirect relationship of media multitasking self-
efficacy on learning performance within the personal learning
environment: Implications from the mechanism of perceived
attention problems and self-regulation strategies. Computers &
Education, 106, 56-72.
Wu, J.Y. & Peng, Y.C. (2017). The modality effect on reading literacy:
perspectives from students’ online reading habits, cognitive and
metacognitive strategies, and web navigation skills across
regions. Interactive Learning Environment, 25(7), 859-876.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2016.1224251
Xu, S., & David, P. (2018). Distortions in time perceptions during task
switching. Computers in Human Behavior, 80, 362-369.
Zhuang, W. and Q. Xiao. 2018. Facilitate active learning: the role of the
perceived benefits of using technology. Journal of Education for
Business 93:88-96.

55
APPENDICES

56
57
 APPENDIX A

Letter to the Principal

Samar National Pilot Opportunity School of Agriculture

Brgy.Baras San Policarpo, Eastern Samar

MAY, 2023
DIOSDADO A. IGDALINO
School Principal
Samar National Pilot Opportunity School of Agriculture.
San Policarpo, Eastern Samar

Sir:
Good day!
We, the students of Grade 12 of Samar National Pilot Opportunity School of
Agriculture, are presently conducting a research entitled “LECTURE NOTE-
TAKING AND ATTENTION SPAN OF SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS
OF SNPOSA”. This is a requirement of the subject Inquiries, Investigation
and Immersion.
In connection with this, we would like to request from your good office to allow
us to conduct this study to Grade 12 students from Samar National Pilot
Opportunity School of Agriculture, San Policarpo Eastern Samar. Rest
assured that the data gathered strictly for research purposes only and will be
kept with utmost confidentially. We also hope that this study will be great help
to the school, to the students, and to community as whole.
We are looking forward for your favorable action on this regard. Thank you
and God bless!

Very truly yours,

RALPH JAY M. RAVAS
Research Leader

Noted by:
MARLON A. CELIS, Sgd.
Research Adviser

Recommending Approval:

58
CINDY CHARLENE C. RASONABE, Sgd.
Academic Coordinator

Approved:
DIOSDADO A. IGDALINO, Sgd.
School Principal

59
 APPENDIX B
Survey Questionnaire

Samar National Pilot Opportunity School of Agriculture

Brgy. Baras, San Policarpo, Eastern Samar

SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE ON LECTURE NOTE-TAKING AND

ATTENTION SPAN OF SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS IN SAMAR
NATIONAL PILOT OPPORTUNITY SCHOOL OF AGRICULTURE

Source: M. Smith, A. (2016). An Investigation in note-taking strategies for

highschool biology students Allison M Smith Montana State University-
Bozeman, College of Letters & Science, 2016.
Whyte John, & Hart Teressa. (2003). Moss Attention Rating Scale
Moss Research Rehabilitation Institution. https:mrri.org/moss-attention-rating-
scale-mars/

Part I. Lecture Note-taking

Directions: Read each statement carefully. For each statement in the survey,
please indicate how much you agree or disagree with the statement by
putting check (✓) in the box on the right side of each description. There are
no right or wrong answers. Your answers will be kept strictly confidential
and you will not be identified.

Scales:
5 – Strongly agree (indicates that the characteristic is always
manifested)
4 – Agree (indicates that the characteristic is often
manifested)
3 – Neutral (indicates that the characteristic is sometimes
manifested)
2 - Disagree (indicates that the characteristic is seldom
manifested)
1 - Strongly Disagree (indicates that the characteristic is never
manifested)

60
A.) Traditional Note-taking 5 2 1
4 3
(Handwritten) Strongly Disagree Strongly
Agree Neutral
Agree Disagree

1.) I find this method effective

in remembering and
understanding the concept
of the lesson.

2.) I didn’t mind taking notes in

class using this mode of
note-taking.
3.) Taking notes using pen
and paper helped me pay
attention in this class.
4.) Taking notes using pen
and paper was stressful for
me.
5.) Taking notes using pen
and paper helped me
remember information,
even if I didn’t study the
notes.
6.) Notes that I took using pen
and paper helped me
review and study for
tests/quizzes.
7.) While taking notes using
pen and paper, I developed
my good handwriting skills.
8.) Taking notes using pen
and paper distracted me
from paying close attention
to the information
presented in the lectures.
9.) Taking notes using pen
and paper was more
convenient for me.
10.) I am more engaged
in the lecture when I take
notes using pen and paper.

61
B.) Modern Note-taking 5 3 1
4 2
(Smartphone Typing) Strongly Neutral Strongly
Agree Disagree
Agree Disagree
11.) I find this method
effective in remembering
and understanding the
concept of the lesson.
12.) I didn’t mind taking
notes in class using this
mode of note-taking.
13.) Taking notes by
typing/ using my
smartphone helped me pay
attention in class.
14.) Taking notes by
typing was stressful for me.
15.) Taking notes using
my smartphone helped me
remember information,
even if I didn’t study the
notes.
16.) Notes that I took by
typing helped me review
and study for tests/quizzes.
17.) While taking notes
using my smartphone, I
developed my digital
writing skills.
18.) Taking notes using
my smartphone distracted
me from paying close
attention to the information
presented in the lectures.
19.) Taking notes by
typing was more
convenient for me.
20.) I am more engaged
in the lecture when I take
notes using my
smartphone.

62
 Part II. Level of Attention Span

MOSS ATTENTION RATING SCALE

The Moss Attention Rating Scale (MARS) was developed by John

Whyte, MD, PhD, Tessa Hart, PhD, and colleagues at the Moss TBI Model

System at MossRehab Hospital and Moss Rehabilitation Research Institute.

The MARS is designed to be completed by clinicians on the basis of their

everyday, routine interaction with the participant; no special tests or questions

are administered. Each item is rated on a 5-point Likert type scale indicating

the degree to which the item describes the participant’s behavior. Please don’t

leave any items blank. If you are not sure how to answer, just make your best

guess.

1 = Definitely false; 2 = False, for the most part; 3 = Sometimes true,

sometimes false; 4 = True, for the most part; 5 = Definitely true. Answer

honestly by rating your agreement with each statement. Mark under the

answer that best describes your feelings.

5 4 3 2 1
Level of Attention Span Definitel True, for the Sometimes true, False, for the Definitely
y true most part sometimes false most part false
1.) Sustains a
conversation without
interjecting irrelevant or
off-topic comments.
2.) Stops performing a
task when given
something else to do or

63
think about.
3.) Fails to return to a
task after an interruption
unless prompted to do
so.
4.) Persists with an
activity or response after
being told to stop.
5.) Persists at a task or
conversation for several
minutes without stopping
or “drifting off”
6.) Attends to nearby
conversations rather than
the current task or
conversation.
7.) Speed or accuracy
deteriorates over several
minutes on a task, but
improves after a break.
8.) Performance of
comparable activities is
inconsistent from one day
to the next.
9.) Fails to notice
situations affecting
current performance (e.g.
wheel chair hitting
against the table).
10.)Reacts to objects
being directed toward him
/her.

Thank you for participating.

If you wish to receive a copy of the results and the final paper, please do not

hesitate to send us an email. Again, thank you for participating in this study.

Researchers of this study:

Ralph Jay M. Ravas: ralphjayy.ravas@gmail.com

Maria Magdalena Obon: obonmariamagdalena1@gmail.com

Jomar Rauces: raucesj@gmail.com

64
Glydel Porton: glydelporton25@gmail.com

Janna Paulene Operario: Operariojanna752@gmail.com

Judelyn Orque; judelynorque2003@gmail.com

Eunice Sumallo: euniceleberillasumallo@gmail.com

Reynaldo Rosario: reynaldorosario06@gmail.com

Jonel Orque: jonelorque@gmail.com

Jubert Verana: veranajub@gmail.com

John Kerlie Fordaliza: johnkerliefordaliza75@gmail.com

Nicole Shane Mugar: mugarnicoleshane@gmail.com

Mary Rose Orgasan: maryroseorgasan@gmail.com

Zaira Ortinez: ortinezzaira@gmail.com

65
 APPENDIX C
Certification from the Editor

Samar National Pilot Opportunity School of Agriculture

Brgy. Baras, San Policarpo, Eastern Samar

CERTIFICATION FROM THE EDITOR

This certify that the research paper entitled LECTURE NOTE-TAKING

AND LEVEL OF ATTENTION SPAN OF GRADE 12 STUDENTS OF

SAMAR NATIONAL PILOT OPPORTUNITY SCHOOL OF AGRICULTURE

prepared and submitted by RALPH JAY RAVAS et al., in partial fulfillment of

the requirements for the subject INQUIRIES, INVESTIGATION AND

IMMERSION has been edited by the undersigned.

Conformed:

(Sgd.) BRYAN O. LAJO, LPT

Editor

66
 APPENDIX D
Certification from the Statistician

Samar National Pilot Opportunity School of Agriculture

Brgy. Baras, San Policarpo, Eastern Samar

CERTIFICATION FROM THE STATISTICIAN

This certify that the research paper entitled LECTURE NOTE-TAKING

AND LEVEL OF ATTENTION SPAN OF GRADE 12 STUDENTS OF

SAMAR NATIONAL PILOT OPPORTUNITY SCHOOL OF AGRICULTURE

prepared and submitted by RALPH JAY RAVAS et al., in partial fulfillment of

the requirements for the subject INQUIRIES, INVESTIGATION AND

IMMERSION has been statistically reviewed by the undersigned.

Conformed:

(Sgd.) RODEL B. CRUZOS, MAEd-EM

Statistician

67
 APPENDIX E
Certification from the Proofreader

Samar National Pilot Opportunity School of Agriculture

Brgy. Baras, San Policarpo, Eastern Samar

CERTIFICATION FROM THE PROOFREADER

This certify that the research paper entitled LECTURE NOTE-TAKING

AND LEVEL OF ATTENTION SPAN OF GRADE 12 STUDENTS OF

SAMAR NATIONAL PILOT OPPORTUNITY SCHOOL OF AGRICULTURE

prepared and submitted by RALPH JAY RAVAS et al., in partial fulfillment of

the requirements for the subject INQUIRIES, INVESTIGATION AND

IMMERSION has been proofread by the undersigned.

Conformed:

(Sgd.) BRYAN O. LAJO, LPT

Editor

68
 APPENDIX F
Certification from the Researchers

Samar National Pilot Opportunity School of Agriculture

Brgy. Baras, San Policarpo, Eastern Samar

CERTIFICATION OF THESIS ORIGINALITY AND OWNERSHIP

This certify that the research paper we have wrote and submitted to the

research teacher of Samar National Pilot Opportunity School of Agriculture

entitled LECTURE NOTE-TAKING AND LEVEL OF ATTENTION SPAN OF

GRADE 12 STUDENTS OF SAMAR NATIONAL PILOT OPPORTUNITY

SCHOOL OF AGRICULTURE is our own independent work and has not been

previously submitted and presented to another school or department.

We further cede copyright of this thesis in favor of this school Samar

National Pilot Opportunity School of Agriculture.

We sign this instrument with free act and deed this 8 th of June 2023 at

the Senior High School Department of this school, Samar National Pilot

Opportunity School of Agriculture.

THE RESEARCHERS:

69
 RALPH JAY M. RAVAS
JOMAR C. RAUCES MARIA MAGDALENA T. OBON
JUBERT N. VERANA JANNA PAULENE D. OPERARIO
MARY ROSE N. ORGAS JUDELYN N. ORQUE
ZYRA G. ORTINEZ JOHN KERLIE M. FORDALIZA
JONEL N. ORQUE REYNALDO B. ROSARIO
NICOLE SHANE S. MUGAR GLYDEL M. PORTON
EUNICE M. SUMALLO

70