A Comparative Study of Handwriting and Computer Typing in Note-taking by University Students = Análisis comparativo entre escritura manual y electrónica en la toma de apuntes de estudiantes universitarios

Aragón-Mendizábal, Estíbaliz, Delgado-Casas, Cándida, Navarro-Guzmán, José-I., Menacho-Jiménez, Inmaculada and Romero-Oliva, Manuel-F. A Comparative Study of Handwriting and Computer Typing in Note-taking by University Students = Análisis comparativo entre escritura manual y electrónica en la toma de apuntes de estudiantes universitarios. Comunicar, 2016, vol. 24, n. 48, pp. 101-107. [Journal article (Paginated)]

[thumbnail of c4810en.pdf] Text
c4810en.pdf - Published version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike.
Download (399kB)
[thumbnail of c4810es.pdf] Text
c4810es.pdf
Download (387kB)
Alternative locations: http://dx.doi.org/10.3916/C48-2016-10

English abstract

Taking notes is a common strategy among higher education students, and has been found to affect their academic performance. Nowadays, however, the use of computers is replacing the traditional pencil-and-paper methodology. The present study aims to identify the advantages and disadvantages associated with the use of computer (typing) and pencil-and-paper (handwriting) for taking notes by college students. A total of 251 social and health science students participated in the study. Two experimental conditions were chosen: taking notes by hand (n=211), and taking notes by computer (n=40). Those that used computer-written notes performed better on tasks based on reproducing the alphabet, writing sentences, and recognizing words (p<.05). However, those using handwritten notes performed better on free recall tasks (p<.05). Differences between the two conditions were statistically significant rejecting the hypothesis of equality between groups (X2=60.98; p<.0001). In addition, the discriminant analysis confirmed that 77.3% of students were correctly classified by the experimental conditions. Although the computer allowed for greater velocity when taking notes, handwriting enhanced students’ grades when performing memory tasks.

Spanish abstract

La toma de apuntes es una estrategia generalizada del alumnado de Educación Superior y se ha constatado su influencia en el rendimiento académico. El uso del ordenador está desplazando al método tradicional de lápiz y papel. El presente estudio pretende arrojar luz sobre las ventajas y los inconvenientes derivados del uso de uno u otro método en la toma de apuntes en las aulas universitarias. Un total de 251 estudiantes universitarios de ciencias sociales y ciencias de la salud participaron en el estudio. Se plantearon dos condiciones experimentales: toma de notas de forma manual (n=211) y de manera electrónica (n=40). Se hallaron diferencias a favor del grupo que usó el ordenador en las tareas basadas en completar el abecedario, escribir frases y reconocer palabras anotadas previamente (p<.05). Sin embargo, en la tarea de recuerdo libre los resultados reflejaron un mejor desempeño del grupo que tomó notas manualmente (p<.05). Se rechazó la hipótesis de igualdad entre los grupos (X2=60,98; p<.0001). Además, el análisis discriminante confirmó que el 77,3% de los alumnos fueron clasificados correctamente según su condición experimental. El uso del ordenador resultó muy útil cuando se trataba de anotar datos con rapidez; sin embargo, en las tareas de recuerdo los alumnos de escritura manual obtuvieron mejores puntuaciones que los de escritura electrónica.

Item type: Journal article (Paginated)
Keywords: note-taking, handwriting, computer-writing, short-term memory, levels of processing, higher education, tomar notas, escritura manual, escritura electrónica, memoria a corto plazo, niveles de procesamiento, educación superior
Subjects: B. Information use and sociology of information > BJ. Communication
G. Industry, profession and education.
G. Industry, profession and education. > GH. Education.
Depositing user: Alex Ruiz
Date deposited: 02 Aug 2016 07:59
Last modified: 02 Aug 2016 07:59
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/10760/29618

References

Beck, K.M. (2014). Note Taking Effectiveness in the Modern Classroom. The Compass, 1(1). (http://goo.gl/7k4TOj) (2015-09-05).

Berninger, V.W., Abbott, R.D., Augsburger, A., & Garcia, N. (2009). Comparison of Pen and Keyboard Transcription Modes in Children with and without Learning Disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 32, 123-141. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/27740364

Bui, D.C., & Myerson, J. (2014). The Role of Working Memory Abilities in Lecture Note-taking. Learning and Individual Differences, 33, 12-22. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2014.05.002

Bui, D.C., Myerson, J., & Hale, S. (2013). Note-taking with Computers: Exploring Alternative Strategies for Improved Recall. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(2), 299-309. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0030367

Cassany, D. (2012). En línea. Leer y escribir en la Red. [On line. Reading and Writing on the Web]. Barcelona: Anagrama.

Cermak, L.S., & Craik, F.I. (2014). Levels of Processing in Human Memory (PLE: Memory) (Vol. 5). New York, NY: Psychology Press.

Clayton, E. (2015). La historia de la escritura. [The History of Writing]. Madrid: Siruela.

Conard, E.U. (1935). A Study of the Influence of Manuscript Writing and of Typewriting on Children’s Development. The Journal of Educational Research, 29(4), 254-265. doi: 10.1080/00220671.1935.10880582

Connelly, V., Gee, D., & Walsh, E. (2007). A Comparison of Keyboarded and Handwritten Compositions and the Relationship with Transcription Speed. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 77(2), 479-492. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1348/000709906X116768

Craik, F. I. M. & Lockhart, R. S. (1972). Levels of Processing: A Framework for Memory Research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11, 671- 684. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5371(72)80001-X

Craik, F.I. (2002). Levels of Processing: Past, Present... and Future? Memory, 10(5-6), 305-318. doi: http://dx.doi.org/0.1080/096582102440001

Dunlosky, J., Rawson, K.A., Marsh, E.J., Nathan, M.J., & Willingham, D.T. (2013). Improving Students’ Learning with Effective Learning Techniques: Promising Directions from Cognitive and Educational Psychology. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 14(1), 4-58. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1529100612453266

Einstein, G.O., Morris, J., & Smith, S. (1985). Note-taking, Individual Differences and Memory for Lecture Information. Journal of Educational Psychology, 77(5), 522-532. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.77.5.522

Fisher, J.L., & Harris, M.B. (1973). Effect of Note Taking and Review on Recall. Journal of Educational Psychology, 65(3), 321-325. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0035640

Fried, C.B. (2008). In-class Laptop Use and its Effects on Student Learning. Computers & Education 50(3), 906-914. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2006.09.006

Hyden, P. (2005). Teaching Statistics by Taking Advantage of the Laptop’s Ubiquity. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 101, 37-42. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/tl.184

Jasmin, K., & Casasanto, D. (2012). The Qwerty Effect: How Typing Shapes the Meanings of Words. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 19(3), 499-504. doi: 10.3758/s13423-012-0229-7

Kay, R., & Lauricella, S. (2011). Exploring the Benefits and Challenges of Using Laptop Computers in Higher Education Classrooms: A Formative Analysis. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 37(1), 1-18. (http://goo.gl/qh3Wjw) (2015-11-07).

Kobayashi, K. (2005). What Limits the Encoding Effect of Note-taking? A Meta-analytic Examination. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 30, 242–262. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2004.10.001

Lockhart, R.S., & Craik, F.I.M. (1990). Levels of Processing: A Retrospective Commentary on a Framework for Memory Research. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 44(1), 87-112. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0084237

Longcamp, M., Zerbato-Poudou, M.T., & Velay, J.L. (2005). The Influence of Writing Practice on Letter Recognition in Preschool Children: A Comparison between Handwriting and Typing. Acta Psychologica, 119(1), 67-79. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2004.10.019

Moin, L., Magiera, K., & Zigmond, N. (2009). Instructional Activities and Group Work in the U.S. Inclusive High School Co-taught Science Class. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 7, 677-697. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10763-008-9133-z

Mueller, P.A., & Oppenheimer, D. M. (2014). The Pen is Mightier than the Keyboard. Advantages of Longhand over Laptop Note Taking. Psychological Science, 25, 1159-1168. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0956797614524581

Paschek, G. (2013). Las ventajas de escribir a mano. [Advantages of Handwriting]. Mente y Cerebro, 62, 18-21.

Rabinowitz, J.C., & Craik, F.I. (1986). Specific Enhancement Effects Associated with Word Generation. Journal of Memory and Language, 25, 226-237. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0749-596X(86)90031-8

Ragan, E.D., Jennings, S.R., Massey, J.D., & Doolittle, P.E. (2014). Unregulated Use of Laptops over Time in Large Lecture Classes. Computers & Education, 78, 78-86. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2014.05.002

Rogers, J., & Case-Smith, J. (2002). Relationships between Handwriting and Keyboarding Performance of Sixth-grade Students. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 56(1), 34-39. doi:10.5014/ajot.56.1.34

Sevillano, M.L., Quicios, M.P., & González-García, J.L. (2016). Posibilidades ubicuas del ordenador portátil: percepción de estudiantes universitarios españoles [The Ubiquitous Possibilities of the Laptop: Spanish University Students’ Perceptions]. Comunicar, 46(24), 87-95. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.3916/C46-2016-09

Smoker, T.J., Murphy, C.E., & Rockwell, A.K. (2009). Comparing Memory for Handwriting versus Typing. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 53(22), 1.744-1.747. Sage Publications. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/154193120905302218

Stefanou, C., Hoffman, L., & Vielee N. (2008). Note Taking in the College Classroom as Evidence of Generative Learning. Learning Environments Research, 11, 1-17. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10984-007-9033-0

Steimle, J., Brdiczka, O., & Mühlhäuser, M. (2009). Collaborative Paper-based Annotation of Lecture Slides. Educational Technology & Society, 12, 125-137. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TLT.2009.27

Sülzenbrück, S., Hegele, M., Rinkenauer, G., & Heuer, H. (2011). The Death of Handwriting: Secondary Effects of Frequent Computer Use on Basic Motor Skills. Journal of Motor Behavior, 43(3), 247-251. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00222895.2011.571727

Treisman, A. (2014). The Psychological Reality of Levels of Processing. In L.S. Cermak & F.I. Craik (Eds.), Levels of Processing in Human Memory (pp. 301-330). New York, NY: Psychology Press.

Tront, J.G. (2007). Facilitating Pedagogical Practices through a Large-scale Tablet PC Development. IEEE Computer 40(9), 62-68. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/MC.2007.310

Weaver, B.E., & Nilson, L.B. (2005). Laptops in Class: What are they good for? What can you do with them? New Directions in Teaching and Learning, 101, 3-13. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/tl.181


Downloads

Downloads per month over past year

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item
Contact us
Send email Sponsors
Sponsor: AIMS Sponsor: D&P Sponsor: UniNa CAB Get connected
Facebook Facebook Twitter Twitter Linkedin LinkedIn RSS RSS