Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Advantages of Longhand Over Laptop Note Taking

pss.sagepub.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 23 posts

Re: Advantages of Longhand Over Laptop Note Taking

#11

Post by WalterBright »

crazygringo wrote: post #8

On the other hand, I type at least 10x faster than I write. If people learned to only take notes on as much as they would write otherwise, it seems you'd get the best of both worlds -- faster note-taking which would allow time for deeper processing. But really, the deeper problem is taking notes at all. Honestly, in what world is it efficient for a lecturer to recite, and all the students take notes? Students should…

Note taking worked very well for me because it caused the information to be fixed into my memory, even if I never looked at the notes again.

Taking notes on paper is far more effective, because you cannot type diagrams or equations or draw arrows, etc. The batteries never die on notepaper, they're light and easy to carry, they don't make noise, the display doesn't distract the folks behind you, etc.

Later, just run the notes through a scanner.

Re: Advantages of Longhand Over Laptop Note Taking

#12

Post by zhte415 »

I favour guided note taking a lot. A page, with concepts, and a blocked-off section for personal questions similar to the Cornell method. Together with diagrams and drawing lots of arrows, I know of no electronic method which is as fast as the pen.

If taking notes means essentially taking meeting minutes, the material provided by the lecturer is lacking.

Re: Advantages of Longhand Over Laptop Note Taking

#13

Post by pandaman »

crazygringo wrote: post #8

On the other hand, I type at least 10x faster than I write. If people learned to only take notes on as much as they would write otherwise, it seems you'd get the best of both worlds -- faster note-taking which would allow time for deeper processing. But really, the deeper problem is taking notes at all. Honestly, in what world is it efficient for a lecturer to recite, and all the students take notes? Students should…

The point of note-taking is not in passing some oral tradition from the lecturer to the students. If the information exchange had been an issue then there had not been any lectures after the invention of printing process - all lectures had been printed and distributed to students. Such a process, in fact, exists but does not substitute lectures as you might already know.

The point of note-taking is that people learn better this way as this and numerous other researches show. One theory is that it's because of activation of motor cortex, which is largely dedicated to controlling hands and fingers [1]. It appears that people learn better when the larger parts of their brain are active. The same principle explains reciting as a learning technique. Speech also takes a large part of the brain and it similarly helps learning.

On the same note, I believe the failing American education can be explained by the decline of handwriting. It will be interesting to see how well Finland will fare after they stop teaching longhand in 2016 [2]

1. http://www.acbrown.com/neuro/Lectures/Motr/NrMotrPrmr.htm

2. http://www.savonsanomat.fi/uutiset/kotimaa/nappaintaitoja-op...

Re: Advantages of Longhand Over Laptop Note Taking

#14

Post by agumonkey »

tjl wrote: post #10
agumonkey wrote: post #5

The abstract rings true to me. In high-school I had a fetish for heavy rewording, formatting of notes. The more I formatted it (indentation, color coding, consistent abbreviations) the more I learned indirect relationships in the content. Out of my hat, I tend to think that digital tools aren't good for learning, for they are too symbolic. I believe native interactions stimulate the brain more and feed more data to p…

I improved my grades in the later undergrad years by taking the notes from class and re-writing them in a nice form (like you using colour and cleaning it up) into bound notebooks, like the kind used for log books. Then, if I needed to review for a test, I just grabbed the book. Now, I have a handy set of books on my shelf.

I'll add that the constraints forced me to focus on what was new and counter-intuitive to me. Limited space meant I'll have to trim away what felt obvious, and only keep the obscure.

Re: Advantages of Longhand Over Laptop Note Taking

#15

Post by SyneRyder »

I'd be curious to see how these results change with pen-driven technology, such as the Galaxy Note tablets, or the Livescribe pens (that simultaneously write to paper, create digital copies stored in Evernote, and also record an audio version of the lecture/meeting).

I've always felt that when I need to think through concepts, walking away from the computer & working with pen & paper was a more effective way to do it, at least for myself.

Re: Advantages of Longhand Over Laptop Note Taking

#16

Post by SiVal »

pandaman wrote: post #13
crazygringo wrote: post #8

On the other hand, I type at least 10x faster than I write. If people learned to only take notes on as much as they would write otherwise, it seems you'd get the best of both worlds -- faster note-taking which would allow time for deeper processing. But really, the deeper problem is taking notes at all. Honestly, in what world is it efficient for a lecturer to recite, and all the students take notes? Students should…

The point of note-taking is not in passing some oral tradition from the lecturer to the students. If the information exchange had been an issue then there had not been any lectures after the invention of printing process - all lectures had been printed and distributed to students. Such a process, in fact, exists but does not substitute lectures as you might already know. The point of note-taking is that people learn…

I believe the failing American education can be explained by the decline of handwriting.

Handwriting isn't declining; cursive handwriting is. I strongly believe that writing things by hand (handwriting) is an aid to learning, but I don't think learning two different, parallel scripts increases that learning. (I don't object to cursive as an art form--in fact I love it and practice it--but that is something for older kids in art class, not something for writing papers and taking notes while you're still new to writing.)

Those who print all the time can write just as quickly, draw the same diagrams, arrows, underlining, marginalia, and so on, as those who write in cursive or in both scripts. Using a single script instead of two will not lessen the benefits of writing by hand, but using a keyboard instead of printing by hand is more problematic.

Re: Advantages of Longhand Over Laptop Note Taking

#17

Post by pandaman »

SiVal wrote: post #16
pandaman wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point of note-taking is not in passing some oral tradition from the lecturer to the students. If the information exchange had been an issue then there had not been any lectures after the invention of printing process - all lectures had been printed and distributed to students. Such a process, in fact, exists but does not substitute lectures as you might already know. The point of note-taking is that people learn…

I believe the failing American education can be explained by the decline of handwriting. Handwriting isn't declining; cursive handwriting is. I strongly believe that writing things by hand (handwriting) is an aid to learning, but I don't think learning two different, parallel scripts increases that learning. (I don't object to cursive as an art form--in fact I love it and practice it--but that is something for older…

>Those who print all the time can write just as quickly

If they have studied cursive as an art form in the 3d grade then I agree. Otherwise, not really. Cursive is not an art form, it's an efficient system of handwriting. If you are seeing it as an art form - you are not using handwriting enough in my humble opinion. When I went to school, rebelling kids were developing all kinds of different ways to longhand to stand out and show their individuality. I have never seen anybody typing voluntarily. It's just not as quick.

Re: Advantages of Longhand Over Laptop Note Taking

#18

Post by gumby »

I'm interested in why. The linked paper has some fascinating discussion of prior research on the "why" question, but as yet really the only data we have come from correlational studies rather than explanatory ones.

I type a lot (5x-10x?) faster than I can write but I take all my meeting notes by pen (I use a livescribe but it hasn't changed my workflow much). It's clearly faster in terms of retention, comprehension and relevance. But why?

I have noticed that in note taking I have my own idiosyncratic handwriting: primarily joined-up ("cursive"), with many letterforms surviving from my childhood, but with some that are formed in a way that simply seems more natural to me (especially the decenders of y and g) intermixed with some "printed" characters (for example j, as well as almost all the capital letters, to the extent that I use them at all). Definitely not designed for someone else to read again, and even in my case I often have to puzzle out what I had written -- yet still, it has a much better result than typing! I clearly have adapted my writing to reduce its overhead.

Apart from note taking I almost don't write at all: a few hand-printed notes ("don't throw this away") or addresses, and whiteboards of course. These always use separated, printed letters and seem cognitively complex to write (i.e. slow!). Typing is clearly the most effortless.

With my own n of one I have tried taking notes with a wireless keyboard on the table or my lap (so the screen isn't a barrier between me and my interlocutor) but it doesn't help. There presumably is some disjoint mechanism between handwriting and typing, and somehow the handwriting barrier is lower.

Re: Advantages of Longhand Over Laptop Note Taking

#19

Post by SiVal »

pandaman wrote: post #17
SiVal wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe the failing American education can be explained by the decline of handwriting. Handwriting isn't declining; cursive handwriting is. I strongly believe that writing things by hand (handwriting) is an aid to learning, but I don't think learning two different, parallel scripts increases that learning. (I don't object to cursive as an art form--in fact I love it and practice it--but that is something for older…

>Those who print all the time can write just as quickly If they have studied cursive as an art form in the 3d grade then I agree. Otherwise, not really. Cursive is not an art form, it's an efficient system of handwriting. If you are seeing it as an art form - you are not using handwriting enough in my humble opinion. When I went to school, rebelling kids were developing all kinds of different ways to longhand to stan…

This has been measured by researchers, and cursive provided no speed advantage over printing. That's why it's so easy and common for people who know how to write in cursive to revert to printing all the time even after years of cursive in school.

Cursive as a non-art, general writing system was developed because of the need to keep the pen nib in contact with the paper as much as possible to draw the ink drop forward. Each time the nib was lifted, you risked leaving an ink blob. Kids advancing from pencil to pen needed to also change from printing to cursive.

The shift away from liquid ink pens (quill, steel, fountain, cartridge) to polymerizing ("ball point") pens in the second half of the 20th Century obviated that need.

Re: Advantages of Longhand Over Laptop Note Taking

#20

Post by pandaman »

SiVal wrote: post #19
pandaman wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Those who print all the time can write just as quickly If they have studied cursive as an art form in the 3d grade then I agree. Otherwise, not really. Cursive is not an art form, it's an efficient system of handwriting. If you are seeing it as an art form - you are not using handwriting enough in my humble opinion. When I went to school, rebelling kids were developing all kinds of different ways to longhand to stan…

This has been measured by researchers, and cursive provided no speed advantage over printing. That's why it's so easy and common for people who know how to write in cursive to revert to printing all the time even after years of cursive in school. Cursive as a non-art, general writing system was developed because of the need to keep the pen nib in contact with the paper as much as possible to draw the ink drop forward…

Have researchers ever published they research? Also, appreciate downvotes from the illiterate :)
Post reply on HN