Category: Learning

Note taking – Handwriting vs Typing

Dwayne Harapnuik 2 Comments

Which is better taking notes by handwriting or by typing? Like all research, the answer is in the details and the interpretation, not just the initial results.

The Mueller/Oppenhiemer study The Pen Is Mightier Than the Keyboard Advantages of Longhand Over Laptop Note Taking revealed that since students can type much faster than they can write there is a tendency for students to mindlessly transcribe large volumes of notes. In contrast, with handwritten notes, a student must focus more on the concepts than on the transcription. The authors pointed to additional research in their literature review suggested summarization and conceptualization resulting from handwriting notes added in retention and deeper understanding.

The authors also speculated as did many other bloggers who reposted the summary results that if one could combine the efficiency of typing with the conceptualization of handwriting that taking notes with a laptop or tablet could contribute equally to memory retention. This is a key point of this debate–Rather then just mindlessly type and record the information being transferred if the typist were to apply the same method of summarization and conceptualization that happens with handwriting notes then typing notes would be even more effective and efficient.

While being more efficient with the passive information transfer required from your typical lecture is helpful in dealing with those situations where one has no choice but to take in a lecture, if we are really concerned with deeper learning then we would provide an alternative to the typical lecture. Since the lecture is still the primary mode of information transfer in secondary and post-secondary education this will continue to be an ongoing issue.

While I have no reason to doubt the Mueller/Oppenhiemer study that is currently popular in the traditional media and blogosphere I am always hesitant to trust the “most popular” opinion and I explored further to see if there were any additional studies that provided an alternative perspective. A recent undergraduate research project by Ian Schoen of Pitzer College that directly compared typing notes and handwriting notes in both the lecture and textbook study. In his senior thesis Effects of Method and Context of Note-taking on Memory: Handwriting versus Typing in Lecture and Textbook-Reading Contexts Schoen found that although the survey participants preferred taking notes by hand, his research revealed that typing notes in a lecture produced slightly higher retention scores.

Article Abstract:

Both electronic note-taking (typing) and traditional note-taking (handwriting) are being utilized by college students to retain information. The effects of the method of note-taking and note-taking context were examined to determine if handwriting or typing notes and whether a lecture context or a textbook-reading context influenced retention. Pitzer College and Scripps College students were assigned to either handwrite or type notes on a piece of academic material presented in either a lecture or textbook context and were given a test to assess their retention. The results demonstrated that there was a significant main effect for typing notes such that typing notes produced higher retention scores than handwriting notes. The results also indicated that there was an interaction between the method of note-taking and context such that the lowest scores were achieved in the condition in which participants hand0-wrote notes during a lecture. In total, these findings suggest that typing as a method of note-taking may be an influential factor in memory retention, particularly in a lecture context.

Read the full article…

If the goal is to retain information from a lecture or other form of information transfer, then taking notes is better than not taking notes is the one fact consistent in all the research on this topic. It is also clear that much more research will need to be conducted to provide a more definitive answer on this issue. Until all the research is in, one’s personal preference should also play a significant role in deciding just how to take notes.

The other key factor in this debate is that you can’t just blindly trust NPR, Scientific America, popular educational websites or other traditional news sources you have to go back to the primary sources to really see what the research points to and how it has been interpreted. Upon closer reading of the research, one could argue if used properly the typing notes on your laptop could be more effective then handwriting–assuming the note take applies the same summarization and conceptualization skills that are required due to the lesser speed of handwriting.

Reference

Mueller, P. A., & Oppenheimer, D. M. (2014). The Pen Is Mightier Than the Keyboard Advantages of Longhand Over Laptop Note Taking. Psychological Science, 25(6), 1159–1168. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797614524581

Schoen, I. (2012). Effects of method and context of note-taking on memory: Handwriting versus typing in lecture and textbook-reading contexts (Pitzer Senior Theses). Pitzer College. Retrieved from http://scholarship.claremont.edu/pitzer_theses/20/

Personalized learning and the new Behaviorism

Dwayne Harapnuik Leave a comment

Outside the field of behaviorism, Chomsky’s paper is considered to be a classic, and is cited as final evidence of the inadequacy of behaviorism as a general framework for animal behavior and human affairs (Virués-Ortega, 2006 p. 243).

As you will see in the Noam Chomsky Behaviorism video and read in the articles linked below even though behaviorism has been shown to be inadequate it not only persists to this day it still dominates educational practice. Most recently we have seen a resurgence of behaviorism in the form of personalized learning, or “competency-based education,” which Diane Ravitch (2018) argues are are both euphemisms for computer adaptive instruction.

Norm Freiesn (2018) argues that educations primary purpose has always been to help children to gradually become free and responsible adults who will contribute to everyday life in our civil society. The reliance on computer algorithms to control the education process moves it away from its essence as a human activity. Ironically the label of “personalized learning” is used even though computer-aided instruction depersonalizes and reduces the process of learning to that of matching curricular competency with workforce placement. Personalized learning is really about the meaningful connections that are made with teachers, peers, and the significant learning experiences that are made possible by giving learners choice, ownership, and voice through authentic learning opportunities.

The following warning from Paul Emerich (2018) a former Silicon Valley personalized learning expert emphasizes the human dimension of genuine personalized learning:

We must walk away from this hyper-individualized brand of personalized learning. We must walk away from its reductionism, assuming that education is simply an arrangement of individualized playlist cards or isolated experiences. We must run from the idea that technology is necessary to make the classroom a more personal and humanized place, because what personalizes the classroom is not fancy technology and big data: truly knowing children is what personalizes and humanizes a modern classroom.

References

Chomsky N. Review of B. F. Skinner, Verbal Behavior. Language. 1959;35:26–58. Retrieved from https://chomsky.info/1967____/

Chomsky N. Review of B.F. Skinner’s Beyond Freedom and Dignity. The New York Review of Books. 1971 Dec 30;17:18–24. Retrieved from http://www.nybooks.com/articles/1971/12/30/the-case-against-bf-skinner/

Emerich, P. (2018, January 16). Why I left Silicon Valley, edTech, and “personalized” learning [Blog]. Retrieved June 22, 2018, from https://paulemerich.com/2018/01/15/why-i-left-silicon-valley-edtech-and-personalized-learning/

Friesen, N. (2018). Personalized learning technology and the new behaviorism: Beyond freedom and dignity. Retrieved from https://www.academia.edu/36112036/Personalized_Learning_Technology_and_the_New_Behaviorism_Beyond_Freedom_and_Dignity.docx

Ravitch, D. (2017, December 29). 5 risks posed by the increasing misuse of technology in schools [Blog]. Retrieved June 22, 2018, from https://www.edsurge.com/news/2017-12-29-5-risks-posed-by-the-increasing-misuse-of-technology-in-schools

Skinner, F.B. (1965).Science and Human Behavior. New York: The Free Press.

Skinner, B.F. (1971). Beyond Freedom and Dignity. New York: Bantam/Vintage

Virués-Ortega, J. (2006). The Case Against B. F. Skinner 45 years Later: An Encounter with N. Chomsky. The Behavior Analyst, 29(2), 243–251. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/223960274_The_Case_Against_B_F_Skinner_45_years_Later_An_Encounter_with_N_Chomsky

Watters, A. (2017, December 23). Education technology and the new behaviorism. Retrieved June 22, 2018, from http://hackeducation.com/2017/12/23/top-ed-tech-trends-social-emotional-learning

Disruptive Innovation Hype

Dwayne Harapnuik Leave a comment

This video is our response to the Disruptive Innovation hype that is all too often publish by too many mainstream organizations. The following infographic is what Dr. Thibodeaux and I discuss in this week’s episode of our Learner’s Mindset Discussion.


Source: http://www.govtech.com/education/higher-ed/Documenting-Disruptions-Infographic.html

Nuremburg Funnel – the idiomatic expression started back in the 17th century that conveys the notion of pouring in information.

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremberg_Funnel

En Lan 2000 – A 19th-Century Vision of the Year 2000

Source: https://publicdomainreview.org/collections/france-in-the-year-2000-1899-1910/

How to cut through the hype of educational promises

Dwayne Harapnuik 2 Comments

Personalize Learning GrantWhen educational issues hit the evening news it is very important that you understand how to move past the hype to see what is really happening. The announcement of Chicago Public Schools and nonprofit Leap Innovations receiving a $14 million grant from Chan Zuckerberg Initiative to expand personalized learning to 100 schools is definitely worth investigating. Without fully understanding what personalized learning means within the educational context, on its own merits, it sounds like a great idea. If we look to the recent confession from Larry Berger, CEO of Amplify about what personalized learning actually is. Berger’s company Amplify creates products and curriculum that are supposed to “truly personalize learning” (https://www.amplify.com/curriculum) and since he and his company has spent over a decade using big data algorithms to promote this model, his insider knowledge is useful.

Berger argues that when most people refer to personalized learning they are referring to the engineering model of personalized learning. His explanation of the model is worth repeating verbatim (link to the full confession):

You start with a map of all the things that kids need to learn.

Then you measure the kids so that you can place each kid on the map in just the spot where they know everything behind them, and in front of them is what they should learn next.

Then you assemble a vast library of learning objects and ask an algorithm to sort through it to find the optimal learning object for each kid at that particular moment.

Then you make each kid use the learning object.

Then you measure the kids again. If they have learned what you wanted them to learn, you move them to the next place on the map. If they didn’t learn it, you try something simpler.

If the map, the assessments, and the library were used by millions of kids, then the algorithms would get smarter and smarter, and make better, more personalized choices about which things to put in front of which kids.

I spent a decade believing in this model—the map, the measure, and the library, all powered by big data algorithms.

Here’s the problem: The map doesn’t exist, the measurement is impossible, and we have, collectively, built only 5% of the library.

To be more precise: The map exists for early reading and the quantitative parts of K-8 mathematics, and much promising work on personalized learning has been done in these areas; but the map doesn’t exist for reading comprehension, or writing, or for the more complex areas of mathematical reasoning, or for any area of science or social studies.

If the CEO of one of the leading personalized learning companies is willing to confess that – The map doesn’t exist, the measurement is impossible, and we have, collectively, built only 5% of the library – then perhaps we should listen to him. Especially when he points to the fact that if we really want our kids to learn how to learn then we need to take a look at what “your best teachers and coaches do for you—without the benefit of maps, algorithms, or data—to personalize your learning?”

Chances are these great teachers and coaches created significant learning environments in which they gave you choice, ownership, and voice through authentic learning opportunities. Learning has always been personal because until you take ownership of your own learning by making meaningful connections you do not learn. Effective teachers have always known that learning is the responsibility of the learner and their role was to create the environment in which this could happen.

These types of teachers have always used the latest technology to enhance the learning environment and recognized that technology, big data, and algorithms as simply tools that can be used to help make this happen. Unfortunately, we have the tendency to look to the tools to solve our problems. We need to head the warning or confession of the foremost tool maker and remember that: The map doesn’t exist, the measurement is impossible, and we have, collectively, built only 5% of the library

Instead of looking to technology to solve the personal component of personalized learning we need to look to the great teachers who have been doing personalized learning all along by giving their learners choice, ownership, and voice through authentic learning opportunities. These people have also been using technology in those authentic learning opportunities to help their learner explore, create, collaborate and communicate.

Personalized learning is one of the many educational technology quick fixes that we have a tendency to hope will solve our learning challenges. There are many more ideas, issues, and topics that need clarification and we are looking to you and our Digital Learning and Leading students to join us in exploring these significant issues.

  • Consider the following list as a starting point and let us know if you would like to write an article, post or other publication that will bring real clarity to the learning environment:
  • Never been a better time to be a learner and/or teacher
  • Growth mindset & Grit criticism
  • STEM instruction is mostly delivered via lecture
  • The much-needed shift to mastery learning
  • Personalized learning problems & benefits
  • Individualized instruction
  • Differentiated instruction
  • Additional names for competency-based education
  • Why technology isn’t a Quick fix
  • Silicon Valley’s failed promises with edtech
  • Problems with SAMR and related quick fix methodologies
  • Learning styles and related educational Zombie myths (bad ideas that just won’t die)
  • Problem-based instruction that isn’t
  • Shift from passive to active learning
  • Choice
  • Ownership
  • Voice
  • Authentic learning opportunities
  • Why all elements of COVA must co-exist
  • COVA from a student perspective
  • The issue with taking ownership and agency – why folks don’t do this
  • Creating significant learning environments
  • Future of education
  • Connecting the dots – making meaningful connections
  • Why – go & show rather than sit & get
  • Digital leader vs digital manager
  • Design thinking for designed learning
  • Confronting the Myth of the ‘Digital Native’
  • Decades of evidence…but where is the change? Translating educational research to practice
  • 18 years into the 21st century – how are we doing with 21st Century learning
  • Communities of Practice (CoP’s) and their impact
  • Problems with STEM/STEAM initiatives
  • Importance of Learning How to Learn
  • Importance of asking good questions vs finding right answers
  • Reality of Thorndyke vs. Rhetoric of Dewey – more to be said
  • Failing forward
  • Feedback to Feedforward
  • How to Avoid the Hype/Getting Caught in the whirlwind of day-to-day processes

Please contact either Dr. Thibodeax or myself (Dr. Harapnuik) if you would like to research, write, and publish on one or more of these topics. This list is also just a starting point so if you have other ideas with which you would like to collaborate write, just let us know.