Just looking for other Doper’s views on this law professor’s assertation that verbatim note-taking is a hinderance for retention and understanding.
I’d always been of the opinion that writing down anything put it through the brain, and, so to speak, made the brain “look” at what was being put down. Certainly that was the theory of teaching back at the Navy’s Nuclear Power School, where there were approved notes that all instructors had to use, and that all the students were required to write down, verbatim, in their own notebooks.
My experience was that this experience did help me remember the things in class discussion.
I’d always thought that part of it was simply that the brain processed language it heard, and language it read, or wrote, in two different ways, and so it had to be involved in translating between the two modes of thought, or the two sections of the brain. So, I’d have assumed that typing notes on a laptop would have had the same benefit as writing them down by hand.
So, I would have loved the idea of laptops in the classroom to allow me to be able to take verbatim notes. But I can see where that would have a poor effect on a course that was intended to involve a lot of classroom discussion.
So, just wondering whether other Dopers think that verbatim note-taking reduces or improves knowledge retention?
Ha. I agree with the esteemed law professor that laptops can be very distracting, for both the students and the professors. THAT SAID…
(1) You want a good grade in law school? Vomit back the professor’s own words. Sure, you can pass using hornbooks and legal outlines, but if you want to ace the class, then speak to the professor in his own language. That’s reason #1 to allow / encourage verbatim note-taking.
(2) Really, who cares about classroom participation other than the professors? Nobody - and I mean, nobody - learns much in a law school class. At least, in the sense that they don’t have to study and assimilate the material later during study-time. It’s ridiculous to say “well they’re just taking notes, and not learning!” Why? Because they’re going to learn later from those notes.
(3) Finally, it’s a well-documented fact ( ) that the gunners in law school - that is, the guys whose hand shoots up and who pander to the professor and actively participate in arcane legal discussions - well, they get the worst grades. (Want to be the valedictorian? Sit in the back with the efficient people and surf the net.) The fact is that in law school, with blind grading, “classroom participation” is completely irrelevant - and that’s the way it should be.
(4) Finally, let me just say — to all the law professors out there — if you (and the material) are more interesting than Spider Solitaire, then you won’t have a problem. But until that day…
It would seem to me that there are really two issues at work here:
Do laptops in class distract from the learning experience?
Is verbatim note-taking a bad thing?
These issues are not necessarily related, in my experience. In our classes (at a law school yet), laptops are allowed. Probably about two-thirds of the students use them. Yet these students do not take verbatim notes–at least those that I have seen. They’re good, yes; but they are far from a verbatim transcript of the instructor’s lecture.
What does happen is just what Coles is afraid of: students use them to surf the Net during lectures, IM friends, post to message boards, play games, and so on. True, sometimes, they will call up the case being discussed from a legal database and take notes as seems necessary. But from what I see on laptop screens from the back of the class, where I continue to take notes by hand, it’s only sometimes. They’re not taking verbatim notes.
For the record, I like handwriting notes because it forces me to think over what has just been said, and write it down in a brief way so I can get on to the next point that the instructor has already started talking about. My mind is engaged with the subject matter during the lecture. I must be doing something right, because occasionally, my laptop-using colleagues ask to borrow my notes so they can photocopy them.
I agree that the linked opinion piece in the OP is a discussion of two issues.
I did try to make the OP a bit more focused, though.
I’d meant to concede that laptops could be as much a distraction as a help (or more of one) in the classroom. It’s not something I can imagine even trying to debate.
I’m really interested in people’s experiences, or opinions, on verbatim note-taking.
So he’s managed to replace verbatim note taking on bits of dead dinosaur, with verbatim note taking on bits of dead tree. I don’t really see the point. I’m not sure how much “learning” actually goes on in a lecture; I try to write down almost everything my profs say, every number, every gesture, etc. The learning happens after class when you review the notes side by side with the text, and try to re-solve the problems.
I wonder if the crochety old fart objects to tablet PCs. I’m not sure why a Law student would need a tablet PC though, a regular keyboard should be good enough.
For the record, I have never been distracted in a meaningful class*, by what someone else was doing on their computer.
*I do enjoy watching a game of slime volleyball in those effing seminar/drone on about some society/job/technology for an hour+ classes.
Who in the world has time to take verbatim notes? I had no idea it was possible. I’ve always taken down key words, themes, and tried to structure them in as logical a way as possible. I do type more quickly on the computer and, even better, I can go back and put a point half a page back if that’s where it belongs.
At my law school about 98% use their laptops for notetaking. A healthy portion of those actually taking notes (as opposed to IMing or whatever) do near-verbatim transcripts. I think its silly – clearly not everything the professor says is important. I handwrite and have plenty of time to write down everything that bears noting. My study group often requests my class notes.
Another thing I prefer about handwriting is that I can join concepts visually much more easily on paper. I use a lot of arrows and such to designate the interrelations of things.
Hasn’t anyone heard of a tape recorder? Record the class, taking notes on the highlights. Flesh the notes out later at your convenience from the recorder.
God help us! Vaguely tuning in during class is bad enough, but trying to listen to the lecture again? Ugh.
Anyway, if you use a tape recorder, then you don’t feel like you have to pay attention and engage in the class. Thus, all of that crotchety ol’ professor’s arguments against laptops apply to you as well. Have a nice day!
ETA: of course, that last bit was said firmly cheek-in-tongue.
Because then the student doesn’t process the information at all…they just read it, like the text. The idea is to make you transition the stuff from ears to hand, hoping some of it sticks in different places than strictly read material does. I give my students a copy of my lecture notes on key units, but only after they have taken the lecture notes thamselves.
Personally, I think that all note-taking is bad. Notes are good for recording raw data like names and dates. But it hinders your ability to take in the core “learning” of the topic; I.e. the whys and hows.
If you never take notes, you have to retain the information. No you won’t be able to recall everything, but what you do recall will be the parts that you’ve trained yourself to be worth memorizing. Anything else you can just look up (dates and names.) What you do remember, though, is the stuff that will serve you well in living life since it stays in your brain past your final exam. You’ll be able to connect your knowledge of Napolean to modern day business since you still remember 20 years later and it popped up into your head as one case of how things went in a situation that your mind linked to.
Notes allow you to not memorize the information, and they encourage you to only store keywords so that during the test, the keywords on the page bring forth the exact words you noted down and crammed into your head the night before. And which you then proceed to forget the next day.
Knowing a bunch of keywords isn’t very useful in life. It just let’s you win at Jeopardy.
You think he would’ve kicked up hell about the laptops when it was actually relevant, before they made the decision to make them mandatory.
My SO is in a situation with mandated laptops, and I have to say 30 laptops in a classroom are at least less distracting than 3.
His reference to students expecting to see the answer on their screen is roughly the same as a student scanning their notes for the answer. Kind of a weak stab at technology.
Not really. No matter how fast I can type I’m not typing everything you say. That’s ridiculous.
Like I said before, this is a lot more distracting when a few students have them as opposed to all of them. 10 years ago, if you’re boring they’d just doodle, or chat up their classmates. At least IMing is silent.
My point is that contact time with the professor is valuable, but only if there is interaction.
If the lecturer just reads out the material and the students copy it down, there’s no time for questions. Plus there will be some transcription errors.
I found that the best way to study is to listen very carefully in class, jot down a few key points, and then copy someone *else’s * verbatim notes.
(And no, I didn’t feel guity about photocopying someone else’s notes - all you need is one speed-writer per class, and there’s always at least one OCD victim who’ll do it anyway, no matter what the policy is. Besides, I wasn’t studying stenography. Writing fast doesn’t make you smarter.)
) that the gunners in law school - that is, the guys whose hand shoots up and who pander to the professor and actively participate in arcane legal discussions - well, they get the worst grades. (Want to be the valedictorian? Sit in the back with the efficient people and surf the net.) The fact is that in law school, with blind grading, “classroom participation” is completely irrelevant - and that’s the way it should be.