个人笔记与合作笔记:学生笔记完整性、考试成绩和学术写作的准实验研究结果

IF 6.4 1区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Internet and Higher Education Pub Date : 2022-10-01 DOI:10.1016/j.iheduc.2022.100873
Matthew Courtney , Jamie Costley , Matthew Baldwin , Kyungmee Lee , Mik Fanguy
{"title":"个人笔记与合作笔记:学生笔记完整性、考试成绩和学术写作的准实验研究结果","authors":"Matthew Courtney ,&nbsp;Jamie Costley ,&nbsp;Matthew Baldwin ,&nbsp;Kyungmee Lee ,&nbsp;Mik Fanguy","doi":"10.1016/j.iheduc.2022.100873","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>There is research showing benefits to both collaboration and note-taking, but a lack of research into how they may both work together in an online context. More specifically, there is a gap in the research looking at how collaborative note-taking and individual note-taking can be compared when considering the quality of the notes taken, and how note-quality can impact student performance. The present study looks at the online note-taking behavior and performance of 186 graduate students studying at a Korean university. The results indicate that students who collaborate perform better than individual note-takers on measures of recall of course content, but that individual note-takers perform better on tasks focused on academic writing. Furthermore, the findings suggest that note-quality has no effect on collaborative note-takers' recall of course content, and a slight negative impact on their writing, while individual note-takers benefit from higher quality notes for both recall and writing.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48186,"journal":{"name":"Internet and Higher Education","volume":"55 ","pages":"Article 100873"},"PeriodicalIF":6.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S109675162200029X/pdfft?md5=218af55c63d1556c954b28fccee03601&pid=1-s2.0-S109675162200029X-main.pdf","citationCount":"7","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Individual versus collaborative note-taking: Results of a quasi-experimental study on student note completeness, test performance, and academic writing\",\"authors\":\"Matthew Courtney ,&nbsp;Jamie Costley ,&nbsp;Matthew Baldwin ,&nbsp;Kyungmee Lee ,&nbsp;Mik Fanguy\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.iheduc.2022.100873\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>There is research showing benefits to both collaboration and note-taking, but a lack of research into how they may both work together in an online context. More specifically, there is a gap in the research looking at how collaborative note-taking and individual note-taking can be compared when considering the quality of the notes taken, and how note-quality can impact student performance. The present study looks at the online note-taking behavior and performance of 186 graduate students studying at a Korean university. The results indicate that students who collaborate perform better than individual note-takers on measures of recall of course content, but that individual note-takers perform better on tasks focused on academic writing. Furthermore, the findings suggest that note-quality has no effect on collaborative note-takers' recall of course content, and a slight negative impact on their writing, while individual note-takers benefit from higher quality notes for both recall and writing.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48186,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Internet and Higher Education\",\"volume\":\"55 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100873\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S109675162200029X/pdfft?md5=218af55c63d1556c954b28fccee03601&pid=1-s2.0-S109675162200029X-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"7\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Internet and Higher Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S109675162200029X\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Internet and Higher Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S109675162200029X","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

摘要

有研究表明协作和记笔记都有好处,但缺乏关于它们如何在在线环境中协同工作的研究。更具体地说,在考虑到笔记的质量,以及笔记的质量如何影响学生的表现时,如何比较合作笔记和个人笔记的研究存在空白。本研究调查了韩国一所大学186名研究生的在线笔记行为和表现。结果表明,在回忆课程内容方面,合作的学生比单独记笔记的学生表现得更好,但在学术写作方面,单独记笔记的学生表现得更好。此外,研究结果表明,笔记质量对合作记笔记者对课程内容的回忆没有影响,对他们的写作有轻微的负面影响,而个人记笔记者则受益于更高质量的笔记,无论是回忆还是写作。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Individual versus collaborative note-taking: Results of a quasi-experimental study on student note completeness, test performance, and academic writing

There is research showing benefits to both collaboration and note-taking, but a lack of research into how they may both work together in an online context. More specifically, there is a gap in the research looking at how collaborative note-taking and individual note-taking can be compared when considering the quality of the notes taken, and how note-quality can impact student performance. The present study looks at the online note-taking behavior and performance of 186 graduate students studying at a Korean university. The results indicate that students who collaborate perform better than individual note-takers on measures of recall of course content, but that individual note-takers perform better on tasks focused on academic writing. Furthermore, the findings suggest that note-quality has no effect on collaborative note-takers' recall of course content, and a slight negative impact on their writing, while individual note-takers benefit from higher quality notes for both recall and writing.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Internet and Higher Education
Internet and Higher Education EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
19.30
自引率
4.70%
发文量
30
审稿时长
40 days
期刊介绍: The Internet and Higher Education is a quarterly peer-reviewed journal focused on contemporary issues and future trends in online learning, teaching, and administration within post-secondary education. It welcomes contributions from diverse academic disciplines worldwide and provides a platform for theory papers, research studies, critical essays, editorials, reviews, case studies, and social commentary.
期刊最新文献
Editorial Board The paradox of self-efficacy and technological dependence: Unraveling generative AI's impact on university students' task completion Prior online learning experiences as incidental professional development: A cross-sectional survey of online instructor beliefs and strategies Interaction and dialogue: Integration and application of artificial intelligence in blended mode writing feedback A situated expectancy-value theoretical perspective of teaching presence and student engagement in blended learning environments
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1