Araştırma Makalesi
PDF EndNote BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

A Systematic Review of Note Taking Strategy Researches

Yıl 2022, Cilt 42, Sayı 2, 1555 - 1572, 29.08.2022
https://doi.org/10.17152/gefad.912361

Öz

This study aims at examining master's and doctoral theses, and scientific articles, which are written on note taking in Turkey, systematically and descriptively. Systematic review method was used in the research. The research to be included in the review were obtained from the databases of Council of Higher Education (YÖK) Thesis Center, ULAKBİM TR Index and Dergipark with keywords. According to the findings, 83% of the studies investigate the relationship between notetaking and variables such as academic achievement, listening skill, and retention of information in memory. 65% of the studies were conducted using experimental methods, and qualitative methods that could reveal the functioning of the teaching process and students' opinions about this process were rarely used. Many issues related to note taking such as note taking with computers, note taking in the education of individuals in need of special education, history of notetaking, cognitive psychology and note taking have been ignored. In most of the studies, data were collected from university and secondary school students. As a result, it emerges that the note taking strategy should be associated with different fields, it should be handled outside of the methods and approaches used, and data should be collected from different study groups.

Kaynakça

  • Atrash, A., Abel, M.-H., Moulin, C., Darène, N., Huet, F. ve Bruaux, S. (2015). Note-taking as a main feature in a social networking platform for small and medium sized enterprises. Computers in Human Behavior, 51, 705–714.
  • Blair, A. (2010). The Rise of Note‐Taking in Early Modern Europe. Intellectual History Review, 20(3), 303–316.
  • Boyle, J. R. (2012). Note-Taking and Secondary Students with Learning Disabilities: Challenges and Solutions. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 27(2), 90–101.
  • Boyle, J. R., Forchelli, G. A. ve Cariss, K. (2015). Note-Taking Interventions to Assist Students With Disabilities in Content Area Classes. Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 59(3), 186–195.
  • Bozkurt, Z. (2009). The effect of language of note taking on successful task completion. (Yüksek Lisans Tezi), İhsan Doğramacı Bilkent Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü.
  • Bui, D. C. ve Myerson, J. (2014). The role of working memory abilities in lecture note-taking. Learning and Individual Differences, 33, 12–22.
  • Büyüköztürk, Ş., Kılıç Çakmak, E., Akgün, Ö. E., Karadeniz, Ş. ve Demirel, F. (2013). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
  • Castelló, M., & Monereo, C. (2005). Students’ Note-Taking as a Knowledge-Construction Tool. L1-Educational Studies in Language and Literature, 5(3), 265–285.
  • Corey, S. M. (1935). The efficacy of instruction in note making. Journal of Educational Psychology, 26, 188-194.
  • Crawford, C. C. (1925). The correlation between college lecture notes and quiz papers. The Journal of Educational Research, 12(4), 282-291.
  • Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Sage Publications.
  • Divesta, F. J., & Gray, G. S. (1972). Listening and note taking. Journal of Educational Psychology, 63(1), 8-14.
  • Dror, I. E. (2007). Gold mines and land mines in cognitive technology. Içinde I. E. Dror (Ed.), Cognitive Technologies and the Pragmatics of Cognition (ss. 1–7). John Benjamins Publishing Company.
  • Flanigan, A. E., & Titsworth, S. (2020). The impact of digital distraction on lecture note taking and student learning. Instructional Science, 48(5), 495–524.
  • Glesne, C. (2015). Ön hazırlıklar: sizin için iyi olanı yapmak (Çev.: S. Yalçınoğlu). İçinde A. Ersoy ve S. Yalçınoğlu (Editörler), Nitel araştırmaya giriş (ss. 37-84). Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık.
  • Gough, D., Oliver, S., & Thomas, J. (2012). An introduction to systematic reviews: SAGE Publications.
  • Güneş, F. (2007). Türkçe öğretimi ve zihinsel yapılandırma. Nobel Yayın Dağıtım.
  • Horowitz, I. A., & Bordens, K. S. (2002). The effects of jury size, evidence complexity, and note taking on jury process and performance in a civil trial. Journal of Applied Psychology. Horowitz, Irwin A.: Dept of Psychology, Oregon State U, 102 Moreland Hall, Corvalis, OR, US, 97331, ihorowitz@orst.edu: American Psychological Association.
  • Kim, K., Turner, S. A., & Pérez-Quiñones, M. A. (2009). Requirements for electronic note taking systems: A field study of note taking in university classrooms. Education and Information Technologies, 14(3), 255–283.
  • Landis, J. R. ve Koch, G. G. (1977). The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data. Biometrics, 33(1), 159–174.
  • Luo, L., Kiewra, K. A., Flanigan, A. E. ve Peteranetz, M. S. (2018). Laptop versus longhand note taking: effects on lecture notes and achievement. Instructional Science, 46(6), 947–971.
  • McGuire, L. C., Morian, A., Codding, R. ve Smyer, M. A. (2000). Older Adults’ Memory for Medical Information: Influence of Elderspeak and Note Taking. International Journal of Rehabilitation and Health, 5(2), 117–128.
  • Mueller, P. A. ve Oppenheimer, D. M. (2016). Technology and note-taking in the classroom, boardroom, hospital room, and courtroom. Trends in Neuroscience and Education, 5(3), 139–145.
  • Oğuz, A. (1989). Derste not almanın öğrenme ve hatırlama düzeyine etkisi. (Doktora Tezi), Hacettepe Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Ankara.
  • Pettricrew, M. ve Roberts, H. (2006). Systematic reviews in the social sciences: Blackwell Publishing.
  • Peverly, S. T., Garner, J. K. ve Vekaria, P. C. (2014). Both handwriting speed and selective attention are important to lecture note-taking. Reading and Writing, 27(1), 1–30.
  • Piolat, A., Olive, T. ve Kellogg, R. T. (2005). Cognitive effort during note taking. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 19(3), 291–312.
  • Reddington, L. A., Peverly, S. T. ve Block, C. J. (2015). An examination of some of the cognitive and motivation variables related to gender differences in lecture note-taking. Reading and Writing, 28(8), 1155–1185.
  • Robinson, A. T. (1905). Note Taking. Boston: D. C. Heath & Co., Publishers.
  • Schepman, A., Rodway, P., Beattie, C. ve Lambert, J. (2012). An observational study of undergraduate students’ adoption of (mobile) note-taking software. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(2), 308–317.
  • Soll, J. (2010). From Note‐Taking to Data Banks: Personal and Institutional Information Management in Early Modern Europe. Intellectual History Review, 20(3), 355–375.
  • Terry, W. S. (2013). İnsan Belleği: Kavramsal Yaklaşımlar (Çev.: B. Cangöz,). İçinde B. Cangöz (Editör), Öğrenme ve bellek (ps. 327-384). Ankara: Nobel Akademi.
  • Trevors, G., Duffy, M. ve Azevedo, R. (2014). Note-taking within MetaTutor: interactions between an intelligent tutoring system and prior knowledge on note-taking and learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 62(5), 507–528.
  • Vekaria, P. C. ve Peverly, S. T. (2018). Lecture note-taking in postsecondary students with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Reading and Writing, 31(7), 1551–1573.

Not Alma Stratejisi Araştırmalarının Sistematik Olarak İncelenmesi

Yıl 2022, Cilt 42, Sayı 2, 1555 - 1572, 29.08.2022
https://doi.org/10.17152/gefad.912361

Öz

Bu araştırmada Türkiye’de not alma stratejisi ile ilgili yapılan yüksek lisans ve doktora tezleri ile akademik makalelerin sistematik ve betimsel olarak incelenmesi amaçlanmıştır. Araştırmada sistematik derleme yöntemi kullanılmıştır. Derlemeye alınacak araştırmalara anahtar sözcükler aracılığıyla YÖK Ulusal Tez Merkezi, ULAKBİM TR Dizin ve Dergipark veri tabanlarından ulaşılmıştır. Elde edilen bulgulara göre araştırmaların %83’ünde not almanın akademik başarı, dinleme becerisi ve bilgilerin bellekte kalıcılığı gibi değişkenlerle olan ilişkisi irdelenmiştir. Araştırmaların %65’i deneysel yöntemler kullanılarak yürütülmüş ve öğretim sürecinin işleyişini ve öğrencilerin bu süreçle ilgili görüşlerini ortaya çıkarabilecek nitel yöntemlere çok az başvurulmuştur. Bilgisayarla not alma, özel eğitime ihtiyaç duyan bireylerin eğitiminde not alma, not almanın tarihi, bilişsel psikoloji ve not alma gibi not alma ile bağlantılı olabilecek pek çok konu göz ardı edilmiştir. Yapılan çalışmaların büyük çoğunluğunda veriler üniversite ve ortaokul öğrencilerinden toplanmıştır. Sonuç olarak not alma stratejisinin daha farklı alanlarla ilişkilendirilmesi, kullanılagelen yöntem ve yaklaşımlar dışında ele alınması ve farklı çalışma gruplarından veri toplanması gerektiği ortaya çıkmaktadır.

Kaynakça

  • Atrash, A., Abel, M.-H., Moulin, C., Darène, N., Huet, F. ve Bruaux, S. (2015). Note-taking as a main feature in a social networking platform for small and medium sized enterprises. Computers in Human Behavior, 51, 705–714.
  • Blair, A. (2010). The Rise of Note‐Taking in Early Modern Europe. Intellectual History Review, 20(3), 303–316.
  • Boyle, J. R. (2012). Note-Taking and Secondary Students with Learning Disabilities: Challenges and Solutions. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 27(2), 90–101.
  • Boyle, J. R., Forchelli, G. A. ve Cariss, K. (2015). Note-Taking Interventions to Assist Students With Disabilities in Content Area Classes. Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 59(3), 186–195.
  • Bozkurt, Z. (2009). The effect of language of note taking on successful task completion. (Yüksek Lisans Tezi), İhsan Doğramacı Bilkent Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü.
  • Bui, D. C. ve Myerson, J. (2014). The role of working memory abilities in lecture note-taking. Learning and Individual Differences, 33, 12–22.
  • Büyüköztürk, Ş., Kılıç Çakmak, E., Akgün, Ö. E., Karadeniz, Ş. ve Demirel, F. (2013). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
  • Castelló, M., & Monereo, C. (2005). Students’ Note-Taking as a Knowledge-Construction Tool. L1-Educational Studies in Language and Literature, 5(3), 265–285.
  • Corey, S. M. (1935). The efficacy of instruction in note making. Journal of Educational Psychology, 26, 188-194.
  • Crawford, C. C. (1925). The correlation between college lecture notes and quiz papers. The Journal of Educational Research, 12(4), 282-291.
  • Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Sage Publications.
  • Divesta, F. J., & Gray, G. S. (1972). Listening and note taking. Journal of Educational Psychology, 63(1), 8-14.
  • Dror, I. E. (2007). Gold mines and land mines in cognitive technology. Içinde I. E. Dror (Ed.), Cognitive Technologies and the Pragmatics of Cognition (ss. 1–7). John Benjamins Publishing Company.
  • Flanigan, A. E., & Titsworth, S. (2020). The impact of digital distraction on lecture note taking and student learning. Instructional Science, 48(5), 495–524.
  • Glesne, C. (2015). Ön hazırlıklar: sizin için iyi olanı yapmak (Çev.: S. Yalçınoğlu). İçinde A. Ersoy ve S. Yalçınoğlu (Editörler), Nitel araştırmaya giriş (ss. 37-84). Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık.
  • Gough, D., Oliver, S., & Thomas, J. (2012). An introduction to systematic reviews: SAGE Publications.
  • Güneş, F. (2007). Türkçe öğretimi ve zihinsel yapılandırma. Nobel Yayın Dağıtım.
  • Horowitz, I. A., & Bordens, K. S. (2002). The effects of jury size, evidence complexity, and note taking on jury process and performance in a civil trial. Journal of Applied Psychology. Horowitz, Irwin A.: Dept of Psychology, Oregon State U, 102 Moreland Hall, Corvalis, OR, US, 97331, ihorowitz@orst.edu: American Psychological Association.
  • Kim, K., Turner, S. A., & Pérez-Quiñones, M. A. (2009). Requirements for electronic note taking systems: A field study of note taking in university classrooms. Education and Information Technologies, 14(3), 255–283.
  • Landis, J. R. ve Koch, G. G. (1977). The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data. Biometrics, 33(1), 159–174.
  • Luo, L., Kiewra, K. A., Flanigan, A. E. ve Peteranetz, M. S. (2018). Laptop versus longhand note taking: effects on lecture notes and achievement. Instructional Science, 46(6), 947–971.
  • McGuire, L. C., Morian, A., Codding, R. ve Smyer, M. A. (2000). Older Adults’ Memory for Medical Information: Influence of Elderspeak and Note Taking. International Journal of Rehabilitation and Health, 5(2), 117–128.
  • Mueller, P. A. ve Oppenheimer, D. M. (2016). Technology and note-taking in the classroom, boardroom, hospital room, and courtroom. Trends in Neuroscience and Education, 5(3), 139–145.
  • Oğuz, A. (1989). Derste not almanın öğrenme ve hatırlama düzeyine etkisi. (Doktora Tezi), Hacettepe Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Ankara.
  • Pettricrew, M. ve Roberts, H. (2006). Systematic reviews in the social sciences: Blackwell Publishing.
  • Peverly, S. T., Garner, J. K. ve Vekaria, P. C. (2014). Both handwriting speed and selective attention are important to lecture note-taking. Reading and Writing, 27(1), 1–30.
  • Piolat, A., Olive, T. ve Kellogg, R. T. (2005). Cognitive effort during note taking. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 19(3), 291–312.
  • Reddington, L. A., Peverly, S. T. ve Block, C. J. (2015). An examination of some of the cognitive and motivation variables related to gender differences in lecture note-taking. Reading and Writing, 28(8), 1155–1185.
  • Robinson, A. T. (1905). Note Taking. Boston: D. C. Heath & Co., Publishers.
  • Schepman, A., Rodway, P., Beattie, C. ve Lambert, J. (2012). An observational study of undergraduate students’ adoption of (mobile) note-taking software. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(2), 308–317.
  • Soll, J. (2010). From Note‐Taking to Data Banks: Personal and Institutional Information Management in Early Modern Europe. Intellectual History Review, 20(3), 355–375.
  • Terry, W. S. (2013). İnsan Belleği: Kavramsal Yaklaşımlar (Çev.: B. Cangöz,). İçinde B. Cangöz (Editör), Öğrenme ve bellek (ps. 327-384). Ankara: Nobel Akademi.
  • Trevors, G., Duffy, M. ve Azevedo, R. (2014). Note-taking within MetaTutor: interactions between an intelligent tutoring system and prior knowledge on note-taking and learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 62(5), 507–528.
  • Vekaria, P. C. ve Peverly, S. T. (2018). Lecture note-taking in postsecondary students with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Reading and Writing, 31(7), 1551–1573.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil Türkçe
Konular Sosyal
Bölüm Makaleler
Yazarlar

Yusuf AYDIN> (Sorumlu Yazar)
AKDENIZ UNIVERSITY
0000-0003-0898-9020
Türkiye

Yayımlanma Tarihi 29 Ağustos 2022
Yayınlandığı Sayı Yıl 2022, Cilt 42, Sayı 2

Kaynak Göster

Bibtex @araştırma makalesi { gefad912361, journal = {Gazi Üniversitesi Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi}, issn = {1301-9058}, address = {}, publisher = {Gazi Üniversitesi}, year = {2022}, volume = {42}, number = {2}, pages = {1555 - 1572}, doi = {10.17152/gefad.912361}, title = {Not Alma Stratejisi Araştırmalarının Sistematik Olarak İncelenmesi}, key = {cite}, author = {Aydın, Yusuf} }
APA Aydın, Y. (2022). Not Alma Stratejisi Araştırmalarının Sistematik Olarak İncelenmesi . Gazi Üniversitesi Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi , 42 (2) , 1555-1572 . DOI: 10.17152/gefad.912361
MLA Aydın, Y. "Not Alma Stratejisi Araştırmalarının Sistematik Olarak İncelenmesi" . Gazi Üniversitesi Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi 42 (2022 ): 1555-1572 <https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/gefad/issue/72357/912361>
Chicago Aydın, Y. "Not Alma Stratejisi Araştırmalarının Sistematik Olarak İncelenmesi". Gazi Üniversitesi Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi 42 (2022 ): 1555-1572
RIS TY - JOUR T1 - Not Alma Stratejisi Araştırmalarının Sistematik Olarak İncelenmesi AU - YusufAydın Y1 - 2022 PY - 2022 N1 - doi: 10.17152/gefad.912361 DO - 10.17152/gefad.912361 T2 - Gazi Üniversitesi Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi JF - Journal JO - JOR SP - 1555 EP - 1572 VL - 42 IS - 2 SN - 1301-9058- M3 - doi: 10.17152/gefad.912361 UR - https://doi.org/10.17152/gefad.912361 Y2 - 2022 ER -
EndNote %0 Gazi Üniversitesi Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi Not Alma Stratejisi Araştırmalarının Sistematik Olarak İncelenmesi %A Yusuf Aydın %T Not Alma Stratejisi Araştırmalarının Sistematik Olarak İncelenmesi %D 2022 %J Gazi Üniversitesi Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi %P 1301-9058- %V 42 %N 2 %R doi: 10.17152/gefad.912361 %U 10.17152/gefad.912361
ISNAD Aydın, Yusuf . "Not Alma Stratejisi Araştırmalarının Sistematik Olarak İncelenmesi". Gazi Üniversitesi Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi 42 / 2 (Ağustos 2022): 1555-1572 . https://doi.org/10.17152/gefad.912361
AMA Aydın Y. Not Alma Stratejisi Araştırmalarının Sistematik Olarak İncelenmesi. GEFAD. 2022; 42(2): 1555-1572.
Vancouver Aydın Y. Not Alma Stratejisi Araştırmalarının Sistematik Olarak İncelenmesi. Gazi Üniversitesi Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi. 2022; 42(2): 1555-1572.
IEEE Y. Aydın , "Not Alma Stratejisi Araştırmalarının Sistematik Olarak İncelenmesi", Gazi Üniversitesi Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, c. 42, sayı. 2, ss. 1555-1572, Ağu. 2022, doi:10.17152/gefad.912361