Improving Note-Taking Skills for Students With Disabilities Through a Smartpen Intervention

Abstract

Students with disabilities (SWD; e.g., learning disabilities) often struggle with slower processing speed and poor working memory skills, which reduce the quality of their notes. This study evaluated the effects of a note-taking intervention using the researcher-created smartpen strategy in conjunction with the assistive technology of the Livescribe™ Smartpen to assess the effects of students’ overall notes and lecture comprehension. Both SWD and without disabilities in ninth-grade English Language Arts classes participated in this study. The note-taking intervention was designed to assist SWD to take notes using the smartpen assistive technology, aid students in identifying key vocabulary content, amend their notes for errors or missed information, and establish a summary of the lecture. Results from the data analysis found that SWD in the experimental group recorded more words in their notes, as well as an increase in word count on the immediate free recall assessment.

Keywords

secondary age/grade level specific learning disability exceptionality assistive technology technology perspectives English language arts smartpen high-incidence disabilities

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Armbruster

(2008). Note-taking from lectures. In Flippo

Caverly

(Eds.), Handbook of college reading and study strategy research (pp. 220–248). New York, NY: Routledge.

Assistive Technology Act. (2004). Retrieved from https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-108publ364/html/PLAW-108publ364.htm

Badger

White

Sutherland

Haggis

(2001). Note perfect: An investigation of how students view taking notes in lectures. System, 29, 405–417. doi:10.1016/S0346-251X(01)00028-8

Bakunas

Holley

(2001). Teaching organizational skills. Clearing House, 74, 151–154. doi:10.1080/00098650109599182

Belson

S. I.

Hartmann

Sherman

(2013). Digital note taking: The use of electronic pens with students with specific learning disabilities. Journal of Special Education Technology, 28, 13–24. doi:10.1177/016264341302800202

Berry

(2006). Teacher talk during whole-class lessons: Engagement strategies to support the verbal participation of students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 21, 211–232.

Boyle

J. R.

(2010a). Note-taking skills of middle school students with and without learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 43, 530–540. doi:10.1177/0022219410371679

Boyle

J. R.

(2010b). Strategic note-taking for middle-school students with learning disabilities in science classes. Learning Disability Quarterly, 33, 93–109. doi:10.1177/073194871003300203

Boyle

J. R.

Forchelli

G. A.

(2014). Differences in the note-taking skills of students with high achievement, average achievement, and LD. Learning and Individual Differences, 35, 9–14. doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2014.06.002

10.

Boyle

J. R.

Joyce

R. L

. (2019). Smartpen technology for note-taking in inclusive English/language art classes. Reading & Writing Quarterly: Overcoming Learning Difficulties. doi:10.1080/10573569.2019.1579130

11.

Boyle

J. R.

Rivera

T. Z.

(2012). Note-taking techniques for students with disabilities: A systematic review of the research. Learning Disability Quarterly, 35, 131–143. doi:10.1177/0731948711435794

12.

Boyle

J. R.

Rosen

S. M.

Forchelli

G. A.

(2016) Exploring metacognitive strategy use during note-taking for students with learning disabilities. Education 3-13 International Journal of Primary, Elementary and Early Years Education, 44, 161–180. doi:10.1080/03004279.2014.929722

13.

Boyle

J. R.

Weishaar

(2001). The effects of a strategic note-taking technique on the comprehension and long term recall of lecture information for high school students with LD. LD Research and Practice, 16, 125–133.

14.

Brookhart

S. M.

Nitko

A. J.

(2008). Assessment and grading in classrooms. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.

15.

Bui

D. C.

Myerson

Hale

(2013). Note-taking with computers: Exploring alternative strategies for improved recall. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105, 299–399. doi:10.1037/a0030367

16.

Cohen

(1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. New York, NY: Routledge Academic.

17.

Cook

T. D.

Campbell

D. T.

Shadish

(2002). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.

18.

Cortiella

Horowitz

S. H.

(2014). The state of learning disabilities: Facts, trends and emerging issues (pp. 2–45). New York, NY: National Center for Learning Disabilities.

19.

Dalsen

(2017). Technology, disability, and law: Then and now. Journal of Special Education Technology, 32, 102–108. doi:10.1177/0162643417704438

20.

Deshler

D. D.

Lenz

K. B.

Bulgren

Schumaker

J. B.

Davis

Grossen

Marquis

. (2004). Adolescents with disabilities in high school setting: Student characteristics and setting dynamics. Learning Disabilities: A Contemporary Journal, 2, 30–48. ERIC Number: EJ797691.

21.

Deshler

D. D.

Schumaker

Bui

Vernon

(2006). High schools and adolescents with disabilities: Challenges at every turn. In Deshler

D. D.

Schumaker

J. B.

(Eds.), Teaching adolescents with disabilities: Accessing the general education curriculum (pp. 1–34). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

22.

DiDonato-Barnes

Fives

Krause

E. S.

(2014). Using a table of specifications to improve teacher-constructed traditional tests: An experimental design. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 21, 90–108. doi:10.1080/0969594X.2013.808173

23.

Dimitrov

D. M.

Rumrill

P. D.

Jr (2003). Pretest-posttest designs and measurement of change. Work, 20, 159–165.

24.

Ebbers

S. M.

Denton

C. A

. (2008). A root awakening: Vocabulary instruction for older students with reading difficulties. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 23, 90–102. doi:10.1111/j.1540–5826.2008.00267.x

25.

Englert

C. S.

Mariage

T. V.

Okolo

C. M.

Shankland

R. K.

Moxley

K. D.

Courtad

C. A.

Chen

(2009). The learning-to-learn strategies of adolescent students with disabilities: Highlighting, note taking, planning, and writing expository texts. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 34, 147–161. doi:10.1177/1534508408318804

26.

Faber

J. E.

Morris

J. D.

Lieberman

M. G.

(2000). The effect of note-taking on ninth grade students’ comprehension. Reading Psychology, 21, 257–270. doi:10.1080/02702710050144377

27.

Fuller

Healey

Bradley

Hall

(2004). Barriers to learning: A systematic study of the experience of disabled students in one university. Studies in Higher Education, 29, 303–318. doi:10.1080/03075070410001682592

28.

Granbom

(2016). Formative assessment and increased student involvement increase grades in an upper secondary school biology course. Journal of Biological Education, 50, 185–195. doi:10.1080/00219266.2015.1028572

29.

Hamilton

S. I.

Seibert

M. A.

Gardner

III Talbert-Johnson

(2000). Using guided notes to improve the academic achievement of incarcerated adolescents with learning and behavior problems. Remedial and Special Education, 21, 133–140. doi:10.1177/074193250002100302

30.

Huxham

(2010). The medium makes the message: Effects of cues on students’ lecture notes. Active Learning in Higher Education, 11, 179–188. doi:10.1177/1469787410379681

31.

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 (2004)

32.

Joyce

R. L

. (2016). Smartpen technology and note-taking strategy on achievement for students with disabilities in secondary English classes. Available from Dissertations & Theses @ Temple University (1858815760) (Order No. 10240663).

33.

Kahn

Hillwig

(2010). Addressing today’s diverse learners. Journal of Psychological Issues in Organizational Culture, 1, 64–70. doi:10.1002/jpoc.20014

34.

Kay

Benzimra

(2017). Exploring factors that influence technology-based distractions in bring your own device classrooms. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 55, 974–995. doi:10.1177/0735633117690004

35.

Kennedy

Boyle

J. R.

(2017). The promise and problem with technology in special education: Implications for academic learning. In Kauffman

J. M.

Hallahan

D. P.

Pullen

(Eds.), Handbook of special education. New York, NY: Routledge.

36.

Keppel

(1991). Design and analysis: A researcher’s handbook (3rd ed.). Englewood Clifts, NJ: Prentice Hall.

37.

Livescribe. (n.d.). Echo smartpen. Retrieved from http://www.livescribe.com/en-us/smartpen/echo/features.html

38.

Luo

Kiewra

K. A.

Samuelson

. (2016). Revising lecture notes: How revision, pauses, and partners affect note taking and achievement, Instructional Science, 44, 45–67. doi:10.1007/s11251-016-9370-4

39.

Maydosz

Raver

S. A.

(2010). Note taking and university students with learning difficulties: What supports are needed? Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 3, 177–186. doi:10.1037/a0020297

40.

Moin

L. J.

Magiera

Zigmond

(2009). Instructional activities and group work in the US inclusive high school co-taught science class. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 7, 677–697. doi:10.1007/s10763-008-9133-z

41.

Mueller

P. A.

Oppenheimer

D. M.

(2014). The pen is mightier than the keyboard: Advantages of longhand over laptop note-taking. Psychological Science, 25, 1159–1168. doi:10.1177/0956797614524581

42.

M. W.

(2018). Use of iPads as assistive technology for students with disabilities. Techtrends: Linking Research and Practice to Improve Learning, 62, 95–102. doi:10.1007/s11528-017-0199-8

43.

M. W.

Rao

(2017). Using a digital pen to support secondary students with learning disabilities. Intervention in School and Clinic, 53, 36–43.

44.

Patti

A. L.

Garland

K. V.

(2015). Smartpen applications for meeting the needs of students with learning disabilities in inclusive classrooms. Journal of Special Education Technology, 30, 238–244.

45.

Peverly

S. T.

Ramaswamy

Brown

Sumowski

Alidoost

Garner

(2007). What predicts skill in lecture note taking? Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 167–180. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.99.1.167

46.

Piolat

Olive

Kellogg

R. T.

(2005). Cognitive effort during note-taking. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 19, 291–312.

47.

Rahmani

Sadeghi

(2011). Effects of note-taking training on reading comprehension and recall. Reading Matrix: An International Online Journal, 11, 116–128.

48.

Salend

S. J

. (2009). Classroom testing and assessment for all students: Beyond standardization. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin. doi:10.4135/9781483350554

49.

Salend

S. J.

(2011) Creating student friendly tests. Educational Leadership, 52–58. doi:10.1353/csd.2011.0043

50.

Shernoff

D. J.

Csikszentmihalyi

Schneider

Shernoff

E. S

. (2014). Student engagement in high school classrooms from the perspective of flow theory. In Applications of flow in human development and education (pp. 475–494). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer. doi:10.1521/scpq.18.2.158.21860

51.

Steimle

Brdiczka

Muhlhauser

(2009). CoScribe: Integrating paper and digital documents for collaborative knowledge work. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 2, 174–188. doi:10.1109/TLT.2009.27

52.

Stover

D. L.

Pendegraft

(2005). Revisiting computer-aided notetaking technological assistive devices for hearing-impaired students. Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 79, 94–97. doi:10.3200/TCHS.79.2.94-97

53.

van der Meer

(2012). Students’ note-taking challenges in the twenty first century: Considerations for teachers and academic staff developers. Teaching in Higher Education, 17, 13–23. doi:10.1080/13562517.2011.590974

54.

Watson

Johnston

(2007). Assistive technology in the inclusive science classroom. The Science Teacher, 74, 34–38. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.libproxy.temple.edu/docview/214612258?accountid=14270