The increasing number of college students with learning disabilities (C/LD) requires development of empirically validated strategies for use by faculty who lecture these students. The effects of a pausing procedure (three 2-minute pauses spaced at logical intervals during a videotaped lecture) and a lecture outline on the notetaking performance of C/LD were investigated. The completeness of students' notes and their immediate free recall of lecture ideas were compared for lecture conditions incorporating the pause procedure, a lecture outline, and a combination of both procedures. Results indicated that the pause procedure alone was most effective for enhancing students' immediate recall of lecture ideas and completeness of recorded notes. Implications are discussed in terms of future research on effective lecturing techniques for college students with learning disabilities.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AndersonT.H.ArmbrusterB.B. (1986). The value of taking notes (Reading Education Report No. 374). Champaign: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Center for the Study of Reading.
2.
BakerL.LombardiB.R. (1985). Students' lecture notes and their relation to test performance. Teaching of Psychology, 12, 28–32.
3.
Beirne-SmithM.DeckM.D. (1989). A survey of postsecondary programs for students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 22, 456–457.
4.
BlighD. (1972). What's the use of lectures?Harmondsworth, England: Penguin Books.
5.
BretzingB.KulhavyR.CaterinoL. (1987). Notetaking by junior high students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 359–362.
6.
BursuckW.D.RoseE.CowenS.YahayaM.A. (1989). Nationwide survey of postsecondary education services for students with learning disabilities. Exceptional Children, 56, 236–245.
7.
CarrierC.A.WilliamsM.D.DalgaardB.R. (1988). College students' perceptions of notetaking and their relationship to selected learner characteristics and course achievement. Research in Higher Education, 28, 223–239.
8.
Clyde-SnyderM. (1982). Criterion and behavioral checklist for adults with specific learning disabilities. Ellensburg: Central Washington University, The Helds Project Series. Appendix A, 25–27.
9.
CollingwoodV.HughesD.C. (1978). Effects of three types of university lecture notes on student achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 70, 175–179.
10.
Di VestaF.J.GrayG.S. (1972). Listening and note taking. Journal of Educational Psychology, 64, 321–325.
11.
Di VestaF.J.SmithD.A. (1979). The pausing principle: Increasing the efficiency of memory for ongoing events. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 4, 288–296.
12.
EinsteinG.O.MorrisJ.SmithS. (1985). Note-taking, individual differences, and memory for lecture information. Journal of Educational Psychology, 77, 522–532.
13.
GajarA.H.MurphyJ.P.HuntF.M. (1982). A university program for learning disabled students. Reading Improvement, 19 (4), 282–288.
14.
HartleyJ. (1976). Handouts and student note taking. Programmed Learning and Educational Technology, 13, 58–64.
15.
HartleyJ. (1983). Notetaking research: Re-setting the scoreboard. Bulletin of the British Psychological Society, 36, 13–14.
16.
HartleyJ.MarshallS. (1974). On notes and notetaking. Universities Quarterly, 28, 225–235.
17.
HughesC.A.SuritskyS.S. (1992). Notetaking skills of university students with and without learning disabilities. Unpublished manuscript, Penn State.
18.
KahnM.S. (1980). Learning problems of the secondary and junior college learning disabled student: Suggested remedies. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 13 (4), 40–44.
19.
KiewraK.A. (1985). Investigating notetaking and review: A depth of processing alternative. Educational Psychologist, 20, 23–32.
20.
KiewraK.A.FletcherH.J. (1984). The relationship between levels of notetaking and achievement. Human Learning, 3, 273–280.
21.
LockeE.A. (1977). An empirical study of lecture note taking among college students. Journal of Educational Research, 71, 93–99.
22.
MatthewsP.R.AndersonD.W.SkolnickB.D. (1987). Faculty attitude toward accommodations for college students with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Focus, 3, 46–52.
23.
MorganC.H.LilleyJ.D.BorehamN.C. (1988). Learning from lectures: the effect of varying the detail in lecture handouts on note-taking and recall. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 2, 115–122.
24.
PalmatierR.A.BennettJ.M. (1974). Notetaking habits of college students. Journal of Reading, 18, 215–218.
25.
PeckK.L.HannafinM.J. (1983). The effects of notetaking pretraining on the recording of notes and retention of aural instruction. Journal of Educational Research, 77, 100–107.
26.
PraterG.MinnerS. (1986). Factors inhibiting the performance of learning-disabled students in postsecondary settings. Reading, Writing, and Learning Disabilities, 2, 273–277.
27.
RoweM.B. (1976). The pausing principle—Two invitations to inquiry. Research on College Science Teaching, 5, 258–259.
28.
RoweM.B. (1980). Pausing principles and their effects on reasoning in science. New Directions in Community Colleges, 31, 27–34.
29.
RoweM.B. (1983). Getting chemistry off the killer course list. Journal of Chemical Education, 60, 954–956.
30.
RuhlK.L.HughesC.A.GajarA.H. (1990). Efficacy of the pause procedure for enhancing learning disabled college students' long- and short-term recall of facts presented through lecture. Learning Disability Quarterly, 13, 55–64.
31.
RuhlK.L.HughesC.A.SchlossP.J. (1987). Using the pause procedure to enhance lecture recall. Teacher Education and Special Education, 10, 14–18.
32.
SuritskyS.K. (1992). Notetaking difficulties and approaches reported by university students with learning disabilities. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 10 (1), 3–10.
33.
SuritskyS.K.HughesC.A. (1991). Benefits of notetaking: Implications for secondary and postsecondary students with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 14 (1), 7–18.
34.
VogelS.A. (1982). On developing LD college programs. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 15, 518–528.
35.
WittrockM.C. (1990). Generative processes of comprehension. Educational Psychologist, 24, 345–376.
