The intention to improve students’ level of knowledge retention has triggered various research and theory inbuilt.

Summary of Note taking articles
Name
Course
Institution
Date

Summary: Both handwriting speed and selection attention are important to Lecture note-taking
The intention to improve students’ level of knowledge retention has triggered various research and theory inbuilt. While there are various aspects that need to be taken into account, Peverly, Garner and Vekaria (2013) focus on selection attention and handwriting speed as the essential factors towards quality note-taking, and hence, easy recalling and memorizing for deeper understanding. Titled ‘Both handwriting speed and selection attention are important to Lecture note-taking,’ the authors take a focused approach where they incorporate primary and secondary research.
Firstly, they intend to evaluate the relationship of handwriting speed with its components (speed of verbal access, fine motor fluency, working memory, language comprehension), and attention (composing of selective and executive control) to note-taking and the entire mentioned variable in testing performance (written recall). Secondly, they purpose to determine whether all the components of handwriting speed take responsibility for the relationship of handwriting speed to notes.
In their experiment, they found out that lecture note was highly related to handwriting speed, sustained attention and language comprehension. To determine the level of understanding, they used tests such as multiple choice and written recall. This is in relation to various secondary materials where researchers state that tests that measure inferences are measures of understanding (Peverly, Garner & Vekaria, 2013). Hence, this would create the basis for the quality of note taking which will imply easy written recall and memory leading to Students improvement in their performance.
Among the finding, they also indicated that the components of handwriting speed, fine motor speed and verbal access speed are both related to handwriting speed (Peverly, Garner & Vekaria, 2013). However, they do not predict the quality of notes when handwriting speed is regressed. Therefore, it was evident that selection attention and handwriting speed were the variables that showed significant relation to notes. Additionally, note-taking skills were the only variables that were substantially related to test performance.
Summary: An Analysis of Notes Taken During and After a Lecture Presentation
Titled ‘An Analysis of Notes Taken During and After a Lecture Presentation,’ Haynes et al (2015) carried out an exploratory analysis in the article where they focus on various trends in note taking on the basis of number of words, irrelevant and relevant word count, and ratios of relevant to total word count. This was from the previous studies that focused on investigating how timing of note taking would affect the encoding and external storage functions of college students note-taking.
Therefore, Haynes et al (2015) carried out an experiment on 16 college students enrolled in three sections of introduction to psychology. The researcher performed several analyses on their participants’ relevant ratios by the use of sub-classifications of participants that recorded high or low relevance ratios with participants passing or failing a retention question.
The results demonstrated that taking notes during presentation enables students to record a lot of relevant information. They also found out that those students who passed the immediate retention question had a higher relevant ratio to those who failed the question (Haynes et al 2015). This hence increases their scores on question related to the presentation subject. Additionally, experiments on comparing the note takers’ relevant ratios to the relevance ratios of the lecturer’s PowerPoint demonstrated that almost all the participants had noted substantially irrelevant information as compared to what was in the PowerPoint. Hence, this would affect the retention of information.
In this regard, the authors recommend that interventions meant to enhance note taking skill need to focus on strengthening the capability to record more relevant information. In particular, Haynes et al (2015) state that support for such interventions appears in comparing of the high and low relevant ratios with the failing and passing the immediate question. Additionally, teaching students in ways that improves relevance ratios of their notes will improve their academic abilities, leading to positive results. Therefore, this was an implication that there is essence for students to be trained on recording relevant information during presentations in class. This will be a good technique towards improving academic performance.
Summmary: Relationships between spontaneous note-taking, self-reported strategies and comprehension when reading multiple texts in different task conditions:
Hagen, Braasch and Braten (2014) carried out a research on the relationships that exists between self-reported strategies, spontaneous note taking relationships between spontaneous and comprehension when reading several texts in various task conditions. Before taking to the primary research, the authors’ secondary research from various scholarly materials demonstrated that that Models of text comprehension provide that readers construct different mental representation layers. Further,they found out that Kintsch’s integration model explaining that meaning the meaning is constructed through the process of integration when reading a single text.
Further, the authors explored that the integration of text-based representation with previous knowledge through inference making leads to the formation of a situation model. In essence, a situation model is a composition of the learner’s interpretation of the text with the information in the text integrated from the previous knowledge to form a coherent representation (Hagen, Braasch & Braten, 2014). Therefore, a deep situational understanding of the text will need integration of information from various parts of the reading and connecting text information to the previous knowledge. However, they also found that in a situation where a reader is reading several texts on the same topic, the reader has to grasp both the information on each text as well as making connection across texts for improved integrated understanding.
Having this knowledge from the secondary research, Hagen, Braasch and Braten (2014) proceeded to investigate note-taking during multiple text reading in two different task condition in relation to comprehension performance and self-reports of use of strategy. In their experiments, they included forty four undergraduates who were supplied with multiple texts about change in climate and consequently provide summaries and arguments. The analysis of the students’ spontaneous note-taking indicated that intertextual elaboration techniques from their notes were related as well integration comprehension for student reading to develop an argument. However, there was no relationship that was shown for students reading to summarize the information (Hagen, Braasch & Braten, 2014). Therefore, they found out that the relationship between note-taking and techniques demonstrated a heightened awareness of use of strategy across students reading to construct an argument. Hence, this explains the reason for their variance of their note-taking techniques in their performance based on each one’s comprehension.

References
Hagen, M., Braasch, J., & Bråten, I. (2014). Relationships between spontaneous note-taking, self-reported strategies and comprehension when reading multiple texts in different task conditions: Journal of Research in Reading. Journal of Research in Reading,, 37(S1), S141-S158.
Haynes, J., McCarley, N., & Williams, J. (2015). An Analysis of Notes Taken During and After a Lecture Presentation. North American Journal of Psychology, 17(1), 175-186.
Peverly, S., Garner, J., & Vekaria, P. (2014). Both handwriting speed and selective attention are important to lecture note-taking. Springer Science Business Media Dordrecht 2013, 27(1), 1-30.