The author uploaded the full text here: <a href="http://www.academia.edu/6273095/The_Pen_Is_Mightier_Than_The_Keyboard_Advantages_of_Longhand_Over_Laptop_Note_Taking" rel="nofollow">http://www.academia.edu/6273095/The_Pen_Is_Mightier_Than_The...</a>
I'm interested in <i>why</i>. The linked paper has some fascinating discussion of prior research on the "why" question, but as yet really the only data we have come from correlational studies rather than explanatory ones.<p>I type a <i>lot</i> (5x-10x?) faster than I can write but I take <i>all</i> my meeting notes by pen (I use a livescribe but it hasn't changed my workflow much). It's clearly faster in terms of retention, comprehension and relevance. But why?<p>I have noticed that in note taking I have my own idiosyncratic handwriting: primarily joined-up ("cursive"), with many letterforms surviving from my childhood, but with some that are formed in a way that simply seems more natural to me (especially the decenders of y and g) intermixed with some "printed" characters (for example j, as well as almost all the capital letters, to the extent that I use them at all). Definitely not designed for someone else to read again, and even in my case I often have to puzzle out what I had written -- yet still, it has a much better result than typing! I clearly have adapted my writing to reduce its overhead.<p>Apart from note taking I almost don't write at all: a few hand-printed notes ("don't throw this away") or addresses, and whiteboards of course. These always use separated, printed letters and seem cognitively complex to write (i.e. slow!). Typing is clearly the most effortless.<p>With my own n of one I have tried taking notes with a wireless keyboard on the table or my lap (so the screen isn't a barrier between me and my interlocutor) but it doesn't help. There presumably is some disjoint mechanism between handwriting and typing, and somehow the handwriting barrier is lower.
Longhand ruled my course simply because, at the time there were few good options for fast equation and diagram transcription. 80-90% of our lectures were equations with short notes around them.<p>Occasionally we'd have lecturers who handed out dense powerpoint slides and then went through and explained them very rapidly. Good luck doing that on a laptop.<p>I think perhaps 3 out of 80 people used laptops. I usually wrote everything verbatim with a bit of extra stuff the lecturer was saying if something wasn't immediately obvious.<p>I'd then go through and convert it all to LaTeX forcing myself to understand each equation that went in (i.e. if there was a step with an integral that was omitted in the lecture, perform it). That way you know exactly how to do all the steps and you can add your own relevant comments that you may have glossed over in the auditorium. Worked well for me and I could then recycle the reams of paper that collected on my shelves.<p>As for distraction, we played Peggle a lot in quantum mechanics...
I favour guided note taking a lot. A page, with concepts, and a blocked-off section for personal questions similar to the Cornell method. Together with diagrams and drawing lots of arrows, I know of no electronic method which is as fast as the pen.<p>If taking notes means essentially taking meeting minutes, the material provided by the lecturer is lacking.
On the other hand, I type at least 10x faster than I write. If people learned to only take notes on as much as they would write otherwise, it seems you'd get the best of both worlds -- faster note-taking which would allow time for <i>deeper</i> processing.<p>But really, the deeper problem is taking notes at all. Honestly, in what world is it efficient for a lecturer to recite, and all the students take notes? Students should be able to pay attention without being distracted, and a designated note-taker should be taking everything down, getting the professor to correct any mistakes, and then e-mailing everyone afterwards. Note-taking is an anachronism that deserves to die.
I'd be curious to see how these results change with pen-driven technology, such as the Galaxy Note tablets, or the Livescribe pens (that simultaneously write to paper, create digital copies stored in Evernote, and also record an audio version of the lecture/meeting).<p>I've always felt that when I need to think through concepts, walking away from the computer & working with pen & paper was a more effective way to do it, at least for myself.
The abstract rings true to me. In high-school I had a fetish for heavy rewording, formatting of notes. The more I formatted it (indentation, color coding, consistent abbreviations) the more I learned indirect relationships in the content.<p>Out of my hat, I tend to think that digital tools aren't good for learning, for they are too symbolic. I believe native interactions stimulate the brain more and feed more data to process that is useful for newcomers.
> Prior studies have primarily focused on students’ capacity for multitasking and distraction when using laptops.<p>I prefer to not multi-task at all and just pay attention.