Janet, et al. Brown and Adler did a piece on this topic back in Feb. of 2008. See: http://connect.educause.edu/Library/EDUCAUSE+Review/MindsonFireOpenEducation t/45823?time=1233090464 About 2/3 of the way through is the part on the long tail of learning, or the rise in niche learning. This piece is a bit lengthy, but important to people in my position. Mr. James B. Greenberg Director Teaching, Learning and Technology Center Milne Library SUNY College at Oneonta Oneonta, New York 13820 blog: The 32nd Square at http://32ndsquare.blogspot.com wiki: The 32nd Square at http://32ndsquare.wikidot.com email: [log in to unmask] phone: 607-436-2701 fax: 607-436-3081 IM: oneontatltc Twitter: greenbjb "Ignorance is curable, stupidity lasts forever" P Think before you print! Please consider the environment before printing this email > From: Janet Nepkie <[log in to unmask]> > Reply-To: Teaching Breakfast List <[log in to unmask]> > Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2009 14:43:14 -0500 > To: <[log in to unmask]> > Subject: Re: note-taking > > Jim, Terry et al. > Terry's idea about discussing note-taking is a good idea. I'd like to propose > another idea, too. > > I've just finished Chris Anderson's update of his book "The Long Tail," which > is all about how niche marketing to MANY people earns a larger profit than > marketing "hits" to fewer people, providing the delivery system for the sale > of products is free or nearly free. > > The book made me wonder about niche teaching, (if you understand what I'm > trying to say). > How can we teach a large body of knowledge but deliver it in ways that are > relevant to each individual? > We might use technology for part of that task, or smaller groups of students, > but one thing we CAN'T is add more hours to the teacher's load. That won't > actually help students. > > If I've made a clear statement and question, does anyone have any thought or > answers? > > Thanks > Janet > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Teaching Breakfast List on behalf of Terry L. Helser > Sent: Tue 1/27/2009 11:02 AM > To: [log in to unmask] > Subject: FW: note-taking > > This is part of a note taking thread on chem ed list. Relevant? > Terry > > ------ Forwarded Message > From: Ellen Loehman <[log in to unmask]> > Reply-To: CHEMED-L <[log in to unmask]> > Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2009 19:03:50 -0700 > To: CHEMED-L <[log in to unmask]> > Subject: Re: note-taking > > on 1/26/09 9:33 AM Brenda Gelinas wrote: > >> What does education research say about note taking? Have there been good >> studies done? Is the fill in the blank method with powerpoints notes as >> effective as let's say the Cornell note taking method? > > Marzano, Pickering & Pollock, > Classroom Instruction that Works: Research-based Strategies for Increasing > Student Achievement > ASCD > > Admittedly for the K-12 classroom, but you college folks might find some > gems in the lower echelons of education. The strategies are ranked in order > of effect size and validity of metadata. > > #1. Identifying similarities and differences > Percentile gains 31%-46% > #2. Summarizing and note taking > Percentile gains 23%-47% > There is a long chapter on types of note-taking > #3. Reinforcing effort and providing recognition > Percentile gains 22%-48% > #4. Homework and practice > Percentile gains 1%-24% > #5. Nonlinguistic representations > Percentile gains 19%-40% > #7 Cooperative learning > Percentile gains 0%-28% > #8 Setting objectives and providing feedback > Percentile gains 18%-41% > #9 Generating and testing hypotheses > Percentile gains 2%-28% > #10 Cues, questions and advanced organizers > Percentile gains 10%-39% > > The first two strategies are especially recommended. > > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > Ellen Loehman > [log in to unmask] > > ------ End of Forwarded Message