An Alignment of Interactive Notebooks with the Principles of Universal Design

Abstract

Use of traditional notebooks can often lead to a lack of organization, lack of understanding of expectations, and a lack of purposeful connection to learning content. The authors argue that interactive notebooks provide a classroom of diverse learners with routines that allow for creativity while also giving needed structure as students are engaged in academic content in meaningful ways. In this article the authors provide evidence from research on the possible components that can be incorporated within interactive notebooks for K-12 mathematics classrooms. Specifically, the guidelines of Universal Design for Learning are aligned with specific strategies that are based upon prior research.

Keywords: Interactive notebooks, note-taking, mathematics, middle school

Taking notes from an oral lecture is difficult for many students. Students must listen for incoming content, decide what points are important, process verbal information, and record/write down information in note form; in many cases these processes occur almost simultaneously (Boyle, 2013). According to Piolat, Olive, and Kellogg (2005), these fast-paced processes must be integrated for note-taking to accomplish its purpose. If students experience executive function difficulties, complex, multitasking activities such as note-taking can be challenging. Meltzer and Krishnan (2007) found that these executive function difficulties prevent students from using efficient methods. Considering that most students typically write about 17 to 20 words per minute and teachers present at approximately 110 words per minute (Boyle, 2013), it is not surprising that note-taking is a cognitively difficult task. Due to the complex nature of note-taking, if students’ information during the lecture, more than likely the information will be lost. Among the difficulties students encounter during note taking, Suritsky (1992) reported the top five areas: writing fast enough, paying attention, making sense of notes, deciding important information to note, and understanding the instructor. These difficulties often result in poor performance of recording notes and, subsequently, poor test performance. 

This paper provides an overview of interactive notebooks and how they differ from traditional note-taking. This comparison will be combined with research findings of the difficulties that students encounter with traditional note-taking and how interactive notebooks create opportunities for students to process information. Universal Design for Learning will provide a framework for addressing the processing functions (auditory, memory, visual/spatial) that allow effective note-taking to take place.

What is an Interactive Notebook?

An interactive student notebook (ISN) is different from a traditional notebook as it requires students to think about and express their own ideas as they process information (Bower & Lobdell, 2005; Caine et al., 2005; Kiewra, 1985). For the creation of this notebook, a spiral binding may be used to organize class information.

Parts of the ISN include a running table of contents and page numbers to help students stay organized and ensure their assignments are being recorded and properly ordered (Bower & Lobdell, 2005). The ISN not only assists students to stay organized and easily access their classroom notes for further practice and review.

Interactive notebooks are successful because “they use both the right-and left-brain hemispheres to help sort, categorize, and implement new knowledge creatively” (Young, 2003). On the right side of the notebook, the information should be regarded as “testable” and should be structured so that key ideas and concepts are clear. On the left side, students are reviewing what they have learned and demonstrate mastery of material. They are exploring opinions, clarifying values, and asking questions about new ideas. According to Young (2003), the right side of the interactive notebook uses both the right and left brain hemispheres to help the students remember important concepts. The right side of the notebook is used for teacher information (notes, lectures, discussions, handouts, etc.) while the left side is used for student information (drawings, cartoons, personalized wording of vocabulary, etc.) (Young, 2003).

Left side (output)	Right side (input)
Student processing Brainstorming, mind maps, drawings, diagrams, flow charts, matrices Poetry/Songs, Math Goals, Problem of the Day, Tasks/Practice Problems, Reflections, Test Corrections Writing prompts Websites	Teacher directed Answers to questions from textbook book, Reading notes from their textbook, literature, videos, or primary sources, Teacher provided notes, Concept information/facts, Handouts/Worksheets, Vocabulary Words/definitions, Fold-ables

According to Bower, Lobdell, and Owens (2005), teachers should informally assess notebooks on a regular basis and give students immediate constructive feedback. This monitoring will ensure that students are keeping the notebook organized as well as providing helpful comments and suggestions (Bower et al, 2005). When scoring, include any homework assignments in the notebook and use a clear scoring rubric to enable students to better understand what is expected of them (NSTA, 2002). This notebook will represent the student’s thoughts, ideas, and beliefs and students will take pride in their work.

What is Universal Design for Learning

Universal Design for Learning, (UDL), is a framework for instructional content creation and evaluation, which addresses the barriers to learning students exhibit (Rose, 2001).  The framework proposes a set of guidelines based on educational neuroscience research. There are three main domains, each interconnected to neural networks: the recognition network has the function of collecting and decoding input coming from outside the learner, connecting it to background knowledge; the strategic network manages critical thinking and problem solving, determining how a learner interacts with the environment; and the affective network connects inputs and requests to memories and feelings, encouraging or inhibiting participation, goal setting and engagement (Rose, 2001). UDL identifies three main principles addressing the specific functions of each network a) multiple means of representation, b) multiple means of action and expression, and c) multiple means of engagement. 

Elements of UDL that Address Interactive Notetaking in Middle School Mathematics

From the above three principles are nine guidelines, each having a set of checkpoints to be verified by educators as they create lessons. The guidelines will be listed and described in the next section. UDL was initially developed with the specific purpose to support students with special needs. Its approach, however, is based on general brain functioning and not on specific intervention on particular impairment, and is useful for all students (Roberts, Park,, Brown, & Cook, 2011).

UDL Guidelines and Connection with Interactive Notebooks

This section will describe how the UDL framework relates to strategies that can be used within interactive notebooks as well documenting the research behind them.

Guideline 1: Provide Multiple Means of Engagement. This guideline focuses on how teachers engage and instill motivation in a variety of students within their classroom. The following principles for teachers apply: provide options for recruiting interest, providing options for sustaining effort and persistence, and providing options for self-regulation.

   Principle 1a.  Provide options for recruiting interest. Students are often more interested if the learning relates to real-world situations and is found meaningful or valuable to them. Examples within interactive notebooks include:

• Graffiti Boards are a cooperative engagement strategy in which students write or visually represent ideas about a topic on the left side of their interactive notebook  There are extensive contemporary researches on graffiti in many disciplines, such as linguistics, cultural studies, politics, art, and communication (Farnia, 2014; Oganda, & Mogambi 2015). The research analysis of the data has shown that graffiti serve both personal and social communicative language functions.

• Where I am from poem can be used to learn about a student’s mathematical background and perspectives toward learning math.  It has been shown that the poem encourages interaction between teachers and students as well between students. (Arkoudis, Yu, Baik., Borland, Chang, Lang, Lang, Pearce, & Watty, 2010).

• Comic Strip Writing can be used as a pre or post activity to reinforce mathematical structures and order by encouraging creativity and choice. (Morrison, Bryan, & Chilcoat, 2002).  This research has shown that  designing their own comic books can help students develop their writing, comprehension, and research skills.

Principle 1b. Provide options for sustaining effort and persistence.  As teachers, it is important to help students set goals and address why goals are important in and outside of the classroom as well as understanding the steps when solving word problems. Examples within interactive notebooks include:

• Providing meaningful and constructive feedback can be provided daily by teachers for students within the left side where students are reflecting and processing information. A study by Burnett (2003) showed that providing ability and effort feedback influenced students’ self-concept.
• Shared progress monitoring is where the student and teacher work together to assess and reflect upon short and long term goals set (Lipsey & Wilson 1993).
• Feedback rubric for peer revision allows students to evaluate the quality of their problems solving skills or the steps that they used to solve an equation (Brookhart, 2013).

Principle 1c. Provide options for self-regulation. It is important that learners are able to regulate their own emotions or intrinsic abilities. This can be taught through incorporating the following examples within interactive notebooks:

• Rubrics/Contracts help students and teachers define “quality.”  When students use rubrics regularly to judge their own work, they begin to accept more responsibility for the end product ( Brewer, Williams, & Sher, 2007)
• KWLCharts start students thinking about what they Know about a topic, what they Want to know, and what they have Learned in the end (Ogle 1986).
• Triangle, Square, and Circle is a strategy that encourages students to reflect on their learning and process information presented in the lesson. Similar to other closing strategies, it asks students to pick out 3 important pieces of information, what they are “squared away with”  and to question anything that is still circling in their mind (Popham, 2008).

Guideline 2: Multiple Means of Representation

Multiple Means of Representation (MMR) has been referred to as the “what” of learning (Rose, Meyer, Strangman, & Rappolt, 2002). Within this principal, the brain is able to process information through the senses, even when it is incomplete or distorted (Mangiatordi, 2014). The ability to identify objects, to connect new information to background knowledge and, in general, to decode input depends on the recognition network (Rose et al., 2002).

Principle 2a. Provide options of perception. This principle allows students to interact with flexible content that does depend on a single sense like sight, hearing, movement, or Touch. Because the interactive notebook can involve a multitude of colors, text and spacing options the following strategies are available to students:

–Number lines provide access to seeing relationships between numbers . They promote number sense and help in practicing solving problems involving proportional reasoning fractions, and ratios, operations with positive and negative numbers (Teppo & van den Heuvel-Panhulzen, 2013).

-Word sorts are multisensory activities that help learners identify patterns and group words based on different categories. Math students  can sort words based on a variety of similarities in mathematical operations, vocabulary, graphical representations, or shapes (Bear, Invernizzi, Templeton, Johnston, 2008).

-Concept mappingare visual representations students create to connect ideas, concepts, and terms. Students can use them to organize information they already know and to incorporate new learning with this prior knowledge van Bon-Martens, 2014).

Principle 2b. Provide options for language, mathematical expressions, and symbols. Learners vary in their facility with different forms of representation—both verbal and non-verbal. Vocabulary, expressions, and symbols that may sharpen and clarify concepts for one learner may be opaque and foreign to another.  The following strategies that can be used within an interactive notebook:

–Frayer Models are graphic organizers that are composed of four boxes with the target vocabulary word, symbol, or expression in the center.  The four boxes consist of a student’s definition in their own words, characteristics of the term/expression/symbol or “official definition”, examples, and nonexamples (Frayer, Frederick, Klausmeier, 1969).                         

–Foldables arefolded pieces of paper that help students to organize, display, and arrange information, making it easier for students to grasp math concepts and master skills (Mumford, Blair, & Marcy, 2006).

–Multiple representations using drawings are found within the interactive notebook.  Notebooks allow students to see the same mathematical expression or mathematical relationship presented in more than one form.  This strategy is particularly useful for helping students understand the meaning of algebraic symbols (Ainsworth 2006).  

Principle 2c.  Provide options for comprehension. The UDL principle of providing

options comprehension requires that students  are taught how to transform accessible

information into usable knowledge. The following strategies are specific ways of helping students to comprehend materials using an interactive notebook:

–Sketch and Stretch is a strategy that encourages students to illustrate (draw) ideas and details from direct instruction to demonstrate their understanding.  The teacher stops at various intervals and allows students to sketch their response to a comprehension or analysis prompt (“Draw what you think the graph will look like”). (Borasi, Siegel, Fonzi, & Smith, 1998).

–Anticipation Guides are used before beginning the lesson. Students listen to or read several statements about key concepts within the new content and choose whether they agree or disagree while recording their responses in their interactive notebook. After the lesson presentation, students revisit the Anticipation Guide and see if they still agree with their initial decisions (Duffelmeyer, 1994).

–My Favorite “No” has teachers provide a question or problem at the beginning of class. Then, for 5 minutes, students work independently  to solve the problem. Students write on small cards and turn those in after five minutes.  Teachers then quickly analyze the responses and determine which one is incorrect but that students can learn from others’ mistakes (Bangert-Drowns, Kulik, & Kulik 1991; Fuchs & Fuchs 1986). 

Guideline 3:  Provide Multiple Means of Action and Expression.

•  

Principle 3a. Provide options for physical action. Varying the methods for responding and navigating along with incorporating assistive technology to make learning available for all students is the goal within this guideline. As interactive notebooks do not incorporate assistive technology, but they can vary the methods for responding and navigating through the following examples:

• Menu of Options encourages student choice in demonstrating their understanding of a content standard or skill by providing a variety of options for them to choose from (i.e. make a brochure, create a poem, draw a picture, etc.). (Brant, 1998).

• Open Mind Diagram requires students to use symbols, words, phrases, and pictures to describe a topic or summarize what they have learned (Cajamarca, 2016).

• Mini White board responses can be used by placing white paper into a clear plastic sleeve and inserting this into the students’ binders or notebooks. This provides the teacher with formative assessment (Eidissen, Bjerkeli, & Drageset).

Principle 3b: Provide options for expression and communication. It is important for teachers to allow students multiple ways to express their learning within a mathematics classroom. The following are examples of ways this can be incorporated within an interactive notebook:

–     Manipulatives such as algebra tiles, rulers, protractors, etc. can be cut out and provided to students to insert into pockets within their interactive notebook for easy access when needed to solve problems requiring tools (Clements, 2000).

–     Poster Summary is a strategy that can be used to help students use a graphic organizer to summarize their learning through writing sentences, drawing pictures, and making connections from information learned in a text or reading. (Newman, 2010)

–     Sticky notes can be used to help students interact with the content by allowing them to write down their ideas and arrange them in a way that aids in comprehension of the topic (Stormont, 2008).

3c. Provide options for executive functions. Allowing students to set long term goals and monitor their progress along the way helps to increase executive functioning in order to reach high levels of self-awareness and processing of new information.

•  Problem Solving Checklist provides students with the steps to follow in order to reach a solution. This can be used next to the math exemplar or a problem solved by a teacher showing all steps to see proper steps and approaches to solve a problem using the new algorithm learned (Zrebiec, Mastropieri, & Scruggs, 20040.

• Open Notes is a strategy where students are able to use their notes from their interactive notebook on their quiz or test. This promotes organization and involvement in class activities that add to their notebooks (Pelech, 2016)

• Self-Monitoring allows students to reflect upon their learning behaviors and goals in order to assess their progress and determine changes to their strategies in order to reach their goals with the help of a peer or teacher. Charts can be used for students to track their weekly or daily progress in a mathematics class that are inserted into their interactive notebooks (Lan, 1996).

Conclusions and Future Work

 Lectures and class discussions require students to use many processing skills all at the same time; namely, listening and note-taking skills to efficiently comprehend and retain oral information (Suritsky & Hughes, 1996). Student performance in content area classrooms is particularly dependent on the quality of information obtained from lectures. A student must have the ability to record and organize notes, self-regulate to assess and monitor the use of note-taking strategies, and revisit them to amend any misheard or inaccurate information (Boyle, 2015). Through the use of interactive notebooks, teachers can ensure that students are actively participating in developing accurate notes in content areas. In order to assist students in creating their interactive notebooks, teachers can modify their lectures to incorporate the principles of universal design for learning (UDL) as they teach new content. By providing multiple means for engagement, representation, and action and expression all learners are given access to strategies that may help enhance their understanding.

Although the research cited above connects research based strategies that have been proven to promote comprehension, there is no quantitative evidence that prove interactive notebooks are successful with these specific strategies in a mathematics classroom.  The interactive notebook in the case of this article becomes a container, or a way of putting all of these very effective strategies together to promote mathematics comprehension. Further research is needed in order to assess a deeper role of interactive notebooks and their direct impact on learning.

References

Ainsworth, S. (1999). The functions of multiple representations. Computers & Education, 33, 2-3.

Arkoudis, S., Yu, X., Baik, C., Borland, H., Chang, S., Lang, I., Lang, J., Pearce, A., & Watty, K. (2010). Finding common ground: Enhancing interaction between domestic and international students. Melbourne, Australia: Australian Learning & Teaching Council.

Bangert-Drowns, Kulik, & Kulik (1991). Effects of frequent classroom testing. The Journal of Educational Research. 82(2), 89-99. doi 10.1080/00220671.1991.10702818

Bear, D., Invernizzi, M., Templeton, S., Johnston, F. (2008). Words Their Way: Word Study For Phonics, Vocabulary, and Spelling Instruction. 4th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Brant, R. (1998). Powerful learning. Alexandria, V.A.: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Brewer, G., Williams, A., & Sher, W. (2007). Utilising learning contracts to stimulate student ownership of learning. In Proceedings of the 2007 AaeE Conference, Melbourne.

Borasi, R., Siegel, M., Fonzi, J., & Smith, C. (1998). Using Transactional Reading Strategies to Support Sense-Making and Discussion in Mathematics Classrooms: An Exploratory Study. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 29(3), 275-305. doi:10.2307/749791

Bower, B. & Lobdell, J. (2005). Social studies alive! Engaging diverse learners in the elementary classroom. California: Teachers’ Curriculum Institution.

Brookhart, S. M. (2013). How to create and use rubrics for formative assessment and grading. ASCD.

Burnett, P. (2003). The Impact of Teacher Feedback on Student Self-talk and Self-concept in Reading and Mathematics. The Journal of Classroom Interaction,38(1), 11-16. Retrieved March 3, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/23874243

Bower, B., Lobdell, J., & Owens, S. (2005). Bring learning alive! The TCI approach for middle and high school social studies. Palo Alto, CA: Teachers’ Curriculum Institute.

Boyle, J. R. (2013). Strategic Note-Taking for Inclusive Middle School Science Classrooms. Remedial and Special Education, 34(2), 78–90. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932511410862

Caine, R. M, Caine, G., McClintic, C. & Klimek, K. (2005). 12 Brain/mind learning principles in action: The fieldbook for making connections, teaching and the human brain. California: Corwin Press.

Cajamarca Llivigañay, M. I. (2016). The open-mind diagram as a cooperative learning strategy to develop the english as foreign language basic writing skills amongst ninth-grade students, group “a” at profesor. Julio Ordoñez Espinoza high school, 2014–2015 academic period (Bachelor’s thesis).

Clements, D. H. (2000). ‘Concrete’manipulatives, concrete ideas. Contemporary issues in early childhood, 1(1), 45-60.

Duffelmeyer, F. A. (1994). Effective anticipation guide statements for learning from expository prose. Journal of Reading, 452-457.

Farnia, M. (2014). A Thematic Analysis of Graffiti on the University Classroom Walls – A Case of Iran. International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature, 3(3), 48-57. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.3n.3p.48

Fuchs & Fuchs (1986).  Effects of systematic formative assessment: A meta-analysis. Exceptional Children, 53, 199-208.

Frayer, D., Frederick, W. C., and Klausmeier, H. J. (1969). A Schema for Testing the Level of Cognitive Mastery. Madison, WI: Wisconsin Center for Education Research.

Kiewra, K. A. (1985). Learning from a lecture: An investigation of notetaking, review and attendance at a lecture. Human Learning 20:33-39.

Lan, W. Y.  (1996) The effects of self-monitoring on students’ course performance, Use of learning strategies, attitude, self-judgment ability, and knowledge representation. The Journal of Experimental Education, 64 (2), 101-115, doi: 10.1080/00220973.1996.9943798

Lipsey, M.W. & Wilson, D.B. (2003). The efficiency of psychological, educational, and behavioral treatment: Confirmation from meta-analysis. American Psychologist, 48(12), 1181-1209.

Mangiatordi A. (2014) Using Universal Design for Learning Guidelines to Evaluate a Computer Assisted Note Taking Software Solution. In: Mascio T., Gennari R., Vitorini P., Vicari R., de la Prieta F. (eds) Methodologies and Intelligent Systems for Technology Enhanced Learning. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, vol 292. Springer, Cham

Meltzer, L., & Krishnan, K. (2007). Executive Function Difficulties and Learning Disabilities: Understandings and Misunderstandings. In L. Meltzer (Ed.), Executive function in education: From theory to practice (p. 77–105). Guilford Press.

Morrison, T., Bryan, G., & Chilcoat, G. (2002). Using Student-Generated Comic Books in the Classroom. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy,45(8), 758-767. Retrieved March 3, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/40012828.

Mumford, M.D. & Blair, C.S. & Marcy, Richard. (2006). Alternative knowledge structures in creative thought: Schema, associations, and cases. Creativity and Reason in Cognitive Development. 117-136. 10.1017/CBO9780511606915.008.

NSTA (2002). Science interactive notebooks in the classroom. Retrieved from https://www.nsta.org/premium-publications/news/story.aspx?id=47679

Newman, L. (2010). Anchor charts: Making thinking visible. Retrieved from www.engageny.org/sites/default/files/resource/attachments/anchor_charts.pdf

Oganda, O., & Mogambi, H. (2015). The language of graffiti on public transport vehicles in Kenya: Issues and perspectives. International Journal of Education and Research, 3(6), 47-56.

Ogle, D. (1986) K-W-L A Teaching Model That Develops Active Reading of Expository Text. The Reading Teacher, 39, 564-570.

Pelech, J. R. (2016). Comparing the Effectiveness of Closed-Notes Quizzes with Open-Notes Quizzes: Blending Constructivist Principles with Action Research to Improve Student Learning. ie: inquiry in education, 8(1), 5.

Piolat, A., Olive, T., & Kellogg, R. (2005). Cognitive effort during note taking. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 19(3), 291-312

Popham, W . J . (2008) . Transformative assessment. Alexandria VA: ASCD.

Roberts, K., Park, H., Brown, S. & Cook, B. (2011). Universal Design for Instruction in Postsecondary Education: A Systematic Review of Empirically Based Articles. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 24(1), 5-15.

Rose, David. (2001). Universal Design for Learning. Journal of Special Education Technology. 16. 66-67. 10.1177/016264340101600208.

Rose, D., Meyer, A., Strangman, N., and Rappolt, G. (2002). Teaching Every Student in the Digital Age. Alexandra, Virginia: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Rose, D. and Strangman, N. (2007). Universal Design for Learning: meeting the challenge of individual learning differences through a neurocognitive perspective. Universal Access in the Information Society, 5, 381-391. doi 10.1007/s10209-006-0062-8.

Stormont, M. (2008). Increase academic success for children with ADHD using sticky notes and highlighters. Intervention in School and Clinic, 43(5), 305-308. https://doi.org/10.1177/1053451207311768

Suritsky, S.K. (1992). Notetaking difficulties and approaches reported by university students with learning disabilities. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 12(1), 3-10.

Teppo, A., van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, M. Visual representations as objects of analysis: the number line as an example. ZDM Mathematics Education 46, 45–58 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-013-0518-2.

Thomas Eidissen, Karen Bjerkeli, Ove Drageset. The forgotten technology. Teachers use of mini white-boards to engage students. Eleventh Congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education, Utrecht University, Feb 2019, Utrecht, Netherlands. ?hal-02417062?.

Van Bon-Martens, M. J. H., van de Goor, L. A. M., Holsappel, J. C., Kuunders, T. J. M., Jacobs-van der Bruggen, M. A. M., Te Brake, J. H. M., & van Oers, J. A. M. (2014). Concept mapping as a promising method to bring practice into science. Public Health, 128(6), 504-514.

Young, J. (2003). Science interactive notebooks in the classroom. Science Scope 26, 44-46.

 Zrebiec, H.U., Mastropieri, M.A., Scruggs, T.E. (2004). Check it off: Individualizing a math algorithm for students with disabilities via self-monitoring checklists. Intervention in School and Clinic, 39 (5), 269-275.  https://doi.org/10.1177/10534512040390050301.