1. Notes No More
AHEAD 2017
Cheryl Muller

2. Objectives Evaluate traditional note-taking as a course accommodation
Distinguish access vs study aid
Understand the changing landscape of classroom teaching
Identify technology to provide access
Our struggles/What we have learned

3. We have tried a variety of traditional note-taking models and have found disadvantages with all.
Paid note-takers
Small number of students
Lack of interest in topic
Volunteer peer note-takers
Engaged in class/had a stake
Inconsistent product
Charity model
Student Work with instructor
Burden on student and instructor
Student find own note-taker
Burden on student
Institution responsibility
Numbers out of control
History of our office – small, did not work with LD students
Numbers increased had to make a change
Many iterations: volunteer note-takers

4. 25 years ago, written notes were the only record of class information after class was done.
History of our office – small, did not work with LD students
Numbers increased had to make a change
Many iterations: volunteer note-takers

5. Now, students are provided a wide variety of tools and records of what was discussed in class.
History of our office – small, did not work with LD students
Numbers increased had to make a change
Many iterations: volunteer note-takers

6. “It’s what I have always had” Distraction Can’t keep up
But students often still want notes, sometimes for reasons not related to access.
“It’s what I have always had”
Distraction
Can’t keep up
Too much information
Can’t read my writing
Don’t know what is important
Study aid
When we began to talk with students more intentionally about the reason they request notes, most were not disability related.

7. Let’s consider the impact of the tools/approaches commonly in place.

8. Some methods that remove auditory barriers to lecture content.
Complete transcript of lecture
CART
Captioned videos
ASL interpreters
PowerPoint slides and other visual materials provided by instructor

9. Today, lectures are not always “one and done”, and not only at one pace.
Audio recording
Panopto / Lecture Capture
Synchronized recording tools
MS OneNote
Smart pen
Class materials provided by instructor
Flipped classroom and collaborative learning

10. Consider a parallel example
Textbook and other written course material
Prior to technology, recorded version of material provided
Technology advances, now scan and convert print documents to electronic version
Student uses software to listen to content (may take longer, but provides access)
Not create an outline of the book

11. Do notes go beyond access?
Shorter and represent info valuable to remember later when studying
Notes are unique to the individual who takes them
Similar to tutoring

12. We receive a large number of requests for note-taking.
Semester
# of Students
# of Requests
# of Classes
Fall 2015
702
2694
1379
Spring 2016
583
2341
1189
Fall 2016
413
1638
1008
Spring 2017
285
1095
681
Spring 2015
Number of students:
Number of requests: 2674
Number of classes: 1333
Fall 2015
Number of students:
Number of requests: 2694
Number of classes: 1379
Spring 2016
Number of students:
Number of requests: 2341
Number of classes: 1189
Fall 2016
Number of students:
Number of requests: 1638
Number of classes: 1008
Spring 2017
Number of students:
Number of requests: 1095
Number of classes:

13. We don’t always fill those requests.
Semester
Requests by Class
Fulfilled Requests*
Unfulfilled
Fall 2015
1379
12%
88%
Spring 2016
1189
11%
89%
Fall 2016
1008 7%
93%
Spring 2017
681 8%
92%
Spring 2015
Active requests : classes Fulfilled class requests (NT assigned): 182 (14%)
Unfulfilled class requests : classes (86%)
Fall 2015
Active requests : classes
Fulfilled requests: 169 classes (12%)
Unfulfilled requests : 1210 classes (88%)
Spring 2016
Active requests : classes
Fulfilled requests: classes (11%)
Unfulfilled requests : 1062 classes (89%)
* Fulfilled Requests = NT Assigned
Fall 2016
Active requests : classes
Fulfilled requests: classes (7%)
Unfulfilled requests : 939 classes (93%)
Spring 2017
Active requests : classes
Fulfilled requests: classes (8%)
Unfulfilled requests : 625 classes (92%)

14. Sometimes we don’t fulfill a request because it isn’t necessary – access is in place.
Fall 2016
Unfulfilled requests: classes (93% of total)
Not needed: classes (63% of unfilled)
Canceled: classes (32% of unfilled)
Spring 2017
Unfulfilled requests: classes (92% of total)
Not needed: classes (78%of unfilled)
Canceled: classes (18% of unfilled)
Not Needed = Plan in place/not reasonable
Canceled = Dropped class/student canceled
Spring 2015
Unfulfilled requests: 1151 classes (86% of total requests)
Not needed (plan in place/not reasonable): 332 classes (29% of unfulfilled requests)
Canceled (dropped class/student canceled): 463 classes (40% of unfulfilled requests)
Fall 2015
Unfulfilled requests: classes (88% of total)
Not needed: classes (58% of unfilled)
Canceled: classes (37% of unfilled)
Spring 2016
Unfulfilled requests: classes (89% of total)
Not needed: classes (60% of unfilled)
Canceled: classes (35% of unfilled)
Semester
Unfulfilled Requests (classes)
Not Needed
Canceled
Fall 2015
1210 (88% total)
58%
37%
Spring 2016
1062 (89%)
60%
35%
Fall 2016
939 (93%)
63%
32%
Spring 2017
625 (92%)
78%
18%

15. Sometimes we don’t fulfill a request because we just can’t.
Semester
Unfulfilled Requests
(classes)
No Notetaker assigned
Fall 2015
1210
5% (65 classes)
Spring 2016
1062
5% (48 classes)
Fall 2016
939
5% (49 classes)
Spring 1017
625
3% (20 classes)
Spring 2015
Unfulfilled requests : classes (86%)
couldn’t fill (student confirm/no nt matched) classes (31%)
Fall 2015
Unfulfilled requests : classes (88%)
couldn’t fill: classes (5%)
Spring 2016
Unfulfilled requests : classes (89%)
couldn’t fill: classes (5%)
Fall 2016
Unfulfilled requests : classes (93%)
couldn’t fill: classes (5%)
Spring 2017
Unfulfilled requests : classes (92%)
couldn’t fill: classes (3%)

16. When we fulfill notetaking requests, students often don’t use the notes.
After 2 years of tracking data, we found:
On average, 13% of notes posted were never downloaded by students
On average, 13 % of notes were accessed after one month or more
This means that on average, 26 % of students either never downloaded or accessed notes after a month had passed
16 days was the average length of time that passed before downloading notes
Spring 2017 – time between downloads was significantly decreased from previous semesters
After 2 years of tracking data:
15% never download notes
15% access notes every 2-3 weeks
Note: Spring 2017, noticed that time between downloads was significantly decreased from previous semesters

18. This change provides opportunities to have better conversations with faculty.
Early outreach to discuss course design
Opportunity to discuss additional inclusive course practices
Use of technology
Brainstorming how to increase student engagement
Collaborative activities

19. This change enables us to explore/provide better and more resources to students.
Focus on making sure students know how to use resources provided by faculty
Posted material
Panopto
Supplemental instruction
Highlight and promote campus resources
Offer skill building workshops on site
How to take notes
How to organize notes
How to use notes
How to utilize office hours

20. Students have reported that they utilize materials more effectively.
They attend instructor office hours
Focus on questions/concepts that are unclear
Work with Faculty Fellow
Knowing information can be found via other resources, alleviates stress to take notes

21. Technology is a great tool
Smart phones
Take pictures of writing on board
Laptop/tablets
Download course outlines in advance
Digital recorders
Download to computer
Apps
OneNote
Notability
Livescribe pen

22. Comments/Questions….

23. Thank you C Cheryl Muller Associate Director 520-621-9170 C