English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

College students were trained in how to record concept map notes, matrix notes, or conventional (control group) notes. Students then read a brief text using their respective note-taking method in preparation for fact, relationship, and concept test items that were administered immediately or following a review period. It was predicted that matrix note takers would achieve most, because matrix notes are more computationally efficient than map notes. Although matrix notes did not prove superior to map notes in terms of achievement, results suggested several problems with map note taking. First, conventional note takers achieved more on relationship items than map note takers, but not matrix note takers. Second, map note takers had more incomplete notes and lower quality notes than matrix note takers. Last, concept map note takers rated their notes lower in effectiveness, ease of construction, enjoyability, and likelihood of future use compared to matrix note takers.

Concept Map versus Matrix Note Taking: Achievement, Attitude, and Note-Taking Effects