There's a difference between taking notes and transcribing, and people who benefit from and proselytize taking notes tend to be very far from the transcribing end of the spectrum. People who are the most effective note-takers tend to synthesize what they're hearing and only write down key points. While the synthesized notes are smaller and therefore faster to write, the real benefit comes from the act of synthesis itself. It forces a level of understanding that the listener wouldn't be forced to attain were it not for taking the notes.

Sadly, there's very little emphasis on what it means to take good notes, or how to go about doing it. I suspect that good note-takers don't even realize that there's a difference between notes and transcripts, so when they promote note-taking as a study tool they neglect to mention a critical step. You probably could become a good note-taker with some practice, and would benefit from it, but if you're not still in school I doubt it would be worth your time.

You're right there is a difference. But I have a problem taking in what I'm hearing unless I repeat it in my head a few times. I don't have enough real time computational power to physically write the stuff down and process what I'm hearing.

When I was forced to take notes I never actually transcribed, but in effect what I wrote down was practically transcribing because I could not keep the processing in real time to write down only the important points.

The best way to take notes is to not do it during the class. Pay full attention only to the teacher/speaker during the class/lecture and make a conscious attempt to remember everything they said. Immediately following, get together with 3-5 like-minded friends and attempt to as a group write the entire lecture from start to finish from memory. If no one can remember something, skip it.

It takes a few weeks/months to develop your focus, attention span, and memory enough to be able to get near 100% short-term retention, but you start to see benefits almost immediately. And the long-term benefits to your memory and focus can't be understated.

Also, it's really interesting how many other people are expressing that they never took notes in college. I was famous for it in my college (my advisor wrote a paragraph about it in grad school recommendations), whereas I always thought it was common sense, seeing other people who spent the whole class scribbling, but didn't really understand a bit of what was actually taught.

I think this kind of approach can only work in certain situations and modes of teaching. For biology or anything that requires more memorization than conceptualization, I think it is key to have a running tab of the topics/key points. This is especially key for fast speaking lecturers or topics that you are just being introduced to. I think your approach is really helpful in topics that are more conceptual. Math, CS, and logic are much better learned with full concentration.

That said, I think pre-studying and post-studying immediately before or after class is really, really helpful - regardless whether notes are taken. The only challenge is that it takes much more time and a lot of effort. This is another clear example of the relationship between effort and reward.

I preferred to scribble in the margins of my notebook during lectures; not words or likenesses of anything in particular, but kind of Hugh Macleod-ish pattern scribbles[1]. Some teachers really hated that I wasn't looking up at them and thought I was being super disrespectful, which didn't make sense to me since I was asking questions that clearly indicated I was paying attention.

[1]: http://gapingvoid.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/rackspace-1...

Ah yes, I learned to do this as well with certain professors. I always found the ME professors were impressed after the first lecture and could tell I was paying attention. But with some others, it was a different story.

I agree completely with you, and presume that, as in most things, people are different.

I've personally found that intensely concentrating on what is said and actively engaging in thinking about it is the most effective way for me to not only remember what is said, but come up with interesting side-thoughts and insights about my own situation in the process.

Writing is just mechanical to me and prevents me from properly concentrating on what is said.

I've had the same problem in various situations, most notably my linear algebra class in college. After a few classes I realized that if I took notes I would lose track of what the teacher was saying; I had to shift my attention to the act of writing. he moved so fast that it was a choice of pay attention or take notes. I opted for "pay attention". While I could recall few details I did much better absorbing essential concepts and abstracts.

OTOH, at conferences I've been trying to close the laptop and take notes using pen and paper. I get more out of the talks this way, but it works because the information density is lower than my math course.

And I don't take a whole lot of notes, but try to jot down key points or things that might help trigger some recall later. I figure I can Google for stuff if all I have are some keywords written down, so I don't have to notate whole sentences.

Yeah the key for me is to think about what's being said and question it or relate it to things I know. Integrate it into the knowledge network with as many links as possible. "Yes, of course, because...", or "Hmm, but doesn't this implication of this contradict the implications of this other thing"?

This way I have a path to the new information from old information, and I'm unlikely to forget it. For me at least, atoms of information are much harder to remember than connections. And they're much less useful, too.