Web Memo: A WWW Browser for Learning with Support for Writing Notes in Web Material
Web Memo: A WWW Browser for Learning with Support for
Writing Notes in Web Material
Masayoshi Yanagisawa
Faculty of Human Science, Toyo Eiwa University, Japan
[email protected]
Kiyomi Ito
Dept. of Human System Science, Graduate School of Decision Sciences and Technology
Tokyo Institute of Technology, Japan
[email protected]
Kanji Akahori
Dept. of Human System Science, Graduate School of Decision Sciences and Technology
Tokyo Institute of Technology, Japan
[email protected]
Abstract: There are a lot of web materials or texts on the Internet. In e-learning and classroom
lectures with computers, teachers often use web learning materials or text. In this study, a web
browser called WebMemo was developed that allows students to write notes in web pages, just like
taking notes in their notebooks or textbooks, such as marking, annotating, and drawing. This note
data is stored on a server and students can review their notes on the web at any time. In experimental
use, students found that writing notes in web pages are useful in studying, and reviewing their notes
on the web is effective for learning.
Keywords: Web Browser, Note Taking, Annotation Tool, Learning Material
1. Introduction
There are a lot of web learning materials or texts on the Internet. In e-learning and classroom lectures
with computers, teachers often use web learning texts. Usually students view these texts on the
computer screen.
However, the degree of understanding of information displayed on a computer screen is less than for
printed matter (Kiyohara et al., 2001). One of the reasons is the impossibility of writing notes on the
computer screen. Students use writing notes to help them understand a text and to make the text
more useful for future tasks (O’Hara and Sellen, 1997). Annotations are often helpful for other readers
as well (Luff et al., 1992) (Marshall, 1997).
Some systems have been developed to allow writing notes on web pages (Cadiz et al., 2000) (Koch,
S. and. Schneider, 2000). These systems allow only text annotation. However, we consider that free
drawings in the textbook are also important to study.
The approach of this study is to develop a system that allows students to not only write textual
annotation but also draw on web pages, just like taking notes in a book.
2069
International Conference on Computers in Education 2004
2. WebMemo System
Just like a printed textbook, the WebMemo allows reading and writing notes in a learning text on the
web. Technologically, the notes, such as marking, annotating and drawing, are displayed on a layer
above the textlayer on the web browser, and therefore the original web materials are not changed.
The note data is stored on a server and students can review the notes on top of the materials at any
timeand any where. They can review and add information to the web at the classroom and also at
their home.
2.1. Interface
Figure 1 shows a screenshot of the WebMemo client. There are three main parts: the “Display Area”,
“Browser Control Buttons” and “Drawing Tools”. Web pages and notes are presented in the “Display
Area”. Students can write notes on the web page by using the “Drawing Tools”. The “Drawing Tools”
consist of three main tools:
We assume the student uses a keyboard, mouse or tablet as an input device.
Marking Tool
Highlights important text with a colour pen.We prepared six colours (red, yellow, green, blue, black
and white)
Annotation Tool
Annotates with a sticky note.Students can type on this text area.
Freehand Tool
Draws with a freehand pen. Students can make lines, boxes, characters and figures.
Offcourse it is very hard to draw good figures using mouse. Therefore, we recommend to use tablet
PC.
2070
Web Memo: A WWW Browser for Learning with Support for Writing Notes in Web Material
Figure 1: Screenshot of WebMemo client
2.2. System Overview
Figure 2 shows the architecture of the WebMemo System. This system consists of the WebMemo
server and WebMemo clients. The WebMemo client was developed as a Java program; Depending
on students’ environment, student can select on HTML interface or a Java application interface. The
WebMemo server was developed using JSP, Servlets and databases on Windows 2000 Server.
HTTP is used to store and retrieve note data.
2071
International Conference on Computers in Education 2004
Figure 2: Architecture of WebMemo System
3. Evaluation
Three experiments were conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of WebMemo. The subjects of the
experiments were undergraduate students, and learning contents were related to internet etiquette
and security.
3.1. Experiment 1: Subjective Evaluation
Objectives
Evaluate the usefulness of WebMemo; gather subjects’ comments.
Method
75 subjects learned with web pages using WebMemo for 30 minutes. They all use Windows XP
professional and 3 button mouse. After learning, subjects answered a questionnaire about usefulness
of writing notes in web pages. Subjects evaluated the usefulness of WebMemo on a 5-point scale.
(1: not useful - 5: most useful)
2072
Web Memo: A WWW Browser for Learning with Support for Writing Notes in Web Material
Result
Figure 3 shows the result of usefulness of writing notes in web pages. 90% of subjects replied that
writing notes in web pages is useful.
Comments from the subjects included “it is useful that a display can be used like a notebook” and “it is
enjoyable to use”. These results show the usefulness of writing notes in a web page directly.
Furthermore, there were also comments about the purpose of writing notes in instructional materials,
such as “to highlight important place to review later”. It follows that notes in learning materials will be
effective when reviewing.
%#
$%#
%#
()*+,-.)/-0
-.)/-0
.1,.1
213,()*+,-.)/-0
!"#
213,43,400,-.)/-0
&'#
Figure 3: Usefulness of WebMemo
3.2. Experiment 2: Effectiveness of Learning
Objectives
Evaluate the effectiveness of learning with WebMemo. This experiment focuses on the effect of
review notes on the WebMemo.
Method
First, 41 subjects learn with web pages for 30 minutes. They read and take notes in web learning
materials using WebMemo. After one week, subjects were divided into two groups: an experimental
group (21 subjects) and a control group (20 subjects). We did not carry out a pre-test, because these
learning contents were first-time contents for these subjects. Subjects in the experimental group
reviewed the web pages with their previous notes. Subjects in the control group reviewed only the
web learning materials. Finally, subjects took a post-test on the contents of the web pages.
Result
Table 1 shows the average scores on the post-test for the experimental group and the control group.
The average score of the experimental group is significantly higher than that of the control group
(t(34)=2.08 p<.05). It follows from that review of written notes in web pages is effective.
2073
International Conference on Computers in Education 2004
Table 1: Average score of post-test (out of 15)
Experimental Group
Control Group
7.8
6.6
Average Score
3.3. Experiment 3: Refinement of interface
Objectives
Finding ways to improve WebMemo. Comparing written note data in printed materials with note data
in WebMemo.
Method
40 subjects were divided into two groups: an experimental group (20 subjects) and a control group
(20 subjects). Subjects of the experimental group took notes in web pages using WebMemo for 30
minutes. Subjects of the control group wrote notes in printed materials with the same contents as the
web pages, using highlight pens and colour pens.
Result
All drawings are counted and classified into note types, such as highlight, under line, wavy line, dual
line, box line, symbol and text annotation. Figure 4 shows the result of the average frequency of note
type. Students used highlight most, and the frequency of highlight is not different between print and
WebMemo. Therefore, the most important note type of writing was supported by WebMemo. There
are two statistically significant differences in frequency of writing; underline and box. This is likely
because WebMemo lacks support for drawing straight lines.
**p<0.01
* p<0.05
**
*
0.4
0.4 0.1
Li
ne
W
av
y
Li
ne
U
nd
er
Hi
gh
lig
ht
0
1.1
0.1 0
Li
ne
2
0.1
Types of Notes
Figure 4: Average frequency of note type
2074
0.1 0
0.1 0.1
An
no
tat
io
n
3.8
4
Sy
m
bo
l
6
Bo
x
8
8.4 7.9
D
ua
lL
in
e
Average Frequency
10
Printed Paper
WebMemo
Web Memo: A WWW Browser for Learning with Support for Writing Notes in Web Material
4. Conclusion
In this study we have developed the WebMemo System, which allows for writing notes in web pages.
Three evaluation experiments have showed as follows:
Writing notes in web learning materials is useful in learning
Review of notes in web materials is effective for learning
Supporting of line drawing by WebMemo is necessary
The future direction of this study will be establishment of a learning environment where notes are
shared. For example, a student will be able to see other students’ notes to see how other students
study. Also, a teacher will be able to see all students’ notes to know the condition of the students.
Reference List
Cadiz, JJ.,Gupta, A. and Grudin, J. (2000) “Using web annotation for asynchronous collaboration around
documents”, CSCW 2000, pp. 309-318
Kiyohara, K., Nakayama, M., Shimizu, Y., Kimura, H. and Shimizu, H. (2001) “The influence that the display
media and the way of showing sentences give the understanding”, Technical Report of IEICE, ET 2000120, pp.53-60
Koch, S. and Schneider, G. (2000) “Implementation of an annotation service on the WWW Virtual Notes”,
th
Proceedings of the 8 Euro Micro Workshop on Parallel and Distributed Processing, IEEE Computer
Society Press, Rhodes, Greece, pp.92-98
Luff, P., Heath, C. and Greatbatch, D. (1992) “Tasks-in-interaction: paper and screen based documentation in
collaborative activity”, Proceedings of the 1992 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative
Work (CSCW 92), pp.163-170
Marshall, C. (1997) “Annotation: From Paper Books to the Digital Library”, Proceedings of the 1997 ACM
International Conference on Digital Libraries (DL 97), pp.131-140
O’Hara, K. and Sellen, A. (1997) “A comparison of reading paper and on-line documents”, Proceedings of the
1997 ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI 97), pp.335-342
2075