Does Summarizing Your Notes Help You Learn? Only With Training, Dunlosky Says

Partly. Psychologist John Dunlosky's summary of a major review of ten study strategies describes summarization as helping some undergraduates, but rates it "helpful only with training on how to summarize." The strategies he rates higher are practice testing and distributed practice (spreading study over time).

That matters if you use the Cornell method, because its page has a built-in summary box. Here is what the two sources say, and how to use that box without relying on it.

1. What Dunlosky's review says about summarization

In a 2013 American Educator article, Dunlosky describes a review he wrote with colleagues of ten learning strategies. Summarization is item 8 on the list, defined as writing summaries of various lengths of to-be-learned texts. His description is that it "involves paraphrasing the most important ideas within a text."

His verdict is mixed:

• Some success for undergraduates. The article says it "has shown some success at helping undergraduate students learn."
• Younger students may struggle. Those who have difficulty writing high-quality summaries "may need extensive help to benefit."
• Training helps. In one study he cites, teachers got 90 minutes of training to teach summarizing. Students then had five coaching sessions of about 50 minutes each, starting with short paragraphs and ending with summarizing a chapter. Coached students recalled more important points from a chapter than uncoached students.
• The cost is the catch. He writes that the need for extensive training "will make the use of this strategy less feasible in many contexts," and that relying on it to improve learning "may not be as effective as using other less-demanding strategies."

His summary table lists it plainly: "Helpful only with training on how to summarize."

2. How much training is that?

Using the article's numbers: five sessions of about 50 minutes is 5 × 50 = 250 minutes, or 4 hours 10 minutes of coaching for students. The teachers also needed 90 minutes of training first. For comparison, the Cornell handout asks for at least ten minutes a week of reviewing old notes. At that pace, 250 minutes is 25 weeks of weekly reviews.

This does not mean summarizing is a waste of that time. The point is that the benefit in the study he cites came from structured coaching with feedback, not from students simply being told to "summarize."

3. What the Cornell handout asks for

The Learning Strategies Center's one-page handout for the Cornell Note-taking System shows a page with a 2.5-inch cue column, a 6-inch note-taking column and a 2-inch summary area at the bottom. It says: "After class, use this space at the bottom of each page to summarize the notes on that page."

The five steps (record, questions, recite, reflect, review) are separate from that box. Note that the steps do the work Dunlosky rates highly:

• Questions. Step 2 has you write questions from your notes as soon after class as possible. The handout says this helps clarify meanings, reveal relationships, establish continuity and strengthen memory, and "sets up a perfect stage for exam-studying later."
• Recite. Step 3 has you cover the note column and say the answers aloud from the cues. That is a form of practice testing, the first strategy in Dunlosky's list, which he calls one of the most effective because it works across ages and materials.
• Review. Step 5 asks for at least ten minutes every week reviewing all previous notes, which fits his distributed practice point that studying across several sessions beats one cramming session.

Dunlosky even describes the same move: when taking notes in class, he suggests leaving room on each page for practice tests, and hiding key ideas with your hand, then writing them from memory.

4. A way to use the summary box

Combining the two sources, here is one reasonable approach. It is a synthesis, not a rule from either document.

1. Write the summary after the questions. Do steps 1 and 2 first, so the cue column is built before you compress anything.
2. Keep it to what fits. The box is about 2 inches tall.
3. Use your own words. Dunlosky's definition is paraphrasing, not copying.
4. Do not stop at the summary. He warns students to try to self-explain and "not merely paraphrase (or summarize)," because the latter "do not consistently boost performance." Self-explanation means explaining how new information relates to what you already know. Cornell's step 4 questions, such as "How do they fit in with what I already know?", are the same idea.
5. Spend most of your time on recite and review. Those map to the strategies he rates highest.

5. What we can and cannot conclude

Two limits are worth stating. First, the Dunlosky source here is his magazine-length account of the review, not the full monograph (pages 4 to 58 of the journal issue, per his citation), so the study details come from his retelling. Second, neither document tests the Cornell summary box itself. The Cornell handout says to use it; Dunlosky says summarizing is conditional. Putting them together is an interpretation.

For the layout and the five steps in full, see the Cornell note-taking method, explained.