The Charting Method of Note-Taking: A Guide for Comparative Subjects

The charting method is a note-taking system that organises information in a table: columns hold the categories or attributes you are comparing (causes, dates, outcomes, significance) and rows hold the cases or examples (wars, theories, cell types). It is the best format for any subject built on comparison across the same dimensions, and covering columns turns the chart into a ready-made self-test.

The charting method transforms comparative content from a collection of separate notes into a single structure that makes relationships visible. It is the most underused note-taking system in academic settings, despite being ideally suited to several of the most commonly studied subjects.

When charting is the right tool

The diagnostic question: are you studying multiple instances of the same type of thing, evaluable on the same criteria?

If yes, charting is probably more efficient than any linear note format.

Subjects where charting excels:

• History: Multiple wars, revolutions, political leaders, or periods — compared across causes, key events, outcomes, significance
• Biology: Cell types, organisms, physiological processes, genetic inheritance patterns — compared across structure, function, location, mechanism
• Economics: Economic models, policies, market structures, historical events — compared across causes, assumptions, outcomes, limitations
• Psychology: Theories, studies, research methods — compared across theorist, year, methodology, findings, strengths, weaknesses
• Sociology: Theoretical perspectives, social issues, studies — compared across perspective, key claims, evidence, criticisms
• Literature: Multiple texts, characters, themes — compared across author intent, technique, context, effect

Subjects where charting is less useful:

• Mathematics: Sequential and procedural — outlines and worked examples are better
• Physics (most topics): Derivations, concepts, and problem-solving sequences — linear notes are clearer
• Philosophy: Arguments and counter-arguments in a dialogue structure — Cornell notes or structured essays are more appropriate

Setting up a chart

Step 1: Identify the row items. These are the multiple instances you are comparing. In a history chart: individual wars or events. In biology: specific cell types or processes.

Step 2: Identify the column categories. These are the attributes or dimensions on which you will compare your row items. The best column headings are those that will appear in exam questions — the criteria on which you will be assessed.

Common column headings by subject:

History: Causes | Key events/actors | Immediate outcomes | Long-term significance | Contested interpretations

Biology (processes): Location | Inputs | Outputs | Key enzymes/molecules | Regulation mechanism | Net energy yield

Psychology (studies): Theorist/Researcher | Year | Aim | Method | Sample | Findings | Strengths | Limitations | Application

Economics (policies): Policy type | Mechanism | Short-term effects | Long-term effects | Limitations | Examples

Step 3: Fill in the table. During a lecture or while reading, fill cells as information becomes available. Leave cells blank when information is not yet available — the blank cell is a visible gap to fill in the next session.

Converting a chart to active recall

A completed chart is a reference document. The revision value comes from testing yourself against it.

Technique 1: Column cover. Cover the rightmost column (most detailed information). Try to retrieve the hidden content from the visible row labels and other columns. Move the cover to reveal one column at a time.

Technique 2: Row cover. Cover all content cells for one row. Retrieve all the attributes for that specific case from memory.

Technique 3: Full reproduction. Close your notes. On a blank page, attempt to reproduce the full chart — row labels, column headings, and all cell content — from memory. Compare to the original. Colour-code the gaps.

Technique 4: Comparison questions. For each pair of rows, write a one-sentence comparison: "WWI and WWII shared [X] as a long-term cause but differed in [Y]." This active synthesis is one of the most effective preparation activities for exam questions that require comparison.

An example: psychology study comparison chart

With this table, covering any column and retrieving from the others is immediate retrieval practice. Comparison questions write themselves: "Compare Milgram and Asch in terms of method and what they reveal about social influence."

Combining charting with other methods

Charting is often most effective as a second-pass note format:

• First pass (lecture or reading): outline or sentence method notes — capture everything
• Second pass (same day, 20 minutes): convert to charting — identify the comparative structure and reorganise

The second-pass conversion is itself a learning event: reorganising content into a comparative table requires understanding what the categories are and what the content says about each. This active processing deepens encoding compared to simply re-reading the original notes.

For the overview of all note-taking methods, see Note-Taking Methods Compared. For the Cornell system that works well for individual topic depth, see The Cornell Note-Taking Method.

References

• Piolat, A., Olive, T., & Kellogg, R.T. (2005). Cognitive effort during note taking. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 19(3), 291–312.
• Karpicke, J.D., & Blunt, J.R. (2011). Retrieval practice produces more learning than elaborative studying. Science, 331(6018), 772–775.
• Pauk, W. (1962). How to Study in College. Houghton Mifflin.