Concept map

About: Concept map is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 3614 publications have been published within this topic receiving 67941 citations. The topic is also known as: concept mapping.

The Origins of the Concept Mapping Tool and the Continuing Evolution of the Tool

Abstract: A research program at Cornell University that sought to study the ability of first and second grade children to acquire basic science concepts and the effect of this learning on later schooling led to the need for a new tool to describe explicit changes in children’s conceptual understanding. Concept mapping was invented in 1972 to meet this need, and subsequently numerous other uses have been found for this tool. Underlying the research program and the development of the concept mapping tool was an explicit cognitive psychology of learning and an explicit constructivist epistemology. In 1987, collaboration began between Novak and Canas and others at the Florida Institute for Human and Machine Cognition, then part of the University of West Florida. Extending the use of concept mapping to other applications such as knowledge elicitation, and the integration of concept mapping with the World Wide Web (WWW) led to the development of software that greatly enhanced the potential of concept mapping, evolving into the current version of CmapTools now used world-wide in schools, universities, corporations, and governmental and nongovernmental agencies. Differences between concept maps and other knowledge representation tools, some of which built on early concept mapping studies, are described. The integration of concept mapping software programs with the WWW and other new technologies permits a new kind of concept map-centred learning environment wherein learners build their own knowledge models, individually or collaboratively, and these can serve as a basis for life-long meaningful learning. Combined with other educational practices, use of CmapTools permits a New Model for Education, described briefly. Preliminary studies are underway to assess the possibilities of this New Model.

An Introduction to Concept Mapping as a Participatory Public Health Research Method

Abstract: In this article, the authors introduce concept mapping as a useful participatory research method for public health researchers interested in generating hypotheses and developing theory. The authors first provide an overview of concept mapping, which combines qualitative approaches with quantitative analytical tools to produce visual displays of the relationship between ideas. Then, they present an illustrative research application of the method to the exploration of women’s perceptions of the relationship between residential neighborhood factors and intimate partner violence experiences. They give attention to the data collection and analysis procedures and to demonstrating the intricacies of using concept mapping for public health research purposes. Finally, the article concludes with a discussion of the unique contributions and challenges associated with concept mapping.

An investigation of the effectiveness of concept mapping as an instructional tool

Abstract: The study of concept mapping as a research topic evolved from work conducted at Cornell University under the auspices of Novak (Novak and Gowin, 1984). Most recently reported is a 12-year longitudinal study of science concept learning in which Novak and his colleagues developed concept maps as a tool to represent knowledge structures (Novak and Musonda, 1991). Predicated on Ausubel’s assimilation theory of cognitive learning, these maps depicted the hierarchy and relationships among concepts. Data gathered from clinical interviews given before and after instruction were transformed from their raw, propositional form to concept maps. These “before and after” maps, which represented specific pre- and postinstruction concept meanings held by students, were then analyzed for changes in students’ cognitive structure. In summarizing the results of this study, Novak and Musonda reported that experimental students showed “many more valid conceptions and many fewer invalid conceptions” (p. 148) when compared to a similar sample of students who received no formal instruction in basic science concepts. In the research done since Novak developed this tool, concept mapping has become a viable educational medium. For example, there is evidence that concept maps can help teachers become more effective (Beyerbach and Smith, 1990; Hoz et al., 1990), and can serve as a heuristic for curriculum development (Starr and Krajcik, 1990). Perhaps most importantly, concept maps have been reported to be a potent instructional tool for promoting what Ausubel has described as meaningful learning. Meaningful learning refers to anchoring new ideas or concepts with previously acquired knowledge in a nonarbitrary way (Novak, 1977). It is this latter role of concept maps that is the focus of this study.

Using Cognitive Tools to Represent Problems

Abstract: The premise of this paper is that the key to problem solving is adequately representing the problem to be solved. Most research has focused on how problems are (re)presented to learners. The assumption that those external representations naturally map onto learners’ internal representations of problems has not been confirmed. New research has examined the role of tools for externalizing learners’ internal representations. Descriptions of how three kinds of cognitive tools—semantic networks, expert systems, and systems modeling tools—can be used to externalize learner’s internal representations are provided. Research is needed to study the efficacy of these tools for supporting problem solving.

Comparison of the reliability and validity of scores from two concept-mapping techniques*

Abstract: This paper reports the results of a study that compared two concept-mapping techniques, one high-directed, ''fill-in-the-map,'' and one low-directed, ''construct-a-map-from-scratch.'' We examined whether: (1) skeleton map scores were sensitive to the sample of nodes or linking lines to be filled in; (2) the two types of skeleton maps were equivalent; and (3) the two mapping techniques provided similar infor- mation about students' connected understanding. Results indicated that fill-in-the-map scores were not sensitive to the sample of concepts or linking lines to be filled in. Nevertheless, the fill-in-the-nodes and fill- in-the-lines techniques were not equivalent forms of fill-in-the-map. Finally, high-directed and low-directed maps led to different interpretations about students' knowledge structure. Whereas scores obtained under the high-directed technique indicated that students' performance was close to the maximum possible, the scores obtained with the low-directed technique revealed that students' knowledge was incomplete com- pared to a criterion map. We concluded that the construct-a-map technique better reflected differences among students' knowledge structure. fl 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 38: 260 - 278, 2001 Concept maps have been used to assess students' knowledge structure, especially in science education (Novak, 1990). The justification for assessing students' knowledge structures is based on the idea that relating concepts that belong to the same domain is an important characteristic of scientific literacy (e.g., Bybee, 1996; Moore, 1995). Theory and research have shown that understanding a subject domain such as science is associated with a rich set of relations among important concepts in the domain (Novak, 1998; Novak & Gowin, 1984; Novak, Gowin, & Johansen, 1983; Novak & Ridley, 1988). We know, for example, that successful learners develop elaborate and highly integrated frameworks of related concepts (Mintzes, Wandersee, & Novak, 1997), just as experts do (Chi, Glaser, & Farr, 1988; Glaser, 1991). Research has shown that highly organized structures facilitate problem solving and other cognitive activities (e.g., generating explanations or rapidly recognizing meaningful patterns; Baxter, Elder, & Glaser,