Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Successful and unsuccessful mapping behaviors for learning procedural-type knowledge

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Educational technology research and development Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Mind mapping is a powerful technique that is often used for teaching declarative knowledge, but seldom implemented to record procedural knowledge. The present study focused on the latter. During a 12-week public presentation course, self-developed mind mapping software was utilized as a learning tool and an instrument to collect and analyze user behavior logs while summarizing and revising procedural knowledge. The participants were 53 working adults. They were divided into successful and unsuccessful mapping profiles based on their improvement. The pre- and post-tests on presentation skills, lag sequential analysis on log data, and interviews suggested that participants showing successful mapping behavior prioritized readability and ease of navigation of their maps. Their counterparts with unsuccessful mapping behavior tended to overload their maps and overuse highlighting. The discovery of actions and behavior patterns during the creation and revision of mind maps corresponding to successful/unsuccessful mind mapping profiles provides important suggestions to enhance existing digital mind mapping tools and to diagnose students who are falling behind. The implementation of mind mapping for procedural learning expands the area of mind mapping research and enlarges our understanding of teaching procedural knowledge.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ackerman, P. L., & Kanfer, R. (1988). Declarative and procedural knowledge in skill acquisition: An aptitude—treatment interaction framework for training. In V. John (Ed.), Proceedings of the human factors society annual meeting. SAGE Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ashcraft, M. H., & Krause, J. A. (2007). Working memory, math performance, and math anxiety. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14(2), 243–248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bhattacharya, D., & Mohalik, R. (2020). Digital mind mapping software: A new horizon in the modern teaching-learning strategy. Journal of Advances in Education and Philosophy, 4(10), 400–406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Black, R. (2019). Glossophobia (Fear of public speaking): Are you glossophobic. Retrieved November 7, 2022 from https://www.psycom.net/glossophobia-fear-of-public-speaking. 

  • Buzan, T. (1983). Use both sides of your brain. EP Dutton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buzan, T., & Buzan, B. (2006). The mind map book. Educational Publishers LLP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chang, K. E., Sung, Y. T., & Chen, I. D. (2002). The effect of concept mapping to enhance text comprehension and summarization. The Journal of Experimental Education, 71(1), 5–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chow, J. Y. (2013). Nonlinear learning underpinning pedagogy: Evidence, challenges, and implications. Quest, 65(4), 469–484.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davies, M. (2011). Concept mapping, mind mapping and argument mapping: What are the differences and do they matter? Higher Education, 62(3), 279–301.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elo, S., & Kyngäs, H. (2008). The qualitative content analysis process. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 62(1), 107–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frerichs, L., Young, T. L., Dave, G., Stith, D., Corbie-Smith, G., & Lich, K. H. (2018). Mind maps and network analysis to evaluate conceptualization of complex issues: A case example evaluating systems science workshops for childhood obesity prevention. Evaluation and Program Planning, 68, 135–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galván-Sánchez, I., Verano-Tacoronte, D., González-Betancor, S. M., Fernández-Monroy, M., & Bolívar-Cruz, A. (2017). Assessing oral presentation skills in electrical engineering: Developing a valid and reliable rubric. International Journal of Electrical Engineering Education, 54(1), 17–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grazziotin-Soares, R., Curtis, D. A., & Ardenghi, D. M. (2021). Use of mind maps in dental education: An activity performed in a preclinical endodontic course. Journal of Dental Education, 85(5), 623–633.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heckner, M. K., Cieslik, E. C., Eickhoff, S. B., Camilleri, J. A., Hoffstaedter, F., & Langner, R. (2021). The aging brain and executive functions revisited: Implications from meta-analytic and functional-connectivity evidence. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 33(9), 1716–1752.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hurrell, D. (2021). Conceptual knowledge or procedural knowledge or conceptual knowledge and procedural knowledge: Why the conjunction is important to teachers. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 46(2), 57–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kern, C. S., & Bush, K. L. (2006). Mind-mapped care plans: Integrating an innovative educational tool as an alternative to traditional care plans. Journal of Nursing Education, 45(4), 112–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knowlton, B. J., & Moody, T. D. (2008). Procedural learning in humans. In J. H. Byrne (Ed.), Learning and memory: A comprehensive reference (pp. 321–340). Academic Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, C. B., Jonassen, D., & Teo, T. (2011). The role of model building in problem solving and conceptual change. Interactive Learning Environments, 19(3), 247–265.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. E. (2017). Using multimedia for e-learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 33(5), 403–423.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merchie, E., & Van Keer, H. (2016). Stimulating graphical summarization in late elementary education: The relationship between two instructional mind-map approaches and student characteristics. The Elementary School Journal, 116(3), 487–522.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nickols, F. (2000). The knowledge in knowledge management. The Knowledge Management Yearbook, 2000–2001, 12–21.

  • Nyagblormase, G., Gyampoh, A., Hinson, J., Aidoo, B., & Yeboah, E. (2021). Effect of mind mapping as a learning tool on online learning of chemistry. Studies in Learning and Teaching, 2(2), 47–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Okebukola, P. A. (1990). Attaining meaningful learning of concepts in genetics and ecology: An examination of the potency of the concept – mapping technique. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(5), 493–504.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Polat, O., Yavuz, E. A., & Tunc, A. B. O. (2017). The effect of using mind maps on the development of maths and science skills. Cypriot Journal of Educational Sciences, 12(1), 32–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sackett, G. P. (1978). Observing behavior: Theory and applications in mental retardation. University Park Press.

  • Shapiro, S. S., Wilk, M. B., & Chen, H. J. (1968). A comparative study of various tests for normality. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 63(324), 1343–1372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shi, Y., Yang, H., Dou, Y., & Zeng, Y. (2022). Effects of mind mapping-based instruction on student cognitive learning outcomes: A meta-analysis. Asia Pacific Education Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-022-09746-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vakil, E., & Agmon-Ashkenazi, D. (1997). Baseline performance and learning rate of procedural and declarative memory tasks: Younger versus older adults. The Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 52(5), 229–234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Gog, T., & Sweller, J. (2015). Not new, but nearly forgotten: The testing effect decreases or even disappears as the complexity of learning materials increases. Educational Psychology Review, 27(2), 247–264.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • VanLehn, K. (2013). Model construction as a learning activity: A design space and review. Interactive Learning Environments, 21(4), 371–413.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Viberg, O., Hatakka, M., Bälter, O., & Mavroudi, A. (2018). The current landscape of learning analytics in higher education. Computers in Human Behavior, 89, 98–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vosniadou, S., Skopeliti, I., & Ikospentaki, K. (2004). Modes of knowing and ways of reasoning in elementary astronomy. Cognitive Development, 19(2), 203–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walker, J. M., & King, P. H. (2003). Concept mapping as a form of student assessment and instruction in the domain of bioengineering. Journal of Engineering Education, 92(2), 167–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilensky, U. (1999). GasLab–an extensible modeling toolkit for connecting micro- and macro-properties of gases. In W. Feurzig & N. Roberts (Eds.), Modeling and simulation in science and mathematics education (pp. 151–178). Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Zheng, X., Johnson, T. E., & Zhou, C. (2020). A pilot study examining the impact of collaborative mind mapping strategy in a flipped classroom: Learning achievement, self-efficacy, motivation, and students’ acceptance. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68(6), 3527–3545.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by the National Science and Technology Council (MOST 108-2511-H-011-002-MY4, MOST 111-2811-H-011-004). We would like to express our gratitude to Dmitrii Matveichev for developing the software for the research.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Graduate Institute of Digital Learning and Education, National Taiwan University of Science and Technology, 43, Sec.4, Keelung Rd., Taipei, Taiwan

    Katerina Evers & Sufen Chen

  2. Empower Vocational Education Research Center, National Taiwan University of Science and Technology, 43, Sec.4, Keelung Rd., Taipei, Taiwan

    Katerina Evers

  3. Optentia Research Focus Area, North-West University, Vanderbijlpark, South Africa

    Sufen Chen

Authors
  1. Katerina Evers
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sufen Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sufen Chen.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Evers, K., Chen, S. Successful and unsuccessful mapping behaviors for learning procedural-type knowledge. Education Tech Research Dev (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-023-10336-8

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-023-10336-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation