Abstract
Generative strategies, where learners process the target content while connecting different concepts to build a knowledge network, has shown potential to improve student learning outcomes. While concept maps in particular have been linked to the development of generative strategies, few studies have explored structuring the concept mapping process to support generative strategies, and few studies offer intelligent support. In this work, we present a concept mapping tool that offers navigational support in the form of hyperlinks, where nodes in the concept map are linked to segments of text. We evaluate the effect of the hyperlinks on generative strategies and learning outcomes through a week-long high school study with 32 participants. Our results indicate that proper navigational and visual aid during concept mapping facilitates the development of generative strategies, with implications for learning outcomes. Based on these findings, we propose a constraint-based tutoring system to adaptively support the development of generative strategies in concept mapping.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Vekiri, I.: What is the value of graphical displays in learning? Educ. Psychol. Rev. 14(3), 261–312 (2002)
Winn, W.: Learning from maps and diagrams. Educ. Psychol. Rev. 3(3), 211–247 (1991)
Novak, J.D., Cañas, A.J.: The theory underlying concept maps and how to construct and use them (2008)
Davies, M.: Concept mapping, mind mapping and argument mapping: what are the differences and do they matter? High. Educ. 62(3), 279–301 (2011)
Chang, K.-E., Sung, Y.-T., Chen, S.F.: Learning through computer-based concept mapping with scaffolding aid. J. Comput. Assist. Learn. 17(1), 21–33 (2001)
Hirashima, T., Yamasaki, K., Fukuda, H., Funaoi, H.: Kit-build concept map for automatic diagnosis. In: Biswas, G., Bull, S., Kay, J., Mitrovic, A. (eds.) AIED 2011. LNCS, vol. 6738, pp. 466–468. Springer, Heidelberg (2011). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-21869-9_71
Wu, P.-H., et al.: An innovative concept map approach for improving students’ learning performance with an instant feedback mechanism. Br. J. Educ. Technol. 43(2), 217–232 (2012)
Grabowski, B.L.: Generative learning: past, present, and future. In: Jonassen, D.H. (ed), Handbook of research for educational communications and technology, pp. 897–913 (1996)
Ponce, H.R., Mayer, R.E.: Qualitatively different cognitive processing during online reading primed by different study activities. Comput. Hum. Behav. 30, 121–130 (2014)
Cañas, A.J., et al.: CmapTools: a knowledge modeling and sharing environment. Concept maps: theory, methodology, technology. In: Proceedings of the first international conference on concept mapping, vol. 1 (2004)
Zeiliger, R., Reggers, T., Peeters, R.: Concept-map based navigation in educational hypermedia: a case study. In: Proceedings of ED-MEDIA, vol. 96 (1996)
Puntambekar, S., Stylianou, A., Hübscher, R.: Improving navigation and learning in hypertext environments with navigable concept maps. Hum.-Comput. Interact. 18(4), 395–428 (2003)
Kinchin, I.M.: If concept mapping is so helpful to learning biology, why aren’t we all doing it? Int. J. Sci. Educ. 23(12), 1257–1269 (2001)
Wittrock, M.C.: Generative learning processes of the brain. Educ. Psychol. 27(4), 531–541 (1992)
Ritchie, D., Volkl, C.: Effectiveness of two generative learning strategies in the science classroom. Sch. Sci. Math. 100(2), 83–89 (2000)
Doctorow, M., Wittrock, M.C., Marks, C.: Generative processes in reading comprehension. J. Educ. Psychol. 70(2), 109 (1978)
Ohlsson, S.: Learning from performance errors. Psychol. Rev. 103(2), 241 (1996)
Nesbit, J.C., Adesope, O.O.: Learning with concept and knowledge maps: a meta-analysis. Rev. Educ. Res. 76(3), 413–448 (2006)
Weinbrenner, S., Engler, J., Hoppe, H.U.: Ontology-supported scaffolding of concept maps. In: Biswas, G., Bull, S., Kay, J., Mitrovic, A. (eds.) AIED 2011. LNCS, vol. 6738, pp. 582–584. Springer, Heidelberg (2011). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-21869-9_108
Mitrovic, A., Koedinger, K.R., Martin, B.: A comparative analysis of cognitive tutoring and constraint-based modeling. In: Brusilovsky, P., Corbett, A., Rosis, F. (eds.) UM 2003. LNCS, vol. 2702, pp. 313–322. Springer, Heidelberg (2003). doi:10.1007/3-540-44963-9_42
Hake, R.R.: Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: a six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses. Am. J. Phys. 66(1), 64–74 (1998)
Jain, A., Nandakumar, K., Ross, A.: Score normalization in multimodal biometric systems. Pattern Recogn. 38(12), 2270–2285 (2005)
Acknowledgment
We thank the high school teacher that collaborated with us for her kind help with this work and all the students that participated in our high school study. This research was funded by NSF CISE-IIS-1451431 EAGER: Towards Knowledge Curation and Community Building within a Post digital Textbook.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Wang, S., Walker, E., Wylie, R. (2017). What Matters in Concept Mapping? Maps Learners Create or How They Create Them. In: André, E., Baker, R., Hu, X., Rodrigo, M., du Boulay, B. (eds) Artificial Intelligence in Education. AIED 2017. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 10331. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-61425-0_34
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-61425-0_34
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-61424-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-61425-0
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)