Advertisement

Instructional Science

, Volume 20, Issue 1, pp 25–47 | Cite as

Didactic use of concept mapping in higher education: applications in medical education

  • Sophia Mahler
  • Ron Hoz
  • Dita Fischl
  • Esther Tov-Ly
  • Omri Z. Lernau
Articles

Abstract

This paper describes the use of concept mapping for didactic purposes in higher education at the university level, namely, in medical schools. The first study involved the use of concept mapping to evaluate students' self learned knowledge of subject matter during their clerkship in a department of surgery. The individually constructed cognitive maps facilitated learning by being used in group discussions with the tutor, to identify correct ideas as well as misconceptions, and to convey the tutor's view, and thereby facilitated learning. The second, unrelated study employed concept mapping to evaluate an inservice Orientation Workshop for medicine school faculty. The cognitive structure characteristics of the participants and their congruence with those of the workshop teachers were assessed. These provided evidence regarding the attainment of the workshop's objectives for different kinds of participant. For example, by using concept mapping in planning instruction or preparing materials for teaching, teachers become learners. Potential didactic uses in higher education are discussed in light of these studies.

Keywords

High Education Medical School Structure Characteristic Medical Education Subject Matter 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Anderson, J. R. (1985). Cognitive psychology and its implications (2nd edition). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  2. Ausubel, D. P., Novak, J. and Hanesian, H. (1978). Educational psychology: a cognitive view. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
  3. Benor, E. E. and Mahler, S. (1987). Teacher training and faculty development in medical education. Israeli Journal of Medical Education, 23, 976–982.Google Scholar
  4. Champagne, A. B. and Klopfer, L. E. (1981). Using the ConSAT: a memo to teachers. (Reports to Educators R.T.E. 4) Pittsburgh: Learning Research and Development Center, University of Pittsburgh.Google Scholar
  5. Chi, M. T. H., Glaser, R. and Rees, E. (1982). Expertise in problem solving. In R., Sternberg (Ed.), Advances in the psychology of human intelligence. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  6. Cook, T. D. and Campbell, D. T. (1979). Quasi-experimentation. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
  7. Elbaz, F., Hoz, R., tomer, Y., Chayoth, R., Mahler, S. and Yeheskel, N. (1986). The use of concept mapping in the study of teachers' cognitive structures. In M., Ben-Peretz, R., Bromme and R., Halkes (Eds.), Advances in the study of teacher thinking. Lisse: Swets and Zeitlinger.Google Scholar
  8. Fensham, P. J., Garrard, J. E. and West, L. T. H. (1981). The use of cognitive mapping in teaching and learning strategies. Research in Science Education, 11, 121–129.Google Scholar
  9. Howard, R. W. (1987). Concepts and schemata. London: Cassell.Google Scholar
  10. Hoz, R. (1986). Project for the Evaluation of Teacher Education. PETE annual report 1985–6. Beer-Sheva: Ben-Gurion University of the Negev.Google Scholar
  11. Hoz, R. (1987). Dimensions of teachers' knowledge structures and their identification by concept mapping. Presented at the Annual meeting of AERA, Washington DC.Google Scholar
  12. Hoz, R., Bowman, D., Kozminsky, E., Chayoth, R. and Tomer, Y. (1989). The use of concept mapping as a tool to diagnose misconceptions in science learning. Paper submitted for publication.Google Scholar
  13. Hoz, R., Mahler, S., Yeheskel, N., Tomer, Y. and Elbaz, F. (1984). Project for the Evaluation of Teacher Education. PETE annual report 1984. Beer-Sheva: Ben-Gurion University of the Negev.Google Scholar
  14. Hoz, R., Kozminsky, E. and Bowman, D. (1987). The role of prior knowledge in learning: a study of students' cognitive structure in an earth sciences course. Unpublished manuscript. Beer-Sheva: Ben-Gurion University of the Negev.Google Scholar
  15. Hoz, R., Tomer, Y. and Tamir, P. (1990). The relations between disciplinary and pedagogical knowledge and the length of teaching experience of biology and geography teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(10), 973–985.Google Scholar
  16. Kozma, R. (1986). Learning tool. Ann Arbor: Arborworks Inc.Google Scholar
  17. Kozma, R. (1989). Principles underlying the Learning Tool. Presented at the annual AERA meeting, San Francisco.Google Scholar
  18. Leinhardt, G. and Smith, D. (1985). Expertise in mathematics instruction: subject matter knowledge. Journal of Educational Psychology, 77, 247–271.Google Scholar
  19. Lesgold, A. M. (1984). Acquiring expertise. In J. R., Anderson and S., Kosslyn (Eds.), Tutorials in learning and memory. New York: Freeman.Google Scholar
  20. Mahler, S. and Neumann, L. (1987). Faculty development in medical instruction: the cognitive dimension. Israeli Journal of Medical Sciences, 23(12), 1247–1251.Google Scholar
  21. Mahler, S. and Neumann, L. (1987). The effect of personal and institutional variables upon faculty instructional behavior. College Student Journal, 21, 137–145.Google Scholar
  22. Novak, J. D. and Gowin, D. B. (1984). Learning how to learn. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Novak, D. N., Gowin, D. B., and Johansen, G. T. (1983). The use of concept mapping and knowledge vee with junior high school teachers. Science Education, 67, 625–645.Google Scholar
  24. Perkins, D. N., Simmons, R. and Tishman, S. (1990). Teaching cognitive and metacognitive strategies. Journal of Structural Learning, 10(4), 285–303.Google Scholar
  25. Ploger, D. (1988). Reasoning and the structure of knowledge in biochemistry. Instructional Science, 17, 57–76.Google Scholar
  26. Schallert, D. L. (1982). The significance of knowledge: a synthesis of research related to schema theory. In W., Otto and S., White (Eds.), Reading expository material. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  27. Stewart, J. (1979). Content and cognitive structure: critique of assessment and representation techniques used by science education researchers. Science Education, 63, 395–405.Google Scholar
  28. Tomer, Y. (1990). Evaluation of learning disciplinary and pedagogical knowledge in teacher training. Unpublished dissertation. Jerusalem: Hebrew University of Jerusalem.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sophia Mahler
    • 1
  • Ron Hoz
    • 1
  • Dita Fischl
    • 1
  • Esther Tov-Ly
    • 1
  • Omri Z. Lernau
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of EducationBen-Gurion University of the NegevBeer-ShevaIsrael
  2. 2.Shaare Zedek Medical CenterJerusalemIsrael

Personalised recommendations