Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry

, Volume 402, Issue 6, pp 1979–1986 | Cite as

The use of concept maps for knowledge management: from classrooms to research labs

  • Paulo Rogério Miranda Correia
ABCs of Teaching Analytical Science

The knowledge explosion, information technology development and globalization have dramatically affected our society [1]. Knowledge societies, which have been emerging since the end of the last century, have shaped our contemporary way of life [1, 2]. New challenges and global problems with long-term impact must be addressed, implying a need for changing the way we transmit knowledge (education) and produce knowledge (research) [3, 4]. Both classrooms and research labs must be transformed into learning organizations, i.e. groups of people who are continually enhancing their creative capabilities [5, 6]. According to Peter Senge, there are five disciplines critical to building effective collaborative teams: systems thinking, personal mastery, mental models, building a shared vision and team learning [5]. Despite all the theoretical frameworks available, there is a lack of strategies and tools to change old-fashioned practices still prevalent in education and research labs. In this...


Mental Model Information Asymmetry Concept Mapping Collaborative Process Consensus Building 
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.



The author thank the Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq-553710/2006-0, 486194/2011-6), Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES-3555-09-7), and Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP-2006/03083-0, 2008/04709-6, 2011/09941-7) for funding his research group.


  1. 1.
    Friedman TL (2007) The world is flat [updated and expanded]: a brief story of the twenty-first century. Picador, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    UNESCO (2005) Towards knowledge societies: UNESCO world report. UNESCO Publishing, Paris. Accessed 9 January 2012
  3. 3.
    Sawyer RK (2006) Educating for innovation. Think Skill Creativity 1:41–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gardner H (2006) Five minds for the future. Harvard Business School Publishing, BostonGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Senge PM (1994) The fifth discipline: the art and practice of the learning organization. Doubleday, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Senge PM, McCabe NHC, Lucas T, Kleiner A, Dutton J, Smith B (2000) Schools that learn: a fifth discipline field book for educators, parents, and everyone who cares about education. Doubleday, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Novak JD (2010) Learning, creating, and using knowledge: concept maps as facilitative tools in schools and corporations, 2nd edn. Routledge, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Davies M (2011) Mind mapping, concept mapping, argument mapping: what are the differences and do they matter? High Educ 62:279–301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Moon BM, Hoffman RR, Novak JD, Cañas AJ (2011) Applied concept mapping: capturing, analyzing, and organizing knowledge. CRC Press, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Liberato C (2004) Conceiving of concept maps to foster meaningful learning: An interview with Joseph D. Novak. J Chem Educ 81:1303–1308CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hay DB (2007) Using concept maps to measure deep, surface and non-learning outcomes. Stud High Educ 32:39–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hay DB, Kinchin IM, Lygo-Baker S (2008) Making learning visible: the role of concept mapping in higher education. Stud High Educ 33:295–311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hay DB, Wells H, Kinchin IM (2008) Quantitative and qualitative measures of student learning at university level. High Educ 56:221–239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Torres PL, Marriott RCV (2009) Handbook of research on collaborative learning using concept mapping. Information Science Reference, HersheyCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lattuca LR (2001) Creating interdisciplinarity: interdisciplinary research and teaching among college and university faculty. Vanderbilt University Press, NashvilleGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lattuca LR, Voigt LJ, Fath KQ (2004) Does interdisciplinarity promote learning? Rev High Educ 28:23–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Fischer F, Bruhn J, Gräsel C, Mandl H (2002) Fostering collaborative knowledge construction and visualization tools. Learn Instr 12:213–232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Harvey D (2011) Analytical Chemistry 2.0. Available at ASDL website: Accessed 9 January 2012
  19. 19.
    Visser J, Visser-Valfray M (2008) Learners in a changing landscape: reflections from a dialogue on new roles and expectations. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Wandersee JH (1990) Concept mapping and the cartography of cognition. J Res Sci Teach 27:923–936CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Escola de Artes, Ciências e HumanidadesUniversidade de São PauloSão PauloBrazil

Personalised recommendations