Skip to main content
Log in

Probing personal knowledge: The use of a computer-based tool to help preservice teachers map subject matter knowledge

  • Published:
Research in Science Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper reports on the use of a HyperCardTM-based tool to create and modify concept maps about science related subject matter. The tool was trialed with seventy-one preservice teachers who were planning to teach a science topic to a primary school class. Data gathered from interviews, journals and analysis of concept maps indicated that the concept mapping tool was easy to use because it generated little cognitive load and quickly became transparent to the users. This allowed preservice teachers to focus their attention upon the construction of their maps and to organise their cognitive frameworks into more powerful integrated patterns. It was also found that the process of concept map construction may enhance preservice teacher thinking about effective teaching.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Armbruster, B. B. (1979).An investigation of the effectiveness of “mapping text” as a studying strategy for middle school students. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois, Springfield, Illinois.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ausubel, D. P. (1968).Educational psychology: A cognitive view. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beyerbach, B. A. & Smith, J. M. (1990). Using a computerized concept mapping program to assess preservice teachers' thinking about effective teaching.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(10), 961–971.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, J. H. (1991). Using visual organizers to focus on thinking.Journal of Reading, 34(7), 526–534.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, K. M., Faletti, J., Patterson, H., Thornton, R., Lipson, J., & Spring, C. (1990). Computer-based concept mapping-SemNet software: A tool for describing knowledge networks.Journal of College Science and Technology, 19, 347–352.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goetz, E. T. & Armbruster, B. B. (1980). Psychological correlates of text structure. In R. J. Spiro, B. C. Bruce, & W. F. Brewer (Eds.),Theoretical issues in reading comprehension: Perspectives from cognitive psychology, linguistics, artificial intelligence, and education. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harlen, W. (1992).The teaching of science; Studies in primary science. London: David Fulton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harlen, W., Macro, C., Schilling, M., Malvern, D., & Reed, K. (1990).Progress in primary science. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haywood, J., & Norman, P. (1988). Problems of educational innovation: The primary teacher's response to the microcomputer.Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 4(1), 34–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heimlich, J. E., & Pittelman, S. D. (1986).Semantic mapping: Classroom applications. Newark, Delaware: International Reading Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holley, C. D., & Dansereau, D. F. (1984).Spatial learning strategies: Techniques, applications, and related issues. Sydney: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howell, D. C., (1992).Statistical methods in psychology (3rd ed.). Belmont, CA: Duxbury Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jegede, O. J., Alaiyemola, F. F., & Okebukola, P. A. O. (1990). The effect of concept mapping on students' anxiety and achievement in biology.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(10), 950–960.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jonassen, D. H. (1991). What are cognitive tools? In M. Kommers, D. H. Jonassen, & J. T. Mayes, (Eds.),Cognitive tools for learning computers and system sciences (Vol. 81). Berlin: Springer-Verland in cooperation with NATO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jonassen, D. H., & Reeves, T. C. (1995).Learning with technology: Using computers as cognitive tools. New York: Scholastic Press in collaboration with the Association for Educational Communications and Technology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Langfield-Smith, K. (1992). Exploring the need for a shared cognitive map.Journal of Management Studies, 29(3), 349–369.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lederman, N. G., & Latz, M. S. (1995). Knowledge structures in the preservice teacher: Sources, development, interactions, and relationships to teaching.Journal of Science Teacher Education, 6(1), 1–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lloyd, C. V. (1990). The elaboration of concepts in three biology textbooks: Facilitating student learning.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(10), 1019–1032.

    Google Scholar 

  • Margulies, N. (1991).Mapping inner space: Learning and teaching mind mapping. Tuscon, AZ: Zephyr Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Novak, J. D. & Gowin, D. B. (1984).Learning how to learn. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramsden, P. (1992).Learning to teach in higher education. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tobin, K., Tippins, D. J., & Gallard, A. J. (1994). Research on instructional strategies for teaching science. In D. Gabel (Ed.),Handbook of research on science teaching and learning. New York, NY: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wandersee, J. H. (1990). Concept mapping and the cartography of cognition.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(10), 923–936.

    Google Scholar 

  • West, L. H., & Pines, A. L. (1985).Cognitive structure and conceptual change, Sydney: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • White, R., & Gunstone, R. (1992).Probing understanding. London: The Falmer Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Brian Ferry.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ferry, B. Probing personal knowledge: The use of a computer-based tool to help preservice teachers map subject matter knowledge. Research in Science Education 26, 233–245 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02356434

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02356434

Keywords

Navigation