Research in Science Education

, Volume 11, Issue 1, pp 121–129 | Cite as

The use of cognitive mapping in teaching and learning strategies

  • Peter J. Fensham
  • Jan Garrard
  • Leo West
Article

Summary

In this exercise the first five criteria of Table 3 were probably met. Our subsequent checks may enable us to claim that criterion 6 is also met, and there is little doubt that without it most chemistry teachers would remain sceptical about the worth of such an “extra” set of activities.

The exercise also indicates that it is possible with modifications to move research techniques like 5 and 8 in Table 3 into at least the realm of possibility of teacher-centred or didactic classrooms.

Keywords

Cognitive Mapping Learning Strategy Research Technique Chemistry Teacher Subsequent Check 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. ARCHENHOLD, W. F., DRIVER, R. H., ORTON, A. & WOOD-ROBINSON, C. Cognitive Development Research in Science and Mathematics. Proceedings of an International Seminar, The University of Leeds, 1980.Google Scholar
  2. BRUMBY, M. Students' Perceptions and learning styles associated with the concept of evolution by natural selection. Ph.D. thesis, University of Surrey, 1979.Google Scholar
  3. CHAMPAGNE, A. B., KLOPFER, L. E. & ANDERSON, J.Factors influencing the learning of classical mechanics, University of Pittsburgh, 1979.Google Scholar
  4. DELACÔTE, G., GUESNE, E. & TIBERGHIEN, A. Méthodes et résultats concernant l'analyse des conceptions des élèves dans differents domains physiques. Deux exemples: les notions de chaleur et lumière.Revue Francais Pédagogie, 1978, 45, 25–32.Google Scholar
  5. FENSHAM, P. J. A Research Base for New Objectives of Science Teaching.Research in Science Education, 1980, 10, 23–33.Google Scholar
  6. FENSHAM, P. J., GARRARD, J. E., WEST, L. H. T. Does Learning about learning help in chemistry? submitted toAustralian Science Teachers' Journal, 1980.Google Scholar
  7. GUNSTONE, R. F. Word Association and the Description of Cognitive Structure.Research in Science Education, 1980, 10, 45–53.Google Scholar
  8. HEFFERNAN, M. W. The Measurement of Understanding. M. Ed. thesis, Monash University, 1980.Google Scholar
  9. LYBECK, L. A research approach to science education at Goteborg.European Journal of Science Education, 1979, 1(1), 119–124.Google Scholar
  10. MASKILL, R. & PEREIRA, D. Cognitive structure from digraph analysis of language. 1980, 349–358, in Archenhold et al. op cit. Cognitive Development Research in Science and Mathematics. Proceedings of an International Seminar, The University of Leeds, 1980.Google Scholar
  11. NOVAK, J. D. An alternative to Piagetian psychology for science and mathematics education.Science Education, 1977, 61(4), 453–477.Google Scholar
  12. NOVAK, J. D. Methodological Issues in Investigating Meaningful Learning. 1980, 129–147, in Archenhold et al. op cit. Cognitive Development Research in Science and Mathematics. Proceedings of an International Seminar, The University of Leeds, 1980.Google Scholar
  13. OGBURN, J. Some uses of networks of options for describing complicated qualitative data. 1980, 359–367, in Archenhold et al. op. cit. Cognitive Development Research in Science and Mathematics. Proceedings of an International Seminar, The University of Leeds, 1980.Google Scholar
  14. OSBORNE, R. J. & GILBERT, J. K.An approach to student understanding of basic concepts in science. Institute of Educational Technology, University of Surrey, Guildford. 1979.Google Scholar
  15. PINES, A. L., NOVAK, J. D., POSNER, G. J. & Van KIRK, J. The clinical interview: a method for evaluating cognitive structure.Curriculum Series Research Report, No. 6, Department of Education, Cornell University, 1978.Google Scholar
  16. PREECE, P.F.W. Exploration of semantic space.Science Education. 1978, 63(5), 547–562.Google Scholar
  17. SCHAEFFER, G. Inclusive thinking with exclusive concepts. 1980, 382–396 in Archenhold et al. op. cit. Cognitive Development Research in Science and Mathematics. Proceedings of an International Seminar, The University of Leeds, 1980.Google Scholar
  18. SHAVELSON, R. J. Methods for examining representations of a subject matter structure in a student's memory.Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 1974. 11 (3), 231–249.Google Scholar
  19. STEWART, J. H. Content and Cognitive Structure: Critique used by Science Education Researchers.Science Education. 1979, 63(3), 395–405.Google Scholar
  20. STEWART, J. H.. Techniques for Assessing and Representing Information in Cognitive Structure.Science Education. 1980, 64 (2), 223–235.Google Scholar
  21. SUTTON, C. R. The Learner's Prior Knowledge: a Critical Review of Techniques for Probing its Organisation.European Journal of Science Education. 1980, 2(2), 107–120.Google Scholar
  22. SYMINGTON, D. & NOVAK, J. D. Teaching Children how to Learn. Part 1 and Part 2.Education Magazine (in press).Google Scholar
  23. TIBERGHIEN, A. Modes and conditions of learning—an example: the learning of some aspects of the concept of heat. 1980, 129–309, in Archenhold et al. op. cit. Cognitive Development Research in Science and Mathematics. Proceedings of an International Seminar, The University of Leeds, 1980.Google Scholar
  24. WEST, L. H. T. & FENSHAM, P. J. What is learning chemistry? InChemical Education-a View across the Secondary-Tertiary Interface, 1979. 162–169, R. A. C. I., Chemical Education Division.Google Scholar
  25. WEST, L. H. T. Towards descriptions of the cognitive structures of science students. 1980, 342–347 in Archenhold et al. op. cit. Cognitive Development Research in Science and Mathematics. Proceedings of an International Seminar, The University of Leeds, 1980.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Australian Science Education Research Association 1981

Authors and Affiliations

  • Peter J. Fensham
  • Jan Garrard
  • Leo West

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations