6:56 AM
by David S. BrownIn the original studies at Cornel University in the 1970s, Joseph Novak, his colleagues, and graduate students labeled concept mapping as a tool for identifying what the learner already knew about a subject area (Novak, 1976). The “map” created by each student gave the educator, as well as each student, a visual representation of the student’s prior knowledge and concept understanding. It was believed that in order for successful learning to occur, a student must take active possession of what he or she already knows (as described in a concept map), find a relationship between each concept listed, and restructure the original concept with new terms and new understandings (Novak, 1990). Concept mapping became a way for students to visually recognize their knowledge and understanding of a topic.
According to Roth (1994), restructuring concepts while situated within a small group setting can greatly enhance the learning process. This peer collaboration allows students to influence and teach one another. In a group, students are able to demonstrate what they know about a subject while listening, observing, and learning from others resulting in the modification of their own understanding. Creating concept maps in groups therefore should unite teaching with learning; teaching by one student and learning by another. The end result of a concept map generated by a group of students is educationally directed social interaction by students, a product consisting of the combined knowledge of two or three students, and at least one (possibly two or three) student from each group who have had the opportunity to directly teach a fellow classmate (Novak & Gowin, 1996; Okebukola, 1992; Lumpe &Staver, 1992).
Concept Mapping
The physical structure of a concept map is designed for the benefit of the student and the teacher. Students create a map, review, and modify their ideas by what was drawn and written, then present to their teachers a diagram representing students’ knowledge and organization of that knowledge. Novak’s visual schema begins with the most general, inclusive concept at the top of a hierarchical diagram and proceeds downward to less general concepts and finally to specific examples (Novak, 1976). Some educators evaluate the maps using the number of concepts, links and cross-links as criteria for a grade (Novak, 1981; Novak & Gowin, 1996; Regis & Abertazzi, 1996). The links between concepts show relationships between concepts and the number of cross-links can show the degree of integration between concepts (Pearsall, Skipper & Mintzes, 1997).
Social Constructivism
According to Ausubel (1968), “The most important single factor influencing learning is what the learner already knows.” Novak and Gowin (1996) acknowledge that prior knowledge is important but add that student learning is greatly affected by the environment in which instruction and learning occurs. The majority of today’s high school science classrooms still have the teacher as the center of all classroom activity (lecture being the predominate method of instruction). Due to cable television, computer programs, and reference material, and the much-used Internet, high school students have a wealth of knowledge that could be tapped into. They arrive in class with a wide variety of experiences and degrees of understanding on the topic to be learned. Teachers need to find a way to pool the resources and experiences of all students to make learning more meaningful. Group concept mapping is one way to get students actively involved in learning by using their knowledge to teach the rest of the class.
In today’s high schools, teaching students about the chemical processes occurring in plants using terminology difficult to pronounce (cellular respiration, stroma, and co-enzyme A) is a difficult task for teachers. According to the constructivist view, one problem with lecture, and teachers requiring rote memorization is that students only receive a fragmentation of knowledge (Songer & Mintzes, 1994). Today, however, most educators from middle school on up through graduate school use this instructional strategy without hesitation (Schmidt & Telaro, 1990; Tobin & Gallagher, 1987; Ruiz-Primo & Shavelson, 1996). Some high school teachers have found that using students to teach students not only helps one party to understand concepts, but also strengthens the other party’s confidence and understanding (Lumpe & Staver, 1995).
read more download
According to Roth (1994), restructuring concepts while situated within a small group setting can greatly enhance the learning process. This peer collaboration allows students to influence and teach one another. In a group, students are able to demonstrate what they know about a subject while listening, observing, and learning from others resulting in the modification of their own understanding. Creating concept maps in groups therefore should unite teaching with learning; teaching by one student and learning by another. The end result of a concept map generated by a group of students is educationally directed social interaction by students, a product consisting of the combined knowledge of two or three students, and at least one (possibly two or three) student from each group who have had the opportunity to directly teach a fellow classmate (Novak & Gowin, 1996; Okebukola, 1992; Lumpe &Staver, 1992).
Concept Mapping
The physical structure of a concept map is designed for the benefit of the student and the teacher. Students create a map, review, and modify their ideas by what was drawn and written, then present to their teachers a diagram representing students’ knowledge and organization of that knowledge. Novak’s visual schema begins with the most general, inclusive concept at the top of a hierarchical diagram and proceeds downward to less general concepts and finally to specific examples (Novak, 1976). Some educators evaluate the maps using the number of concepts, links and cross-links as criteria for a grade (Novak, 1981; Novak & Gowin, 1996; Regis & Abertazzi, 1996). The links between concepts show relationships between concepts and the number of cross-links can show the degree of integration between concepts (Pearsall, Skipper & Mintzes, 1997).
Social Constructivism
According to Ausubel (1968), “The most important single factor influencing learning is what the learner already knows.” Novak and Gowin (1996) acknowledge that prior knowledge is important but add that student learning is greatly affected by the environment in which instruction and learning occurs. The majority of today’s high school science classrooms still have the teacher as the center of all classroom activity (lecture being the predominate method of instruction). Due to cable television, computer programs, and reference material, and the much-used Internet, high school students have a wealth of knowledge that could be tapped into. They arrive in class with a wide variety of experiences and degrees of understanding on the topic to be learned. Teachers need to find a way to pool the resources and experiences of all students to make learning more meaningful. Group concept mapping is one way to get students actively involved in learning by using their knowledge to teach the rest of the class.
In today’s high schools, teaching students about the chemical processes occurring in plants using terminology difficult to pronounce (cellular respiration, stroma, and co-enzyme A) is a difficult task for teachers. According to the constructivist view, one problem with lecture, and teachers requiring rote memorization is that students only receive a fragmentation of knowledge (Songer & Mintzes, 1994). Today, however, most educators from middle school on up through graduate school use this instructional strategy without hesitation (Schmidt & Telaro, 1990; Tobin & Gallagher, 1987; Ruiz-Primo & Shavelson, 1996). Some high school teachers have found that using students to teach students not only helps one party to understand concepts, but also strengthens the other party’s confidence and understanding (Lumpe & Staver, 1995).
read more download
0 comments:
Post a Comment