Why is defining the focus question of concept maps important? The identification of superficial maps without conceptual errors
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22600/1518-8795.ienci2020v25n3p471Keywords:
Assessment, Concept maps, Focal question, Semantic analysisAbstract
Concept maps (CMs) are propositional networks set up to answer a focus question. Unfortunately, the literature tends to neglect the focus question role, and the identification of superficial conceptual maps, even if conceptually correct, does not happen. In this paper, an analysis of clusters was carried out based on the performance of students in a questionnaire containing items related to the themes of scientific thought, classical astronomy, and modern astronomy to group students according to their levels of conceptual understanding. The performance of students in each group was used to discuss the features of the CMs built during an assessment task in a Higher Education course. The CMs were analyzed based on the semantic clarity and conceptual correction of the propositions and the appropriateness of the content to address the focus question. The students who best represented their conceptual schema, built maps with a large number of appropriate propositions, and answered in a larger proportion to the focus question, were also those who obtained the best performances in the questionnaire. From the results, it is possible to conclude that the reading of the semantic content of the CMs reveals the students’ conceptual understanding. The critical role of the focus question should be considered in activities involving the construction of CMs to identify superficial maps without conceptual errors.References
Aguiar, J. G., & Correia, P. R. M. (2013). Como fazer bons mapas conceituais? Estabelecendo parâmetros de referências e propondo atividades de treinamento. Revista Brasileira de Pesquisa em Educação em Ciências, 13(2), 141-157. Recuperado de https://periodicos.ufmg.br/index.php/rbpec/article/view/4265
Aguiar, J. D., Cicuto, C. A. T., & Correia, P. R. M. (2014). How can we prepare effective concept maps?: training procedures and assessment tools to evaluate mappers’ proficiency. Journal of Science Educa-tion, 15(1), 14-19. Recuperado de https://www.researchgate.net/publication/260082053_How_can_we_prepare_effective_concept_maps_Training_procedures_and_assessment_tools_to_evaluate_mappers'_proficiency
Ausubel, D. P. (2000). The acquisition and retention of knowledge: a cognitive view. Dordrechet: Kluwer Aca-demic Publishers.
Bauman, A. (2018). Concept Maps: Active Learning Assessment Tool in a Strategic Management Capstone Class. College Teaching, 66(4), 213-221. https://doi.org/10.1080/87567555.2018.1501656
Brakoniecki, A., Shah, F. (2017) The Use of Concept Maps to Assess Preservice Teacher Understanding: A Formative Approach in Mathematics Education. Journal of Education, 197(1), 23-32. https://doi.org/10.1177/002205741719700104
Bybee, R. W., Fuchs, B. (2006). Preparing the 21st century workforce: a new reform in science and technol-ogy education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(4), 349-352. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20147
Cañas, A. J., Novak, J. D., Reiska, P. (2015). How good is my concept map? Am I a good Cmapper? Knowledge Management & E-Learning, 7(1), 6–19. https://doi.org/10.34105/j.kmel.2015.07.002
Correia, P. R. M., do Valle, B. X., Dazzani, M., & Infante-Malachias, M. E. (2010). The importance of scien-tific literacy in fostering education for sustainability: Theoretical considerations and preliminary findings from a Brazilian experience. Journal of Cleaner Production, 18(7), 678-685, 2010. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2009.09.011.
Correia, P., Cabral, G., & Aguiar, J. (2016). Cmaps with Errors: Why not? Comparing Two Cmap-Based As-sessment Tasks to Evaluate Conceptual Understanding. In A. Cañas, P. Reiska, & J. Novak, J. (Eds.). Innovating with concept mapping: 7th international conference on concept mapping, CMC 2016, Tallinn, Estonia, September 5-9, 2016, proceedings. [Basel]: Springer, 2016. 635, 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-45501-3.
Correia, P. R. M., & Aguiar, J. G. (2017). Avaliação da proficiência em mapeamento conceitual a partir da análise estrutural da rede proposicional. Ciência & Educação (Bauru), 23(1), 71-90. https://doi.org/10.1590/1516-731320170010005
Correia, P. R. M., & Nardi, A. (2019). O que revelam os mapas conceituais dos meus alunos? Avaliando o conhecimento declarativo sobre a evolução do universo. Ciência & Educação (Bauru), 25(3), 685-704. Epub October 07, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1590/1516-731320190030008
Davies, M. (2011). Concept mapping, mind mapping and argument mapping: what are the differences and do they matter? Higher Education, 62, 279-301. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-010-9387-6
Holbrook, J., & Rannikmae, M. (2007). The nature of science education for enhancing scientific literacy. International Journal of Science Education, 29(11), 1347-1362. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690601007549
Kinchin, I. M. (2016). Visualising powerful knowledge to develop the expert student. Rotterdam: Sense Pub-lishers.
Kinchin, I. M., Hay, D. B., & Adams, A. (2000). How a qualitative approach to concept map analysis can be used to aid learning by illustrating patterns of conceptual development. Educational Research, 42(1), 43-57. https://doi.org/10.1080/001318800363908
McClure, J. R., Sonak, B., & Suen, H. K. (1999). Concept map assessment of classroom learning: Reliabil-ity, validity, and logistical practicality. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(4), 475-492. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199904)36:4<475::AID-TEA5>3.0.CO;2-O,
Moreira, M. A., Greca, I.M. & Palmero, M.L.R. (2002). Modelos mentales y modelos conceptuales en la enseñanza & aprendizaje de las ciencias. Revista Brasileira de Pesquisa em Educação em Ciências, 2, 36–56. Recuperado de https://periodicos.ufmg.br/index.php/rbpec/article/view/4134
Moreira, M. A. (2011). Aprendizagem significativa: a teoria e textos complementares. São Paulo, SP: Livraria da Física.
Novak, J. D. (2002). Meaningful learning: The essential factor for conceptual change in limited or inappro-priate propositional hierarchies leading to empowerment of learners. Science Education, 86(4), 548–571. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10032
Novak, J. D. (2010). Learning, creating, and using knowledge: concept maps as facilitative tools in schools and corporations. New York: Routledge.
Romero, C., Carzola, M., & Buzón, O. (2017). Meaningful Learning Using Concept Maps as a Learning Strat-egy. Journal of Technology and Science Education, 7(3), 313-332. http://dx.doi.org/10.3926/jotse.276
Ruiz-Primo, M. A., Shavelson, R. J. (1996). Problems and issues in the use of concept maps in science assessment. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(6), 569-600. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199608)33:6<569::AID-TEA1>3.0.CO;2-M
Salmon, D., & Kelly, M. (2015). Using Concept Mapping to Foster Adaptive Expertise: Enhancing Teacher Metacognitive Learning to Improve Student Academic Performance. New York, NY: Peter Lang Publishing.
Toigo, A. M., Moreira, M. A., & Costa, S. S. C. (2012). Revisión de la literatura sobre el uso de mapas conceptuales como estrategia didáctiva y de evaluación. Investigações em Ensino de Ciências, 17(2), 305-339. Recuperado de https://www.if.ufrgs.br/cref/ojs/index.php/ienci/article/view/188
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
IENCI is an Open Access journal, which does not have to pay any charges either for the submission or processing of articles. The journal has adopted the definition of the Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI), which states that the users have the right to read, write down, copy, distribute, print, conduct searches and make direct links with the complete texts of the published articles.
The author responsible for the submission represents all the authors of the work and when the article is sent to the journal, guarantees that he has the permission of his/her co-authors to do so. In the same way, he/she provides an assurance that the article does not infringe authors´ rights and that there are no signs of plagiarism in the work. The journal is not responsible for any opinions that are expressed.
All the articles are published with a Creative Commons License Attribution Non-commercial 4.0 International. The authors hold the copyright of their works and must be contacted directly if there is any commercial interest in the use of their works.
