Chapter 1 - Concept Maps

Professor Joseph D. Novak of Cornell University is credited as developing the Concept Map method back in the 1960s. In turn, Novak's work is largely base upon the research of David Ausubel in the cognitive structure of knowledge and meaningful learning. By meaningful learning, Ausubel (1969) means to describe the development of new information through associated relevance to an individuals existing knowledge.

Students are not the blank slates they are sometimes treated as being. From the first moments that a child has active mental processes, they are learning and developing concepts about the world around them. These concepts form the foundation for future learning and meaningful learning comes from being able to relate new information to this pre-established knowledge (Novak, 1977, p. 74.)

What is a Concept Map?

A Concept Map is not a really new creation but is a variation on graphic design tools such as flowcharts or mind maps. Flowcharts show the flow of information from one activity to the next and are ideal for software development and precise scientific processes. Mind maps are a graphic word association game where a central idea is then linked with related concepts. All these methods are ways of representing knowledge structures.

Flowcharts demonstrate the knowledge of formula and decision-making. Mind maps demonstrate ones ability to see related objects or ideas. What is missing in both of these is the understanding of why such things are associated. Below are simple examples of both Flowcharts and Mind maps.

Fig 1. Example Flowchart

Fig 2. Example Mind map

Flowcharts have a very linear structure with decision branches when alternatives are presented. Mind maps in comparison are very free form with very little structure other than one idea relating to another. Concept Maps are a combination of these two styles with one very important extra feature, a description of the link between two concepts. In other words, the 'Why' behind the association. Adsit (1997) called the technique of Concept Maps, "a way of representing or organising knowledge". Zimmaro (1998) describes Concept Maps as "a visual representation of an individual's knowledge."

In essence, a Concept Map is a graphical diagram that describes the relational connections that an individual makes from one conceptual item to the next. It also demonstrates the cognitive process that takes place as new information is related and connected to previous knowledge. Concept Maps can be seen as both describing and encouraging the process of learning itself.

The Structure of Concept Maps

There are two basic elements that comprise Concepts Maps: Concepts and Relating Links. A concept can be anything from a physical object to an abstract idea. A relating link is a connecting word or phrase that links two concepts together in an intelligent way. By combining the concept and the relating links, one should be able to create a simple short sentence, as shown below. These short sentences are called propositions.

Fig 3. Simple Concept Maps

It is the defining of the relating link that makes Concept Maps different to other forms of knowledge maps. It requires the creator to consider the reason for connections between concepts and to consider their validity. The more complex the map is, the more consideration is required.

Fig. 4 Multiple Concepts linked together.
Image from Zimmaro, 1998.

Adsit (1997) makes the observation that "a concept map goes beyond the typical outline in that concept maps show relationships between concept, including bi-directional relationships." The ability to define the relationship between concepts provides more detail than a mind map. Although Concept Maps and mind maps can look very similar at times, a mind map does not show on what basis a connection has been made.

Recently I was asked as a part of another class to produce a list of instructions that described Concept Maps. What I came up with was a Concept Map about Concept Maps. I admit that I had a bit of fun creating this with pretty pictures and finding links. The point is that others in the class did not even consider the idea of completing the question in this way. Many admitted that it helped them see things in a different way to what they had done. I could have done as most others did and produce a list of points very much like this;

• Concept Mapping is made up with:
• Concepts
• Are Ideas or Information such as
• Names
• Actions
• Objects
• Can connect to Several Concepts
• Connections
• Are Connecting Phrases or Words such as
• "is like"
• "can be"
• "relates to"

I felt that this wasn't enough. It did not demonstrate my understanding of Concept Maps and so I created a Concept Map instead (below.)

Fig. 5 Concept Map on Concept Mapping

There are a few extra points that should be noted. Connections are positive links such as those described above. As these connections are meant to represent a relational link between two concepts, connections such as "is different to", "does not" or other similar negative connection phrases are not considered appropriate for Concept Maps. In other words, connections are meaningful representations of the links between subjects or concepts. The table below sums up the basic descriptions for each of the elements that make up Concept Maps. I will refer to Concept Maps as CMs from now on.

Table 2. Elements Described

The Uses of Concept Maps

In the short time that I have been using CMS myself, I have found an incredible number of uses and applications for this mapping tool. I have even used CMS to plan this very essay and you can find design plans for this essay in the appendix section of this assignment. I have also found it a very powerful Web Design tool that allows the designer to easily create logical links between Web Pages and not go too overboard on linking unrelated pages. How about mapping the Skeletal System of the human body, or any animal for that matter? Other possibilities might also include;

1. mapping the reactions certain chemicals can have with each other (Science)
2. the development of mathematical formula from simple algorithms to the more complex (Maths)
3. plotting the story and characters of a novel (English)
4. historical events and the effects they had (History, Social Studies)
5. linking geographic features and showing how one leads to another (Geography)

These are very specific uses for concept maps and the potential for CMS does not stop here. I personally have discovered many more uses. Zimmaro (1998) views CMS as a powerful tool in three ways:

• Student Learning Tool
• Teacher Instructional Tool
• Assessment Tool - in both Student and Course assessment

In keeping with the theme of CMS, I have adapted Zimmaro's notes into a series of concept maps. The first shows the general uses CMS have from the student perspective.

Fig 6. Uses for the Student

In written terms a student could use CMS to take notes during class and then organelle these notes into a relational coherency. They could also integrate notes from earlier classes and find links to new material. They may also discover relational links to material learned in other courses or classes that they may have missed otherwise.

Fig 7. Instructional Map

The uses of CMS for teacher instruction are just as diverse. By conceptualising the course content, it assists in developing a presentation order and also reminds the instructor of significant links from on topic to another. This facility can also be used on a more detailed level when preparing for a specific class. CMS are also a very presentable media and teachers could use this attribute to their advantage using CMS as the method of presentation.

Fig. 8 Assessment Map

Zimmaro (1998) claims a "concept map represents an individual's own understanding in learning." With that in mind, CMS could be used to evaluate and chart the progress of student learning. Relational misunderstandings can be easily spotted in a CM and steps can then be made to assist student understanding further. I have also found and therefore agree with the idea that CMS can stimulate Self-evaluation. Once the structure of CMS is understood, one is able to see missed or potential connections that may not have been considered before. It also may assist the instructor to evaluate the course itself and identify areas that may need further clarification.

By combining the three maps and looking for more connections between concepts, one may come up with a CM that looks something like this (click image to get a larger version);

Fig 9. Uses of Concept Maps

Pros and Cons

In describing the uses of CMS, I have already listed a number of advantages. These are as follows

• Represents conceptual learning
• Stimulates relational cognitive development
• Encourages self-evaluation
• Can connect previously unrelated or cross-course material
• Can assist in course design and management
• Can identify areas of learning difficulty
• A visual learning and presentation tool
• Evaluation of student progress
• Easy implementation
• Easily taught
• Can be enjoyable
• Versatility of application

Everything has its advantages and its disadvantages. With CMS some potential downsides areas such as:

• Misconception or Design Error?
• When a flaw is found in the structure of a student's CM, is it due to a lacking of understanding of the material or of CMS? If a student has not managed to understand the use, application and technical aspects of CMS, then errors that do occur may not be a direct reflection of their understanding of the material taught.
• How to Assess?
• How does one mark CMS? Due to the very nature of CMS, it is unlikely that two people will come up with the same result. Under current grading requirements, this makes the marking of CMS very difficult. Novak (1984) does provide a scoring structure for his creation, yet he also admits that any "scoring key for concept maps has a certain degree of subjectivity inherent in it, as in fact is the case with all evaluation instruments." (p. 105) Maybe the question should be rethought. Why does one need to assess? CMS are a great evaluation tool and perhaps that's where they belong.
• What about communication skills?
• While there is a certain amount of communication ability required in the design of CMS (e.g. the use of prepositions) and they are very useful as a visual communication tool, there is very little direction education in communication in other modes such as written or verbal. Obviously education cannot neglect these areas and they do have their place. The fact that CMS can be used as a presentation tool and therefore involve some verbal communication combines verbal and visual communication skills. To create the CM and then describe it would demonstrate communication abilities. In terms of writing and as I have mentioned earlier, I have used CMS to plan this very essay. Writing again has its place in education but can be assisted by the use of CMS CMS do not demonstrate communication ability and can not replace the written or verbal assessment of learning, but can be used to assist communication development.
• CMS are very confusing.
• Students and educators alike may find the mode of thought that CMS require to be uncomfortable to what they are used to. Scott (1992) refers to the student that asks "Just tell us the right answer." (p. 325) For students that have learning views that are very one way in nature (i.e. teacher gives answers, students take notes) and have not felt the need to understand their learning, the approach that CMS requires may be treated as a burden initially. Similarly for a teacher, they may view CMS as altering their role as a teacher. CMS require a different perspective to learning than the stereotypical school currently provides and it may take effort to overcome such view.