Critiquing as an alternative to generating concept maps to support knowledge integration processes

2Citations
Citations of this article
7Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

As constructing concept maps from scratch can be time consuming, this study explores critiquing given concept maps with deliberate errors as an alternative. A form of concept map that distinguishes between different levels, called Knowledge Integration Map (KIM), was used as an assessment and embedded learning tool. The technology-enhanced biology unit was implemented in four high school science classes (n = 93). Student dyads in each class were randomly assigned to the KIM generation (n = 41) or critique (n = 52) task. Dyads in the generation group created their own connections from a given list of concepts, while dyads in the critique group received a concept map that included commonly found errors. KIMs in both groups consisted of the same concepts. Findings indicate that generating or critiquing KIMs can facilitate the construction of cross-level connections. Furthermore, results suggest that critiquing concept maps might be a more time-efficient alternative to generating concept maps from scratch.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Schwendimann, B. A. (2016). Critiquing as an alternative to generating concept maps to support knowledge integration processes. In Communications in Computer and Information Science (Vol. 635, pp. 40–53). Springer Verlag. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-45501-3_4

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free