We seek to provide an alternative theoretical perspective on concept mapping (a formalism for representing structural knowledge) to that provided by Ray McAleese in this issue of ALT-J (auto-monitoring). We begin with an overview of concept maps as a means of describing a learner's knowledge constructs, and then discuss a broader class of tools, Mindtools, of which concept maps are a member. We proceed by defining Mindtools as formalisms for representing knowledge, and further elaborate on concept maps as a formalism for representing a particular kind of knowledge: structural knowledge. We then address McAleese's use of the term auto-monitoring and some of the steps in his model of concept maps. Finally, we describe some limitations of concept mapping as a formalism and as a cognitive learning strategy.DOI:10.1080/0968776940020107
CITATION STYLE
Jonassen, D. H., & Marra, R. M. (2011). Concept mapping and other formalisms as Mindtools for representing knowledge. Research in Learning Technology, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.3402/rlt.v2i1.9573
Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.