This is the latest version of this eprint.

Full text available as:



Concept maps are found to be useful in eliciting knowledge, meaningful learning, evaluation of understanding and in studying the nature of changes taking place during cognitive development, particularly in the classroom. Several experts have claimed the effectiveness of this tool for learning science. We agree with the claim, but the effectiveness will improve only if we gradually introduce a certain amount of discipline in constructing the maps. The discipline is warranted, we argue, because science thrives to be an unambiguous and rigorously structured body of knowledge. Since learning science may be seen as a process where a novice is expected to be transformed into an expert, we use the context of learning science for making the proposal. Further, we identify certain anomalies in the evaluation of concept maps, and suggest that the evaluation should be based on semantics of the linking words (relation types) and not on graphical criteria alone.

Item Type:Conference Paper
Keywords:concept maps, refined concept maps, learning science, semantics of relations, novice, expert, conceptual change, cognitive development, concept graphs, Novak
Subjects:Philosophy > Epistemology
ID Code:6412
Deposited By: G., Nagarjuna
Deposited On:12 Apr 2009 03:22
Last Modified:11 Mar 2011 08:57

Available Versions of this Item

  • A PROPOSAL TO REFINE CONCEPT MAPPING FOR EFFECTIVE SCIENCE LEARNING. (deposited 12 Apr 2009 03:22) [Currently Displayed]

References in Article

Select the SEEK icon to attempt to find the referenced article. If it does not appear to be in cogprints you will be forwarded to the paracite service. Poorly formated references will probably not work.

Ausubel, D., Novak, J., and Hanesian, H. (1978). Educational Psychology: A Cognitive View. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

Arnaudin, M. A., Mintzes, J. J., Dunn, C. S., & Shafer, T. H. (1984). Concept mapping in college science teaching. Journal of College Science Teaching, 117—121.

Cañas, A. J., & Carvalho, M. (2004). Concept Maps and AI: an Unlikely Marriage? In Proceedings of SBIE 2004: Simpósio Brasileiro de Informática Educativa. Manaus, Brasil: SBC.

Carey, S. (1986). Conceptual change and science education. American Psychologist, 41(10), 1123--1130.

Costa, J. V., Rocha, F. E., & Favero, E. L. (2004). Linking phrases in concept maps: A study on the nature of inclusivity. In A. J. Canas, J. D. Novak, & F. M. Gonzalez (Eds.), Concept Maps: Theory, Methodology, Technology. Universidad Publica de Navarra, Pampalona, Spain.

Fisher, K. (1990). Semantic networking: The new kid on the block. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(10), 1001--1018.

IHMC CmapTools (2004). The Website of CmapTools.

Kharatmal, M. (2006). Concept map on cell structure and function. At IHMC Public Cmaps \ Meena (India) \ Cell Structure and Function \ Cell Structure and Function.

Kremer, R. (1995). The design of a concept mapping environment for knowledge acquisition and knowledge representation. Proceedings of the 9th International Knowledge Acquisition Workshop.

Kuhn, T. (1962) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. USA: University of Chicago Press.

Markham, K. M., Mintzes, J. J. & Jones, M. G. (1994). The concept map as a research and evaluation tool: Further evidence of validity. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(1), 91—101.

Martin B. L., Mintzes, J. J., & Clavijo, I. E. (2000). Restructuring knowledge in biology: Cognitive processes and metacognitive reflections. International Journal of Science Education, 22(3), 303-323.

Mintzes, J. J. (In Press). Knowledge restructuring in biology: Testing a punctuated model of conceptual change. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education.

Mintzes, J. J., Wandersee, J., & Novak, J., (Eds.). (1998). Teaching Science for Understanding --- A Human Consctructivist View. USA: Academic Press.

Mintzes, J. J., Wandersee, J. H., & Novak, J. D. (1997). Meaningful Learning in Science: The Human Constructivist Perspective. In Gary D. Phye (Ed.), Handbook of Academic Learning: Construction of Knowledge (pp. 405-47). USA: Academic Press.

Nersessian, N. J. (1998). Conceptual change. In W. Bechtel, & G. Graham (Eds.), A Companion to Cognitive Science. Blackwell, Malden, MA. 155-166.

Nagarjuna, G. (working paper). From Folklore to Science. Paper presented at the Eighth International History, Philosophy, Sociology & Science Teaching Conference, Leeds, UK, July 15-18, 2005.

Nagarjuna, G. (1994). The Role of Inversion in the Genesis, Development and the Structure of Scientific Knowledge. Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur, India.

Novak, J. D., & Gowin, D. B. (1984). Learning How to Learn. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Sowa, J. (2006). Concept mapping. Talk presented at the AERA Conference, San Francisco.

Sowa, J. (1984). Conceptual Structures: Information Processing in Mind and Machine. USA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.

Thagard, P. (1992). Conceptual Revolutions. USA: Princeton University Press.

Thompson, T. L., & Mintzes, J. J. (2002). Cognitive structure and the affective domain: On knowledge and feeling in biology. International Journal of Science Education, 24(6), 645-600.

Vosniadou, S. & Ioannides, C. (1998). From conceptual development to science education: A psychological point of view. International Journal of Science Education, 20(10), 1213-1230.

Wallace, J. D., & Mintzes, J. J. (1990). The concept map as a research tool: Exploring conceptual change in biology. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(10), 1033--1052.


Repository Staff Only: item control page