Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

An investigation into high-achiever and low-achiever knowledge organisation and knowledge processing in concept mapping: A case study

  • Published:
Research in Science Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study used concept map content analysis and interviews to gain insights into the knowledge organisation and knowledge processing of pre-service teachers. Forty-eight preservice teachers of elementary science from a teachers’ training college in Sarawak, Malaysia, participated in this study. Correlations between achievement and five concept map characteristics showed that there were significant positive correlations (p<.01) between achievement and: the number of appropriate links; the average number of appropriate concepts per cluster; and, the hierarchy score of subjects’ concept maps, and significant negative correlations (p<.01) between achievement and: the number of inappropriate links; and, the average number of inappropriate concepts per cluster. Interviews with high-achievers and lowachievers revealed that there were differences in the way they processed knowledge during concept mapping. The high-achievers were more thorough than were the low-achievers in cognitive processing of knowledge, taking time to make sense of concepts, sort and group concepts, form relevant links between concepts, and organise concepts hierarchically. Active cognitive processing of knowledge seems to be related to more complex, well-integrated cognitive structures for the material learned.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ahlberg, M. (1993, August).Concept maps, Vee diagrams and rhetorical argumentation analysis (RAA): Three educational theory-based tools to facilitate meaningful learning. Paper presented in Misconceptions Seminar, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York.

  • Bandura, A. (1994). Self-efficacy. In R. J. Corsini (Ed.),Encyclopaedia of psychology (2nd ed.) (Vol. 3, pp. 368–369). New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beyerbach, B. A. (1988). Developing a technical vocabulary on teacher planning: Preservice teachers’ concept maps.Teaching and Teacher Education, 14(4), 339–347.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chi, M. T. H., Feltovich, P. J., & Glaser, R. (1981). Categorization and representation of physics problems by experts and novices.Cognitive Science, 5, 121–152.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chi, M. T. H., Leeuw, N., Chiu, M. H., & Lavancher, C. (1994). Eliciting self-explanations improves understanding.Cognitive Science, 18, 439–477.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fraser, K., & Edwards, J. (1985). The effects of training in concept mapping on student achievement in traditional tests.Research in Science Education 15, 158–165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldsmith, T., Johnson, P., & Acton, W. (1991). Assessing structural knowledge.Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 88–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • King, A. (1994). Guiding knowledge construction in the classroom: Effects of teaching children how to question and how to explain.American Educational Research Journal, 31(2), 338–368.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larkin, J. H., McDermott, J., Simon, D. P., & Simon, H. A. (1980). Expert and novice performance in solving physics problems.Science, 208, 1335–142.

    Google Scholar 

  • Livingston, C., & Borko, H. (1989, July–August). Expert-Novice differences in teaching: A cognitive analysis and implications for teacher education.Journal of Teacher Education, 37, 36–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lonka, K., Lindblom-Ylainne, S., & Maury, S. (1994). The effect of study strategies on learning from text.Learning and Instruction, 4, 253–271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malone, J., & Dekkers, J. (1984). The concept map as an aid to instruction in science and mathematics.School Science and Mathematics, 84(3), 220–231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mason, C. L. (1992). Concept mapping: A tool to develop reflective science instruction.Science Education, 76(1), 51–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCrindle, A. R., & Christensen, C. A. (1995). The impact of learning journals on metacognitive and cognitive processes and learning performance.Learning and Instruction, 5, 167–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mestre, J., & Touger, J. (1989, September). Cognitive research—What’s in it for physics teachers?The Physics Teacher, 447–456.

  • Novak, J. D. (1977).A theory of education. Ithaca: Cornell University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Novak, J. D. (1988). Learning science and the science of learning.Studies in Science Education, 15, 77–101.

    Google Scholar 

  • Novak, J. D. (1990). Concept mapping: A useful tool for science education.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(10), 937–949.

    Google Scholar 

  • Novak, J. D., & Gowin, D. B. (1984).Learning how to learn. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Novak, J. D., Gowin, D. B., & Johansen, G. T. (1983). The use of concept mapping and knowledge vee mapping with junior high school science students.Science Education, 67(5), 625–645.

    Google Scholar 

  • Novak, J. D., & Musonda, D. (1991). A twelve-year longitudinal study of science concept learning.American Educational Research Journal, 28(1), 117–153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pankratius, W. J. (1990). Building an organised knowledge base: Concept mapping and achievement in secondary school physics.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(4), 315–333.

    Google Scholar 

  • Okebukola, P. A. (1990). Attaining meaningful learning of concepts in genetics and ecology: An examination of the potency of the concept mapping technique.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(5), 493–504.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pankratius, W. J. (1990). Building an organized knowledge base: Concept mapping and achievement in secondary school physics.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(4), 315–333.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roehler, L., Duffy, G., Conley, M., Herrmann, B., Johnson, J., & Michelson, S. (1990).Teachers’ knowledge structure: Documenting their development and their relationship to instruction. East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University Institute for Teaching.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmid, R. F., & Telaro, G. (1990). Concept mapping as an instructional strategy for high school biology.Journal of Educational Research, 84, 78–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weinstein, C. F., & Mayer, R. E. (1986). The teaching of learning strategies. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.),Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed.) (pp. 315–327). New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winitzky, N., Kauchak, D., & Kelly, M. (1994). Measuring teachers’ structural knowledge.Teaching and Teacher Education, 10(2), 125–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Batu Lintang Teachers’ College, Kuching, Sarawak, Malaysia

    Mary Wong Siew Lian

Authors
  1. Mary Wong Siew Lian
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mary Wong Siew Lian.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Siew Lian, M.W. An investigation into high-achiever and low-achiever knowledge organisation and knowledge processing in concept mapping: A case study. Research in Science Education 28, 337–352 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02461567

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02461567

Keywords

Search

Navigation