Concept Mapping:
a learning theory-based instructional tool
Specific uses of concept mapping in science education
Most research on the efficacy of concept maps covers their use as teacher-directed guides (Cliburn 1990; Lambiotte and Dansereau 1991; Moreira 1979; Stewart, Van Kirk and Rowell 1979; Wolfe and Lopez 1993). The idea here is that the expert constructed map (as an advance organizer) would provide an anchor on which to attach new knowledge. All of the papers cited above showed that the use of teacher made concept maps increased either learning and/or retention of science information.
Student produced maps as learning tools have been studied to a lesser degree (Arnaudin, Mintzes, Dunn and Shafer 1984; Okebukola 1992; Wallace, Mintzes and Markham 1992; Wolfe and Lopez 1993). While it would be more useful for students to make their own personal and idiosyncratic map for more meaningful learning it is also likely that the maps will not be as well designed as the expert made maps. A good compromise would be a student made map with expert derived lists of concepts.
In addition, the richness of knowledge (how interlinked the concepts were) was found to be increased by the use of concept maps (Lambiotte and Dansereau 1991). These authors suggested that students that made or viewed concept maps would have a broader knowledge base and therefore be more able to solve problems compared to those students that learned by rote memorization. Lastly, the above author's experiments tested the efficacy of different presentation types (concept mapping, text outlines or lists) on learning between students with differing amounts of prior knowledge. They found that students with low prior knowledge learned better with concept mapping than the other two linear presentations. In conclusion, concept mapping appears to be a good method to promote meaningful learning among students with different academic preparedness- a situation typically found in introductory science classes.