By Lynne Anderson-Inman & Leigh Zeitz

The mechanics of drawing a concept map often get in the way of ideas students want to represent. Modern visual outliners take the eraser dust out of concept mapping.

Concept mapping is a process by which learners represent their understanding of a specific knowledge domain in graphic form. Using a system of "nodes" and "links," learners draw a map that visually represents the way in which they think a set of concepts are related. This representation is bound to change over time, as knowledge increases and understanding is refined. In the terms of Stensvold and Wilson (1990), concept mapping is a process whereby "students cast and recast their own knowledge structure in a diagrammatic form."

Student-created concept maps (also called semantic maps or webs) can help learners "construct knowledge" by providing a vehicle for integrating new information with information previously learned. This process of knowledge construction has been widely recommended for studying content area materials and/or synthesizing information from a variety of sources (Ault, 1985; Novak & Gowin, 1984; Pankratius, 1990; Schewel, 1989; Stice & Alvarez, 1987; Zeitz & Anderson-Inman, 1992). Because the learner plays an active role in creating and modifying the concept map, this study strategy promotes active learners and involved students.

A fair amount of research has been conducted on the efficacy of concept mapping as a strategy for studying and learning. The success of concept mapping seems to depend upon a number of variables: (a) who constructs the concept map (Lambiotte, Skaggs & Dansereau, 1991; Moore & Readence, 1984), (b) when and how often it is used in the learning process (Moore & Readence, 1984; Pankratius, 1990), (c) and how much information is included about the relationships between concepts (Novak, Gowin, & Johannsen, 1983). In short, the research suggests that mapping is most effective when students create their own maps throughout the learning process and that students benefit most from maps that "show" the connections between concepts using labeled links.

The greatest obstacle to integrating concept mapping into the classroom as a study strategy is the actual process of making a map. Students find the process of making and changing paper-based concept maps extremely difficult. For example, Allen (1989) used concept mapping to promote meaningful learning and achievement in a high school chemistry course. When asked what they thought of the procedure, students responded with phrases like "the pits," "I hate it," and "It always ends up in a big mess." Although most students in Allen's study saw concept mapping as a valuable tool for studying the connections between ideas, they did not intend to use it in other classes because it was so cumbersome.

There is increasing recognition, however, that the computer can be used to facilitate the concept mapping process (Fisher, 1990; Fisher et al. 1990; Kozma, 1991; Mikulecky et al., 1989; Zeitz, 1992; Zeitz & Anderson-Inman, 1992). Using a computer to create concept maps enables learners to move or modify concepts and links at will, thereby removing the drudgery and mess of revising their maps on paper. Mapping in an electronic environment makes the process more accessible to students in much the same way as word processing increases students' enthusiasm for writing. It has been our experience that electronic concept mapping removes the frustration and confusion felt by students when expected to construct concept maps on paper.

To create electronic concept maps, it is best for students to use a graphics program specifically designed for this purpose. A new genre of software for creating concept maps is emerging. For example, programs like Inspiration® (1992) make it possible for learners to create and modify concept maps dynamically. The software facilitates entering words to represent concepts and their supporting details, and also enables lines (links) to be drawn indicating different types of conceptual relationships. When desired, these lines can be labeled so as to reflect the different relationships involved. Because electronic concept maps exist in a fluid medium (as opposed to paper and pencil), they can be easily altered and expanded to reflect the learner's improved understanding over time. Inspiration® encourages revisions to the concept map because deletions, additions, and changes are accomplished quickly and easily.

Creating a Concept Map with Inspiration

The process of creating a concept map with Inspiration® is both fast and automatic. Figure 1 shows the opening screen: a "main idea" node in the center and a menu of options down the left side of the screen. The student merely types in a word or phrase to represent the primary concept of the map and then chooses a direction by clicking on one of the arrows at the top of the menu. A second node will appear automatically in the direction chosen and a link will attach it to the original node (Figure 2). Both the new node and the link are then easily labeled by selecting (clicking on) the desired component and typing an identifying word or two. Subsequent nodes can then be added to either the new node or the original node using the same process (Figure 3).

Changes can be made to an Inspiration® map using a variety of fairly intuitive techniques. For example, nodes and links can be repositioned by clicking and dragging them to new locations; nodes and links can be relabeled by selecting and retyping; the direction of links can be reversed through a menu selection; nodes can be customized in appearance; the map can be enlarged or reduced when needed and all errors can be easily deleted. The electronic medium of computer-based concept mapping allows for considerable personalization of the process and minimal frustration for the user. All this leads to an ideal environment for information organization and manipulation, a key feature of effective studying (Anderson-Inman & Tenny, 1989).

Studying with Concept Maps

When using electronic concept mapping as a study strategy, the goal is to give learners a dynamic vehicle for recording and manipulating the way in which they understand what they are reading or learning. Critical to the success of this strategy is the opportunity for learners to work on (revise) their concept maps at periodic intervals. For example, prior to reading an assigned chapter, the learners might be asked to create a concept map for a set of terms provided by the teacher. While reading the chapter students might be asked to revise their maps to include newly learned information and to clarify newly understood conceptual relationships. After additional classroom instruction, the maps might again be modified. Depending on the complexity of the reading material and the size of the knowledge domain to be learned, this process might be repeated many times until the unit is concluded. This strategy for creating and revising electronic concept maps during the process of information acquisition and synthesis is called "computer-based formative concept mapping" or CBFCM (Zeitz & Anderson-Inman, 1992).

CBFCM is illustrated in the following example from a high school biology classroom. Students have been asked to learn about the structure of cells and 11 important vocabulary words have been given to them by the teacher. The students' first task is to create concept maps representing their existing knowledge of how these 11 terms are conceptually related. Each term is to be placed in a node and the lines linking the nodes are to be labeled. Figure 4 is an example of how one student, Rachel, depicted her understanding of the assigned terms.

Rachel's premap shows an accurate but imprecise understanding of the terms provided by her teacher. She has correctly identified "cell" as the main idea or primary concept. All other concepts in the map radiate from this central concept like spokes on a wheel. Important distinguishing information is included in the labels Rachel has placed on the links between the word cell and its subordinate concepts. For example, she correctly indicates that Plant Cell and Animal Cell are each a "type" of cell. In addition, she suggests that cells are "studied with" an electron microscope. Most of the remaining terms are probably unfamiliar to Rachel but she guesses that these are structures that a cell "has." Although this designation is not inaccurate, it fails to reflect the interrelationship of these terms to each other.

Following this exercise to determine prior knowledge and build a conceptual foundation for new learning, students are asked to read Chapter 3 entitled "Cell Structure." While reading, Rachel has access to her concept mapping program on the computer and therefore inserts new concepts and rearranges the position of many of the nodes containing words from the original vocabulary list. Her concept map has grown is size and complexity, as well as accuracy. Figure 5 depicts this newly expanded map.

Most obvious is Rachel's decision to reposition the various terms representing structures that a cell "has" and place them under the nodes for either Plant Cell, Animal Cell or both. She has correctly learned that the word "organelles" is a more generic term than the others and therefore subordinates the terms for specific cell structures to the term representing a more general concept. In order to designate which organelles appear in plant cells and which in animal cells, Rachel duplicated the node labeled "Organelles" and put one node under each type of cell. Because most organelles are found in both plant and animal cells, Rachel used a system of crosslinks to represent this relationship without repeating nodes for the structures they have in common.

Rachel's first reading of the chapter also revealed information concerning the correct relationship between chromosomes and nucleus. In addition, Rachel found that the original list of cell parts had been incomplete. She has compensated for this by adding several nodes to her concept map. Some of the additions are specific to only one type of cell (e.g., nodes for Cell Wall, Plastids, and Centrioles) and one appears in both types of cells (see the node for Vacuoles). Rachel realizes there are more organelles requiring additional nodes but the period is over.

On the next day, the teacher spends approximately 25 minutes discussing the types of microscopes used by scientists to study the appearance of cells and how they are constructed. He demonstrates the microscopes with projections of what is seen through each and explains their relative advantages and disadvantages. This demonstration is concluded with a summary of how electron microscopes advanced our understanding of cells, leading to the formulation of "cell theory": a set of statements about what cells are and how they function. During the remainder of the period students are given time to integrate this information into their concept maps. Figure 6 shows how Rachel tied this new information to her growing representation of concepts related to cell structure.

On the last day of the unit, the teacher provides students with time to reread the chapter on cell structure and suggests they augment their concept maps with more details in preparation for an upcoming test. Rachel's map (Figure 7) reflects these new details. Some are additional concepts and are placed in new nodes. For example, three types of plastids are now indicated, additional organelles shared by both plant and animal cells are now listed and Rachel shows that a nucelus has a nucleolus. More detailed information for some of the concepts is placed into "note windows" which are linked to each node. See the notes attached to the node "cell theory" in Figure 8 for an example. These notes greatly expand the amount of information which can be included in a concept map. Furthermore, they are easily hidden and then shown again, providing students with a simple way to self test their knowledge of the material they contain.

And finally, additional information is also included in the way Rachel has modified the appearance of her nodes. Inspiration® provides users with a variety of options for customizing their diagrams. Rachel has taken advantage of these options to clarify the nodes' hierarchical relationship and to highlight important concepts in her map. These cosmetic changes help to personalize Rachel's concept map, while at the same time providing yet one more incentive for manipulating the concepts and reviewing the conceptual relationships she has depicted.

Conclusion

Concept mapping as a study strategy has been discussed and recommended for decades. It encourages students to represent their vision of how a knowledge domain is structured and fosters reflection of how concepts are interrelated. It facilitates information manipulation and active involvement in the learning process. And it provides an avenue of expression for learners who excel in visual representation and interpretation. Unfortunately, when concept mapping is practiced on paper, many of these potential benefits are minimized. Students resist making changes that would require recopying and the mental manipulation that might be fostered by the process is therefore constrained. Fortunately, we live in an era when the use of concept mapping as a study strategy can be realistically expected and integrated into any subject area. The advent of computer-based concept mapping to foster knowledge representation and construction is an exciting technological advance. What teachers do with tools such as Inspiration® will hopefully have positive and longlasting effects on students' understanding of content-area information as well as their willingness to be actively engaged in the learning process.

Lynne Anderson-Inman, College of Education, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR 97402; LYNNEAI@oregon.uoregon.edu. Leigh Zeitz, Price Laboratory School, University of Northern Iowa, Cedar Falls, IA. 50613; ZEITZ@iscsvax.uni.edu.