Chemical Education Today
Reports from Other Journals
A View from the Science Education Research Literature: Concept Map Assessment of Classroom Learning by William R. Robinson A concept map is a diagram consisting of nodes that represent concepts and labeled lines that indicate the relationship between those concepts. The combination of two nodes and a labeled line is called a proposition. In the concept maps presented here, the nodes are circles with words indicating the name of the concept. Concept maps are more directly related to the knowledge of facts and ideas and how they are related rather than to how the facts and concepts are used to solve problems. As such, concept maps constitute a means for assessing different kinds of knowledge than do problems. Figures 1 and 2 show concept maps drawn by two different students (1) . Clearly,
element describes
contains protons
atomic number
come from
contains
describes
isotopes
mass number
neutrons
Figure 1. Concept map prepared by a general chemistry student who was given positioned but unconnected nodes.
the second student has the more extensive understanding of concepts related to isotopes and atomic structure as introduced in the beginning of a general chemistry course. The utility of concept maps has been discussed in a special issue of the Journal of Research in Science Teaching, which is dedicated to concept-mapping. In it, Novak (2) described four ways that concept-mapping could be of value in science education: as a learning strategy, as an instructional strategy, as a tool in the instructional design process, and as a means of assessing a student’s understanding of scientific concepts. The special issue also contains papers describing these uses as well as a list of 100 references related to concept-mapping. A few papers describing the use of concept maps in chemistry have appeared in this Journal. Stensvold and Wilson used concept maps to connect chemistry concepts to laboratory activities (3) . Pendley, Bretz, and Novak (4) interviewed students and then constructed concept maps that represented the students’ knowledge and how that knowledge changed over time. Regis, Albertazzi, and Roletto (5) described the use of concept maps as a learning tool. Although concept maps have been used by researchers to represent student knowledge obtained from interviews, student-prepared concept maps have not seen common use as assessment tools. Indeed, questions have been raised about the reliability and validity of these concept map assessment tasks (6) .
Proposition to be Scored
Is there any relationship (No) between the concepts of Score = 0 the proposition?
has a unique atomic number
element
(Yes)
may have
equals the number of have the same isotopes vary in number of
neutrons
protons
have same number of differ in
equals number of protons plus
Does the label indicate a (No) possible relationship Score = 1 between the concepts of the proposition? equals number of neutrons plus
mass number
Figure 2. Concept map prepared by a second student with a more extensive understanding of isotopes and atomic structure. See Figure 1 for details.
(Yes)
Does the direction of the arrow indicate a hierarchical, causal, (No) Score = 2 or sequential relationship between the concepts that is compatible with the label? (Yes) Score = 3
Figure 3. The Relational Scoring Method for scoring a concept map.
JChemEd.chem.wisc.edu • Vol. 76 No. 9 September 1999 • Journal of Chemical Education
1179
Chemical Education Today edited by Volker B. E. Thomsen Spectro Analytical Instruments, Inc. 160 Authority Drive Fitchburg, MA 01420
Reports from Other Journals
The paper “Concept Map Assessment of Classroom Learning: Reliability, Validity, and Logistical Practicality” by John R. McClure, Brian Sonak, and Koi K. Suen (7), gives us a reason to reconsider the use of concept maps in our classes. McClure et al. asked pairs of graduate students to score concept maps prepared by 63 undergraduates in an educational psychology course. Following training in writing concept maps, the undergraduates were given a list of 20 concepts from the course, and each student was asked to create a concept map using as many of the terms as possible. The maps were scored by pairs of graduate students, each pair using one of six different scoring methods with each member of a pair working independently. The score reliability for the six methods ranged from 0.23 to 0.76 with the highest reliability found for the relational scoring method based on the evaluation of separate propositions (Figure 3). Correlations of scores with a measure of the concept map’s similarity to a master map provided evidence for the validity of five of the six methods. The times required to provide training in concept-mapping, produce concepts, and score concept maps are consistent with their use in classroom assessment, and
1180
McClure and his coworkers suggest that it would be worthwhile to consider the adoption of concept-mapping as one of a battery of alternate assessment techniques. Literature Cited 1. Francisco, J. S.; Nakhleh, M. B.; Nurrenbern, S.C. Department of Chemistry, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN. Personal communication, 1999. 2. Novak, J. D. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 1990, 27, 937–949. 3. Stensvold, M.; Wilson, J. T. J. Chem. Educ. 1992, 69, 230–234. 4. Pendley, B. D.; Bretz, R. L.; Novak, J. D. J. Chem. Educ. 1994, 71, 9–15. 5. Regis, A.; Albertazzi, P. G.; Roletto, E. J. Chem. Educ. 1996, 73, 1084–1088. 6. Stuart, H. A. Eur. J. Sci. Educ. 1985, 7, 73–81. 7. McClure, J. R.; Sonak, B.; Suen, K. K. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 1999, 36, 475–492.
William R. Robinson is in the Department of Chemistry, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907; email:
[email protected].
Journal of Chemical Education • Vol. 76 No. 9 September 1999 • JChemEd.chem.wisc.edu
