Int. J. Cont. Engineering Education and Lifelong Learning, Vol. 11, Nos. 1/2, 2001 135

Concept mapping as a learning strategy for autonomous students with a serialistic cognitive style Heling Huai Capital Normal University, Peking, China E-mail: [email protected]

Piet Kommers University of Twente, P.O. Box 217, 7500 AE Enschede, The Netherlands E-mail: [email protected] Abstract: This paper aims at improving serialist students’ learning effect by concept mapping. It discusses concept mapping as a learning strategy and its effects in either an accommodatory or a compensatory strategy of the student’s style. In order to exam the effects, an Autonomous Learning Concept Mapping (ALCM) course containing Globalistic Concept Mapping (GCM) and Specialistic Concept Mapping (SCM), is designed and implemented in the study. The learning effect of ALCM on serialists is evaluated by exam and questionnaire. The paper concludes that serialists improve their learning achievements when they use CM accommodatory strategy properly. Concept mapping improves serialists’ learning effects when it is used in a special approach. Keywords: Concept mapping; cognitive style; serialistic; holistic; learning strategy. Reference to this paper should be made as follows: Huai, H. and Kommers, P. (2001) ‘Concept mapping as a learning strategy for autonomous students with a serialistic cognitive style’, Int. J. Continuing Engineering Education and Lifelong Learning, Vol. 11, Nos. 1/2, pp.135–151. Biographical notes: Dr. Heling Huai is an associate professor in Capital Normal University Beijing China. She has a background in biology. Her masters study is in the field of computer-based education. She gained her PhD in the field of educational instrumentation in October 2000 from University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands. She has been working in the field of media-based education since 1985. She did research in media-based educational system design and development. She delivers several courses at both master level and undergraduate level. In her PhD research, she related cognitive style to memory capacity and explored the interrelationships between memory capacity and cognitive style. She invented the autonomous learning concept-mapping course and explored the effective usage of concept mapping in biology learning. She creates links between cognitive styles and memory capacity and the links between concept mapping and cognitive styles. Dr. Piet Kommers is Assistant Professor at the University of Twente in the Netherlands. His studies were education, music academy, sonology, computer science and psychology at the Utrecht State University. He has specialized in media for learning since 1979. Besides his interest in extending media

Copyright © 2001 Inderscience Enterprises Ltd.

136

H. Huai and P. Kommers metaphors he cannot stay away from the intrigues of how to conceive conceptual entities, human memory, mental imagery, consciousness and its mutual relations. He is currently investigating the potential of Virtual Reality as ‘concept space’ and the potential of synthetic sound for navigation. He has coordinated and edited several books on educational technology: hypermedia in instruction, Eastern European media studies, telematics, document management for hypermedia design, and Virtual Reality. He was visiting professor at East China Normal University at Shanghai, Glushkov Institute for Cybernetics at Kiev, Colorado University at Denver, Amman University in Jordan, Pretoria University in South Africa, Washington University in Seattle and NOVA University in Florida. In 1999 he received the title of Honorary Professor by the International Research & Training Center of UNESCO at Kiev in Ukraine and was invited to be Distinguished Advisor in ICT for Education by the University of Hong Kong. He also recently received the title of Honorary Doctor from the President of the Capital Normal University in Peking.

1

Introduction

Various modes of Concept Mapping (CM) methods have different effects on learning achievements. Being a global learning method, CM could be used in a particular approach. The effect of CM as a learning method depends also on the student’s learning style. The accommodatory CM strategy of an individual’s learning style increases successful learning. In the present article, CM is implemented in two approaches, specialistic and globalistic. The paper finds that specialistic CM (SCM) improves serialists’ learning results, while globalistic CM (GCM) has no significant effects on increasing learning achievements. Individual learners have their own learning preference called the learning style. Students with different learning styles have differences in learning achievements. Using the strengths of an individual’s learning style properly, leads to more balancing learning effects and increases successive learning.

2

Concept mapping

A concept map is a graphical two-dimensional diagram consisting of nodes representing concepts and labelled lines denoting the relation between a pair of nodes (concepts), and representing relationships between concepts. Relations in concept maps are propositions; concept labels joined by a link. Propositions are the basic building blocks. They are represented as diagrams identifying a relation between two concepts. A proposition represents a unit of declarative knowledge. Concept maps are organized hierarchically, with the broadest, most inclusive concept at the top of the map and subordinate, detailed concepts lower on the map [1]. Concept mapping is very helpful for the organization of information and development of higher level thinking skills, thus deepening knowledge and facilitating clarity of thought. Concept mapping facilitates students in digging out the meanings and interrelationships of concepts. In order to reflect the relationships between concepts, and to connect the new concepts to an individual’s prior knowledge, students are prompted to find the meanings and links between them. Concept mapping facilitates learners in increasing the number of links between new information and prior knowledge, which

Concept mapping as a learning strategy for autonomous students

137

make them generative. In a general sense, CM is a global learning strategy. The research question of the current paper is: will CM help serialists to increase their learning achievements? How can serialists properly use CM to reach optimal learning?

3

Theoretical orientation

Research on learning styles is always closely related to cognitive styles. These two terms are sometimes used in the same way. Current research also uses the two terms in the same way. But to some degree, there are differences between these two terms. The definition of learning is not the content goal of this research study. The differences and varieties of learning are crucial in this dissertation study. What are learning style and strategy? What is cognitive style? Which factors affect learning style and strategy? How do learning style and learning strategy affect learning performances and achievements?

4

Definitions of cognitive style and learning style

To some degree, cognitive style and learning style are differentiated by some researchers. Messick [2] ascribes cognitive styles as relating to the organization and control of cognitive processes and learning styles to the organization and control of strategies for learning and knowledge acquisition. Learning style is situated between personality and learning strategy on the continuum that leads to a learning outcome [3], and reflects the learner’s preferred learning strategies. Witteman [4] made a distinction between cognitive style and learning style. According to him, cognitive style refers to an individual’s information processing based on neurological functioning, while the learning style is used to denote the styles resulting from a person’s cognitive style and personal variables like motivation, reflectiveness, locus of control, impulsiveness. The distinction between cognitive styles and learning styles is not the focus of this dissertation. From a cognitive perspective, cognitive style is a characteristic mode of thinking, remembering, and problem solving conceived as varying across individuals, developing in congenial ways around underlying personality differences [5]. According to some researchers [6], it is highly consistent and pervasive. It is deliberately seen as a stable, even unchangeable, individual characteristic which partly controls and organizes cognitive strategies. Kagan, Sahen, Widaman, Schwarzwald and Tyrell [7] provide a definition of cognitive style as the stable individual preference in the mode of perceptual organization and conceptual categorization of the external environment. It refers both to individual differences in general principles of cognitive organization and to various self-consistent idiosyncratic tendencies that are not reflective of human cognitive functioning in general [8]. Riding and Rayner [9] believe that cognitive style should be seen as an individual’s preferred and habitual approach to organizing and representing information. This dissertation research addresses Messick’s [10] definition: cognitive style a s “characteristic self-consistencies in information processing that develops in congenial ways around the underlying personality trends” [p.61]. It is a relatively fixed aspect or learning performance and influences a person’s general attainment or achievement in

138

H. Huai and P. Kommers

learning situations. According to Rosenberg [11], learning style, from a behavioral perspective, refers to an individual’s characteristic pattern of behaviour when confronted with a problem. If a person is observed in a number of different problem solving situations, a modal pattern of behaviour can usually be ascertained. It is this modal pattern of behaviour that is his learning style. Oen [12] believed that learning style is a consistent pattern of behaviour or activity preferred and employed by the individual to acquire knowledge, skills, and attitudes effectively and efficiently. Learning style consists of distinctive behaviours, which serve as indicators of how a person learns from and adapts to his environment. It also gives clues as to how a person’s mind operates [13,14]. Schultz [15] defined learning style as the way an individual learns best, considering a number of relevant factors, such as the preferred environment, emotional and social setting, need for structure, cultural influences, preferred sensory modalities, reasoning patterns, and memory factors. In short, learning style is not a one time or occasional process or behaviour. It can be assessed as the preferred approach to a problem. It is also related to skills, perception, and personality characteristics. A learning style reveals a consistent attitude towards learning and intellectual abilities. Learning style can be considered as a stable way of approaching learning tasks that are characteristic of individuals [15].

5

Consistency of learning/cognitive style

Does one’s style remain stable over time and throughout a variety of tasks? Based on the definition of learning/cognitive style and the consistency of the patterns and behaviours, learning style is assumed to be stable. In fact, there are some evidences of consistency in approaches over time and tasks. Investigations by Biggs [16], Saeljoe [17], Svenson [18], and Entwistle and Ramsden [19] have described consistencies in approaches arising from qualitative and quantitative data and shown that consistent tendencies of using meaningful or reproductive strategies are associated with several indices of learning outcome. It was found [20] that individuals develop habitual ways of approaching study tasks. Both approaches and style strategy need to be seen as consistent and context dependent. However, learning is a function of the individual’s engagement with the learning context. In practice, some students reveal a capacity to adapt to or shape the environment of learning more effectively than others. This capacity appears to be learnable. Variability in strategies to suit contexts is an important component of this capacity [20]. Sternberg [21,22] found that those who are aware of their own learning strategies and the variety of strategies available to them, and who are skilled in making the right choices, can be said to be responding intelligently to the context. The following questions arise. Can learning/cognitive style be changed? Reinert [23] stated that ‘style’ can be developed but not learned. Style is laid down in early life and is not subject to fundamental change, although it is possible to bend it and to develop it. Since evidence strongly suggests that the dominant qualities of a learner’s style are unchangeable, it is accepted that styles are deliberately seen as stable, even unchangeable, but strategies and approaches are amenable to change through intervention.

Concept mapping as a learning strategy for autonomous students

6

139

Dimensions of cognitive styles

The following Table is a list of the main cognitive styles found in the literature [24,6]. It by no means includes all style dimensions. No matter how many ‘styles’, they can never capture the complexity of real human learning. •

Field-independent versus field-dependent: this distinction was used by Witkin, Cox and Friedman [6] to specify articulation and global functioning. This dimension includes perceptual functioning and cognitive functioning. People who are heavily influenced by the surrounding field are called ‘field-dependent’, whereas those who are relatively uninfluenced by the surrounding field are called ‘field-independent’. The field-independent style is characterized by analysis and structure, whereas the field-dependent style involves a more global, less analytical processing of stimulus material. Individuals with a more analytical cognitive style are likely to have an internalized frame of reference to which they adhere as a guide to self-definition and which they maintain as distinctly separate from external social referents. A fielddependent style involves a more global, less analytical processing of stimulus material, and individuals with a more global style tend to rely more on external referents for self-definition.

•

Assimilation versus accommodation: assimilation means that people tend actively to transform and interpret their experience by engaging with mental structures when they are confronted with an experience, which may be any change in a person’s physical or mental environment. Complementary to the process of assimilation is the process of accommodation, which may be defined as the process of modifying schemata to solve problems arising from new experiences within the environment. Through the interplay of these two processes of intelligent activity a person either assimilates new experiences to existing schemata or accommodates his/her schemata to meet new situations.

•

Convergence versus divergence: this represents the degree of an individual’s relative reliance upon convergent thinking (pointing towards logical conclusions and uniquely correct or conventionally best outcomes), as a contrast to divergent thinking (pointing towards variety and quantity of relevant output). It denotes the tendency to look for a single outcome or the tendency to entertain multiple possibilities.

•

Reflection versus impulsivity: this denotes the individual’s consistency in the speed and adequacy with which alternative hypotheses are formulated and information processed. Reflective individuals tend to ponder and evaluate various possibilities before deciding, as against impulsive individuals who tend to respond quickly, even though they are frequently incorrect. Sometimes this is referred to as conceptual tempo.

•

Serialist versus holist: serialists have a tendency to approach things in a linear, stepby-step fashion, as opposed to a tendency to begin with the whole. Serialists tend to go into details before ‘seeing the big picture’. Holists prefer to begin globally rather than deeply.

140

H. Huai and P. Kommers

•

Risk-taking versus cautiousness: this refers to a person’s tendency to take chances to achieve preset goals as opposed to a tendency to seek certainty and to avoid exposure to risky situations.

•

Tolerance of unrealistic experiences is a dimension of differential readiness to accept perceptions and ideas at variance with conventional experience. It denotes the tendency to accept events and ideas that are improbable or clearly different from the ordinary.

•

Constricted versus flexible control is a dimension of individual differences in the susceptibility to distraction and cognitive interference.

•

Sensory modality refers to the individual’s preference for sensory modalities, such as kinesthetic (leading to what has sometimes been called physical thinking, visual (leading to figural or spatial thinking), or auditory modes (leading to verbal thinking) to experience the world.

•

Levelling versus sharpening concerns individual variation in assimilation into memory. It refers to the tendency to minimize differences in contrast to the tendency to maximize them.

•

Cognitive complexity versus simplicity: this refers to the individual differences in tendency to construct the world in a multidimensional and discriminating way. A complex individual’s conceptual system is highly differentiated (consisting of a large number of distinct dimensions or concepts), while simplicity prefers simple or wellpatterned situations.

•

Breadth of categorization relates to consistent preferences for broad inclusiveness as opposed to narrow exclusiveness in establishing the acceptable range for specified categories. It denotes the tendency to include instances in a category or group as against excluding them.

•

Conceptualizing style refers to individual consistencies in the utilization of particular kinds of stimulus properties and relationships as bases for forming concepts, such as the routine of using thematic or functional relations among stimuli (relational conceptualizing) as opposed to the analysis of descriptive attributes (analyticdescriptive conceptualizing) or the inference of class membership (categoricalinferential conceptualizing).

•

Conceptual articulation versus conceptual discrimination: this refers to individual differences in the extent to which stimuli or items of information are treated in dimensional rather than categorical terms. That is, the extent to which instances of a concept are discriminated from each other in a number of intervals or ordered categories within a concept’s range of reference.

•

Conceptual differentiation refers to individual differences in the tendency to categorize perceived similarities and differences among stimuli in terms of many differentiated concepts or dimensions.

•

Conceptual integration versus integrative complexity: this refers to individual consistencies in the extent to which categories of dimensions of information are perceived to be interrelated in multiple and different ways.

Concept mapping as a learning strategy for autonomous students

141

•

Conceptual versus perceptual-motor dominance refers to intro-individual dimensions. On novel or difficult tasks, conceptually dominant individuals show relative specialization of behaviours and relative deficiency in perceptual-motor behaviours, while perceptual-motor dominant individuals exhibit the opposite pattern.

•

Strong versus weak automatization refers to an individual’s relative ability to perform simple repetitive tasks compared to what would be expected of him in this regard from his general level of ability.

•

Scanning refers to individual differences in the extensiveness and intensity of attention deployment, leading to individual variations in vividness of experience and the span of awareness.

•

Compartmentalization refers to consistent tendencies to isolate ideas and objects into discrete, relatively rigid categories.

•

Field articulation embraces two relatively independent modes of perceiving complex stimulus arrays: element articulation involves the articulation of discrete elements from a background pattern; form articulation highlights large figural forms against the patterned background.

The style dimensions may complement one another, on the one hand, or intensify one another, on the other [24].

7

Learning strategy

The fundamental research in the area of learning style and strategy began with German cognitive psychologists in the early 1900s, and since that time, research has proliferated and educators have become actively interested in this field. Again here, there are many different definitions from different perspectives. Their basis lies in the structure of neural organization and personality that intervenes between human development and learning experiences. Briefly stated, styles are generally consistent and pervasive patterns towards learning and intellectual abilities. Schmeck [3] cited Entwistle and Ramsden [19] saying that the word style refers to the stable, trait-like consistency in one’s approach to attending, perceiving, and thinking. Style even has a physiological basis and is largely fixed for the individual, while strategies are ways that may be learned and developed to cope with situations and tasks, and are particular methods of utilizing styles to make the best of a situation. Strategies and approaches are amenable to change through intervention. Learning strategies are often associated with cognitive/learning styles. It seems that these two are so closely interwoven that the definition of one almost automatically entails the definition of the other. A style is a disposition towards a certain learning strategy [25]. It is a stable way of approaching tasks that are characteristic for individuals. Strategies underlie performances of tasks, or a pattern of information processing activities that is used to prepare an anticipated test or memory [26]. According to Schmeck [3], the term strategy was originally a military term that referred to procedures for implementing the plan of a large-scale military operation. The more specific steps in the implementation of the plan were called tactics. More generally,

142

H. Huai and P. Kommers

the term strategy refers to the implementation of a set of procedures (tactics) in order to accomplish something. Schmeck [3] defines a learning strategy as a sequence of procedures for accomplishing learning. It is essentially a method for approaching a task, or more generally to attain a goal. Each strategy could call upon a variety of processes in the course of its operation [27]. They are theoretically composed of processes. He described learning strategies as the pattern of information-processing activities in which a person engages when confronted by a learning task. They may be thought of as tools. How to distinguish styles and strategies? Kirby [27] made the distinction: “A strategy is essentially a method for approaching a task, or more generally attaining a goal. Each strategy could call upon a variety of processes in the course of its operation” [p5]. Biggs [16] distinguished styles as stable ways of approaching tasks that are characteristic for individuals, while learning strategies are seen as ways of handling particular tasks. Students have their innate learning style, but they could use an unfamiliar strategy in special situations. This is by no means indicates that they adopt the new strategy as their style and would use it in diversity learning situations. Figure 1 shows the flexibility of cognitive style, learning style and strategy. Figure 1

8

The flexibility of cognitive style, learning style and strategy

Types of learning strategies

An activity becomes strategic when it is particularly vital for the success of the individual learner. Strategies represent a general level of operation which may be more properly called ‘learning activities’ [28]. Below is the list of strategies concerned in the current research. Maintenance Rehearsal. Craik and Lockhart [29] call this a refreshing of the memory trace through repetition. It simply requires repetition. It fits the serialists’ style. Elaboration Rehearsal. Craik and Lockhart [29] call this a more meaningful kind of rehearsal, using related knowledge from long-term memory. It involves adding some sort of symbolic construction to what one is trying to learn as a way to make it more meaningful. This can be accomplished using either verbal or imaginable constructions. Elaboration also involves creating analogies, paraphrasing, and using prior knowledge, experiences, attitudes, and beliefs to help make the new information more meaningful. The major goal of each of these activities is to get the learner actively involved in building bridges between what the learner already knows and what he or she is trying to understand.

Concept mapping as a learning strategy for autonomous students

143

Comprehension monitoring strategies. Metacognition is used to refer to individuals’ knowledge about their own cognitive processes as well as their abilities to control these processes by organizing, monitoring, and modifying them as a function of learning outcomes and feedback [30,31]. Affective strategies. These help to create and maintain suitable internal and external climates for learning [32]. These strategies cannot directly be responsible for knowledge or skill acquisition. They help to create a context in which effective learning can take place.

9

Holistic versus serialistic dimension

The STM (Short-Term Memory) strategy is used by students in order to fit exam and teaching styles, based on the previous research of Lanzing [33,34]. To respond to this situation, this research focuses on the holism versus serialism dimension, which reflects the tendency to respond to learning with either a holistic strategy which is ‘hypothesisled’ (or top-down approach) or a focused strategy which is characterized by a step-bystep process and is ‘data-led’ [9]. This was introduced by Pask and Scott [35]. This dimension is global-holist attention, perception, and thinking at one end and focuseddetailed attention, perception, and thinking at the other. Riding and Rayner [9] believe that learning is a complex subject matter and involves two basic operations: 1

Building a description of how elements in a topic interrelate, that is, forming an understanding of internal structure.

2

Building operations, that is, manipulating the underlying interrelationship between concepts in a topic.

Holists typically adopt a global, thematic approach to learning and building broad descriptions. They work simultaneously at several different levels of thinking, which focus on several aspects and levels of the topic at the same time [35,9]. Serialists normally adopt the sequential learning approach and concentrate on details and procedures. They like to conceptualize information in a linear structure. They usually use a step-by-step approach. It builds upon clearly identified chunks of information that are used to link concepts and parts of the topic [35,9]. Serialistic individuals normally assimilate knowledge and show a more rigid processing style. As the process of assimilation judges incoming information in the light of preconceived ideas, its nature tends to be analytical. A person who is prone to adapt his/her concepts to meet incoming information (accommodation) shows a more flexible processing style, bearing some resemblance to what Pask [36] called holism. The differences that characterize the holist-serialist dimension of style, as approaches to learning, are listed in Table 1. From here it can be seen that holists typically adopt global relations between topics. Holists select a large number of data, while serialistic learners select a small number of data. They show the intention to search for specific data, and often conceptualize information in a linear structure [25]. The serial learners are inclined to focus on local rules and the holistic learner upon global rules.

144 Table 1

H. Huai and P. Kommers Characteristics of holists and serialists Serialists

Holists

Take a local approach and progress in a linear fashion; increase understanding in small increments.

Take a more global approach and progress simultaneously, quickly losing sight of individual components.

Learn the components separately and retain them as separate units.

Retain them only as an integral part of more complex structures.

Use the most interesting or striking point separately.

Start with a great deal of personal interest, thrive on anecdotes, illustrations and analogies. Are conceptually oriented.

Be detailed oriented. Work step by step; focus on the details before achieving an overall understanding, build narrow procedures.

First try to reach overall understanding before filling in the details, build broad descriptions. Span various levels at once.

Perform operation learning and process information in instrumental or pragmatic orientation.

Perform comprehension learning and process information by intrinsic interest and expectation of enjoyment.

Perform a bottom-up processing mode.

Perform a top-down processing mode.

Have low-discrimination skills.

Have high-discrimination skills.

Have concepts in minds that are narrowly related, and relate characteristics within concepts.

Have concepts in minds that are broadly related, and relate concepts to prior knowledge.

Have knowledge structure that is not deep in hierarchy.

Have knowledge structure covering a broad range in hierarchy.

Form specific hypotheses.

Form generalized hypotheses.

10 Four styles on the holistic and the serialistic dimension In the current research students are categorized in four types of styles according to their holistic and serialistic scores. Students with a clear preference for a holistic approach are called holist. Students with a clear preference for a serialistic approach are called serialists. Students who are low in both holists and serialists styles and do not have a preference for either the holist strategy or the serialistic strategy are called in the current research unknown-styles. Those who adopt both the holistic approach and the serialistic approach and can shift between holist and serialists are called versatiles in the current research (see Figure 2).

Concept mapping as a learning strategy for autonomous students Figure 2

145

Four cognitive styles on the holistic-serialistic dimension

Holistic

High

Holists

Versatiles

Low

Unknown-styles

Serialistic

Low

High

Serialistic

11 Matching the style Cognitive styles and differences stimulate educational researchers to think about individuals and how to teach them. The current research believes that in practice, each learner brings his/her style to the learning situation. Cognitive style affects what is learned and how individuals learn. In order to promote successful learning, should students’ style be accommodated or compensated?

Learning style and serialists It is widely accepted that students have habitual learning patterns and characteristic (strategies) preferences, and these habitual preferences are important for learning efficiently and successively. A learning style is not a one time or occasional process or behaviour. It can be assessed as the preferred approach to a problem. A learning style reveals the consistent attitude towards learning and intellectual abilities. A learning style can be considered as a stable way of approaching learning tasks that are characteristic of individuals [16,37]. Holist versus serialist: Pask and Scott introduced this dimension [35]. This dimension reflects the tendency to respond to a learning situation either with a holistic strategy which is ‘hypothesis-led’/conceptual-driven or a focused strategy which is characterized by a step-by-step process and is ‘data-led’/data-driven [9]. This dimension is global-holist attention, perception, and thinking at one end and focused-detailed attention, perception, and thinking at the other.

146 Figure 3

H. Huai and P. Kommers The two CM approaches in the ALCM course

Serialistic individuals normally assimilate knowledge and show a more rigid processing style. As the process of assimilation judges incoming information in the light of preconceived ideas, its nature tends to be analytical. Serialists normally adopt operation learning and concentrate on details, procedures. They like to conceptualize information in a linear structure. They usually use a step-by-step approach, built with chunks of information which are used to link concepts and parts of the topic [35,9]. It is assumed in the current research that successful learning involves the integration of both local and global rules. Serial strategy is needed to achieve understanding and global style to gain success in learning. In the present case, serialists could improve their learning achievement by using the CM strategy. Should they use CM in an accommodatory strategy or in a compensatory approach? In order to exam how serialists gain higher achievements, two CM approaches are designed in a Autonomous Learning Concept Mapping (ALCM) course.

Autonomous learning concept mapping (ALCM) course The ALCM experiment aims at improving serialists’ learning effects by CM. CM could be used convincingly in a special approach and influences the learning achievements of serialists. Two diverse approaches – globalistic concept mapping (GCM), and specialistic concept mapping (SCM) – are designed. The main discrimination between GCM and SCM is the procedure of learning by concept mapping. The GCM approach leads students to process information in a global and top-down procedure. It compensates for the weakness of serialists. SCM facilitates students in specializing the learning process by a bottom-up procedure. It matches the serialists’ style.

Concept mapping as a learning strategy for autonomous students

147

ALCM experiments and results Labelling the students’ learning style Pask’s test is used to tag the students’ learning style. Among 71 students, there are 21 serialists. Twenty one serialist students are randomly divided into two groups, 12 in the GCM group, nine in the SCM group.

The ALCM and its learning effects In the ALCM course, the learning material is biology domain knowledge. The content is about the structure and classification of insects. It includes the concepts and principle of the structure and features of insects. The two groups take the lesson in a successive sequence. Each group starts with a short instruction that guides students to learn the new material in the respective approach. The GCM strategy guides students to learn in a global and top-down approach. The SCM strategy guides students to learn in a special and bottom-up approach. The student studies the materials and constructs a concept map at the same time. An exam is conducted after the learning process to evaluate the learning effects. A T-test is used to test the differences between the two treatment groups.

Means

SD

SE of Mean

Serialists in GCM

.6233

.207

.069

Serialists in SCM

.8490

.273

.050

The T value is –2.72 with 19 degrees of freedom and probability of .014. It is less than .05 and shows significant differences between the two groups. The statistics shows that serialists in the SCM treatment group have significantly higher scores than serialists in GCM group.

12 Summary The SCM and GCM approaches have different influences on learning achievements (see Figure below), which means that serialist students get different effects from SCM and GCM. The SCM strategy is more benefit than GCM for serialists. In summary, with respect to the use of concept mapping as a learning method, the accommodation of one’s learning styles has positive effects on learning achievements, while the compensatory CM strategy does not have significant effects on the serialist student.

148 Figure 4

H. Huai and P. Kommers The means of the two CM groups

Serialist students using the SCM strategy have higher scores than those using the GCM strategy. The investigation questionnaire reveals the self-evaluation of the effects of the concept mapping strategy. The question is: ‘What effects do you get from the CM strategy, according to your self-evaluation, to increase your learning achievements?’. There are four choices, 1 many, 2 some, 3 few, and 4 none. The result shows that serialists in the SCM group feel that they get more effects than from the GCM strategy. Table 2

Self-evaluation of the CM effects on learning GCM

SCM

Many

11.1

8.3

Some

33.3

66.7

Few

55.6

25.0

None

0.0

0.0

(percentage of students)

This is a convincing result that serialists like to use concept mapping in a special approach, which matches their own style. It is on the same line of the exam scores. This experiment suggests that concept mapping, though it is a global strategy, is better used in a special approach to increase serialists’ learning achievement.

13 Conclusions Concept mapping itself is a global learning strategy that does not match the serialistic style. In fact, it is could also be used in a special way, which matches the serialistic style. From the results of the experiments, the paper suggests that concept mapping being in the accommodatory strategy of serialists’ style increases their learning achievements. If they simply use CM in a global way, serialists could get hardly any benefit from concept mapping.

Concept mapping as a learning strategy for autonomous students

149

How can serialists adopt the concept mapping strategy to reach optimal learning effects? This paper gives a good example of applying CM in a special approach. The SCM strategy starts the learning process with the extraction of details. Then it helps students to articulate their new knowledge and to rank the concepts. Next it facilitates students in linking the concepts. This step is the crucial procedure for serialists to generalize knowledge. Linking and generalization are normally overlooked or dismissed by serialists. When they use SCM strategy, serialists are guided to link the concepts and generalize knowledge into a more global view right after the detail extraction and articulation. In this step, serialists get compensation for the weakness of their style without consuming extra energy. If they use GCM strategy, they have to retrieve the prior knowledge from their minds in order to anchor the new concepts. This procedure will consume more energy and distract their attention from learning new concepts. Normally, serialists demand a more step-by-step approach to learn new materials. But when they are engaged in a global learning approach, they cannot get the directions on which they rely, and they have to spend more effort to adjust their strategy. These efforts on adjusting an individual’s strategy distract effort from learning. In summary, it suggests that CM could be used in a special approach in order to help serialist students’ learning.

References and Notes 1

2

3 4 5 6

7

8 9 10 11

J on as sen , D .H ., Bei ss ner, K. B. an d Y acci, M. (1 99 3) S tr uctu ra l kno wled ge: Tech ni qu es fo r Rep res ent in g, Con veyin g, an d Acq ui ri ng St ru ctu ra l Kno wled ge. Lawren ce Erl bau m As so ciat es, Hi ll sd ale, New J ersey . Messick, S. (1987) ‘Structural relationships across cognition, personality and style’, in R.E. Snow and M.J. Farr (Eds.) Aptitude, Learning, and Instruction, Conative and Affective Process Analyses, Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers, Vol. 3, pp.35–75. Schmeck, R.R. (1988) Learning Strategies and Learning Styles, New York and London: Plenum Press. Witteman, H.P.J. (1997) ‘Styles of learning and regulation in an interactive learning group system’, Doctorate Dissertation. University of Leiden. Academic Thesis. Messick, S. (1982) ‘Style in the interplay of structure and process’, Educational Analysis, Vol. 4, pp.105–121. Witkin, H.A., Cox, P.W. and Friedman, F. (1976) Field-Dependence-Independence and Psychological Differentiation: Bibliography with Index. Supplement No. 2. Arlington, Virginia: ERIC Document Reproduction Service, ED 144 946. Kagan, S., Sahen, G., Widaman, K., Schwarzwald, J. and Tyrell, G. (1985) ‘Classroom structural bias: impact of cooperative and competitive classroom structures on cooperative and competitive individuals and groups’, in R. Slavin, S. Sharan, S. Kagan, R.L. Hertz, Lazarowitz,, C. Webb and R. Schmuck (Eds.) Learning to Cooperate, Cooperating to Learn, New York; Plenum Press, pp.277–312. Ausubel, D.P., Novak, J.D. and Hanesian, H. (1978) Educational Psychology: A Cognitive View, 2nd Edition, New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston. Riding, R.J. and Rayner, S.G. (1998) Cognitive Styles and Learning Strategies: Understanding Style Differences in Learning and Behavior, London: Cromwell Press Ltd. Messick, S. (1984) ‘The nature of cognitive styles: problems and promise in educational practice’, Educational Psychology, Vol. 19, pp.2–14. Rosenberg, M.B. (1968) Diagnostic Teaching, Seattle: Special Child Publications.

150 12

13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

21 22 23

24

25

26 27 28 29 30

31

32

H. Huai and P. Kommers Oen, U.T. (1973) ‘Investigating the interaction of learning styles and types of learning experiences in vocational-technical education’, Interim Report. Arlington, Virginia: ERIC Document Reproduction Service, ED 086 836. Gregorc, A.F. (1979) ‘Learning/teaching styles: potent forces behind them’, Educational Leadership, Vol. 36, pp.243–236. Gregorc, A.F. (1979) Workshop: The Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development Conference. Orlando, Florida. Schultz, R.A. (Ed.) (1977) Personalizing Foreign Language Instruction: Learning Styles and Teaching Options, Arlington, Virginia: ERIC Document Reproduction Service, ED 145 689. Biggs, J.B. (1988) ‘Approaches to learning and to essay writing’, in R.R. Schmeck (Ed.), Learning strategies and learning styles, New York: Plenum Press, pp.185–228. Saeljoe, R. (1981) ‘Learning approach and outcome: some empirical observations’, Instructional Science, Vol. 10, pp.47–65. Svenson, L. (1976) Study Skill and Learning, Gothenburg: Acta Universities Göthoburgensis. Entwistle, N.J. and Ramsden, P. (1983) Understanding Students Learning, London: Croom Helm. Ramsden, P. (1988) ‘Context and strategy: situational influences on learning’, in R.R. Schmeck (Ed.) Learning Strategies and Learning Styles, New York: Plenum Press, pp.159–184. Sternberg, R.J. (1981) ‘Intelligence and non entrenchment’, Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 73, pp.1–16. Sternberg, R.J. (1985) Beyond IQ: A Triarchic Theory of Human Intelligence, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Reinert, H. (1977) ‘ELSIE is nor bull! or: on utilizing information concerning student learning styles’, in R.A. Schultz (Ed.) Personalizing Foreign Language Instruction: Learning Styles and Teaching Options, Arlington, Virginia: ERIC Document Reproduction Service, ED 145 689, pp.34–41. Riding, R.J. and Grimley, M. (1999) ‘Cognitive styles, gender and learning from multi-media materials in 11-year-old children’, British Journal of Educational Technology, Vol. 30, No. 1, pp.43–56. Pask, G. (1988) ‘Learning strategies, teaching strategies, and conceptual or learning style’, in R.R. Schmeck (Ed.) Learning Strategies and Learning Styles, New York: Plenum Press, pp.83–100. Schmeck, R.R. (1983) ‘Learning styles of college students’, Individual Differences in Cognition, Vol. 1, pp.233–279. Kirby, J.R. (1984) Cognitive Strategies and Educational Performance, London & New York: Academic Press. Nisbet, J. and Shucksmith, J. (1986) Learning Strategies, London: Routledge and Kogan Paul. Craik, F.I.M. and Lockhart, R.S. (1972) ‘Levels of processing: a framework for memory research’, Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, Vol. 11, pp.671–684. Brown, A.L. (1978) ‘Knowing when, where, and how to remember; a problem of metacognition’, in R.V. Glaser (Ed.) Advance in Instructional Psychology, Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum, pp.77–156. Brown, A.L, Bransford, W.F., Ferrara, R. and Compione, J. (1983) ‘Learning, remembering, and understanding’, in J. Flavell and E. Jarkman (Eds.) Handbook of Child Psychology, Vol. 3, New York: Wiley, pp.77–166. Weinstein, C.E. and Underwood, V.L. (1985) ‘Learning strategies: the how of learning’, in J. Segal, S. Chipman and R. Glaser (Eds.) Relating Instruction to Basic Research Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.

Concept mapping as a learning strategy for autonomous students 33

34 35 36 37

151

Lanzing, J.W.A. (1998) ‘Cognitive styles and concept mapping for hypermedia design’, International Journal of Continuing Engineering Education and Life-long Learning, Vol. 8, No. 1/2, pp.124–140. J. Lanzing was killed in an accident while working on his dissertation on this topic at the University of Twente, Enschede. Pask, G. and Scott, B.C.E. (1972) ‘Learning strategies and individual competence’, International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, Vol. 4, pp.217–253. Pask, G. (1975) Conversation, Cognition and Learning: A Cybernetic Theory and Methodology, New York: Elsevier. Guild, P. and O’Rourke B. (1980) ‘Learning styles: knowledge, issues and applications for classroom teachers’, Doctoral Dissertation. University of Massachusetts. (University microfilms International 8019462).