deep foundations of concept mapping (pdf)

Lawrie HunterKochi University of Technology

http://lawriehunter.com

Information structures: the essential deep foundation

of concept mapping

Argument mapping

Info-structure mapping

Syntactic mapping

Grammar mapping (pseudo)

Association mapping

No need to take notes (:^0)

All materials can be downloadedfrom Hunter’s websiteshttp://lawriehunter/http://www.core.kochi-tech.ac.jp/hunter/orhttp://slideshare.net/rolenzo/

http://lawriehunter/

http://www.core.kochi-tech.ac.jp/hunter/



http://slideshare.net/rolenzo/

Wordle for today

wordle.net

Mapping:abstract ideals vs. doable realities

Keywords: mapping, concept mapping, structures

language information<important

English information<important

Uses of mapping

uses of

mapping

wittingmindless

Uses of mapping

uses of

mapping

wittingmindless

principles of

map use?

Uses of mapping

uses of

mapping

witting

principles of

map use?Information

types Language

patterns

Part 1: the main styles of mapping

Part 2: matching mapping styles to instructional purposes

(1) Novakian mapping, using Cmap tools(2) Hunter's infostructure mapping,

using PowerPoint.

Part 3: deciding mode: electronic vs. hand made

Part 4: using mapping to push the learner to the use of specific language forms and patterns


Grammar maps (not maps)

Association maps

Syntactic maps

Information structure maps

Argument maps

Rhetorical structure maps



Association maps

Syntactic maps


Argument maps


Argument mapping


Syntactic mapping


Association mapping

made with CmapTools

Functions of ‘concept maps’

Wealth of tools: the age of GRAPHIC ORGANIZERS

http://www.visual-literacy.org/periodic_table/periodic_table.html




Wealth of tools: the age of GRAPHIC ORGANIZERS

http://www.eduplace.com/graphicorganizer/

http://www.eduplace.com/graphicorganizer/

Distinguishing maps:Levels of abstraction

Figure: quantum levels of abstraction.From Hunter (2007)

Argument mapping


Syntactic mapping

Association mapping


The links are all lines. The links are all associations.

Mind mapping

What are associations?

Example: we associate with eating.

We associate A with B.

What do you associate with ?


Let’s make a mind map!


A baseball reminds me of _______.

Get a free account from

http://www.mindmeister.com/

Make maps like this, online.

Horn’s argument mapping

http://www.stanford.edu/~rhorn/index.htmlhttp://www.macrovu.com/

http://www.stanford.edu/~rhorn/index.html

http://www.macrovu.com/

AusThink

argument

mapping

http://www.austhink.com/

http://www.austhink.com/

Rationale argument mapping

RST mapping

www.sil.org/~mannb/rst/

RST links are rhetorical devices.

Bill Mann’s Rhetorical Structure Theory (RST)

uses various sorts of "building blocks" to describe texts.

The principal block type deals with "nuclearity" and "relations"

(often called coherence relations in the linguistic literature.)

Abrams, R. An Overview of Concept Mapping. In

Meaningful Learning: A Collaborative Literature Review of Concept Mapping. Retrieved

March 18, 2008 at http://www2.ucsc.edu/mlrg/clr-conceptmapping.html

Concepts are placed in [boxes]...

Lines are drawn from a concept

to a linking word to a concept.

Sequences of concepts and linking words

do not always form grammatically correct sentences.”

“The basic Novakian concept map...

usually starts with a general concept

at the top of the map, and then

works its way down ... to more specific concepts.

Beyond assocation: Novakian

http://www2.ucsc.edu/mlrg/clr-conceptmapping.html



http://cmap.ihmc.us/

Default Novakian: Cmaps

http://cmap.ihmc.us/

Novakian maps (Novak & Cañas, 2006)

can be used at any level of abstraction.

Argument mapping

Information structure mapping

Syntactic mapping

Grammatical mapping (pseudo)

Association mapping

Figure: quantum levels of abstraction.From Hunter (2007)

<broad

correspond to

information

structure

elements

Hunter’s ISmaps

have

graphical

links

ISmaps

syntactic

mapping

semantic

mapping

ISmaps

transcend

pragmatic

barriers

ISmaps’

rangepragmatics’

miniworld

<big

Description Classification

Degree

comparison

Attribute

comparison

Sequence Cause-effect

Contrast

!

Hunter’s ISmaps*

*information structure maps

My friend

Canadian

Englishteacher

57

DESCRIPTION

Hunter’s ISmaps*

CLASSIFICATION

Cars

sedansstationwagonscoupes

Hunter’s ISmaps*

<big

old

COMPARISON (relative)

TokyoCalcutta

Hunter’s ISmaps*

COMPARISON (by attribute)

red

M’s car K’s car

white

3 years old

new

Hunter’s ISmaps*

SEQUENCE

find a

bank machine

put in your

bank card

follow the

directions

Hunter’s ISmaps*

SEQUENCE structure signals

ThenFirst and

find a

bank machine

put in your

bank card

follow the

directions

Hunter’s ISmaps*

SEQUENCE

slice a tomato

toast two slices of bread

ThenFirst and

tear some

lettuce

Hunter’s ISmaps*

CAUSE-EFFECT

heavy

rain

I...late for school

bus was cancelled

Hunter’s ISmaps*

Use the ISmap links to map text.

<big

Description Classification

Degree

comparison

Attribute

comparison

Sequence Cause-effect

Contrast

!

Power generating systems

Generalprocess:

boilNH3

Makesteam

Rotateturbines

Generateelectricity

Boil aliquid

older typeplants

OTECplants

boilH2O

seawaterheat

fossil orN-heat

steam20C

steam500C

lowpower

highpower

zeroenergy cost

highenergy cost

hunter systems

!

!

!

Hunter's ISmapping,using PowerPoint

or other graphical software.

Comparison of Novakian and information structure mapping

Novakian mapping, using Cmap tools,

a free and very usable software

with web sharing built in.

vs.

Yon sama, a Korean actor,

is younger and more handsome than

Tokoro Joji, a Japanese TV personality.

Make a Cmap and an ISmap of this text:

Yon samaTokoro

Joji

actor TV personality

>young

handsome

huntersystems

Korean Japanese

an ISmap of the text:

a Cmap of the text:

Part 2:matching mapping stylesto instructional purposesRepresentations of the information structures

underlying the witting use of maps:

Writers work with

Rhetorical structure

Argument structure

Information structure

Text structure

Paragraph structure

Sentence structure

Part 2:matching mapping stylesto instructional purposesRepresentations of the information structures

underlying the witting use of maps:

Writers work with

Rhetorical structure

Argument structure

Information structure

Text structure

Paragraph structure

Sentence structure

Mappers make


Argument maps


Association maps

Syntactic maps


mystery

zone

Mapping decision matrix________________________

Training

-extensive contained warmups

-for Teacher's observation

-L's need support?

-L's need constraint?

-for peer commenting

-look quickly at shapes only

-look carefully at node content and links

Software vs. tangibles

Training

Mapping type

Constraint

Mapping decision matrix

________________________

Mapping type

-mind maps

-relation maps (Novakian)

-structure maps


Training

Mapping type

Constraint

mind maps

relation maps

structure maps

Mapping decision matrix

________________________

Mapping type

1. Mind maps

-for amassing 'thoughts'

-relations only by association

-for rearranging, clustering, prioritizing (software good

for this)


Training

Mapping type

Constraint

mind maps

relation maps

structure maps


Mapping type

2. Relation maps (Novakian maps)

-for relating concepts in articulately related pairs

-CMC debate going on now:declarative reading or not?


Training

Mapping type

Constraint

mind maps

relation maps

structure maps


Mapping type

3. Structure maps (e.g. ISmaps)

-for representation of syntactic structures at the level of

-sentence

-paragraph

-short technical summary articles

-not necessarily one unified map

-background information may be

-a separate map

-a layer (font color, sidebar, etc.)

-persuasion may be 'picture frames' or title bars or submaps


Training

Mapping type

Constraint

mind maps

relation maps

structure maps


Constraint

1. Architectural constraint

- by size

- by content

2. Rhetorical constraint

-by rhetorical device limitations

3. Relational constraint

-by Novakianism


Training

Mapping type

Constraint

structural

rhetorical

relational

Part 3:deciding mode:electronic vs. hand made


-tangibles first

-because quick

-to encourage revisions (paper is cheap)

-software for presentation, sharing, editing, beauty


Training

Mapping type

Constraint

Using four types of task constraint

which reduce to easily manageable task design elements:

architectural constraint (number of nodes, etc.)

rhetorical constraint (type of links)

relational constraint (nature of links)

degree of abstraction (rhetorical distance) (not today)

Part 4:using mapping to push the learnerto the use of specific language forms and patterns

Pushing the learner________________________

Constraint

1. Architectural constraint

- by size (number of nodes)

- by content (e.g. only noun phrases)


Training

Mapping type

Constraint

architectural

rhetorical

relational


Constraint

2. Rhetorical constraint

-by rhetorical device limitations

-e.g. in a rhetorical structure map,

only allow argument moves as link content


Training

Mapping type

Constraint

architectural

rhetorical

relational


Constraint

3. Relational constraint:

-by Novakianism

i.e. restrict linking phrase content

e.g. only verbs

e.g. only action verbs

e.g. only information structure signals

(classification, comparison, sequence, cause-effect)


Training

Mapping type

Constraint

architectural

rhetorical

relational

Hunter’s framework

Key content Background Persuasion

Rhetorical

structure

Information

organization

Information

structures

Thank you for your kind attention,

and thank you in advance for your feedback and suggestions.

Lawrie Hunter

downloads fromhttp://lawriehunter.com

view and download athttp://slideshare.net/rolenzo

http://lawriehunter.com/

http://slideshare.net/rolenzo

Information structures: The essential deep foundation of concept mapping

Abstract ideals vs. do-able realities

Selected domain for this paper: mapping/concept mapping/argument mapping

Concept mapping and concept mapping software have taken solid hold in many realms of education in many countries, primarily

for use in representing learner and instructor perceptions of the interrelations between concepts. However, it is not so easy to design

effective and motivating mapping tasks, or to choose the appropriate type of mapping for a task/project/curriculum. This paper sets

out a set of conceptual tools for the witting use of mapping in curriculum and materials design.

These central questions are addressed:

(1) Which kind of mapping to use for different instructional purposes;

(2) When to do mapping electronically and when by hand; and

(3) How to create curriculum and materials that go beyond "I do mapping in my class" to lead the learner to the use of the specific

language forms and patterns appropriate to each type of information.

This paper identifies mapping types and information structures underlying the witting use of maps: rhetorical structure, text

structure, paragraph structure and sentence structure. Without incorporating these structures in the framing of task design, the

instructor/designer will not be able to control the form of learner output.

This is followed by an analysis of the information-related character of two salient styles of mapping:

(1) Novakian mapping, which is the most commonly used mapping in science education today; and

(2) Hunter's infostructure mapping, which is a very limited (and thus effective) mapping style for second language learning

technical-oriented tasks.

The conclusion includes a description of four types of task constraint which the author has developed for mapping in the teaching of

entry and upper advanced EFL technical writing. These constraint types, which reduce to easily manageable task design elements,

are: map size; allowable links; rhetorical devices; and degree of abstraction.

Biodata: Lawrie Hunter is a professor at Kochi University of Technology. His infostructure maps provide the underlying structure

of "Critical Thinking" (Greene & Hunter, Asahi Press 2002) and "Thinking in English" (Hunter, Cengage 2008).


The age of GRAPHIC ORGANIZERS

Suggested Reading About Visual Thinking and Learning

Ausubel, D. (1968). Educational psychology: A cognitive view. New York: Holt, Reinhart and Winston.

Buzan, T. & Buzan, B. (1993). The mind map book: How to use radiant thinking to maximize your

brain's untapped potential. New York: Penguin Books USA Inc.

Buzan, T. (1983). Use both sides of your brain: New techniques to help you read efficiently, study

effectively, solve problems, remember more, think clearly. New York: E.P. Dutton.

Jonassen, D.H. (1996). Computers in the classroom: Mindtools for critical thinking. Englewood Cliffs,

NJ. Prentice-Hall, Inc.

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

Novak, J.D. (1998). Learning, creating and using knowledge: Concept map® as facilitative tools in

schools and corporations. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

http://www.inspiration.com/Parents/Visual-Thinking-and-Learning






