Research in Science Education, 1996, 26(1), 233-245

P r o b i n g P e r s o n a l K n o w l e d g e : T h e Use o f a C o m p u t e r - B a s e d T o o l to H e l p

Preservice Teachers Map Subject Matter Knowledge

Brian Ferry University of Wollongong

Abstract

This paper reports on the use of a HyperCardrM-based tool to create and modify concept maps about science related subject matter. The tool was trialed with seventy-one preservice teachers who were planning to teach a science topic to a primary school class. Data gathered from interviews, journals and analysis of concept maps indicated that the concept mapping tool was easy to use because it generated little cognitive load and quickly became transparent to the users. This allowed preservice teachers to focus their attention upon the construction of their maps and to organise their cognitive frameworks into more powerful integrated patterns. It was also found that the process of concept map construction may enhance preservice teacher thinking about effective teaching.

The key features of concept maps are their spatial or graphic properties that make use of labelled nodes to represent concepts and lines or arcs to represent relationships between pairs of concepts. It has been suggested that their structure parallels the human cognitive structure, as they show how learners organise concepts (Novak & Gowin, 1984; Heimlich & Pittelman, 1986; Wandersee, 1990; Harlen, Macro, Schilling, Malvem, & Reed, 1990; Fisher, Faletti, Patterson, Thornton, Lipson, & Spring, 1990; Margulies, 1991; Clarke, 1991; Langfield-Smith, 1992; White, & Gunstone, 1992; Tobin, Tippings, & Gallard, 1994). The advantages of this form of information presentation have been recognised for many years by established researchers (Ausubel, 1968;- Novak & Gowin, 1984; West & Pines, 1985), and in recent years science educators have begun to report on the use of concept mapping strategies with preservice teachers in order to see how they structure their subject matter knowledge (Lederman & Latz, 1995).

In the context of this study concepts represent "anything that can be recognised; that is, can be attributed identity" (Holley & Dansereau, 1984, p. 23). Thus ideas, objects, images, notions, conceptions, beliefs, events, features, properties, and states are examples of concepts. What is commonly referred to as "having a concept" involves the performance of a combination of generalisation and discrimination behaviour such as classifying correctly any examples of the concept and not including any non-examples, however similar they may be.

Figure 1 shows a simple concept map. It has a formal structure and the relationship between terms is inclusive, with general ones standing above the specific ones.

Strategies such as concept mapping are considered by some researchers (Holley & Dansereau, 1984) to be a primary support strategy that operates directly on text or visual materials on display, or stored in memory. Secondary support strategies maintain a suitable cognitive climate, examples of which are concentration and motivation strategies (Holley & Dansereau, 1984). Under this classification scheme concept maps are considered to be a primary support strategy, but we need to recognise that the processes of creating a concept map activate both primary and secondary support strategies. Moreover, these strategies are likely to be activated in different ways with different learners.

234 FERRY

arc aTC

is a ~ m a 1 / \ is a p l a n t

/

Figure 1. A simple concept map (after White & Gunstone, 1992).

This study focuses on preservice teachers' use of computer software to construct concept maps that represent their current subject matter knowledge. During the process of construction of a concept map, learners identify and define important concepts or ideas and graphically represent the interrelationships among their selected concepts (Armbruster, 1979; Goetz & Armbruster, .1980; Holley & Dansereau, 1984; White & Gunstone, 1992). The result is a structured two- dimensional map representing the spatial organisation of their knowledge structure. However, this structure is of little value unless the links are labelled and White and Gunstone (1992, p. 18) claim that the writing of links is crucial. Therefore, the learner should be encouraged to add notes and labels to their map (Holley & Dansereau, 1984). But this is not an easy task and White and Gunstone maintain that students f'md this "the most irksome task ... and would skip it i f they could" (p. 18).

Uses of Concept Maps

Six uses of concept maps have been identified by White and Gunstone (1992) and these are: to explore understanding of a limited aspect of the topic; to check whether learners understand the purpose of instruction; to see whether learners can make links between concepts; to identify changes that learners make in relationships between concepts; to f'md out which concepts are regarded as key ones; and to promote learner discussion. During this study concept maps were used to audit: learner understanding of a limited aspect of a topic; the links learners make between concepts; and the changes learners make in relationships between concepts. It was also important to ascertain whether learners could use the procedure as a tool to organise their schema into powerful intellectual frameworks.

PROBING PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE 235

Although concept mapping is a popular strategy, we still need to be aware that there has been some disagreement over the long-term benefits of this strategy. White and Gunstone (1992) claimed that mapping appears to be best suited for probing understanding of a whole discipline or a substantial part of it, but Armbruster (1979) asserted that mapping is limited in its application as it doesn't give a "big picture." Other researchers such as Jegede, Alaiyemola and Okebukola (1990) have maintained that "concept mapping serves as a tool to help learners organize their cognitive frameworks into more powerful integrated patterns" (p. 952). The use of a computer- based concept mapping tool developed for this study may, when combined with other instructional and research procedures, provide opportunities for studies that contribute to the resolution of these differences of opinion.

Research by Beyerbach and Smith (1990) showed that concept mapping techniques could enhance preservice teacher thinking about effective teaching. Also the findings of Lederman and Latz (1995) showed that while some preservice teachers may possess the basic subject matter knowledge needed to teach science effectively, they fmd it difficult to relate this knowledge to science topics taught in schools. This study also contributes to the research of Beyerbach and Smith (1990) and that of Lederman and Latz (1995).

Instructing Learners to Create Concept Maps

Holley and Dansereau (1984) recommend that learners employ six steps when they create concept or network maps:

1. Select key concepts. This is a recognition process that activates relevant knowledge, and assists in topic identification.

2. Write the key concepts. 3. Make an attribute list of the key concepts. 4. Relate key concepts in a spatial relationship. 5. Rearrange spatial representations. 6. Compare representation to the text.

R is important for the instructor to model the process of concept map creation to students, and provide assistance that can be in the form of named links, structured hierarchies, chains, or clusters of concepts. Researchers suggest that a period of direct instruction is necessary before learners can successfully employ this process (Harlen, 1992; White & Gunstone, 1992). The instructional steps that follow are recommended by White and Gunstone (1992):

1. Begin with a simple topic, familiar to students so that it is easier for them to concentrate on the learning process. Ensure that a small number of terms are involved.

2. Model the construction of a concept map to the class. This can be done with an overhead projector or computer with projection facilities.

3. Encourage students to think of all possible links and to write down the nature of each link; 4. It is unlikely that students will produce good maps on their first attempt. Provide constructive

criticism. 5. You may provide a suggested layout the first time, but it is important to remove these prompts

from subsequent maps. 6. Tell students that there is not a single correct answer to the task.

236 FERRY

Students could use a set of cards as concept labels and pieces of string for links. They can arrange these on a large sheet of cardboard and attach them with sticky tape. Finally, the relation between pairs of concepts is written next to each link.

Computer technology can be used to replace cardboard and string as concepts and links can be easily manipulated on a computer screen. The use of computer-based concept map tool may make it easier for preservice teachers to construct and revise a concept map of subject matter knowledge. Also the process of concept map construction may provide preservice teachers with an insight into their own understanding of science content knowledge associated with the science topics that they would be teaching.

The concept map tool used in this study is considered to be a cognitive tool. Cognitive tools are defined by Jonassen (1991, p. 2) as "generalisable tools that can facilitate cognitive processing."

They are both mental and computation devices that support, guide and extend the thinking processes of the users. Such tools are external to the leamer and engage the learner in meaningful processing of information.

The Concept Map Tool

A HyperCard TM programming environment was used because Apple Macintosh TM computers were used across the campus and most preservice teachers had at least one university session (fourteen two-hour tutorials) of experience with these computers. Figure 2 shows a concept map that was created by a student who was using the concept map tool.

[Astronomy 1

I ~ ~ [Th . . . . . Laa~dt~t~ I~

{milky Way ~ /

.[upit,a i5 a l a ~ ~a~ planet. It I x a ~ ' m a N s a ~ a t h i ~ l a ~ z o | x i ~ t h a t ~ r ~ i t . Iti~as II

Figure 2. A view of a student concept map in the process of creation.

PROBING PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE 237

F u n c t i o n s o f the C o n c e p t Tools

The first five steps recommended by Holley and Dansereau (1984) were combined with those recommended by White and Gunstone (1992) to guide the design of the concept tools. This "Concept Tool" consisted o f the pallet o f nine buttons shown in Figure 2. The nine buttons on this pallet have the following functions:

1. concept - allows the user to type concept labels and to move these labels in two dimensional space;

2. link - allows the user to draw link arrows between concepts. Arrows indicate the direction of these links;

3. note - users can elaborate upon the concepts and links they create by attaching explanatory notes. Figure 2 displays two concepts labels that have notes attached to them. A bold border is used to indicate that a concept label has an attached note. To display a note the user clicks on the concept label. To hide a note, the user closes the window by clicking on the small box on the top left-hand side of the window. Similarly, notes can be attached to links as shown by the notes labelled NI orN2;

4. eraser - allows the user to correct mistakes; 5. help - provides access to a simple help screen; 6. pr int - allows the user to print out the concept map and the notes; 7. save - allows the user to save the map to a disc; 8. l oad - allows the user to load a map from a disc; 9. clear screen - allows the user to clear the whole screen.

Method

The methods described in this section were designed to provide valid data pertaining to the following research questions:

1. Was the task of concept map construction and revision easier with the HyperCardrM-based concept mapping tool than with pen and paper?

2. Does the concept mapping process serve as a tool to help learners organise their cognitive frameworks into more powerful integrated patterns?

3. Can concept mapping techniques be used to enhance preservice teacher thinking about effective teaching?

T h e S u b j e c t s

The seventy-one subjects were preservice teachers enrolled in their third year o f a Bachelor o f Education (Primary Teaching) Course at the University o f Wollongong. The mean age was 24.4 (SD 5.8), and the age range was 19 years to 49 years. While all subjects had prior instruction with the Apple Macintosh ru computers and with HyperCard TM presentations o f learning materials, it needs to be kept in mind that students who successfully complete an information technology subject are not always confident and competent with computers (Haywood & Norman, 1988).

P r o c e d u r e

Preservice teachers were give a period of direct instruction in a lecture theatre that contained computer projection facilities. The concept mapping tool was presented and the process of concept

238 FERRY

map construction modelled by the researcher. All tutorial sessions were conducted in a computing laboratory, and each time the researcher used computer projection facilities at the start of the session to revise procedures.

Preservice teachers were then given the choice of working alone or in pairs to construct their fwst concept map which was related to the topic of Astronomy. This topic was briefly outlined in a previous lecture and, as an aid to memory, they were provided with a brief list of key concepts. Completed maps were printed at the end of the tutorial session and collected for analysis. Finally, a debriefing session was held at the end of the tutorial session. This session lasted 15 minutes and consisted of an open-ended discussion about issues that emerged during the tutorial session. Dialogue fi-om these tutorial sessions was recorded on audio-tape.

The concept maps were collected and marked by the researcher. They were returned during the following lecture and ways of improving the maps discussed. Once again the computer projection facilities were used to model the process. During the follow up tutorial the preservice teachers revised their previous maps and once again printed them. Again these maps were collected and marked.

During the third and final formal tutorial session, preservice teachers worked alone to develop a final concept map. Four additional hours computing laboratory time were allocated so that they could complete an additional map that related to a topic of their choice. Therefore the amount of formal instruction received was six hours, plus an additional four hours of unsupervised computing laboratory time.

When the preservice teachers completed the final draft of their concept maps, the researcher interviewed twelve preservice teachers about their experience with the concept mapping process. Twenty four preservice teachers kept a reflective journal about their experiences with the process. Twelve of the reflective journals were written by the preservice teachers who were interviewed and the other twelve were written by volunteers drawn from the remainder of their cohort. Both groups were asked to include comments that they thought could help to improve the instructional process and the software. These interview transcripts and written responses were coded and analysed.

Analysis of the Concept Maps

Methods of analysis of concept maps have been discussed Novak and Gowin (1984), White and Gunstone (1992), Lloyd (1990), Harlen et al. (1990), and Jonassen and Reeves (1995). Jonassen and Reeves (1995, p. 28) suggest that researchers need to consider the following when assessing semantic or concept maps: the number of nodes (breadth of the net); the number of instances (extent of the net); the ratio of instances to concepts (intergratedness or embeddedness of the concepts); the centrality of each node; the number of links (parsimony or economy of connections); the consistency in the use of links; the number of "dead-end" nodes linked only to one concept; and the ratio of the number of links to the number of nodes.

The procedure adopted for marking concept maps is a modification of Novak and Gowin's (1984) method and includes some of the criteria suggested by the other researchers previously discussed. The following procedure was chosen because it could be consistently applied.

1. Each valid concept label scores 1 mark. 2. Each note that defines a concept scores 2 marks. A note that defines a concept unambiguously

describes its attributes. 3. Each valid single link scores I mark. A valid link is a line that shows that two concepts are related.

It can be uni-directional or bi-directional.

PROBING PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE 239

4. Each note that clearly describes or explains the link to which it is attached scores 2 marks. 5. A concept that has valid links between two or more concepts is called a node and each node scores

2 marks. In Figure 2 the concept "star" is a node. 6. Each linking concept (joins concepts located on separate branches of the map) scores 2 marks. In

Figure 2 the concept "stars" forms a link between concepts on the left hand side and the concept "globular cluster". In the concept map displayed in Figure 2 the concept "moon" does not link between separate branches and is not considered a linking concept.

How the Criteria were Applied

The example relates to the student concept map shown in Figure 2. The map in that figure displays 9 concepts (scores 9 marks), 6 concepts that are surrounded by dark borders have attached notes (scores 12 marks), 13 links (scores 13 marks), 7 nodes (scores 14 marks), 2 labelled links (scores 4 marks), 1 linking concept (scores 2 marks). The total score is thus 54 marks.

Two researchers both of whom held undergraduate science degrees independently scored the same random sample of twenty concept maps constructed by the preservice teachers who participated this study. Their scores agreed for 17 of the 20 maps. The difference between total scores for the other three maps was two marks on each occasion. In each case there was disagreement over the validity of only one of the nodes. One marker felt that a node was ambiguous and should receive zero marks, while the other felt that the node was valid. This discrepancy was resolved by agreeing to give a score of one mark only to any "ambiguous" nodes that were identified by either marker. Thus the marks ended up the same for both markers on each map evaluated. Another marker then marked the same twenty maps using the new criteria and his marking reached agreement with the other two markers for 18 of the 20 maps. Therefore, this procedure was considered reliable and could be applied consistently.

A Wilcoxon Signed-Ranks test was used (Howell, 1992, p. 616) to compare concept map scores for the fwst and last tutorial session. This test was chosen because the scores were ordinal and any observed differences in scores would not be directly related to the size of the change.

Results

The First Concept Maps

Approximately half(38) of the first concept maps constructed showed limited understanding o f the topic and poor construction. For example, forty-one maps contained concepts that were limited to those presented in lectures and only nine used notes to explain their links. However, all except one had some notes attached to the concepts and this seems to indicate that individual concepts may have been understood, but the links among concepts were not. Notes attached to the concepts were either descriptions or clef'tuitions. For example in the map displayed in Figure 2, the planet Jupiter was described as "...a large gas planet. It has many moons and a thin layer of rings... and a red spot...." Linking concepts were present in eleven maps, and the linking concept "stars" (displayed in Figure 2) shows that the student understood that stars formed part of the Milky Way and were also present in globular clusters.

During the debriefing sessions held after the tutorials the preservice teachers suggested three things that they could do to improve their concept maps: first, improve their content knowledge; second, practise constructing concept maps; and third, include more specific content matter knowledge and reorganise their concepts maps in integrated networks as they acknowledged that their maps were too broad and lacked specific detail. When they came to the second tutorial

240 FERRY

session most subjects brought a revised concept map (constructed on paper) and support materials such as books and summaries. It appears that the process may have activated secondary support strategies (Holley & Dansereau, 1984) as many made an effort to improve their subject matter knowledge and concept map construction skills during the intervening week.

Improvement in the Concept Maps

The main improvements observed were: the use of more specific concepts; greater use of link notes to explain clearly links between pairs of concepts; and greater numbers of linking concepts. Analysis o f interview transcripts and written responses in reflective journals indicated that the preservice teachers considered the instructor demonstration with the computer projection facilities and their independent practice to be an effective instructional process.

The following interview transcript is from an interview with Barbara (aged in her late 40s). She talks about her attempts to create a concept map about an astronomy topic.

Now through the actual process of seeing it visually in front of me using the concept map tool, I thought that there is no way that I could cover this huge topic area. It was actually visually seeing the concepts arranged on the screen and then re-arranging them several times that I realised that I needed a much narrower focus. I then revised my map. Actually I revised it about four times because I kept on wanting to provide too much information and it didn't link together. I think that this is a fault with teachers. We want to skim througla too much information and do not cover enough in depth. Now I've narrowed it down to a study of our Solar System .... This would have been a fairly painful process ifI had to keep re-drawing and rubbing out with pen and paper, but I found the tool was very good for this because I could visually see it and as soon as I put it there in front of me I could immediately see that now there was too much there and change it .... I am a visual person and need to be able see how things link together.

Her interview transcript indicates that the computer-based concept map tool provided a visual display that could be easily altered. Like all of the others interviewed, she revised and refined her concept map several times before she became satisfied with the final product which was a more organised cognitive framework that contained more powerful integrated patterns. Because the revision process was very easy to perform, the revision process was not as "painful" as it would have been with pen and paper. The ability to create, alter and manipulate concepts rapidly was mentioned by all persons interviewed and in sixteen journal entries.

Further investigation is needed in order to understand fully why the preservice teachers went to considerable lengths to improve their concept maps. For example, it was evident from the books and summary diagrams brought to the tutorials that they were trying to fred out more about the topics and were thinking about their concept maps during non-tutorial times. Indeed the resource librarian confirmed that the science section of the resource library was frequently used in the weeks between tutorials by these students.

The result of the Wilcoxon Signed-Ranks Test on the concept map scores (initial median 59, final median 98) was statistically significant (p=.0001). These improvements were expected and may be attributed to a number of factors including: content knowledge; content area selected; practice; peer help; tutorials and lectures. While the effect of the computer-based tool cannot be separated from other variables, the following interview transcript with Leanne (aged in her mid 30s) illustrates the benefits of using the concept mapping tool with preservice teachers as well as ways that they might use it in the classroom.

PROBING PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE 241

I found the tool very simple to use and I'm not a computer whiz. But I found it very user friendly and didn't have any problems .... I just walked in with a prepared idea that I would make my final map about communication. When I look back at it (points to her concept map) I realise that at the start it was me organising my thoughts about the topic of communication rather than trying to do something that was going to be the final product at this stage. I used the computer as a toot in that way and it was me organising my ideas and experimenting with links and concepts. I like to put all of the concepts on the screen first...like I sort of knew when they would go and some of them flowed in a sort of linear progression. Later I went back and tidied it up.

Thus Leanne viewed the concept mapping tool as a cognitive tool and later in the interview she compares the computer tool to pen and paper and says:

I actually used pen and paper to try and prepare to come into the computer lab, but it was no use because I decided to re-design my concept map as soon as I started. The whole layout was different and the names changed. I f I had used paper I would have to completely re-draw it. Also to have notes attached to concepts I found that I had to have a piece of paper attached to this concept and another to another concept and others attached to the links. Whereas if you're actually doing it as you are at the computer you haven't got all of these bits and pieces of paper all over the place....The tool keeps it nice and neat and you know where the notes are and can see them at anytime when you want to check back.

She saw the tool as more efficient than pen and paper and the following comments indicates that she was also thinking about how she would use the tool with children:

I think that I would use this with children because it's user friendly and I 'm sure that the children could manipulate a mouse far better than I can. There is not a lot of fine motor skills needed and they would be physically capable of doing this. It gives them a way of recording their thoughts and if they are anything like me I think of this and then of something else and it's important to capture those thoughts before you forget them and lose them. This is a good way of introducing a topic and getting the children's initial ideas and responses. Maybe it will show where their interests lie, or where there's holes in their knowledge, where there's misconceptions, particular with science concepts. They may (have) some really way off ideas particularly about how things fit together. You can identify those so that you can address them in your teaching.

Leanne's comments suggest that she realises that she can see the value o f applying concept mapping to the classroom. In particular she sees it as a tool to display and record children's thoughts which can be used to guide instruction. Her comments support the claims o f Beyerbach and Smith (1990), and Lederman and Latz (1995) who suggest that concept mapping techniques could enhance preservice teacher thinking about effective teaching.

Use of the Software

During the initial tutorials three independent observers (the director o f the computing laboratory, a Phi) student, and an instructor) each spent thirty minutes observing the preservice teachers as they constructed their initial maps. They reported that few subjects met with any problems when they used the software. Indeed they felt that the concept map tool quickly became transparent and this enabled users to focus on the cognitive processes involved in constructing the concept map.

Initially, most preservice teachers worked in pairs and this supports research by Ramsden (1992) which showed that supportive pairs were beneficial to adult learning. However, the few

242 FERRY

experienced computer users in the group preferred to work alone, and as one graduate in computer programming said: ".... I find that I can't play around with the program if I work with a partner."

Interview transcripts from the less experienced computer users revealed that they found working with a peer allowed them to "bounce" ideas off each other, but by the third tutorial session they were ready to work alone on their own map. The following quote is f rom Michael (aged in his late 20s). He describes his experience with his partner Julie (age 21).

To be frank I hate computers and did not want to work alone in case I got stuck. Luckily I could work with Julie who always has good ideas and she makes me think more about my ideas .... We wanted to make a good concept map because we will use it in our assignment later in the year .... I think that we can also use the same concept map idea in Social Studies.

It appears that Michael was looking for support when he began to use the computer and sought out a previous parmer. Also Michael realised that working with Julie stimulated him to think about his ideas. Furthermore, they realised that concept mapping could be applied to other subjects.

Comments About the Software

The following comment comes from Barbara. She is describing her first attempt with the concept mapping tool.

In the beginning I really didn't know what I was doing, but then it was self-explanatory once you got involved with it. It was a matter of clicking on the concept button and making the concept. Then it (was) just a matter of making my concepts and arranging them on the screen so they looked right. Then I just used the other buttons to make the links and the notes.

Whilst she was unsure at the start, Barbara soon realised that the application was easy to use and that she was capable o f using it.

One strength o f HyperCard-based software is that it continually updates the currently displayed screen. Thus the concept map is continually updated as it is constructed, and if user actions or other events (such as a network malfunction) accidentally causes a computer to "crash," the current concept map is saved and re-displayed when the application is restarted. It was found that a demonstration o f this feature tended to allay fears about accidental data losses.

The comments that follow relate to specific details o f the software and are from the twenty four journal responses collected:

add a printed sheet to explain how to use the program. This would allow us experienced computer users to work on our own (mentioned in 5 of the 24 written responses)

make the link arrows moveable so that I can move the concepts and the arrows together (mentioned in 4 of the 24 written responses)

the note tools are very helpful and are one of the strengths (mentioned in 20 of the 24 written responses).

While the note tools were seen as a strong feature o f the concept mapping tool, future versions o f the program will also take into account the improvements suggested.

PROBING PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE 243

Comments About the Concept Mapping Process

The following comment by Ruth (age 22) probably sums up many of the comments made by the preservice teachers about the instructional process.

We were shown how to use and program and had practice so I didn't find it too hard, but when I began my second map and I looked back at the notes that I made for the first one... They were not so good because I wasn't well prepared. You need to know the topic well and have heaps of books to help you .... Look at my second map (points to her new map) you can see it's much better.

While the software may make the physical task of construction easier, and provide an effective visual display, the learner still has to acquire and organise the knowledge. Furthermore, it appears that initially, many preservice teachers did not realise that their understanding of subject matter knowledge was inadequate until they began to create concept maps. Often they had superficial knowledge of a few key concepts, but had little or no in-depth understanding of related concepts and how they linked together. It is likely that this would have impacted upon their ability to instruct young children effectively.

Conclusion

During this study, the HyperCard-based concept mapping tool made it easy for most preservice teachers to construct and revise a concept map of their current subject matter knowledge. While the physical part of the processes may be easier than pen and paper, learners still have to apply their current knowledge when they structure their map. It was found that the early attempts at creating concepts maps were generally poor and this finding supports the research of White and Gunstone (1992). However the preservice teachers persisted and revised their maps many times. They reported that the revision process was less irksome than with pen and paper and this may be a reason why they persisted with their maps. Data from interview transcripts suggest that software of this design has applications in primary and secondary schools, and later this year the software will be trialed in primary and secondary schools.

Interview transcripts also suggest that the concept mapping tool helped learners organise their cognitive frameworks into more powerful integrated patterns and these findings support the research of Jegede, Alaiyemola and Okebukola (1990). Also, data from the interview transcripts support the research by Beyerbach and Smith (1990) and the findings of Lederman and Latz (1995) and suggest that concept mapping techniques may be used as a tool to enhance preservice teacher thinking about effective teaching.

The computer generated display of linked concepts and the underlying notes may make it easier for learners to identify parts of their map that need revision, or identify deficiencies in their subject matter knowledge. When they were away from the computing laboratory, many students made additional efforts to revise their maps and to improve their subject matter knowledge. In a future study the researcher will attempt to identify the factors that motivated the preservice teachers to acquire more subject matter knowledge.

The evidence from this study suggests that the concept mapping tool was easy to use, and quickly became transparent to the learner. This allowed the learner to focus on the cognitive processes involved in the construction of his or her concept map. However, the use of the concept mapping tool requires careful instruction as the construction of concept maps is a complex skill (Novak & Gowin, 1984; White & Gunstone, 1992). The preservice teachers involved in this study

244 FERRY

received careful instruction that modelled the process before they used the computer application. This is an important point as too often it is assumed that just providing the hardware and the software is enough.

While this innovation challenges science educators to experiment with similar tools, it also challenges instructional designers to consider incorporating such metacognitive tools in quality computer-based instructional materials.

Correspondence: Brian Ferry, Faculty of Education, University of Wollongong, Northfields Avenuce, Wollongong, NSW, 2522, Australia. Internet email: b.ferry@uow.edu.au

References

Armbruster, B. B. (1979). An investigation of the effectiveness of "mapping text" as a studying strategy for middle school students. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois, Springfield, Illinois.

Ausubel, D. P. (1968). Educationalpsychology: A cognitive view. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

Beyerbach, B. A., & Smith, J. M. (1990). Using a computerized concept mapping program to assess preservice teachers' thinking about effective teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 2 7(10), 961-971.

Clarke, J. H. (1991). Using visual organizers to focus on thinking. Journal of Reading, 34(7), 526- 534.

Fisher, K. M., Faletti, J., Patterson, H., Thornton, R., Lipson, J., & Spring, C. (1990). Computer- based concept mapping-SemNet software: A tool for describing knowledge networks. Journal of College Science and Technology, 19, 347-352.

Goetz, E. T, & Annbruster, B. B. (1980). Psychological correlates of text structure. In R. J. Spiro, B. C. Bruce, & W. F. Brewer (Eds.), Theoretical issues in reading comprehension: Perspectives from cognitive psychology, linguistics, artificial intelligence, and education. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Erlbaum.

Harlen, W. (1992). The teaching of science; Studies in primary science. London: David Fulton. Harlen, W., Macro, C., Schilling, M., Malveru, D., & Reed, K. (1990). Progress in primary

science. London: Routledge. Haywood, J., & Norman, P. (1988). Problems of educational innovation: The primary teacher's

response to the microcomputer. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 4(1), 34-43. Heirnlich, J. E., & Pittelman, S. D. (1986). Semantic mapping: Classroom applications. Newark,

Delaware: International Reading Association. Holley, C. D., & Dansereau, D. F. (1984). Spatial learning strategies: Techniques, applications,

and related issues. Sydney: Academic Press. Howell, D. C., (1992). Statistical methods in psychology (3rd ed.). Belmont, CA: Duxbury Press. Jegede, O. J., Alaiyemola, F. F., & Okebukola, P. A. O. (1990). The effect of concept mapping

on students' anxiety and achievement in biology. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(10), 950-960.

PROBING PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE 245

Jonassen, D. H. (1991). What are cognitive tools? In M. Kommers, D. H./onassen, & J. T. Mayes, (Eds.), Cognitive tools for learning computers and system sciences (Vol. 81). Berlin: Springer- Verland in cooperation with NATO.

Jonassen, D. H., & Reeves, T. C. (1995). Learning with technology: Using computers as cognitive tools. New York: Scholastic Press in collaboration with the Association for Educational Communications and Technology.

Langfield-Smith, K. (1992). Exploring the need for a shared cognitive map. Journal of Management Studies, 29(3), 349-369.

Lederman, N. G., & Latz, M. S. (1995). Knowledge structures in the preservice teacher: Sources, development, interactions, and relationships to teaching. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 6(1 ), 1-19.

Lloyd, C. V. (1990). The elaboration of concepts in three biology textbooks: Facilitating student learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 2 7(10), 1019-1032.

Margulies, N. (1991). Mapping inner space: Learning and teaching mind mapping. Tuscon, AZ: Zephyr Press.

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

Ramsden, P. (1992). Learning to teach in higher education. London: koutledge. Tobin, K., Tippins, D. J., & Gallard, A. J. (1994). Research on instructional strategies for teaching

science. In D. Gabel (Ed.), Handbook of research on science teaching and learning. New York, NY: Macmillan.

Wandersee, J. H. (1990). Concept mapping and the cartography of cognition. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(10), 923-936.

West, L. H., & Pines, A. L. (1985). Cognitive structure and conceptual change. Sydney: Academic Press.

White, R., & Gunstone, R. (1992). Probing understanding. London: The Falmer Press.