Survey of learners' knowledge structures: Rationales, methods and instruments

Proceedings of the ASIST Annual Meeting

Volumn 41, Issue , 2004, Pages 218-228

  Wang, Peiling ^a   Bales, Stephen ^a   Rieger, Jason ^a   Zhang, Yan ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 27744509061     PISSN: 15508390     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/meet.1450410126     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (33)

1. Ayersman, DJ. (1995). Effects of knowledge representation format and hypermedia instruction on metacognitive accuracy. Computers in Human Behavior, 11 (3-4), 533-555.
2. Ausubel, D. P. (1963). The psychology of meaningful verbal learning. NY: Grune and Stratton.
3. Ausubel, D.P., Novak, J.D., & Hanesian, H. (1978). Educational psychology: A cognitive view. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
4. Beatty, I.D., & Gerace, W.J. (2002). Probing physics student's conceptual knowledge structures through term association. American Journal of Physics, 70(7), 750-758.
5. Best, J. B., (1995). Cognitive Psychology (4th. ed.). St. Paul: West Publishing Co.
6. Bilal, D., & Wang, P. (under review). A study of children's conceptual structures of science categories and the design of web directories, [submitted for publication on May 5, 2004]
7. Czuchry, M., & Dansereau, D.F. (1998). The generation and recall of personally relevant information. Journal of Experimental Education, 66(4), 293-315.
8. Goldsmith, T.E. & Johnson, P.J. (1990). A structural assessment of classroom learning. In W. Schvaneveldt, (Ed.), Pathfinder associative networks: Studies in knowledge organization (pp. 241-254). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
9. Goldsmith, T.E., Johnson, P.J., & Acton, W.H. (1991). Assessing structural knowledge. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83 (1), 88-96.
10. Ingwersen, P (1992). Information Retrieval Interaction. London: Taylor Graham.
11. Jegede, O.J., Alaiyemola, F.F., & Okebukola, P.A.O. (1990). The effects of concept mapping on student's anxiety and achievement in biology. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(10), 951-960.
12. Jonassen, D.H., & Grabowski, B.L. (1993). Handbook of Individual Differences: Learning and Instruction. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Earbaum Associates.
13. Jonassen, D. (2000). Knowledge is complex: Accommodating human ways of knowing. In D. Soergel, P. Srinivasan, & B. Kwasnik (Eds.), Proceedings of the 11th ASIS&T SIG/CR Classification Research Workshop (pp. 1-7), Silver Spring, Maryland: American Society for Information Science.
14. Lakoff, G. (1987). Woemn, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal about the Mind. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
15. th ASIS SIG/IR Classification Research Workshop, October (pp. 147-164). Columbus, OH.
16. Lykke Neilsen, M. (2002). The word association method: A gateway to work-task based retrieval. Dissertation. Åbo, FI: Åbo Akademi University Press.
17. Markow, P.G., & Lonning, R.A. (1998). Usefulness of concept maps in college chemistry laboratories: Students' perceptions and effects on achievement. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(9), 1015-1029.
18. Mayer, R.E. (1989). Models for Understanding. Review of Educational Research, 59(1), 43-64.
19. Moody, J.W., Will, R.P., & Blanton, J.E. (1996). Enhancing knowledge elicitation using cognitive interview. Expert Systems With Applications, 10(1), 127-133.
20. Novak, J.D. (1998). Learning, creating, and using knowledge. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
21. Novak, J.D. (1990). Concept maps and Vee diagrams: Two metacognitive tools for science and mathematics education. Instructional Science, 19, 29-52.
22. Novak, J.D., & Gowin, D.D. (1984). Learning how to learn. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
23. Reed, W.M, & Oughton, J.M. (1998). The effects of hypermedia knowledge and learning style on the construction of group concept maps. Computers in Human Behavior, 14(1), 1-22.
24. Ruiz-Primo, M.A., Schultz, S.E., Li, M., & Shavelson, R.J. (2001). Comparison of the reliability and validity of scores from two concept-mapping techniques. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(2), 260-278.
25. Ruiz-Primo, M.A., & Shavelson, R.J. (1996). Problems and issues in the use of concept maps in science assessment. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(6), 569-600.
26. Ruiz-Primo, M.A., Shavelson, R.J., Li, M. & Schultz, S.E. (2001). On the validity of cognitive interpretations of scores from alternative concept-mapping techniques. Educational Assessment, 7(2), 99-141.
27. Rumelhart, D.E., & Norman, D.A. (1985). Representation of knowledge. In A.M. Aitkenhead, & J.M. Slack (Eds.), Issues in cognitive modeling (pp. 15-62), Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
28. Schvaneveldt, R.W., Dearholt, D.W., & Durso, F.T. (1988). Graph theoretic foundations of pathfinder networks. Computers and mathematics with applications, 15(4), 337-345.
29. Todd, R. & Kirk, J. (1995). Concept mapping in information science. Education for Information, 13(4), 333-47.
30. Tsai, C,-C, & Huang, C,-C. (2002). Exploring students' cognitive structures in learning science: A review of relative methods. Journal of Biological Education, 36(4), 163-170.
31. Wandersee, J.H. (1990). Concept mapping and the cartography of cognition. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(10), 923-36.
32. Wang, P. (1999). An empirical study of knowledge structures of research topics. In L. Woods (Ed.), Proceedings of the 62nd ASIS annual meeting (pp. 557-586), Medford, NJ: Information Today.
33. Wang, P. (2000). Comparing Cognitive Maps Using Graph Algorithms. In D. Soergel, P. Srinivasan, & B. Kwasnik (Eds.), Proceedings of the 11th ASIS&T SIG/CR Classification Research Workshop (pp. 157-159), Silver Spring, Maryland: American Society for Information Science.