A technique for automatically scoring open-ended concept maps

Educational Technology Research and Development

Volumn 54, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 65-82

  Taricani, Ellen M ^a   Clariana, Roy B ^a  

^a PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Computer based assessment; Pathfinder networks; Technology tools

Indexed keywords

EID: 33645915136     PISSN: 10421629     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11423-006-6497-z     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Ausubel, D. P. (1968). Educational psychology: a cognitive view. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
2. Buzydlowski, J. W. (2002). A comparison of self-organizing maps and Pathfinder networks for the mapping of co-cited authors. Doctoral dissertation completed at Drexel University. Retrieved October 3,2004, from http://faculty.cis.drexel.edu/jbuzydlo/papers/thesis.pdf.
3. Caňas, A. J., Coffey, J. W., Carnot, M. J., Feltovich, P., Hoffman, R. R., Feltovich, J., & Novak, J. D. (2003). A summary of literature pertaining to the use of concept mapping techniques and technologies for education and performance support. A report for The Chief of Naval Education and Training at Pensacola, Florida. Retrieved October 3, 2004, from http://www.ihmc.us/users/aCaňas/Publications/ConceptMapLitReview/IHMC/ LiterarureReviewonConceptMapping.pdf.
4. Clariana, R. B. (2002). ALA-Mapper, version 1.0. Retrieved October 3, 2002, from http://www.personal.psu.edu/rbc4/ala.htm.
5. Clariana, R. B. (2003). Latent semantic analysis writing prompt, used with the permission of Knowledge Analysis Technologies, LLC. Retrieved October 30, 2003 from http://www.personal.psu.edu/rbc4/frame.htm.
6. Clariana, R. B., Koul, R., & Salehi, R. (in press). The criterion related validity of a computer-based approach for scoring concept maps. International Journal of Instructional Media, 33(3), in press.
7. Clariana, R. B., & Poindexter, M. T. (2004). The influence of relational and proposition-specific processing on structural knowledge. Presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, April 12-16, San Diego, CA. Retrieved April 15, 2004 from http://www.personal.psu.edu/rbc4/aera_2004.doc.
8. Crocker, L. A., & Algina, J. (1986). Introduction to classical and modern test theory. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
9. Dearholt, D. W. & Schvaneveldt, R. W. (1990). Properties of Pathfinder Networks. In Schvaneveldt (Ed.), Pathfinder associative networks: studies in knowledge organization (pp. 1-30). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
10. Deese, J. (1965). The structure of associations in language and thought. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins Press.
11. Durso, F. T., & Coggins, K. A. (1990). Graphs in the social and psychological sciences: empirical contributions of Pathfinder. In Schvaneveldt (Ed.), Pathfinder associative networks: Studies in knowledge organization (pp. 31-51). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
12. Dwyer, F. M. (1972). A guide for improving visualized instruction. State College, PA: Learning Services.
13. Elman, J. L. (in press). An alternative view of the mental lexicon. Trends in Cognitive Science, in press. Retrieved December 10, 2004 from http://www.crl.ucsd.edu/-elman / Papers / elman_tics_opinion_2004.pdf.
14. Frase, L. T. (1969). Structural analysis of the knowledge that results from thinking about text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 60(6, Part 2), 1-16.
15. Goldsmith, T. E., & Davenport, D. M. (1990). Assessing structural similarity of graphs. In Schvaneveldt (Ed.), Pathfinder associative networks: studies in knowledge organization (pp. 75-87). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
16. Harper, M. E., Hoeft, R. M., Evans, A. W., & Jentsch, F. G. (2004). Scoring concepts maps: Can a practical method of scoring concept maps be used to assess trainee's knowledge structures? Paper presented at the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 48th Annual Meeting.
17. Herl, H. E., O'Neil, H. F. Jr., Chunga, G. K. W. K., & Schacter, J. (1999). Reliability and validity of a computer-based knowledge mapping system to measure content understanding. Computers in Human Behavior, 15, 315-333.
18. Humphreys, M. S., Bain, J. D., & Pike, R. (1989). Different ways to cue a coherent memory system: A theory for episodic, semantic and procedural tasks. Psychological Review, 96, 208-233.
19. Jonassen, D. H. (1987). Assessing cognitive structure: verifying a method using pattern notes. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 20(3), 1-13.
20. Jonassen, D. H., Beissner, K., & Yacci, M. (1993). Structural knowledge: techniques for representing, conveying, and acquiring structural knowledge. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
21. Kinchin, I. M. (2000). Using concept maps to reveal understanding: A two-tier analysis. School Science Review, 81, 41-46.
22. KNOT. (1998). Knowledge Network and Orientation Tool for the Personal Computer, version 4.3. Retrieved October 3, 2003 from http://interlinkinc.net/.
23. Lambiotte, J., & Dansereau, D. (1992). Effects of knowledge maps and prior knowledge on recall of science lecture content. Journal of Experimental Education, 60, 189-201.
24. Lee, Y., & Nelson, D. (2005). Viewing or visualizing - which concept map strategy works best on problem solving performance? British Journal of Educational Technology, 36(2), 193-203.
25. Luckie, D. (2001). C-TOOLS: Concept-Connector Tools for online learning in science. A National Science Foundation grant. Retrieved October 3, 2003 from http://www.msu.edu/luckie/CTOOLS.pdf.
26. McClure, J., Sonak, B., & Suen, H. (1999). Concept map assessment of classroom learning: reliability, validity, and logistical practicality. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36, 475-492.
27. McClelland, J. L., McNaughton, B. L., & O'Reilly, R. C. (1995). Why there are complementary learning systems in the hippocampus and neocortex: insights from the successes and failures of connectionist models. Psychological Review, 102, 419-457.
28. Novak, J. D., & Gowin, D. B. (1984). Learning how to learn. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
29. Pike, R. (1984). A comparison of convolution and matrix distributed memory systems. Psychological Review, 92, 281-294.
30. Robinson, D. H., Corliss, S. B., Bush, A. M., Bera, S. J., & Tomberlin, T. (2003). Optimal presentation of graphic organizers and text: A case for large bites? Educational Technology Research and Development, 51(4), 25-41.
31. 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, 569-600.
32. Ruiz-Primo, M. A., Schultz, S., Li, M., & Shavelson, R. J. (1999). On the cognitive validity of interpretations of scores from alternative concept mapping techniques. (CSE Tech. Rep. No. 503). Los Angeles: University of California, National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST).
33. Rye, J. A., & Rubba, P. A. (2002). Scoring concept maps: an expert map-based scheme weighted for relationships. School Science and Mathematics, 102, 33-44.
34. Safayeni, F., Derbentseva, N., & Caňas, A. J. (2003). Concept maps: a theoretical note on concepts and the need for cyclic concept maps. Retrieved October 3, 2004 from http://cmap.ihmc.us/Publications/ResearchPapers/ Cyclic%20Concept%20Maps.pdf.
35. Schau, C., Mattern, N., Zeilik, M., & Teague, K. W. (1999). Select-and-fill-in concept map scores as a measure of students' connected understanding of introductory astronomy. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association (Montreal, Canada, April). Available from ERIC ED434909.
36. Shavelson, R. J., Lang, H., & Lewin, B. (1994). On concept maps as potential authentic assessment is science. (CSE Tech. Rep. No. 388). Los Angeles: University of California, National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST).
37. Schvaneveldt, R. W. (1990). Pathfinder associative networks: Studies in knowledge organization. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
38. Schvaneveldt, R. W., Dearholt, D. W., & Durso, F. T. (1988). Graph theoretic foundations of Pathfinder networks. Computers and Mathematics with Applications, 15, 337-345.
39. Tan, S. C. (2000). The effects of incorporating concept mapping into computer assisted instruction. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 23, 113-131.
40. Taricani, E. M. (2002). Effects of the level of generativity in concept mapping with knowledge of correct response feedback on learning. Dissertation Abstracts International, ISBN # 0-493-67101-3.
41. Yin, Y., Vanides, J., Ruiz-Primo, M. A., Ayala, C. C., & Shavelson, R. J. (2004). A comparison of two construct-a-concept-map science assessments: created linking phrases and selected linking phrases. (CSE Tech. Rep. No. 624). Los Angeles: University of California, National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST).