Scoring Concept Maps: An Expert Map-Based Scheme Weighted for Relationships

School Science and Mathematics

Volumn 102, Issue 1, 2002, Pages 33-44

  Rye, James A ^a   Rubba, Peter A ^b  

^a WEST VIRGINIA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 4944262273     PISSN: 00366803     EISSN: 19498594     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1949-8594.2002.tb18194.x     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. Acton, W., Johnson, P., & Goldsmith, T. (1994). Structural knowledge assessment: Comparison of referent structures. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86, 303–311.
2. Anderson, T., & Huang, S. (1989). On using concept maps to assess the comprehension effects of reading expository text. (Technical Report No. 483). Urbana-Champaign : Center for the Studying of Reading, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 310 368).
3. Arnaudin, M., Mintzes, J., Dunn, C., & Shafer, T. (1984). Concept mapping in college science teaching. Journal of College Science Teaching, 14, 117–121.
4. Borg, W., & Gall, M. (1971). Educational research methods. New York : David McKay Company, Inc.
5. CTB McGraw-Hill. (1986). CAT: California achievement test forms E & F: Norms book, Dec.-Feb.C, Montery, CA : CTB McGraw-Hill.
6. Edmondson, K. (2000). Assessing science understanding through concept maps. In J. Mintzes, J. Wandersee, & J. Novak (Eds.), Assessing science understanding (pp. 15–40). San Diego, CA : Academic Press.
7. Gall, M., Borg, W., & Gall, J. (1996). Educational research (6th ed.). White Plains, NY : Longman Publishers.
8. Goldsmith, T., & Davenport, D. (1990). Assessing structural similarity of graphs. In R. Schvaneveldt (Ed.), Pathfinder associative networks (pp. 31–52). Norwood, NJ : ABLEX Publishing Corporation.
9. Goldsmith, T., Johnson, P., & Acton, W. (1991). Assessing structural knowledge. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 88–96.
10. Good, R., Novak, J., & Wandersee, J. (Eds.) (1990). Special issue: Perspectives on concept mapping. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(10).
11. Gordon, S., Schmierer, K., & Gill, R. (1993). Conceptual graph analysis: Knowledge acquisition for instructional system design. Human Factors, 35, 459–481.
12. Heinze-Fry, J. A. (1987). Evaluation of concept mapping as a tool for meaningful education of college biology students. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Cornell University, Ithaca, NY.
13. Horton, P. B., McConney, A., Gallo, M., Woods, A., Senn, G., & Hamelin, D. (1993). An investigation of the effectiveness of concept mapping as an instructional tool. Science Education, 77, 95–111.
14. Inman-Anderson, L., & Ditson, L. (1999). Computer-based concept mapping: A tool for negotiating meaning. Learning and Leading With Technology, 26, 6–13.
15. Jonassen, D. (1993). Changes in knowledge structures from building semantic net versus production rule representations of subject content. Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 20, 99–106.
16. Jonassen, D. (2000). Computers as mindtools for schools. Englewood Cliffs, NJ : Prentice-Hall.
17. Judd, C. M., & McClellan, G. H. (1989). Data analysis: A models approach. Florida : Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
18. Kinchin, I., Hay, D., & Adams, A. (2000). How a qualitative approach to concept map analysis can be used to aid learning by illustrating patterns of conceptual development. Educational Research, 42, 43–57.
19. Lomask, M., Baron, J. B., Greig, J., Harrison, C. (1992, March). ConnMap: Connecticut's use of concept mapping to assess the structure of students' knowledge of science. Symposium presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Cambridge, MA.
20. Luft, J. (1998). Challenging myths. The Science Teacher, 66(4), 40–43.
21. Malone, J., & Dekkers, J. (1984). The concept map as an aid to instruction in science and mathematics. School Science and Mathematics, 84, 220–231.
22. 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.
23. McMillan, J. (1992). Educational research. New York : Harper-Collins Publishers.
24. Moore, G. (1983). Developing and evaluating educational research. Boston : Little, Brown, and Company.
25. National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC : National Academy of Sciences.
26. Novak, J. (1992). A view on the current status of Ausubel's assimilation theory of learning. A paper presented at the meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.
27. Novak, J., & Gowin, D. (1984). Learning how to learn. New York : Cambridge University Press.
28. Novak, J., & Musonda, D. (1991). A twelve-year longitudinal study of science concept learning. American Educational Research Journal, 28, 117–153.
29. Patton, M. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. London : Sage Publications.
30. Rice, D., Ryan, J., & Samson, S. (1998). Using concept maps to assess student learning in the science classroom: Must different methods compete? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35, 1103–1127.
31. Roth, W. M., (1994). Science discourse through collaborative concept mapping: New perspectives for the teacher. International Journal of Science Education, 16, 437–455.
32. Rubba, P., Wiesenmayer, R., Rye, J., & Ditty, T. (1996). The leadership institute in STS Education: A collaborative teacher enhancement, curriculum development and research project of Penn State University and West Virginia University with rural middle/junior high school science teachers. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 7, 1–10.
33. Rubba, R., Wiesenmayer, R., Rye, J., McClaren, M., Sillman, K., Yorks, K., Yukish, D., Ditty, T., Morphew, V., Bradford, C. Dorough, D., & Arabas, K. (Eds). (1995). Global atmospheric change: The enhanced greenhouse effect, ozone layer depletion, and ground level ozone pollution. A Science-Technology-Society Issue Investigation and Action Unit for the middle grades [Online]. University Park, PA : The Pennsylvania State University. Available: http://www.ed.psu.edu/CI/papers/sts/gac-main.html.
34. Ruiz-Primo, M., & Shavelson, R. (2000). Psychometrics of assessing student understanding. In J. Mintzes, J. Wandersee, & J. Novak, (Eds). Assessing science understanding (pp. 303–341). San Diego, CA : Academic Press.
35. Ruiz-Primo, M., Schultz, S., Li, M., & Shavelson, R. (2001). Comparison of the reliability and validity of scores from two concept-mapping techniques. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 260–278.
36. Ruiz-Primo, M., & Shavelson, R. (1996). Problems and issues in the use of concept maps in science assessment. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33, 569–600.
37. Rye, J. (1995). An investigation of the concept map as an interview tool to facilitate externalization of conceptual understandings associated with global atmospheric change by eighth grade physical science students. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA.
38. Rye, J. (1998). Understanding the role of chlorofluorocarbons in global atmospheric change. Journal of Geoscience Education, 46, 488–493.
39. Rye, J., & Rubba, P. (1998). An exploration of the concept map as an interview tool to facilitate the externalization of students' understandings about global atmospheric change. The Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35, 521–546.
40. Rye, J., & Rubba, P. (2000). Students' understandings of global warming: Implications for STS education beyond 2000. In D. Kumar & K. Chubin (Eds.), Science, technology, & society: A sourcebook on research and practice. New York : Kluwer Publishers.
41. Schvaneveldt, R. (Ed.). (1990). Pathfinder associative networks. Norwood, NJ : ABLEX Publishing Corporation.
42. Shavelson, R., Lang, H., & Lewin, B. (1993). On concept maps as potential “authentic assessments” in science. Los Angeles, CA : National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 367 691).
43. Shymansky, J. A., Woodworth, G. Norman, O. Dunkhase, J. Matthews, C. & Liu, C. (1993). A study of changes in middle school teachers' understanding of selected ideas in science as a function of an in-service program focusing on student preconceptions. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30, 737–755.
44. Stensvold, M., & Wilson, J. (1990). The interaction of verbal ability with concept mapping in learning from a chemistry laboratory activity. Science Education, 74, 473–480.
45. Wallace, J., & Mintzes, J. (1990). The concept map as a research tool: Exploring conceptual change in biology. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27, 1033–1052.
46. Wandersee, J., Mintzes, J., & Novak, J. (1994). Research on alternative conceptions in science. In D. Gabel (Ed.), Handbook of research on science teaching and learning (pp. 177–210). New York : MacMillan Publishing Company.
47. White, R.T. (1985). Interview protocols and dimensions of cognitive structure. In L.H. West & A.L. Pines (Eds.), Cognitive structure and conceptual change (pp. 51–58). Orlando, FL : Academic Press, Inc.
48. White, R., & Gunstone, R. (1992). Probing understanding. New York : The Falmer Press.
49. Xiufeng, L., & Hinchey, M. (1996). The internal consistency of a concept mapping scoring scheme and its effect on prediction validity. International Journal of Science Education, 18, 921–937.