Does constructivist approach applicable through concept maps to achieve meaningful learning in Science?

A concept map is a graphic organizer, which uses schematic representation, hierarchically to organise a set of concepts, connected by means of words in order to build meaningful statements. It shows meaningful relationship between concepts in the shape of propositions, and it reveals each student’s comprehension and knowledge structure (Novak and Gowin, 1999). Novak and Gowin (1999, p. 1) tells us “concept mapping is a way to help students and educators to see the meanings of learning materials.” It reveals the way in which we could assimilate the concept structure with the source of knowledge, on which the map prepares. When it is made by a working group and being shared by all students, it gives colourful pleasure oftheir reflexive thought (Novak and Gowin, 1999) and it can become an excellent process of building knowledge in a social environment that is cooperative and constructivist. To put it briefly, concept maps are excellent tools for a cooperative activity that will lead to a very meaningful learning (Novak, 2002). Out of different types of concept maps, spider concept map may be organized by placing the central concept in the centre of the map and outwardly radiating sub concepts linked to it and students may easily understand the cause/effect relationships of science by linking, interlinking, sub concepts and examples with the super concept. Their cognitive structure increases radially by the collaboration of new and old knowledge (Beissner, Jonassen & Grabowski, 1994). Spider concept map is a multi flow map, in which multiple outcomes found by the multiple inputs of concepts, sub concepts (Merrill &Tennyson, 1997). In this map, the complex cause and effect relationships can be expressed by the central event with sub concepts depicted or both sides’ radials help students to branch their knowledge structure in a meaningful way (Kolloffel & Tessa, 2011). Similarly, the hierarchy concepts may represent the information in the descending order of importance. The most important information is placed on the top and illustrates the downwards classification of the concepts. The super concepts should be placed in the top and the sub concepts are downwardly depicted to express the total concept in a true manner (Hinze- Fry & Novak, 1990).

Collaborative and Individual Modes of Concept Mapping

Okebukola & Ogunniyi (1984) studied the learning mode (e.g. cooperative or individualistic) under concept mapping strategy. The objective of the study was to know the student’s achievement after concept mapping strategy. The cooperative learning involved the students working in small heterogeneous ability groups while the individualistic mode involves students working alone on an assigned task. They found cooperative mode of concept mapping has improved student’s misconception and doubt significantly more than individual map practices. Cooperative group student’s achievement and retention are much better than individual learner. Crandell, & Soderston, 1996) compared the effect of collaborative concept mapping on elementary pre service teachers' anxiety, efficacy, and achievement in physical science. The study conducted with pre service teachers (n=118, HE Science), indicated that collaborative concept map could lower the anxiety about learning physical science, lower all the trait anxiety, and increase science achievement. However, it did not have a significant effect on anxiety toward teaching physical science, self-efficacy, and outcome expectancy. Chiu, Huang, & Chang, (2000) studied the collaborative concept mapping process, mediated by computer. The subjects learned and constructed concept map during instruction and the researchers identified that the four patterns of computer-mediated collaborative concept map should process information: (1) concept introduction; (2) limited concept introduction; (3) less link establishment; and (4) proposition construction orientation. Collaborative concept map practice is a useful practice among students. Van Boxtel et al 1997 compared the study of collaborative construction of conceptual understanding, interaction processes, and learning outcomes in emerging from a concept mapping and a poster and collaborative concept mp approach is a suitable technique for classroom management. Similarly, Gilbert & Greene (2002) investigated the college students' collaborative use of concept map as inspiration generation to learn educational technology. 15 higher education psychology students were the sample of the study. After concept map learning among students cooperatively to educational technology the researchers found that the concept maps are most stimulating activity among the samples. The cooperative concept map has positive effect on students learning. Inspiration by the teacher is not directly influence the achievement of the students but collaborative concept map has directly promotes meaningful learning. In fact, Kealy, 2001; Van Boxtel et al 2002 studied the knowledge maps and their use in computer-based collaborative learning environments. 13 higher education biology students are the purposive samples of the study. The purpose of the study was to study the effect of concept map on achievement of the students through computer based collaborative learning. The findings of the study stated that there exists significant difference in achievement scores between collaborative learners and collaborative concept map learners.

Constructivist Approach use through Concept Maps

Kostoovich et al 2007 observed from their study concept map as a constructivist tool for student’s learning and knowledge evaluation. They found, concept map might serve as potentially useful tool in physics studied among medical students. Simon, & Schifter, 1991 investigated the using of constructivist approach with online concept map: relationship between theory and nursing education. This study described an online course that used concept maps and self-reflective journals to assess student’s thinking processes. The use of concept map with reflective journal provided a learning experience that allowed students to integrate content consistent with a constructivist paradigm. This integration is a developmental process influenced by the personal preferences of students, concept map design, and content complexity. This developmental process provides early evidence that the application of concept mapping in the online environment, along with reflective journal, allows students to make new connections, integrate previous knowledge, and validate existing knowledge. Similarly, Aitken & Deaker,2008 examined concept map as constructivist tool for student’s learning and knowledge evaluation. This study indicated that, concept mapping might serve as a potentially useful tool in physics studies with medical students by helping them better to understand the underlying physics concept. Quantitative analysis revealed that almost all students in the intervention groups emphasized, concept map stimulates the understanding of the concept; enables systematic repetition of concepts. However, qualitative analysis of students’ answers to the open-type question highlighted that, concept mapping helped students: systematize their physic knowledge, develop their conceptual understanding of the nature and structure of physics concepts, and develop their understanding through collaborative learning (Haney & Czerniak, 2003).

Concept Map provides Meaningful Learning

Okebukola & Jegede (1988) studied on cognitive preference and learning mode as the determinant of meaningful learning through concept mapping. All students on the programme had taken Biology, Chemistry, Physics, Mathematics and English course as their requirements. The primary t-test revealed no significant difference between the mean pre test scores on achievement of experimental and control group. Novak (1990) observed from the study, concept maps as diagram of two meta-cognitive tools facilitates meaningful learning. The finding of the study indicated that concept mapping is a meaningful strategy in learning. Similarly, Okebukola (1990) studied the effect of concept mapping techniques on attaining meaningful learning of concept genetics and ecology. Overall result indicated that concept mapping is significantly better than no treatment, but the two together are significantly better than either alone. Concept map serves as a tool to help learners to organize their cognitive frame works into more powerful integrated pattern (Fraser & Adward, 1987; Schemid, & Telaro, 1990).