Cmap Tools as an essential for teaching academic writing
Academic writingprocess:Cycling between Cmaps and text analysis=>Cmaps as an essential toolLawrie HunterKochi University of Technologyhttp://www.core.kochi-tech.ac.jp/hunterJALTCALL 2013June 1, 2013
No need to take notes (:^0)All materials can be downloadedfrom Hunter’s websiteshttp://lawriehunter.com/http://www.core.kochi-tech.ac.jp/hunter/and many more ppts available athttp://slideshare.net/rolenzo/
Academic writing process: Cmaps as an essential toolFor mapping approaches to summarizing and argument, graphics software and mapping software ingeneral are preferable to pencil and paper because of ease of revision and restructuring. Among thosesoftware, Cmap Tools freeware has the further distinct advantage that it forces the user to specify therelations between links and thus reveals rhetorical structure or orchestration (or their absence) that isnot visually apparent in text. Cmaps are Novakian maps, i.e. each link between two nodes is labeledwith a phrase specifying the relation between those nodes. If we strengthen Novakian maps withseveral visual metaphors (e.g. up is abstract, down is concrete; up is overarching, down is subordinate)we get an even more compressed representation. This presents an altogether more powerfulrepresentation than that offered by mind maps.Grounded on a case study of a fruitful application of Cmap Tools, wherein EAP learners of academicwriting for management discover intellectual leverage in argument mapping, this paper argues thatCmap Tools deserves a place amongst the essential tools for instructional discourse, particularly insettings such as EAP where the identification of rhetorical orchestration is difficult, where argument isoften masked by other rhetorical devices, and where ones own thinking about an approach to aproblem is complex and difficult to encode directly in text.To tentatively support its claims, this paper tracks EAP (English for Academic Purposes) learners cyclingbetween discourse analysis and concept mapping as they worked to unpack a paper that they hadinitially identified as a good model.ace lookatthest8i*min
=> Unconscious narrowing-of instructional frame-of design scope=> Handicapped design process-away from where we liveSome people say:IT tools R technology
Everything That Doesn’t Work YetAlan Kay, a brilliant polymath who has workedat Atari, Xerox, Apple, and Disney:“Technology, is anything that was inventedafter you were born.”http://www.kk.org/thetechnium/archives/2007/02/everything_that.php
"INVISIBLE" communication TECHNOLOGY-paragraph-argument-metaphor-visual metaphor
Academic writing process: Cmaps as an essential toolFor mapping approaches to summarizing and argument, graphicssoftware and mapping software in general are preferable to penciland paper because of ease of revision and restructuring. Amongthose software, Cmap Tools freeware has the further distinctadvantage that it forces the user to specify the relations betweenlinks and thus reveals rhetorical structure or orchestration (or theirabsence) that is not visually apparent in text.What structurecan you see here?
What structurecan you see?Among those software, Cmap Tools freeware has the further distinctadvantage that it forces the user to specify the relations betweenlinks and thus reveals rhetorical structure or orchestration (or theirabsence) that is not visually apparent in text.
Using visual metaphors to enhance Cmaps To create an even more compressed representation,use visual metaphors:1. up is abstract, down is concrete; 2. up is overarching, down is subordinate3. concepts on the same level have the same degree of abstraction4. rhetorical flow is top to bottom (NO ARROWHEADS!)
TODAYS OUTLINE ===THE TAUGHT (INSTRUCTED) WRITING CENTERWorking with textWorking with concepts ===TOOLS for WC clients / work: Text analysis work (separating levels of abstraction)Moves analysis workMetaphor / frames / cognitive blends Restructuring vs. reorderingArgument mapping / Novakian / Cmap Tools Cohesion work ===CASE study 1MAPPING for summarization of an RP introduction (DOSSIER WORK) Clients auto-return to TOOLSCONCLUSIONBetter summaries (scant data tho)BTW lower WC activity (growing autonomy? peer consulting? other resources?) ===CASE study 2 MAPPING for distillation of an extended (wandering) documenta. analysis: part by part mappingb. synthesis: combining maps of parts into an integrated whole mapCONCLUSION: achieved results not possible with extended text work===
34Since 2003:- Japanese government scholarships- for foreign students- in technical doctoral programmes.!Graduation requirements:- 2+ refereed papers in top journals- dissertation in EnglishL2 studyduring the PhD programis NOT a realistic strategy.KUT EAP scenario
Text analysis TOOLSGraphical* tools, at the sentence level:a. Core content/ background/persuasionb. Communication movesc. Cohesion*graphical = low-text, with spatial structure
Text analysis:core/background chartCore content Background
Text analysis:core/background chartCore content Background Persuasion
SajdastudyLess accurateEEG signalsWere not reliableElectronic image scanning speed1. Human using PC2. PC using human unconscious inputFasterEEG spike is a signal of unconscious identificationTo evaluate Sajda’s new technologySample argument map
Case study 2:Step 1: map an RPs introductionClients draw a constrained mapthe introduction section of a research paper.Purpose: summarize for citationConstraints:-fewer than 10 nodes,-fewer than 5 words/node-links must be verbs
Step 4: rewrite the textThe clients write a new versionof the introduction,based only on the content of the map.
HuntersoriginalvisionMapa textCritiquethe mapMake aconsensusmapRewritethe text
Client behavior: text analysisThe clients developed their own approach,using text analysis chartsfrom previous course work:-core content vs background charts-communication moves analysis charts
Client behavior: text analysisThe clients developed their own approach,using text analysis chartsfrom previous course work:-core content vs background charts-communication moves analysis chartsThey worked in a cyclic manner,mapping in counterpoint withtext analysis work.
Communication moves analysis(prescribed: following Swales & Feak)Swales, J.M.. and Feak, C.B. (2004)Academic writing for graduate studentsUniversity of Michigan Press.
Communication moves analysis(prescribed: following Glasman-Deal)Glasman-Deal, H. (2012)Science Research WritingImperial College Press.
Client behavior: remappingThe clients worked in a cyclic manner,going back to mappingto apply realizationsfrom their text analysis work.
ReorderedchartG R O U P I N GKeyPrinciples ofTQM1-2 Much research has been done with regard to the implementation of TQM and it is believed that thebenefits of higher customer satisfaction, better quality products, and higher market share are oftenobtained following the adoption of TQM by construction companies.2-2 TQM is a way of thinking about goals, organizations, processes, and people to ensure that the rightthings are done right the first time.3-1 TQM is an approach to improving the competitiveness, effectiveness, and flexibility of the wholeorganization.3-2 Oakland (1995) observed that it is essentially a way of planning, organizing, and understanding eachactivity that depends on each individual at each level.Requirementto implementTQM1-3 It requires a complete turnaround in corporate culture and management approach (Quazi andPadibjo 1997) as compared to the traditional way of top management giving orders and employeesmerely obeying them.2-1 It is believed that the single most important determinant of the success an organization inimplementing TQM is its ability to translate, integrate, and ultimately institutionalize TQMbehaviors into everyday practice on the job.2-3 Motwani (2001) feels that implementing TQM is a major organizational change that requires atransformation in the culture, process, strategic priorities, beliefs, etc. of an organization.3-3 Ideas of continuous learning allied to concepts such as empowerment and partnership, which arefacets of TQM, also imply that a change in behavior and culture is required if construction firms are tobecome learning organizations (Love et al. 2000).Benefit ofimplementingTQM1-2 Much research has been done with regard to the implementation of TQM and it is believed that thebenefits of higher customer satisfaction, better quality products, and higher market share areoften obtained following the adoption of TQM by construction companies.4-1 Idris et al. (1996) showed that the electrical and electronic engineering industry in Malaysia haswidely adopted TQM and the main benefits that resulted were improved customer satisfaction,teamwork, productivity, communication, and efficiency.4-2~4-3Mc-Cabe (1996) reported a study of UK companies from different industries which have alreadyimplemented TQM.The results showed that a majority had achieved greater success against performance indicatorsthan was the average for their respective industries.4-4~4-6Culp (1993) cited an example of HDR Inc., Omaha, Nebraska, a large engineering firm that hasimplemented TQM.The experience of applying TQM concepts provided the organization with improvements,information, and learning that occurred only because of the TQM process.This is in addition to positive customer responses and client referrals that the organization receivedas a result of implementing TQM.5-1 There are also other means of achieving TQM success. Ford Motor Company has found success byimplementing its own Ford’s Q1 Award process which, in essence, involves the implementation ofmany quality principles and tools that are often associated with a TQM organization (Stephens 1997).Problems5-2~5-3According to Ghosh and Wee (1996), manufacturing companies in Singapore have reached acertain state of development with regard to TQM and, hence, are on their way to world-classmanufacturing.However, their survey indicated that Japanese manufacturing companies showed a greatercommitment to TQM than their local/regional counterparts.5-4~5-6In a survey carried out by the National Productivity Board in Singapore, Quazi and Padibjo (1997)reported that out of the 300 firms surveyed, only one-third of the manufacturing companies andone-fourth of the services and construction companies had implemented TQM programs.Of those companies that have implemented TQM, most were of foreign origin.This appears to suggest that local companies were lagging behind their foreign competitors.Researchobjectives6-1 The aim of this paper is to examine how TQM can be applied more actively in the constructionindustry.6-2 It seeks to assist contractors in identifying the steps necessary for the implementation of TQM.Researchmethodology6-3 For this purpose, a comparison of the benefits experienced and the TQM performance measuresin two case studies are presented.
HuntersoriginalvisionMapa textCritiquethe mapMake aconsensusmapRewritethe text
EmergentprocessMapa textCritiquethe mapMake aconsensusmapRewritethe textAnalyzethe textRe-mapthe textRe-rewritethe text
Clients variable processClient 1 Client 2 Client 3 Client 4Map the source text Map the source text Map the source text Map the source textCritique the map Critique the map Critique the map Critique the mapMake consensusmapMake consensusmapMake consensusmapMake consensusmapRewrite from map Rewrite from map Rewrite from map Rewrite from mapAnalyze originaltext: freestylemovesAnalyze originaltext: AWGS movesAnalyze originaltext: SRW movesAnalyze originaltext: freestylemovesReorder/reducesource textReorder source text+ insert cohesionRewrite/extractsome sentences ofsource textCombine ownversion withreordered sourcetextRewrite ownversionRewrite ownversionRewrite ownversionNote: this chart is approximate, due to partial reporting
RST mappingwww.sil.org/~mannb/rst/RST links are rhetorical devices.Bill Mann’s Rhetorical Structure Theory (RST)uses various sorts of "building blocks" to describe texts.The principal block type deals with "nuclearity" and "relations"(often called coherence relations in the linguistic literature.)There are 31 main relations in RST mapping. Rhetoric mappingInfo-structure mappingSyntactic mappingGrammar mapping (pseudo)Association mapping
Matching mapping stylesto instructional purposesRepresentations of the information structuresunderlying the witting use of maps:Writers work withRhetorical structureArgument structureInformation structureText structureParagraph structureSentence structure
Matching mapping stylesto instructional purposesRepresentations of the information structuresunderlying the witting use of maps:Writers work withRhetorical structureArgument structureInformation structureText structureParagraph structureSentence structureMappers makeRhetorical structure mapsArgument mapsInformation structure mapsAssociation mapsSyntactic mapsGrammar maps (not maps)mysteryzone
Thank you for your attention.Please write to me.Im happy to share/teach/collaborate.Download this .ppt and many othersfromhttp://www.lawriehunter.com/presns/or view/download athttp://slideshare.net/rolenzo/Lawrie HunterKochi University of Technologyhttp://www.core.kochi-tech.ac.jp/hunter/References
Cmaps as intellectual prosthesis: Cycling between text analysis and rhetorical mappingMind maps are ubiquitous today, and have great fruitful applications. However, in mind maps the links between nodes inmind maps are simply lines representing association; each dyad (two nodes joined by a line) looks like every other. Themind map maker cannot articulate the relations between nodes and hence the clusters of nodes in a mind map can beinterpreted widely.This raises a question: are there low text representations of the content of text that reveal rhetorical structure ororchestration (or their absence)?In Novakian maps, or Cmaps, each link between two nodes is labeled with a phrase specifying the relation between thosenodes. As well, applying several visual metaphors (up is abstract, down is concrete; up is overarching, down is subordinate)can make the representation even more compressed. This presents an altogether more powerful representation than mindmaps.Cmap representation has gained a wide usership, particularly in science education, thanks to the popularity of the freewareCmap Tools, which forces the user to specify the relations between links.This paper reports a case study of a fruitful application of Cmaps, wherein EAP learners of academic writing formanagement discover intellectual leverage in mapping. The learners were asked to draw a constrained map (fewer than 10nodes, 4 words or fewer per node, links must be verbs) of the content of the introduction section of a published researchpaper, and then to critique their maps and arrive at consensus on an accurate mapping. Then they were asked to write anew version of the introduction based only on the content of the map. The learners developed their own approach,working in an iterative manner, mapping in counterpoint with text analysis work. This paper tracks the learners cyclingbetween moves analysis and concept mapping as they worked to unpack a paper that they had initially identified as a goodmodel.The observations made here suggest that the Cmap deserves a place amongst the essential tools for instructional discourse,particularly in settings such as EAP where the identification of rhetorical orchestration is difficult, where argument is oftenmasked by other rhetorical devices, and where ones own thinking about an approach to a problem is complex and difficultto encode directly in text.Biodata: Lawrie Hunter is a professor at Kochi University of Technology. His infostructure maps provide the underlyingstructure of "Critical Thinking" (Greene & Hunter, Asahi Press 2002) and "Thinking in English" (Hunter, Cengage 2008).He isalso the author of "How Academic Writing Works" and "Technical Academic Writing".http://www.core.kochi-tech.ac.jp/hunter/
Sources: GRAPHIC ORGANIZERSSuggested Reading About Visual Thinking and LearningAusubel, D. (1968). Educational psychology: A cognitive view. New York: Holt, Reinhart and Winston.Buzan, T. & Buzan, B. (1993). The mind map book: How to use radiant thinking to maximize your brainsuntapped potential. New York: Penguin Books USA Inc.Buzan, T. (1983). Use both sides of your brain: New techniques to help you read efficiently, study effectively,solve problems, remember more, think clearly. New York: E.P. Dutton.Jonassen, D.H. (1996). Computers in the classroom: Mindtools for critical thinking. Englewood Cliffs, NJ.Prentice-Hall, Inc.Novak, J.D. & Gowin, D.B. (1984). Learning how to learn. New York: Cambridge University Press.Novak, J.D. (1998). Learning, creating and using knowledge: Concept map® as facilitative tools in schools andcorporations. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.http://www.inspiration.com/Parents/Visual-Thinking-and-Learning
Sources: academic writingHunterthe style dossier approachSTRUCTUREBanerjee, D. and Wall, D. (2006) Assessing and reporting performances on pre-sessional EAPcourses: Developing a final assessment checklist and investigating its validity. Journal ofEnglish for academic purposes 5(2006) 50-69.Ferris, D. (2002) Treatment of error in second language student writing. University of MichiganPress.Ginther, A. and Grant, L. (1996) A review of the academic needs of native English-speaking collegestudents in the United States. Research monograph series MS-1. Princeton, NJ: EducationalTesting Service.Glasman-Deal, H. (2010) Science Research Writing. Imperial College Press.Gopen, G.D. & Swan, J.A. (1990) The Science of Scientific Writing. American Scientist 78 550-558.http://www.americanscientist.org/template/AssetDetail/assetid/23947Harwood, N. (2006) What do we want EAP teaching materials for? Journal of English for AcademicPurposes 4 (2005) 149-161.Hunter, L. Online resource for English for Academic Purposes:http://del.icio.us/rolenzo/eapKoutsantoni, D. (2006) Rhetorical strategies in engineering research articles and research theses:Advanced academic literacy and relations of power. Journal of English for Academic Purposes5 (2006) 19-36.Liu, M. & Braine, G. (2005) Cohesive features in argumentative writing produced by Chineseundergraduates. English for specific purposes 24 (2005)Rowley-Jolivet, E. & Carter-Thomas, S. (2005) Genre awareness and rhetorical appropriacy:Manipulation of information structure by NS and NNS scientists in the international conferencesetting. System 33 (2005) 41-64.Swales, J.M.. and Feak, C.B. (2004) Academic writing for graduate students: essential tasks andskills (2nd ed.). University of Michigan Press.Swales, J.M.. and Feak, C.B. (2001) English in Todays Research World: A Writing Guide.University of Michigan Press.
Fauconnier, G. (1997) Mappings in Thought and Language. Cambridge U. Press.Gentner, D., & Wolff, P.(1997). Alignment in the Processing of Metaphor. Journal of Memory andLanguage, 37, 331-355.Kurosawa, M., & Kawahara, T. (1999). An Experimental Study in Metaphor Comprehension. Bulletin ofthe Graduate School of Education, The University of Tokyo 39, 247-257.Kurosawa, M., & Kawahara, T. (1999). Alignment or Abstraction? Metaphor Comprehension inJapanese. Proceedings, Second International Conference on Cognitive Science.http://www.jcss.gr.jp/iccs99OLP/p3-19/p3-19.htmLakoff, George and Mark Johnson 1980. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: The University of ChicagoPress.Mazuka, R. (1998) The Development of Language Strategies: a Cross-Linguistic Study BetweenJapanese and English. Erlbaum.Nisbett, R.E. (2003) The geography of thought. Free Press.Novak, J.D. (1998). Learning, creating and using knowledge: Concept map® as facilitative tools inschools and corporations. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.Sources: mapping and metaphor
Baddeley, A. D. & Hitch, G. (2001). Working memory in perspective: Foreword. In J. Andrade (Ed.), Working memoryin perspective (pp. xv-xix). Hove: Psychology Press.Cañas, A. J., & Novak, J.D. (2006) Re-examining the foundations for effective use of concept maps. In Cañas, A. J., &Novak, J.D. (Eds.), Concept Maps: Theory, Methodology, Technology. Proceedings of the Second InternationalConference on Concept Mapping.Cañas, A. J., Hill, G., Carff, R., Suri, N., Lott, J., Eskridge, T., Gomez, G., Arroyo, M. and Carvajal, R. (2004)Cmaptools: A knowledge modeling and sharing environment. Downloaded April 8, 2008 fromhttp://cmc.ihmc.us/papers/cmc2004-283.pdfChandler, P. and J. Sweller (1992) The split-attention effect as a factor in the design of instruction. British Journal ofEducational Psychology 62: 233-246.Chun, D. M. and Plass, J. L. 1997. Research on text comprehension in multimedia environments. Language learningand technology 1(1): 60-81.Cmap tools. Institute for Human & Machine Cognition. http://cmap.ihmc.us/Dansereau, D.F. (2005) Node-Link Mapping Principles for Visualizing Knowledge and Information. In Tergan, S. andKeller, T. (Eds.) Node-Link Mapping Principles for Visualizing Knowledge and Information. Springer. 61-81.Fulkerson, R. (1996) Teaching the argument in writing. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.Goldman, S.R., & Rakestraw, J.A. (2000). Structural aspects of constructing meaning from text. In M.L. Kamil, P. B.Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. II, pp. 311-335). Mahwah, NJ:Erlbaum.Gopen, G.D. and Swan, J.A. (1990) The Science of Scientific Writing. American Scientist (Nov-Dec 1990), Volume78, 550-558. Downloadable as a pdf from http://www.amstat.org/publications/jcgs/sci.pdfGrow, G. (1996) Serving the strategic reader: cognitive reading theoryand its implications for the teaching of writing.Viewed June 30, 2007 at http://www.longleaf.net/ggrow/StrategicReader/index.htmlHorn, R. E. (1998) Visual Language: Global Communication for the 21st Century. Bainbridge Island, WA: MacroVUPress. http://www.macrovu.com
Hunter L. (2005) Technical Hypertext Accessibility: Information Structures and Rhetorical Framing. Presentation atHyperText 2005, Salzburg. http://www.lawriehunter.com/presns/%20HT05poster0818.htmHunter, L. (2002) Information structure diagrams as link icons. Learning Technology 4(3) July 2002. ISSN 1438-0625. 2002. http://lttf.ieee.org/learn_tech/issues/july2002/index.html#1Hunter, L. (1998) Text nouveau, visible structure in text presentation. Computer Assisted Language Learning 11 (4)October 1998.Mann, B. (1999) An introduction to rhetorical structure theory (RST). http://www.sil.org/mannb/rst/rintro99.htmMoffett, J. (1992). Detecting growth in language. New Hampshire: Boynton/Cook.Mohan, B.A. (1986) Language and content. Addison-Wesley.Novak, J.D. and Cañas, A.J. (2006) The theory underlying concept maps and how to construct them. Report IHMCCmapTools 2006-01, Florida Institute for Human and Machine Cognition (IHMC), 2006. Viewed April 8, 2008 athttp://cmap.ihmc.us/Publications/ResearchPapers/TheoryCmaps/TheoryUnderlyingConceptMaps.htmOlive, Thierry (2004) Working memory in writing: Empirical evidence from the dual-task technique. Europeanpsychologist 9(1), pp. 32-42. Working paper downloaded from http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=15431008Shannon, C.E., & Weaver, W. (1949). The mathematical theory of communication. Urbana: University of IllinoisPress. Explained at http://www.cultsock.ndirect.co.uk/MUHome/cshtml/introductory/sw.htmlTaboada, M. and Mann, W.C. (2006) Rhetorical Structure Theory: looking back and moving ahead. Discoursestudies 8: 423-459Tufte, E.R. (1990) Envisioning information. Cheshire, CONN: Graphics Press.Ueta, R., Hunter, L. & Ren, X. Text usability for non-native readers of English. Proceedings, Information ProcessingSociety of Japan, Vol. 2003.7. Pp. 199-200.