Deep Foundation of Concept Mapping

1,722 views

Published on

Published in: Education, Technology
1 Comment
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,722
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
6
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
82
Comments
1
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Deep Foundation of Concept Mapping

  1. 1. Lawrie Hunter Kochi University of Technology http://lawriehunter.com Information structures: the essential deep foundation of concept mapping Argument mapping Info-structure mapping Syntactic mapping Grammar mapping (pseudo) Association mapping
  2. 2. No need to take notes (:^0) All materials can be downloaded from Hunter ’ s websites http://lawriehunter/ http://www.core.kochi-tech.ac.jp/hunter/ or http://slideshare.net/rolenzo/
  3. 3. Wordle for today wordle.net
  4. 4. Mapping: abstract ideals vs. doable realities Keywords: mapping, concept mapping, structures
  5. 5. language information < important
  6. 6. English information < important
  7. 7. English information < important
  8. 8. Uses of mapping uses of mapping witting mindless
  9. 9. Uses of mapping uses of mapping witting mindless principles of map use?
  10. 10. Uses of mapping uses of mapping witting principles of map use? Information types Language patterns
  11. 11. Part 1: the main styles of mapping Part 2: matching mapping styles to instructional purposes (1) Novakian mapping, using Cmap tools (2) Hunter's infostructure mapping, using PowerPoint. Part 3: deciding mode: electronic vs. hand made Part 4: using mapping to push the learner to the use of specific language forms and patterns
  12. 12. Part 1: the main styles of mapping Grammar maps (not maps) Association maps Syntactic maps Information structure maps Argument maps Rhetorical structure maps
  13. 13. Part 1: the main styles of mapping Grammar maps (not maps) Association maps Syntactic maps Information structure maps Argument maps Rhetorical structure maps Argument mapping Info-structure mapping Syntactic mapping Grammar mapping (pseudo) Association mapping
  14. 14. Functions of ‘ concept maps ’ made with CmapTools
  15. 15. Wealth of tools: the age of GRAPHIC ORGANIZERS http://www.visual-literacy.org/periodic_table/periodic_table.html
  16. 16. Wealth of tools: the age of GRAPHIC ORGANIZERS http://www.eduplace.com/graphicorganizer/
  17. 17. Distinguishing maps: Levels of abstraction Figure: quantum levels of abstraction. From Hunter (2007) Argument mapping Info-structure mapping Syntactic mapping Association mapping Grammar mapping (pseudo)
  18. 18. The links are all lines . The links are all associations . Mind mapping
  19. 19. What are associations? Example: we associate with eating. We associate A with B. What do you associate with ? What do you associate with ?
  20. 20. Let’s make a mind map! What do you associate with ? A baseball reminds me of _______.
  21. 21. Get a free account from http://www.mindmeister.com/ Make maps like this, online.
  22. 22. Horn’s argument mapping http://www.stanford.edu/~rhorn/index.html http://www.macrovu.com/
  23. 23. AusThink argument mapping http://www.austhink.com/
  24. 24. Rationale argument mapping http://www.austhink.com/
  25. 25. RST mapping www.sil.org/~mannb/rst/ RST links are rhetorical devices . Bill Mann’s Rhetorical Structure Theory (RST) uses various sorts of &quot;building blocks&quot; to describe texts. The principal block type deals with &quot;nuclearity&quot; and &quot;relations&quot; (often called coherence relations in the linguistic literature.)
  26. 26. Abrams, R. An Overview of Concept Mapping. In Meaningful Learning: A Collaborative Literature Review of Concept Mapping . Retrieved March 18, 2008 at http://www2.ucsc.edu/mlrg/clr-conceptmapping.html Concepts are placed in [boxes]... Lines are drawn from a concept to a linking word to a concept. Sequences of concepts and linking words do not always form grammatically correct sentences.” “ The basic Novakian concept map... usually starts with a general concept at the top of the map, and then works its way down ... to more specific concepts. Beyond assocation: Novakian
  27. 27. http://cmap.ihmc.us/ Default Novakian: Cmaps
  28. 28. Novakian maps (Novak & Cañas, 2006) can be used at any level of abstraction. Figure: quantum levels of abstraction. From Hunter (2007) Argument mapping Information structure mapping Syntactic mapping Grammatical mapping (pseudo) Association mapping
  29. 29. < broad correspond to information structure elements Hunter’s ISmaps have graphical links ISmaps syntactic mapping semantic mapping ISmaps transcend pragmatic barriers ISmaps’ range pragmatics’ miniworld
  30. 30. Hunter ’ s ISmaps* Description Classification Degree comparison Attribute comparison Sequence Cause-effect Contrast ! *information structure maps < big
  31. 31. Hunter ’ s ISmaps* My friend Canadian English teacher 57 DESCRIPTION
  32. 32. Hunter ’ s ISmaps* CLASSIFICATION Cars sedans station wagons coupes
  33. 33. Hunter ’ s ISmaps* < big old COMPARISON (relative) Tokyo Calcutta
  34. 34. Hunter ’ s ISmaps* COMPARISON (by attribute) red M’s car K’s car white 3 years old new
  35. 35. Hunter ’ s ISmaps* SEQUENCE find a bank machine put in your bank card follow the directions
  36. 36. Hunter ’ s ISmaps* SEQUENCE structure signals Then First and find a bank machine put in your bank card follow the directions
  37. 37. Hunter ’ s ISmaps* SEQUENCE slice a tomato toast two slices of bread Then First and tear some lettuce
  38. 38. Hunter ’ s ISmaps* CAUSE-EFFECT heavy rain I...late for school bus was cancelled
  39. 39. Use the ISmap links to map text. Description Classification Degree comparison Attribute comparison Sequence Cause-effect Contrast ! < big
  40. 40. Power generating systems General process: boil NH3 Make steam Rotate turbines Generate electricity Boil a liquid older type plants OTEC plants boil H2O seawater heat fossil or N-heat steam 20C steam 500C low power high power zero energy cost high energy cost hunter systems ! ! !
  41. 41. Hunter's ISmapping , using PowerPoint or other graphical software. Comparison of Novakian and information structure mapping Novakian mapping, using Cmap tools, a free and very usable software with web sharing built in. vs. Yon sama, a Korean actor, is younger and more handsome than Tokoro Joji, a Japanese TV personality. Make a Cmap and an ISmap of this text:
  42. 42. Yon sama Tokoro Joji actor TV personality > young handsome huntersystems Korean Japanese an ISmap of the text:
  43. 43. a Cmap of the text:
  44. 44. Part 2: matching mapping styles to instructional purposes Representations of the information structures underlying the witting use of maps: Writers work with Rhetorical structure Argument structure Information structure Text structure Paragraph structure Sentence structure
  45. 45. Part 2: matching mapping styles to instructional purposes Representations of the information structures underlying the witting use of maps: Writers work with Rhetorical structure Argument structure Information structure Text structure Paragraph structure Sentence structure Mappers make Rhetorical structure maps Argument maps Information structure maps Association maps Syntactic maps Grammar maps (not maps) mystery zone
  46. 46. Mapping decision matrix ________________________ Training -extensive contained warmups -for Teacher's observation -L's need support? -L's need constraint? -for peer commenting -look quickly at shapes only -look carefully at node content and links Software vs. tangibles Training Mapping type Constraint
  47. 47. Mapping decision matrix ________________________ Mapping type -mind maps -relation maps (Novakian) -structure maps Software vs. tangibles Training Mapping type Constraint mind maps relation maps structure maps
  48. 48. Mapping decision matrix ________________________ Mapping type 1. Mind maps -for amassing 'thoughts' -relations only by association -for rearranging, clustering, prioritizing (software good for this) Software vs. tangibles Training Mapping type Constraint mind maps relation maps structure maps
  49. 49. Mapping decision matrix ________________________ Mapping type 2. Relation maps (Novakian maps) -for relating concepts in articulately related pairs -CMC debate going on now:declarative reading or not? Software vs. tangibles Training Mapping type Constraint mind maps relation maps structure maps
  50. 50. Mapping decision matrix ________________________ Mapping type 3. Structure maps (e.g. ISmaps) -for representation of syntactic structures at the level of -sentence -paragraph -short technical summary articles -not necessarily one unified map -background information may be -a separate map -a layer (font color, sidebar, etc.) -persuasion may be 'picture frames' or title bars or submaps Software vs. tangibles Training Mapping type Constraint mind maps relation maps structure maps
  51. 51. Mapping decision matrix ________________________ Mapping type 3. Structure maps (e.g. ISmaps) -for representation of syntactic structures at the level of -sentence -paragraph -short technical summary articles -not necessarily one unified map -background information may be -a separate map -a layer (font color, sidebar, etc.) -persuasion may be 'picture frames' or title bars or submaps Software vs. tangibles Training Mapping type Constraint mind maps relation maps structure maps
  52. 52. Mapping decision matrix ________________________ Constraint 1. Architectural constraint - by size - by content 2. Rhetorical constraint -by rhetorical device limitations 3. Relational constraint -by Novakianism Software vs. tangibles Training Mapping type Constraint structural rhetorical relational
  53. 53. Part 3: deciding mode: electronic vs. hand made Software vs. tangibles -tangibles first -because quick -to encourage revisions (paper is cheap) -software for presentation, sharing, editing, beauty Software vs. tangibles Training Mapping type Constraint
  54. 54. Using four types of task constraint which reduce to easily manageable task design elements: architectural constraint (number of nodes, etc.) rhetorical constraint (type of links) relational constraint (nature of links) degree of abstraction (rhetorical distance) (not today) Part 4: using mapping to push the learner to the use of specific language forms and patterns
  55. 55. Pushing the learner ________________________ Constraint 1. Architectural constraint - by size (number of nodes) - by content (e.g. only noun phrases) Software vs. tangibles Training Mapping type Constraint architectural rhetorical relational
  56. 56. Pushing the learner ________________________ Constraint 2. Rhetorical constraint -by rhetorical device limitations -e.g. in a rhetorical structure map, only allow argument moves as link content Software vs. tangibles Training Mapping type Constraint architectural rhetorical relational
  57. 57. Pushing the learner ________________________ Constraint 3. Relational constraint: -by Novakianism i.e. restrict linking phrase content e.g. only verbs e.g. only action verbs e.g. only information structure signals (classification, comparison, sequence, cause-effect) Software vs. tangibles Training Mapping type Constraint architectural rhetorical relational
  58. 58. Hunter’s framework Key content Background Persuasion Rhetorical structure Information organization Information structures
  59. 59. Hunter’s framework Key content Background Persuasion Rhetorical structure Information organization Information structures
  60. 60. Thank you for your kind attention, and thank you in advance for your feedback and suggestions. Lawrie Hunter downloads from http://lawriehunter.com view and download at http://slideshare.net/rolenzo
  61. 61. Information structures: The essential deep foundation of concept mapping Abstract ideals vs. do-able realities Selected domain for this paper: mapping/concept mapping/argument mapping Concept mapping and concept mapping software have taken solid hold in many realms of education in many countries, primarily for use in representing learner and instructor perceptions of the interrelations between concepts. However, it is not so easy to design effective and motivating mapping tasks, or to choose the appropriate type of mapping for a task/project/curriculum. This paper sets out a set of conceptual tools for the witting use of mapping in curriculum and materials design. These central questions are addressed: (1) Which kind of mapping to use for different instructional purposes; (2) When to do mapping electronically and when by hand; and (3) How to create curriculum and materials that go beyond &quot;I do mapping in my class&quot; to lead the learner to the use of the specific language forms and patterns appropriate to each type of information. This paper identifies mapping types and information structures underlying the witting use of maps: rhetorical structure, text structure, paragraph structure and sentence structure. Without incorporating these structures in the framing of task design, the instructor/designer will not be able to control the form of learner output. This is followed by an analysis of the information-related character of two salient styles of mapping: (1) Novakian mapping, which is the most commonly used mapping in science education today; and (2) Hunter's infostructure mapping, which is a very limited (and thus effective) mapping style for second language learning technical-oriented tasks. The conclusion includes a description of four types of task constraint which the author has developed for mapping in the teaching of entry and upper advanced EFL technical writing. These constraint types, which reduce to easily manageable task design elements, are: map size; allowable links; rhetorical devices; and degree of abstraction. Biodata: Lawrie Hunter is a professor at Kochi University of Technology. His infostructure maps provide the underlying structure of &quot;Critical Thinking&quot; (Greene & Hunter, Asahi Press 2002) and &quot;Thinking in English&quot; (Hunter, Cengage 2008). http://www.core.kochi-tech.ac.jp/hunter/
  62. 62. The age of GRAPHIC ORGANIZERS Suggested Reading About Visual Thinking and Learning Ausubel, 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 brain's untapped 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 and corporations. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. http://www.inspiration.com/Parents/Visual-Thinking-and-Learning

×