The Influence of Mind Mapping on Eighth Graders’ Science Achievement

Abstract

This study assessed the influence of using mind maps as a learning tool on eighth graders’ science achievement, whether such influence was mediated by students’ prior scholastic achievement, and the relationship between students’ mind maps and their conceptual understandings. Sixty‐two students enrolled in four intact sections of a grade 8 science classroom were randomly assigned to experimental and comparison conditions. Participants in the experimental group received training in, and constructed, mind maps throughout a science unit. Engagement with mind mapping was counterbalanced with involving the comparison group participants with note summarization to control for time on task as a confounding variable. Otherwise, the intervention was similar for both groups in all respects. A multiple choice test was used to measure student gains across two categories and three levels of achievement. Data analyses indicated that the experimental group participants achieved statistically significant and substantially higher gains than students in the comparison group. The gains were not mediated by participants’ prior scholastic achievement. Analyses also indicated that iconography was not as central to participants’ mind maps as often theorized. Depicting accurate links between central themes and major and minor concepts, and using colors to represent concepts were the major aspects that differentiated the mind maps built by students who achieved higher levels of conceptual understanding.

More graph comparison techniques on mind maps to provide students with feedback

“…• Concept map -a measure of hierarchiness which relates hierarchy in the map [7] • Mind map -compare the scores on tests to the technique [8] • Concept map -the more important a concept, the closer it is to the top of the tree [9] • Mind map -have two independent experts score (sometimes with a rubric) the mind map on a scale two times with one week delay and compare correlation of ratings [10] The scoring of maps has been challenged by many researchers in the literature [11], [12]. Kinchin and Hay [13] criticize the shortcomings of strict scoring of concept maps as a motivation to propose qualitative analysis of maps.…”

Using modern graph analysis techniques on mind maps to help quantify learning

“…• Concept map -a measure of hierarchiness which relates hierarchy in the map [8] • Mind map -compare the scores on tests to the technique [14] • Concept map -the more important a concept, the closer it is to the top of the tree [15] • Mind map -have two independent experts score (sometimes with a rubric) the mind map on a scale two times with one week delay and compare correlation of ratings [16] The scoring of maps has been challenged by many researchers in the literature [17], [18]. Kinchin and Hay [19] criticize the shortcomings of strict scoring of concept maps as a motivation to propose qualitative analysis of maps.…”

How effective is Thinking Maps® instruction in improving Jordanian EFL learners’ creative reading skills?

“…Alternative strategies have long been sought to teach reading for better comprehension. Thinking Maps ® , a specific set of graphic organizers or visual teaching tools for “helping younger students with the process of building conceptual understanding of content and promoting achievement” (Abi‐El‐Mona & Adb‐Khalick, , p. 298), has been reported to positively affect students’ achievement (e.g., Holzman, ; Leary, ; López, ). Thinking Maps ® has also been found to foster lifelong learning; provide learners with the skills to be “successful thinkers, problem solvers, [and] decision makers” (Hyerle, , p. 2); and help them improve through interaction with other learners (Hyerle, ; Oakley, ).…”