Lukas Bernhard Becker

Concept mapping (CM) can be an effective strategy to facilitate understanding-based learning of complex and abstract scientific content. In our study, we tried to answer two questions that have not yet been clarified: (1) How effective is CM if the learners do not have the textual learning material available when constructing their concept maps (retrieval setting) in contrast to when the material is available (elaboration setting)? (2) Do potential effects of the two settings depend on the intensity of a previous CM strategy training? To this end, we established a quasi-experimental four-group plan and collected data of N = 93 undergraduate students. The participants received either a detailed CM strategy training or just a short introduction and were then asked to apply CM in a retrieval or elaboration setting. The quality of constructed concept maps and content-related learning success were assessed to determine potential group differences. Overall, our results show a significantly positive but setting-independent effect of the CM strategy training on methodical CM skills. However, the different setting conditions differed neither regarding concept map quality nor content-related learning success, implying that CM in retrieval settings could be as effective as in elaboration settings.

Concept Mapping (CM) is a learning strategy to organize and understand complex relationships, which are particularly characteristic of the natural science subjects. Previous research has already shown that constructing concept maps can promote students’ meaningful learning in terms of deeper knowledge and its more flexible use. While researchers generally agree that students need to practice using CM successfully for learning, key parameters of effective CM training (e.g., content, structure, and duration) remain controversial. This desideratum is taken up by our study, in which three different training approaches were evaluated: a CM training with scaffolding and feedback vs. a CM training without additional elements vs. a non-CM control training. In a quasi-experimental design, we assessed the learning outcome of N = 73 university students who each had participated in one of the trainings before. Our results suggest that an extensive CM training with scaffolding and feedback is most appropriate to promote both CM competence and acquisition of knowledge. From an educational perspective, it would therefore be advisable to accept the time-consuming process of intensive practice of CM in order to enable students to adequately use of the strategy and thus facilitate meaningful learning in terms of achieving sustained learning success.