Learning with Concept Maps: The Effect of Activity Structure and the Type of Task
Saved in:
| Title: | Learning with Concept Maps: The Effect of Activity Structure and the Type of Task |
|---|---|
| Language: | English |
| Authors: | Cristina Amante (ORCID |
| Source: | Instructional Science: An International Journal of the Learning Sciences. 2026 54(1). |
| Availability: | Springer. Available from: Springer Nature. One New York Plaza, Suite 4600, New York, NY 10004. Tel: 800-777-4643; Tel: 212-460-1500; Fax: 212-460-1700; e-mail: customerservice@springernature.com; Web site: https://link.springer.com/ |
| Peer Reviewed: | Y |
| Page Count: | 24 |
| Publication Date: | 2026 |
| Document Type: | Journal Articles Reports - Research |
| Education Level: | Higher Education Postsecondary Education |
| Descriptors: | Concept Mapping, Undergraduate Students, Cooperative Learning, Individual Activities, Group Activities, Classroom Communication, Dialogs (Language), Foreign Countries, Comprehension, Recall (Psychology) |
| Geographic Terms: | Spain |
| DOI: | 10.1007/s11251-025-09764-1 |
| ISSN: | 0020-4277 1573-1952 |
| Abstract: | A review of the literature reveals a discrepancy about what type of task with concept maps is the most effective for individual learning. Furthermore, to date, no research has compared these tasks in individual and collaborative learning contexts. This paper explores the influence of the different tasks on learning, involving concept maps and summaries. The participants were 226 undergraduates who were randomly assigned to 12 experimental conditions. Two independent variables were considered: the knowledge representation task (fill-in-the-blanks concept map, sort a shuffled concepts-provided map, self-construct a map, write a summary) and the structure of the activity (individual + collaborative, collaborative + individual, and fully individual). In addition to the evaluation of comprehension and delayed recall, 4195 verbal exchanges during the collaborative activities were recorded and analyzed. Results confirm an interaction between the type of task and the structure of the activity. The students who self-constructed complete concept maps and then discussed them in pairs obtained better learning results than those in other conditions. Verbal interaction was much more dialogic in this type of task, with a significantly greater proportion than in the other conditions of in-depth exploratory talk episodes, and a lower proportion of cumulative talk. However, the fill-in-the-blanks and shuffled-concepts conditions provided a greater proportion of superficial exploratory talk, and the collaborative summary condition generated a greater proportion of non-dialogic talk fragments. The findings are discussed in the context of the ICAP (Interactive, Constructive, Active, and Passive learning) framework, cognitive load theory and the sociocultural perspective on dialogic learning. |
| Abstractor: | As Provided |
| Entry Date: | 2026 |
| Accession Number: | EJ1499830 |
| Database: | ERIC |
| Abstract: | A review of the literature reveals a discrepancy about what type of task with concept maps is the most effective for individual learning. Furthermore, to date, no research has compared these tasks in individual and collaborative learning contexts. This paper explores the influence of the different tasks on learning, involving concept maps and summaries. The participants were 226 undergraduates who were randomly assigned to 12 experimental conditions. Two independent variables were considered: the knowledge representation task (fill-in-the-blanks concept map, sort a shuffled concepts-provided map, self-construct a map, write a summary) and the structure of the activity (individual + collaborative, collaborative + individual, and fully individual). In addition to the evaluation of comprehension and delayed recall, 4195 verbal exchanges during the collaborative activities were recorded and analyzed. Results confirm an interaction between the type of task and the structure of the activity. The students who self-constructed complete concept maps and then discussed them in pairs obtained better learning results than those in other conditions. Verbal interaction was much more dialogic in this type of task, with a significantly greater proportion than in the other conditions of in-depth exploratory talk episodes, and a lower proportion of cumulative talk. However, the fill-in-the-blanks and shuffled-concepts conditions provided a greater proportion of superficial exploratory talk, and the collaborative summary condition generated a greater proportion of non-dialogic talk fragments. The findings are discussed in the context of the ICAP (Interactive, Constructive, Active, and Passive learning) framework, cognitive load theory and the sociocultural perspective on dialogic learning. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 0020-4277 1573-1952 |
| DOI: | 10.1007/s11251-025-09764-1 |
