Summary
In this exercise the first five criteria of Table 3 were probably met. Our subsequent checks may enable us to claim that criterion 6 is also met, and there is little doubt that without it most chemistry teachers would remain sceptical about the worth of such an “extra” set of activities.
The exercise also indicates that it is possible with modifications to move research techniques like 5 and 8 in Table 3 into at least the realm of possibility of teacher-centred or didactic classrooms.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
ARCHENHOLD, W. F., DRIVER, R. H., ORTON, A. & WOOD-ROBINSON, C. Cognitive Development Research in Science and Mathematics. Proceedings of an International Seminar, The University of Leeds, 1980.
BRUMBY, M. Students' Perceptions and learning styles associated with the concept of evolution by natural selection. Ph.D. thesis, University of Surrey, 1979.
CHAMPAGNE, A. B., KLOPFER, L. E. & ANDERSON, J.Factors influencing the learning of classical mechanics, University of Pittsburgh, 1979.
DELACÔTE, G., GUESNE, E. & TIBERGHIEN, A. Méthodes et résultats concernant l'analyse des conceptions des élèves dans differents domains physiques. Deux exemples: les notions de chaleur et lumière.Revue Francais Pédagogie, 1978, 45, 25–32.
FENSHAM, P. J. A Research Base for New Objectives of Science Teaching.Research in Science Education, 1980, 10, 23–33.
FENSHAM, P. J., GARRARD, J. E., WEST, L. H. T. Does Learning about learning help in chemistry? submitted toAustralian Science Teachers' Journal, 1980.
GUNSTONE, R. F. Word Association and the Description of Cognitive Structure.Research in Science Education, 1980, 10, 45–53.
HEFFERNAN, M. W. The Measurement of Understanding. M. Ed. thesis, Monash University, 1980.
LYBECK, L. A research approach to science education at Goteborg.European Journal of Science Education, 1979, 1(1), 119–124.
MASKILL, R. & PEREIRA, D. Cognitive structure from digraph analysis of language. 1980, 349–358, in Archenhold et al. op cit. Cognitive Development Research in Science and Mathematics. Proceedings of an International Seminar, The University of Leeds, 1980.
NOVAK, J. D. An alternative to Piagetian psychology for science and mathematics education.Science Education, 1977, 61(4), 453–477.
NOVAK, J. D. Methodological Issues in Investigating Meaningful Learning. 1980, 129–147, in Archenhold et al. op cit. Cognitive Development Research in Science and Mathematics. Proceedings of an International Seminar, The University of Leeds, 1980.
OGBURN, J. Some uses of networks of options for describing complicated qualitative data. 1980, 359–367, in Archenhold et al. op. cit. Cognitive Development Research in Science and Mathematics. Proceedings of an International Seminar, The University of Leeds, 1980.
OSBORNE, R. J. & GILBERT, J. K.An approach to student understanding of basic concepts in science. Institute of Educational Technology, University of Surrey, Guildford. 1979.
PINES, A. L., NOVAK, J. D., POSNER, G. J. & Van KIRK, J. The clinical interview: a method for evaluating cognitive structure.Curriculum Series Research Report, No. 6, Department of Education, Cornell University, 1978.
PREECE, P.F.W. Exploration of semantic space.Science Education. 1978, 63(5), 547–562.
SCHAEFFER, G. Inclusive thinking with exclusive concepts. 1980, 382–396 in Archenhold et al. op. cit. Cognitive Development Research in Science and Mathematics. Proceedings of an International Seminar, The University of Leeds, 1980.
SHAVELSON, R. J. Methods for examining representations of a subject matter structure in a student's memory.Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 1974. 11 (3), 231–249.
STEWART, J. H. Content and Cognitive Structure: Critique used by Science Education Researchers.Science Education. 1979, 63(3), 395–405.
STEWART, J. H.. Techniques for Assessing and Representing Information in Cognitive Structure.Science Education. 1980, 64 (2), 223–235.
SUTTON, C. R. The Learner's Prior Knowledge: a Critical Review of Techniques for Probing its Organisation.European Journal of Science Education. 1980, 2(2), 107–120.
SYMINGTON, D. & NOVAK, J. D. Teaching Children how to Learn. Part 1 and Part 2.Education Magazine (in press).
TIBERGHIEN, A. Modes and conditions of learning—an example: the learning of some aspects of the concept of heat. 1980, 129–309, in Archenhold et al. op. cit. Cognitive Development Research in Science and Mathematics. Proceedings of an International Seminar, The University of Leeds, 1980.
WEST, L. H. T. & FENSHAM, P. J. What is learning chemistry? InChemical Education-a View across the Secondary-Tertiary Interface, 1979. 162–169, R. A. C. I., Chemical Education Division.
WEST, L. H. T. Towards descriptions of the cognitive structures of science students. 1980, 342–347 in Archenhold et al. op. cit. Cognitive Development Research in Science and Mathematics. Proceedings of an International Seminar, The University of Leeds, 1980.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Fensham, P.J., Garrard, J. & West, L. The use of cognitive mapping in teaching and learning strategies. Research in Science Education 11, 121–129 (1981). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02356775
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02356775