Concept mapping: a unique means for negotiating meaning in professional studies.

       Concept mapping (Novak & Gowin, 1984) has been used extensively
       as a graphic organiser in classroom teaching. This article
       addresses two particular approaches to using concept mapping
       that go beyond classroom planning into the realm of
       "idea-exchange" with concept mapping as mediator. The notion of
       "negotiative concept mapping" is examined in two professional
       contexts namely teacher education and medical school software
       development. The potential for negotiating ideas and meaning
       using concept mapping in these settings is discussed based on
       empirical materials including: qualitative observations by the
       authors, student surveys, and student interview data.

THE SCOPE OF USE OF GRAPHIC ORGANISERS

Graphic organisers can be a very effective means of sorting ideas and the relationships between ideas. Because in a single diagram one can summarise many concepts, the graphic organiser can potentially serve as a very efficient mind map. As a professional tool, graphic organisers have proven very useful for teachers because of their capacity to clearly delineate curriculum objectives and connections. This capacity allows teachers to substantiate their particular approaches to mandated teaching outcomes.

Webs and semantic networking have been well-used organisers (Nabors, Edwards, & Bartel, 1994; Jonassen, Peck, & Wilson; 1999) within constructivist teaching frameworks environments (Brooks & Brooks, 1993; Duffy & Cunningham, 1996). These work well because within constructivist models, the notion of prior knowledge is particularly relevant when we consider how students are to accommodate new knowledge into existing schema (Posner, Strike, Hewson, & Gertzog, 1982) hence the value of a graphic organiser.

Arguably the most popular graphic organiser has been the concept map (Novak & Gowin, 1984). In the strictest definition, the concept map extends the simple graphic listing of ideas to include critical features namely a hierarchal distribution of ideas and labelling of the relationships between adjacent concepts. The growing popularity of concept maps has spawned a range of software tools for creating maps. Some examples include: SemNet[R], Learning Tool[R], TextVision[R], CMap[R] and most recently Inspiration[R].

A Mindtool Approach in the Classroom

The advent of computer software has made it much easier to construct and modify concept maps. The electronic concept map would aptly be called a "mindtool." Jonassen (1996) defined a mindtool as "a way of using a computer application program to engage learners in constructive, higher-order, critical thinking about the subjects they are studying" p. iv. It is not just a list of ideas; the concept map has great potential to encourage students to carefully consider how groups of ideas are related and conceptually, what their hierarchal arrangement is.

A concept mapping program for instance may be used in three distinctly different teacher-student exercises: (a) the teacher may have students construct a concept map at the onset of a unit in an effort to access prior knowledge (Novak, 1990), (b) a teacher may engage students in preparing a pre and post concept map for a unit of study (Zieneddine & Abd-El-Khal-ick, 2001), and (c) a teacher may work with the students in an ongoing exercise that gradually builds the map as the unit content emerges (MacKinnon, 2001; Odom & Kelly, 1998).

AN APPLICATION IN SCIENCE TEACHER TRAINING

For some time I have posed my teacher interns with the task of preparing a concept map for curriculum units they are likely to encounter in their public school teaching. Acadia University has been a laptop institution (Hemming & MacKinnon, 1998) since 1996. In 2001, the software ICU and Inspiration became available to students and faculty on the university network. Inspiration is a popular mapping tool (www.inspiration.com) while ICU is a "home-grown" networking tool. ICU allows the instructor laptop to link with any obliging student on the network and access (and control) their laptop screen. With a classroom digital projector and laptop docking station, this has allowed for an interesting Mindtool approach.

In three independent science education classes of approximately 30 students, the following exercises were undertaken. After a short tutorial on Inspiration in the second class meeting, students were asked to construct a concept map of the content the course had engaged thus far. On a weekly basis, students worked in groups to update and modify their concept maps. Because screens could be accessed by the instructor at any time and in turn projected for the entire class to observe, it became a unique opportunity to unpack student thinking around the hierarchy of concepts and corresponding relational links. In essence, the students and instructor were able to "negotiate the concept map" in real time as the course progressed.

THE IMPACT OF NEGOTIATIVE CONCEPT MAPPING

Research Design

An electronic survey of 10 questions (5-point Likert scale) was designed to sample student's (a) background experiences with technology, (b) opinion on the ease of using the Inspiration and ICU software, (c) perception of how the concept mapping impacted their construction of knowledge, and (d) perception of the relative utility of using similar communication strategies in other courses.

The survey was randomly field tested with three students with slight modifications to improve clarity. The survey data was collected as an Excel file and analysed for patterns (n=70). Perceived relationships were discussed in a peer-debriefing (Guba & Lincoln, 1989) session with a professional colleague unattached to the research. Based on emergent trends, a standardised open-ended interview was prepared (Patton, 1990; Berg, 2001). The interview schedule was independently field tested with three randomly chosen students and modified for clarity and sequence of questions (Seidman, 1998). The intent of the interviews was to better understand student rationale for the survey trends. Following the completion of the course, five students from each of three sections were randomly selected and invited to participate in a 30 minute interview. Interviews were audio-taped and the tapes transcribed. Transcriptions were supplied to the interviewees for editing to ensure accuracy and extend/clarify any ambiguous conversations. The transcripts were then subjected to iterative coding (Glesne, 1999; Miles & Huberman, 1984) and themes identified. Results were collated and member-checked (Patton) with the 15 interviewees in a focus group session (Morgan, 1997; Berg, 2001).

Results from the Teacher Education Study

In any study of technology impact on education it is crucial to appreciate the predisposition which students have to application of technology to instruction which includes both their skill base and attitudinal factors. In this sample (n=70) it was clear (Likert scale 4/5) that students had confidence in several areas including (but not limited to): (a) communication technologies (e-mail and chat technologies), (b) standard office applications (word processing, spreadsheets, and databases), and (c) web research techniques. Students indicated (97%) that they were not intimidated by the "learning curve" for Inspiration or ICU software nor did they find the concomitant classroom networking difficult to access or use. In fact in interviews, students consistently relayed that the "networking technology was seamless in its application." This was an important finding because new technology integration strategies routinely run the risk of having students preoccupied with difficulties in managing a system sometimes precluding the pedagogical benefits. All indications were that students found the technology "transparent" in its application.

Students found negotiative concept mapping (NCM) to be an excellent (Likert scale 5/5) means of reviewing the work from past meetings. Students suggested that the interactive nature of constructing the NCM in real time allowed them to better understand the nuances and complexities of relationships between concepts. In several instances students alluded to defending their choice of conceptual hierarchy and how it helped them to build confidence in the content. Unanimous reference was made to the quality of discussion that NCM promoted in class. In interviews students noted that NCM "provided a framework for the instructor to address student misconceptions." At the close of the course students were asked to submit an essay that summarised their cognitive growth in the course. Students were astounded at the practical utility of having constructed a concept map of the entire course and found this to be invaluable in assimilating their learning in the course. They repeatedly made reference to the ability to see how all aspects of the course were linked from beginning to end and the inherent "sense-making" that this imparted.

The focus group sessions helped to identify particular advantages to using this strategy in teacher education venues.

          This exercise forced me to think about how I actually
          assimilate and accommodate information as I learn. But
          moreover, the experience has heightened my awareness of how
          important it is for me as a teacher to understand how my
          students think. Learning is complex and constructing meaning
          can only happen in student-centred settings where I as a
          teacher diagnose student's problems with logic ... you know
          rather than just telling them the way it is, I want to build
          on their understanding!

          Scaffolding student's learning is so important but I can't do
          this effectively without knowing the way students think. The
          concept map approach lets me as a teacher get inside the
          student's head. I can see where their thinking is going so
          much more easily when they articulate their understanding in
          a drawing; especially the labelled links.

          I think that the NCM activity forced me to think about the
          inter-relatedness of curriculum and how much more meaningful
          it can be when context is continually adjusted. Forcing us to
          step back and look at the big picture and then revisit new
          curriculum as it relates; that was an ongoing process that I
          think I will incorporate in my teaching. The technology is
          neat, but I can do this in my classroom with chart paper too!
          The idea of building knowledge together is powerful, the
          technology just makes it much more efficient.

          I would like to see the NCM approach used in more of my
          courses because it gets at the concepts and the relationships
          between concepts within a social constructivist framework; it
          works. I do have one concern that I am trying to balance and
          that is the time it takes. I really believe this type of
          learning is substantive but it takes so much time in class to
          negotiate meaning and build consensus; I guess it comes back
          to the question of quality versus quantity.

All indications are that this "mindtool" approach using Inspiration and ICU, shows great promise for teacher education. The facile communication allows the professor and teacher intern to interact in a constructive setting in a way that was never before possible. The interactivity between mentor and students promoted by NCM appears to foster productive inductive instruction. The fruitful exchange and negotiation of ideas can however be applied to other settings.

AN APPLICATION TO SOFTWARE DESIGN: MEDICAL STUDENT TRAINING RESOURCES

As an instructional designer (second author) in a medical faculty for five years my primary role was to assist medicine, dentistry, psychology, nursing, and physiotherapy academics to enhance their teaching and learning through the use of multimedia and online methodology in the health sciences curriculum. To achieve this goal I often needed to work with academics who were experts in health sciences but not necessarily expert in the educational design of multimedia or online learning. The focus in working with the academics was not to redesign entire subjects or modules but to focus on conceptually difficult content areas in which students regularly had learning difficulties. This focus attempted to enrich the curricular area and support student learning to enhance their future professional practice as doctors, dentists, nurses, physiotherapists, and psychologists. This part of the article focuses on one example of interacting with several medical subject matter experts (SMEs) to develop a multimedia module on cervical screening. This content area proven challenging from a number of perspectives.

First Step: Project Concept

As a first step in the process I provided guidance on the proposal and concept to be developed. This is an important stage in the process from an instructional design perspective as often the shaping of a project needs the instructional designer to begin early to influence the future design and development process. As the most significant decisions about a project are made at the beginning of the project it is important that an instructional designer is involved in conceptualizing any grant submissions. Strauss (1997) referred to this factor as the "decision making funnel" as analysis (first stage in any project) requires a greater number of decisions and these decisions are more significant in influencing subsequent phases of the design and development.

Second Step: Informal Conversational Interview

An initial step in conceptualizing a project for multimedia development is an informal interview with the project holders to assess the needs of the SMEs. Questions are interspersed throughout the interview as opposed to completing a more formal needs assessment document. This subtle approach is undertaken in order to understand the SMEs perspective as opposed to imposing an instructional design perspective. The major characteristic of this interviewing method is that the informality of the interview may be perceived as a general conversation about the topic. In other words the conversational style of the interviewer is used in such a way that the SME views it as a relaxed conversation. This method of interviewing is particularly useful in the first meeting with the SME when the instructional designer needs to develop rapport and find out general information about a topic. "The informal conversational interview relies entirely on the spontaneous generation of questions in the natural flow of an interaction" (Patton, 1990, p.280). The instructional designer in this situation utilises skills that emphasis and encourage easy interaction with people, the ability to generate rapid insights, and the ability to formulate questions quickly and smoothly, and be responsive to the SME.

Third Step: Initial Conceptualization 

The next step in the process by the instructional designer is to conceptualize the ideas and concepts of the SMEs from the initial meeting. The instructional designer constructs a map to represent the major aspects of the project. In reality during the first meeting I often sketch out a rough version of the map on paper as the SME is discussing the project. This map provides a draft for the computer generated version of the map. To maximise the interaction in the follow-up meeting with the SME, a concept map is used to conceptualize the project at this particular point in time. This has two functions, first (a) it begins to assist the instructional designer to conceptualize the design for the project but equally important (b) it displays the current thinking about the topic to all members of the design and development team. This enables each member to begin to understand the nature of the project. This first concept map (Figures 1a,1b,1c) illustrates the mental model of the SME in relation to the project as conceptualized by the instructional designer. The advantage of creating a map is that this allows the designer and SME to begin the negotiative process between content, pedagogy and design by using the concept map as a cognitive tool. The construction of a concept map and subsequent discussion with the SME has three advantages. First it informs the designer whether they understand the interrelationships between the content. Second, it provides feedback to the SME about the designers understanding of the topic. Third, it fosters further dialogue between the designer and SME. The resultant map from the first interaction with the SME is shown, it illustrates three topics for the module: (a) context (Figure 1a), (b) preparation (Figure 1b), and (c) examination (Figure 1c).

Fourth Step: Eliciting Tacit Knowledge 

As seen from these concept maps, (Figures 1a,1b,1c) this represents an initial and superficial examination of the topic by the instructional designer and SME. This content will need to be elaborated and a learning design will need to be developed in parallel to the content analysis. Further in-depth information elicitation needs to occur so that the design of the project can be clearly articulated to developers so that they can begin the interface design and a prototype for the project. To assist in the elaboration of the content an ethnographic interview strategy is used in conjunction with the concept map. The ethnographic interview involves conversations with the client which have the explicit purpose of focusing on tacit knowledge. In this case we are interested in the tacit knowledge of the SME about cervical screening. Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995) suggested that explicit knowledge is objective knowledge whereas tacit knowledge is subjective knowledge. Davenport and Prusak (2000) suggested that "tacit, complex knowledge" has been "developed and internalized by the knower over a long period of time" (p. 70). Novak (1998) further suggested that "experts in any field have a good deal of tacit knowledge that they do know how to impart to others" (p.100). Novak (1998) suggested that concept maps are powerful tools in assisting this process as they assist in capturing, preserving, and exchanging tacit knowledge into explicit knowledge. In my 10 years experience in using the concept map with hundreds of SMEs, I have also found concept maps to be powerful tools for assisting the instructional designer - subject matter expert interaction. When combined with the ethnographic interview a powerful tool can be used in negotiating the content, pedagogy, and design for a multimedia project with the SME. Three broad types of questions are used in an attempt to examine this tacit knowledge: descriptive, structural and contrast questions (Spradley, 1979). Descriptive questions include: (a) the grand tour question, (b) the mini-tour question, (c) example questions, (d) experience questions, and (e) native language questions. The grand tour questions typify the descriptive question. When people arrive at a new setting they often wish to physically tour the setting to observe people in action. Structural questions require an explanation and seek to elicit an explanation of some phenomenon by asking for specific information. Contrast questions focus on discovering the meaning of a symbol by <<finding out how it is different from other symbols."

Fifth Step: Elaborating the Content

Once the interview is completed the instructional designer should begin to conceptualize the content in more depth. The map is used to wrestle with the content and begin to elaborate the initial conceptualization of the project. The combination of more focussed questions to elicit specific content and the use of the initial concept map as a springboard for further discussion and elaboration assists this process. Once the overview map has been elaborated, clarified, and verified by the SME and other project members, the next step is to focus on one discrete topic/section of the map and elaborate the content. There are two choices depending upon the judgement of the instructional designer. For instance in some cases it may be beneficial to elaborate the most difficult topic first in order to complete difficult cognitive work at the beginning of the project when motivation is highest. On the other hand it is sometimes beneficial to examine a topic most familiar to the SME to maintain rapport with the SME and motivate them in the design of the multimedia project. In this project we began with topic one, which involved five mini-cases of five women from different ethnic backgrounds and their personal experience with cervical screening. This proved to be the most challenging topic as instead of dealing with one woman in the preparation, examination, and results topics it was necessary to focus on five "authentic cases" (Figures 2a, 2b & 3a, 3b). The project team consisted of SMEs dispersed around Australia and New Zealand in Melbourne, Brisbane, and Auckland and each specialised in issues related to women with different ethnic backgrounds. Topic one involved the examination of five mini-cases. After several meetings and iterations the following map was developed which formed the basis for the learning design of the topic and which included key information. Although interrelationships are not explicitly outlined on the map the instructional designer would outline these aspects to the design and development team. As can be seen from the maps a combination of content analysis and learning design for the multimedia module are beginning to take shape.

Sixth Step: Teachback Interview

In the numerous interactions between the designer and SME the instructional designer may use a teachback interview combined with the concept map at the beginning of each interaction. The teachback interview strategy is based on the "conversation theory" of Pask (1975) who suggested that the very act of teaching a concept "is likely to teach ... the verbalizer ... the concept in its own right" (Pask, p. 63). Within any interview there is constant interplay between the two people, however in the teachback interview there is more emphasis on the process of explanation, clarification, translation, and re-explanation throughout the interview. "The expert describes a procedure to the interviewer, who then 'teaches' it back in the expert's terms and to the expert's satisfaction. When they agree, it is said that they share the same concept" (Neale, 1989, p. 114). The teachback interview may also help to prevent misconceptions by focussing on each concept in turn until a mutual understanding occurs. This process of examining concepts until both share the same concept will almost guarantee both the designer and the SME are on the same wavelength regarding the content being elicited in the designer-SME interview and will help to prevent the formation of misconceptions. Although the teachback interview is a powerful strategy in its own right, when it is combined with the concept map it provides a more pragmatic negotiative tool for both the instructional designer and SME. Concept mapping provides a means of portraying conceptual relationships as discussed with the SME.

Seventh Step: Development of Prototype

This negotiative process between the instructional designer and SME also has the explicit purpose of developing a design brief or blueprint for multimedia designers and developers. A further step in the process involves the use of PowerPoint to begin transforming the concept map into a screen by screen storyboard. The rapport developed in the development of the concept map assists in this process and provides sufficient information for graphic designers and multimedia developers to design the interface, navigation, and develop the first topic as a prototype for evaluation by the SMEs.

Feedback from One SME About the Process

Feedback from SMEs and the project officer involved in the SET project has been positive in relation to the use of concept maps. This was a three year project and many of these maps were created in the first six months of the project. After reflecting on the maps close to the end of the project the following comments were made.

         The maps provide an overview to see the "big picture." This
         enables the team to see where best to place different levels of
         information. Similarly it can assist in planning the
         interactive components by building the complexity as the story
         progresses. A map also provides structure for the development
         of different areas--these can take place at different times
         but be "slotted into" the correct part of the map.

         It creates a clear and complete vision for the project from the
         outset. As a project officer joining the team at a later
         developmental stage I found the maps a very useful tool to get
         up to speed with the project and avoid any duplication of
         effort. The level of detail was very helpful as it allowed you
         to quickly identify any outstanding tasks as the project
         progressed. It also let you stay on track and not get carried
         away with peripheral ideas (unless this was absolutely
         essential).

         All good projects need a good plan. I think that a mind map is
         a fantastic way to organise your thoughts without cluttering it
         up with too many unnecessary details, although I appreciate
         that not everyone does this visually ....

         I can only see advantages. For the team being new to this
         approach it was an invaluable resource and made communication
         between the different members (working on different areas)
         easier.

         The changes during the conception and production were enhanced
         by having the map. We could check for overlap, omissions and
         duplication and correct these.

         It is wonderful to see the initial story boards "come to life"
         in the completed product. Although we added some extras along
         the way

         I can see that we accomplished everything we initially set out
         to achieve. It was a hard slog to get the actual work done but
         at least none of it was wasted effort. And for that I thank the
         vision of the creative team.

Overall, this process has proven to be highly successful in assisting the communication between team members and developing a design plan for the project. The completed project is currently being commercialised and evaluation on the multimedia module is currently being undertaken in four countries. In addition, I have successfully used the process described in working with the oil and gas industry in Canada, open cut coal miners in Central Queensland, Australia and medical doctors in Melbourne, Australia. I am currently utilising the process in Hong Kong with local Chinese in a variety of content areas.

THE IMPACT OF NEGOTIATING IDEAS WITH CONCEPT MAPS

Constructivism 

Although very different in their focus, the two cases discussed in this article demonstrate constructivist approaches to the use of "negotiative concept mapping." Hew, Hur, Jang, & Tian (2004) suggested that constructivism manifests itself in the following prescriptive principles for instruction namely:

       (1) embed learning in complex, realistic, and relevant
       environments; (2) provide for social negotiation as an integral
       part of learning; (3) support multiple perspectives and the use
       of multiple modes of representation; (4) encourage ownership in
       learning; (5) nurture self-awareness of the knowledge
       construction process. (p. 4111).

Both approaches represent methods which emphasise collaboration, dialogue between teacher-education students, or dialogue between medical experts and an instructional designer. Both utilise a process approach, which is not prescriptive. The development of a curriculum model and the design for a multimedia project rely on collaboration between participants. "Collaboration most often requires conversation among participants. Learners working in groups must socially negotiate a common understanding of a task and the methods they will use to accomplish it" (Jonassen, Howland, Moore, & Marra, 1999, p. 9). Both approaches emphasise the construction of knowledge by each of the participants throughout the process.

A Recursive Iterative Process

To the unsuspecting, both descriptions outlined may appear to represent a process, which follows a linear direction and involves a discrete series of steps. In reality both approaches require constant iteration by the students and teacher in the first case and constant iteration by both the SME and instructional designer in the second case. In the case of working with a SME it requires negotiation and clarification to create an accurate representation of the content as depicted by the SME.

Unique Window to Identify Misconceptions

The concept map can provide a useful "mindtool" for the identification of misconceptions. The visual representation allows active participants to scrutinise and pinpoint areas where further clarification or misconceptions may be prevalent. In the designer-SME interaction the concept map focuses the attention of the SME on pertinent information allowing the scanning of the map for accurate and inaccurate information. Keppell (2000) suggested that the map is a powerful nonverbal means of communication between the designer and SME. The map may also act as a communication device that confirms the knowledge shared by the designer and SME. In addition the focus of the interview can then be concerned with gaps in information and the identification of misconceptions (Keppell, 2001).

Processes That Foster Critical Thinking

Both processes emphasise critical thinking in terms of asking participants to "interpret, analyse and evaluate ideas and arguments" (Fisher, 2001, p. v). These skills are transferable to other situations. Students and teachers can use negotiative concept mapping for many other areas of teacher-education. The generic critical thinking skills utilised by the instructional designer in this example have been used in content areas as diverse as medicine, coal mining, and teacher-education and these principles have been successfully used with hundreds of SMEs.

Metacognitive Exercises

When participants are asked to conceptualise how it is they should organise their ideas in a meaningful summative map, it forces them to "think about thinking." Paris and Winograd (1990) suggested that this is a component of the notion of metacognition. In their analysis they posit that metacognition involves two processes "self-appraisal and self management of cognition" p17. Concept mapping as a negotiative tool, involves personal and social construction of meaning but also necessarily metacognitive processes. Paris and Winograd contended that metacognitive exercises lead to higher-order critical thinking patterns that promote learning.

Mapping Unearths Detailed Cognitive Subtleties Through Relational Operators 

There is some evidence that the visuo-spatial representation may assist in triggering further information. Lambiotte, Dansereau, Cross, and Reynolds (1989, p. 332) suggested that knowledge maps are "computationally efficient" in that they "facilitate faster search and recognition of relevant information" (p. 332). The presentation of the concept map to the SME may also activate both the spatial and verbal systems thus increasing the processing efficiency of the information. The graphic nature of the knowledge map may allow spatial and verbal cross-cuing which in turn may assist the retrieval of appropriate content.

Emergent Maps Allow Tracking of Conceptual Development

Tracking the interactive and emergent versions of the map illustrates the development of the concepts. For instance in the interactions with the SME several versions of the map are created. Analysis of these maps can be analysed qualitatively to determine which concepts have been elaborated throughout the process. In the case of the teacher-student model, in an action research mode (Parsons & Brown, 2002), the teacher can collect valuable feedback (Angelo & Cross, 1993; Cross & Steadman, 1996) to inform how they should develop the course in future offerings. For instance, as the teacher sees the students consistently make particularly conceptual connections (that may be short-sighted or incorrect) the emergent maps may give the teacher clues as to how a change in their instructional sequencing or concept-meshing might assist the students in making clear connections in the curriculum.

Hierarchal Distribution Helps Distinguish Global Objectives

The concept map as a negotiative tool, gives instantaneous feedback to what the participants are thinking about the hierarchal organisation of information. Particularly at the onset of negotiating with a map, the teacher or software designer can sense very quickly whether the "big picture" ideas provide an umbrella for developmental thinking. If instead, the teacher or software designer sees that participants are preoccupied with sublevel concepts or specific examples, they can easily curb the process and have participants revisit a logical sequence (general at the top to specific at the bottom). Organisationally, this reconsideration may constitute the difference between a student truly understanding the complexity of ideas that form a unit of information. In the case of the software design, a clear logical sequence (storyboard) is indispensable; the concept map is an effective feedback tool to promote this planning.

CONCLUSION

Concept mapping at a primary level represents a powerful mindtool for knowledge construction by student teachers and instructional designers. As student teachers construct their map they begin to see the interrelationships between disparate content. The process of transforming their understanding of a topic into a graphical representation fosters the development of critical thinking skills. Similarly, instructional designers grappling with an unfamiliar content area may find that transforming the elicited content into a graphical representation may enhance their conceptual understanding of the content area. The instructional designer relies on their metacognitive ability to shape the disparate content and determine interrelationships between the content.

At a secondary level concept mapping promotes communication and allows professors to examine a student's conceptual understanding of a topic. It provides a means of formatively assessing student progress and identifying student misconceptions. The concept map allows the professor to address these misconceptions and provide rich and specific feedback to the students. In the interaction between the instructional designer and subject matter expert, the creation of the concept map allows SMEs to examine the conceptual understanding of the instructional designer and view the potential learning design for the multimedia module. In this situation the instructional designer receives feedback about their conceptualization of the content area.

Negotiative concept mapping at the tertiary level promotes social negotiation and active dialogue to achieve meaningful learning. It represents both personal and social construction of meaning. Negotiative concept mapping combines knowledge construction by individuals; communication using concept maps to explicitly represent ideas; and active dialogue between the learner-professor and between the instructional designer-subject matter expert.

References

Angelo, T., & Cross, K. (1993). Classroom assessment techniques (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Berg, B. (2001). Qualitative research methods for the social sciences (4th ed.). London: Allyn & Bacon.

Brooks, J.G. & Brooks, M.G. (1993). The case for constructivist classrooms. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Cross, K., & Steadman, M. (1996). Classroom research. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Davenport, T.H. & Prusak, L. (2000). Working knowledge: How organizations manage what they know. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Duffy, T. & Cunningham, D. (1996). Constructivism: Implications for the design and delivery of instruction. In D.H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research in educational communications and technology (pp. 170-1198). New York: MacMillan

Fisher, A. (2001). Critical thinking: An introduction. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Glesne, C. (1999). Becoming qualitative researchers (2nd ed.) New York: Longman.

Guba, E., & Lincoln, Y. (1989). Fourth generation evaluation. London: Sage Publications.

Hemming, H., & MacKinnon, G. (1998). The Acadia advantage: Notebook

Hew, K., Hur, J., Jang, H., & Tian, L. (2004). The eight events of instruction: An instructional method based on the constructivist paradigm. In D. Willis, J. Price, R. Carlsen, R. Weber, & N. Davis (Eds.), Proceedings of the Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education, (pp. 4110-4115). Norfolk, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education.

Jonassen, D. (1996) Computers in the classroom: Mindtools for critical thinking. Columbus, OH: Prentice-Hall.

Jonassen, D., Peck, K., & Wilson, B. (1999). Learning with technology. Columbus, OH: Prentice-Hall.

Jonassen, D.H., Howland, J., Moore, J., & Marra, R.M. (1999). Learning to solve problems with technology: A constructivist perspective. Columbus, OH: Merrill Prentice-Hall.

Keppell, M. (2000). Principles at the heart of an instructional designer--subject matter expert interaction. In R. Sims, M. O'Reilly, & S. Sawkins (Eds.), Learning to choose: Choosing to learn. Proceedings of the 17th Annual ASCILITE Conference. Lismore, NSW: Southern Cross University Press (pp. 317-326).

Keppell, M. (2001). Optimising instructional designer--subject matter expert communication in the design and development of multimedia projects. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 12(2/3), 205-223.

Lambiotte, J.G., Dansereau, D.F., Cross, D.R. & Reynolds, S.B. (1989). Multirelational semantic maps. Educational Psychology Review, 1(4), 331-367.

MacKinnon, G.R. (2001). A promising model for incorporating the computer in science learning, Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 20(4), 395-404.

Miles, M.B., & Huberman, A.M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis (2nd ed.). London: Sage.

Morgan, D. (1997). Focus groups as qualitative research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Nabors, M.L., Edwards, L.C. & Bartel, V. (1994). Webbing with spiders. Science and Children, 31(8), 33-35.

Neale, I.M. (1989). First generation expert systems: A review of knowledge acquisition methodologies. The Knowledge Engineering Review, 105-145.

Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The knowledge-creating company: How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation. New York: Oxford University Press.

Novak, J. (1990). Concept mapping: A useful tool for science education. Journal for Research in Science Teaching, 27, 937-950.

Novak, J.D. (1998). Learning, creating, and using knowledge: Concept maps as facilitative tools in schools and corporations. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Novak, J.D. & Gowin, D.B. (1984). Learning how to learn. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Odom, A., & Kelly, P. (1998). Making learning meaningful. The Science Teacher, 65(4) 33-37.

Paris, S.G., & Winograd, P. (1990). How metacognition can promote academic learning and instruction. In B.F. Jones & L. Idol (Eds.), Dimensions of thinking and cognitive instruction (pp. 15-51). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Pask, G. (1975). Conversation theory: Applications in education and epistemology. Amsterdam: Elsevier.

Parsons, R. & Brown, K. (2002). Teacher as reflective practitioner and action researcher. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth-Thomson

Patton, M. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Posner, G.J., Strike, K.A., Hewson, P.W., & Gertzog, W.A. (1982). Accommodation of a scientific conception: Toward a theory of conceptual change. Science Education, 66(2), 221-227

Seidman, I. (1998). Interviewing as qualitative research: A guide for researchers in education and social sciences (2nd ed.). New York: Teachers College Press.

Spradley, J.P. (1979). The ethnographic interview. Fort Worth, TX: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

Strauss, R. (1997). Managing multimedia projects. Boston: Focal Press.

Zieneddine, A., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2001). Doing the right thing versus doing the right thing right: Concept mapping in freshman physics laboratory. European Journal of Physics, 22(5), 501-511.

GREGORY R. MACKINNON

Acadia University

Canada

[e-mail]

MIKE KEPPELL

Hong Institute of Education

China

[e-mail]