Contentious issues in science education: building critical thinking patterns through two-dimensional concept mapping.

Using a survey and follow-up qualitative research design, an elaborate model of technology integration has been studied in a science education classroom. Using a coding system known as cognotes, teacher-interns were first taught how to recognize electronic discussion contributions consisting specifically of critical approaches such as compare, contrast, cause and effect, inductive and deductive reasoning. An electronic concept map outlining the instructor's consideration of a contentious issue (creationism vs. evolution) was supplied to students. Students further developed concept maps (using Inspiration[R] software) in two ways: (a) students hyperlinked the individual concepts in their map to html-based learning logs and (b) students hyperlinked their own relational phrases between concepts to "captured" electronic discussions. The impact of the instructional approach was assessed through a survey of 68 students, standardized semi-structured interviews, and focus group methodology. Students were especially positive with regard to using a two-dimensional hyperlinked graphic organizer to lend a framework to their understanding of a contentious issue in science education. With regard to electronic discussion, students identified improvements in (a) their ability to formulate arguments, (b) their ability to lead effective discussions, and (c) their ability to substantiate their conceptual frameworks. The technology-integration model described is generic in its application and could be used with a variety of content knowledge.

CONTEXT OF THE STUDY

The study was undertaken in the School of Education at Acadia University, the first laptop institution in Canada. In 1996 Acadia entered into a partnership with IBM that would place laptop computers in the hands of some 3500 students and 400 faculty. Through an elaborate network, participants have anywhere-anytime access to the internet and an extensive offering of software. Classrooms are equipped with complete digital audio-visual systems and network connections allowing for an excellent environment to study the pedagogical impacts pf technology integration.

Teacher interns (n=68) in two sections of a science education course were necessarily involved in the action research study. All interns were enrolled in a two-year post-degree Bachelor of Education program leading to teacher certification. A cursory electronic survey of all 68 students established that their level of competency in computer technologies (e.g., word processing, e-mail, spreadsheets, databases, internet searching) was good to very good on a Likert scale. (LS= 4.5 where 1 was very poor and 5 was very good)

A MODEL FOR USING TECHNOLOGY TO UNDERSTAND THE ISSUES SURROUNDING THE CREATION VERSUS EVOLUTION CONTROVERSY

Typically teacher interns in science education are exposed to systematic strategies for engaging the contentious issues in science (National Science Teachers Association [NSTA], 2000). In particular, science teacher interns are anxious to gain experience in dealing with the complicated controversy of creationism versus evolution.

The instructor supplied students with an incomplete electronic hierarchical concept map (Novak, 1990) prepared with the software Inspiration[R] (Figure 1). A conscious choice was made to access electronic concept mapping tools in that they have been shown to result in more conceptually complex mapping amongst students (Royer & Royer, 2004). The concept map was based on component topical aspects that the instructor would introduce in three consecutive class lectures on aspects of engaging evolution versus creationism in science classrooms. The concept map was incomplete in that the relational phrases between concepts were purposefully left blank.

A unique aspect of the Inspiration[R] software (which students have network access to) is its ability to hyperlink external documents (local or online) not only to concept boxes but also to the propositional phrases that link the concepts. In this way students can build up a meaningful graphic organizer in one dimension while providing substantiation of their understanding through hyperlinked supplemental information in the second dimension (Figure 2).

[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]

Science teacher interns were introduced to the creation controversy in three consecutive lectures that conceptually were represented in a graphic organizer they were provided (see Figure 1). As they formulated their understandings they electronically added relational propositions (links between concepts) to their own individual concept maps. Interns were asked to write reflective journals (as Word[R] documents) corresponding to each of the concepts in the concept map. These journal entries were then hyperlinked to their concept map. The Inspiration[R] map and linked local journal entries were saved to CD ROM. Journal entries were later assessed by the instructor based on the quality of conceptual articulation and the extent of reflection engaged by the student. The relational propositions were also evaluated later based on the clarity of the mapping and the "richness" of the descriptors.

Students were then asked to link their relational phrases to external documents, namely html-based captured electronic discussion. Asynchronous electronic discussion was organized in a scheme that had each student leading a discussion and participating in at least three other discussions. Interns directed their coordinated electronic discussions in such a way as to promote and accumulate fruitful discussion around the nature of the propositional phrases they had applied to their individual concept maps. After two weeks of asynchronous electronic discussions, interns captured their discussion and then selectively quoted useful components which they in turn linked to their concept map propositions (see Figure 2). It is important to note that (a) students could choose to add additional concept boxes beyond what was provided by the instructor, (b) students were encouraged to prepare journal entries around all concepts, and (c) students had the choice of selecting which propositional phrases they wished to hyperlink to electronic discussion. In evaluation of this activity, the onus was on the student to demonstrate to the instructor they understood the topic by hyperlinking to well-chosen appropriate supporting documents as previously outlined.

[FIGURE 2 OMITTED]

Promoting Quality Electronic Discussion

Clearly the impact of the concept mapping exercise is in part dependent on the quality of the linked documents, which serve to express the student's depth of understandings. While the personal journal entries inherently will vary in their quality, there are means to more proactively improve another linked component, that is, the electronic discussion. These discussions were coordinated by students and necessarily had to demonstrate two characteristics: (a) they must lend an understanding to the relational phrase between the selected concepts and (b) they must be led in such a way as to promote critical thinking through productive discussion patterns. In an effort to promote substantive discussion within individual discussion groups a series of preliminary exercises were undertaken with all interns.

Based on previous work (MacKinnon & Aylward, 2000) five categories of critical thinking modes were accessed: compare, contrast, cause and effect, inductive and deductive reasoning. For each of these categories a graphic icon and macro was developed for Microsoft Word[R] (Figure 3) such that interns could assign an electronic code "cognote" to specific portions of text in a discussion transcript. In three successive exercises, interns were supplied with a single page of captured electronic discussion. They were then asked to code the entire discussion based on the five aforementioned contribution styles. After each successive exercise, interns were paired with another intern to discuss their comparative recognition and assignment of the codes. Interns then compared their own assignment of codes to that of the instructors in a closure session. Ambiguity in the assignment of cog-notes was discussed. This was repeated in three independent exercises. The instructor noted that students began to recognize discussion patterns in an analytical process; the rationale for instituting such an exercise being to extend student awareness of the higher-order thinking patterns in which they could "contribute" to an asynchronous electronic discussion. In the end the instructor hoped that students would consciously promote substantive discussion to support their understandings of the conceptual relationships within their concept maps.

Based on this coding experience, interns were therefore encouraged to use the identified discussion patterns in their ensuing electronic discussions. The concept map-linked discussions were later evaluated based on the clarity of argumentation and support for the propositional relationships in the first dimension of the concept map.

At the conclusion of the project students submitted a CD ROM containing the concept map hyperlinked to "CD ROM-local" reflective journals and electronic discussion captures for evaluation.

[FIGURE 3 OMITTED]

Research Methods

Teacher interns (n=68) were required to visit and complete an anonymous 25 question online survey at the completion of assignment. The survey had been previously field-tested with five students and modified for clarity. The survey included questions on a Likert Scale (1 agree to 5 disagree) in categories of (a) ease of technology use, (b) perceptions of general utility of the concept map, (c) identifying the utility of the second dimension of the concept map, (d) perceptions of the quality of their discussion group entries, and (e) new learning. The Likert scale was used to define how strongly students felt about the component issues and to help direct the nature of the interview questions. The survey data was not intended to be used to define significant correlations but more to direct the interview design towards unearthing the rationale for emergent trends.

Based on trends in the survey data, a standardized open-ended interview was designed (Berg, 2001; Patton, 1990). With a pilot group of five students, the interview questions were modified to remove ambiguity. After the science education course was completed, five student-interns from each of two sections were randomly selected and invited to participate in a 30 minute interview. All students accepted the invitation, the distribution being six females and four males.

Interviews were audio-taped and transcribed. The transcriptions were coded for emergent themes in an iterative process (Glesne, 1999; Miles & Huberman, 1994). Intermediate results of the survey and interviews were corroborated in a peer-debriefing session with a research colleague (Guba & Lincoln, 1989). A member check session (Morgan, 1997) was arranged in which results were shared with two randomly-invited focus groups of six students (equal representation from each course section; seven males, five females). The reliability and implications of the findings were discussed with the focus groups in an effort to gauge practical impact from an action research perspective (Stringer, 1996; Parsons, 2002).

Results

Survey, interview, and focus group feedback is discussed next under the headings alluded to earlier.

Ease of technology use. The survey indicated that students found the Inspiration[R] software moderately simple to use (Likert scale, hereafter LS=2.1). In interviews, students suggested that the drawing features of the software were easy to learn and apply. However, there was consensus that the hyperlinking feature of the program was tedious; the focus group reiterated this in representative comments such as "I found the linking part of Inspiration[R] to be counterintuitive, I think it was probably set up for linking online URLs rather than local files, there wasn't a browse feature, you had to copy and paste your URL or file path from another location."

The capturing of electronic discussions (in html format) from the campus network system was deemed to be facile (LS=1.5). Similarly the coding system exercises were judged to be clear and effective (LS=1.7). In interviews and focus groups, students generally commented that the application of coding macros (in Microsoft Word[R]) to the captured electronic discussions was "easily done but required a tutorial upfront."

Microsoft Word[R] was used for preparing reflective journals. In the survey students indicated that they had considerable experience using word processors and that the journal writing posed virtually no inherent challenges (LS=1). Interview transcripts uniformly pointed to slight difficulties in linking the Microsoft Word[R] document to the Inspiration[R] concept map.

Perceptions of general utility of the concept map. Students were generally positive about the use of the concept map to graphically organize their ideas (LS=2.1). Students in interviews however raised several issues with regard to how the general map was used. One student said, "while I understand that the professor framed the initial map according to how he taught the concepts, I think I would prefer to build up the map from scratch myself." When this was further addressed in a focus group session, several students rebutted this idea saying "it was important to have the structure provided by the professor because it gave us a feel for what his emphasis was; it was really clear what ideas and relationships he wanted us to focus on." And further on the notion of personalizing the map another student noted, "I think it was crucial that the professor gave us the latitude to extend our maps; I developed new understandings that weren't part of his initial map and I found it very useful to add my own concept boxes and related links."

Students were asked pointedly based on this experience, whether they saw themselves using the concept map as a professional or study tool. From the focus group session several points were made:

    The mapping allows us to see an entire unit of study; if I was
    preparing for an exam I would find it much easier to relate all the
    information and make sense of the overarching themes.
    As teachers, we will be planning units constantly; a concept map is
    so much more powerful than a simple hierarchal list of topics; I
    think it will help us remember to ask good questions about inter-
    relatedness of topics throughout a unit.
    From this experience I can see that the exercise of creating a
    concept map will force me to interact with the content in a way that
    will have me reflecting more often on relationships between
    concepts; my students will benefit from this.

Identifying the utility of the second dimension of the concept map. Students all indicated that they had never accessed the hyperlinking facility of the Inspiration[R] software before this exercise. From survey data it was clear that students found the ability to hyperlink to be very useful (LS=1). In interviews, students individually noted several factors that supported this data. In focus groups students were asked to collectively seriate these factors; the following consensus was forwarded: (a) hyperlinking adds a whole series of possibilities for adding related information, (b) hyperlinking offers extended organization of related ideas, (c) hyperlinking in the concept mapping structure helps to avoid "user disorientation" (Roselli, 1991), and (d) hyperlinking allows us to represent our own unique complex patterns of understanding.

When asked in focus groups how the professor might find this useful as an assessment tool, students offered the following comments: "I think the 2d map gives the instructor a pretty clear picture of how we substantiate our ideas. While I think the hyperlinked concept map gives him an opportunity to see how we understand relationships and content, an important feature is missed."

When probed further the student alluded to the value of observing student's critical thinking patterns.

    If I actually constructed the entire map rather than taking your map
    to start with, you would see how my ideas flow one to the other; in
    a sense it doesn't matter how you might teach it, I may learn quite
    differently than you anticipated; my own map would give you a window
    into how your lecture is "received" and processed; that could be a
    very useful tool for the instructor.

Finally in interviews and focus groups, students made reference to the ownership they had for their maps. "Even though we had the beginning map for a structure, the linking of our journal entries and discussion groups was completely our content and understanding." Said another student, "So often the exercise of electronic discussion is token jabber, I felt like we had a vested interest in generating and coordinating good discussion and the journal entries because it became part of a worthwhile project that would allow the prof to evaluate our understanding of the topic."

Perceptions of the quality of discussion group entries. As alluded to, in the broader sense, students found it purposeful to use captured electronic discussion to support their understandings of conceptual relationships in their concept maps. However, it was clear from focus group sessions that, students felt that the inherent quality of their discussion was improved by the preliminary coding exercise.

Students identified improvements in (a) their ability to formulate arguments, (b) their ability to lead effective discussions, and (c) their ability to substantiate their conceptual frameworks.

With respect to the exercise itself, students made the following representative comments. "It was good to break down my discussion this way, I would have normally just spoke my mind without thinking about how to logically connect my ideas. Now when I think of making a contribution I am more careful about how I present the ideas." To the contrary another group suggested, "A fluid discussion involves more than just critical thinking in logical discussion patterns, I wonder whether consciously stopping to think about these codes disturbs the passion of the argument?" While another student noted, "I think the profs intent is to develop a habit of thinking this way subconsciously so that effective discussion becomes second-nature." In earlier research, (MacKinnon & Aylward, 2000) a more comprehensive set of ten cognotes was used to delineate common discussion patterns. In the current research, interviews pointed to the fact that the five cognotes used in the preliminary exercise were not comprehensive. Paraphrasing three students, "the coding lessons were a good way of introducing higher-order discussion patterns that we might not access quite as often as we should, however many other patterns that we use habitually were not highlighted."

New learning. Coding of surveys, interviews, and focus group transcripts yielded several categories of new learning as defined by the participants.

Students said they appreciated using computer technology in a substantive exercise; a process where they could see the value of the technology in achieving educational objectives otherwise difficult to achieve. They noted that the technology tools (Inspiration[R], electronic discussion, and word processing) allowed them to express their understandings in a coherent way. The effective demonstration of these tools they felt would have them "planning with technology" more effectively in their own classroom instruction.

This group of teacher interns felt strongly that the concept mapping exercise helped them become more reflective practitioners. More pointedly their ability to conceptually organize ideas and reflect on conceptual relationships was perceived to be heightened. Collectively they felt this would be an important tool for creating and delivering curriculum in that the complexity of thinking could more easily be mapped using a two-dimensional approach.

Many students found it intriguing to embark upon the metacognitive exercise of assigning cognotes. They said that "reflecting on how they typically discuss a topic versus, new, more substantive and logical discussion patterns was truly a growth experience." Students believed that they had internalized an improved discussion approach and that they would carry this over to other settings both face-to-face and electronic in nature. There is some research to suggest that this in fact does happen for many students (MacKinnon, Pelletier, & Brown, 2002).

DISCUSSION

As with the use of many instructional technology models, the content is far less important than the more global process-oriented objectives. In this group of lectures the intent was to have students reflect on the controversial nature of the topic and then carefully formulate balanced and substantiated opinions. The hope was that the teacher intern's experience of such an exercise would "filter down" into the approach they might model for their own students. The global objective being then to, promote critically reflective teachers and ultimately in their classrooms, reflective (scientifically-literate) citizens. While it is difficult to judge long-term impacts of this instructional approach, early indications are (from the research data) that students "buy-in" to more reflective and critical stances to contentious issues.

It is assumed that in studies of this sort, that the reader draws their own conclusions with respect to the "relative match" between the described sample and inherent classroom culture and their own settings. Based on the feedback from this group of students, it is fair to say that the 2d concept mapping technology model presents no unreasonable barriers to learning and, it accesses a unique ability to map the complexity of conceptual understanding in a simple approach. Having students substantiate their learning in two modes, that is, (a) to personally reflect on concepts through journal entries and (b) to socially construct knowledge through asynchronous electronic discussion provides the instructor with balanced indicators of learning. This instructor felt a confidence with the quality of valid assessment in this model.

An added feature of this model was the embedded process of critical thinking through cognotes and substantive electronic discussion. As corroborated in earlier work (MacKinnon & Bellefontaine, 2002), students in this model benefit from both participating and coordinating a cognote-enriched electronic discussion model especially ones in which the captured transcripts are used in a subsequent exercise.

It is clear that this model has room for improvements. While Inspiration[R] has the capability to hyperlink, other softwares may be more user-friendly in this regard. There appears to be an even distribution of those students who would prefer to be provided with an introductory map and those that would prefer to create the entire map themselves. This points to the need to research the difference in the students ultimate understanding (in both scenarios) as it relates to the instructors objectives. Five cognotes were accessed (from the original 10) in an activity to promote better discussion. While this was intended to be a simpler approach, students indicated in interviews that a more comprehensive model should be considered where all the cognotes are used in the preliminary activity. The activity was evaluated based on a rubric which provided flexibility for creativity in both the preparation of the map as well as "which" supporting documents were hyperlinked in the second dimension. In that this was the first iteration of the activity, the scoring rubric will need to be revisited particularly in the area of developing clear connections between captured electronic discussion and the propositional phrases.

Action research into the impacts of technology on classroom instruction provides glimpses of new types of teaching and learning. Combinations of technologies that encourage both personal and social construction of meaning continue to hold promise for more effective educational experiences.

References

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

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

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

MacKinnon, G. R., & Aylward, L. (2000). Coding electronic discussion groups. International Journal of Educational Telecommunications, 6(1), 53-61.

MacKinnon, G. R., & Bellefontaine, J. (2002). Middle school teacher education and CD ROM technology, Louisiana Middle School Association Journal, 13(1).

MacKinnon, G., Pelletier, J., & Brown, M. (2002). Coding electronic discussion to promote critical thinking: A cross-curricular teacher education approach. In D. Willis, J. Price, & N. Davis (Eds.). Proceedings of the Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education (pp. 1372-1374). Norfolk, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education.

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.

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

National Science Teachers Association (NSTA) (2000). The creation controversy and the science classroom. Arlington, VA: NSTA Press.

Parsons, R. D. (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.

Royer, R., & Royer, J. (2004). Comparing hand drawn and computer generated concept mapping. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 23(1), 67-81.

Roselli, T. (1991). Control of user disorientation in hypertext systems. Educational Technology, 31(12), 42-46.

Stringer, E. T. (1996). Action research: A handbook for practitioners. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

GREGORY R. MACKINNON

Acadia University

Canada

[e-mail]