WWW-intensive concept mapping for metacognition in solving ill-structured problems

ABSTRACT Concept mapping is one of the most intimate and most dynamic learning support activities that needs still a drastic further evolution of methods and tools. WWW-based concept mapping gains momentum quite fast now and needs a solid reviewing of the various approaches and the empirical effects. This article bridges the technological advance of WWW-based concept mapping tools and its more recent effects on learning by problem solving. The results show that it added value manifests in the phases of idea generation and selection. The mapping approach caused a broader perception and a greater diversity of ideas. The conclusion is that further investments are needed to make WWW-based mapping more accessible and integrated in WWW-based learning management systems. Reference to this paper should be made as follows: Stoyanov, S. and Kommers, P. (2006) 'WWW-intensive concept mapping for metacognition in solving ill-structured problems', Int. J. Cont. Engineering Education and Lifelong Learning, Vol. 16, Nos. 3/4, pp.297–316. Biographical notes: Slavi Stoyanov is with Educational Technology Expertise Centre at Open University of The Netherlands. He has a PhD degree on Instructional Technology from the University of Twente, The Netherlands. The professional interests of Stoyanov include domains such as cognitive mapping, learning to solve ill-structured problems, individual differences in learning, and people ware.

1 Follower
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This study investigated the effect of two problem-solving techniques: (a) free-association with a direct reference to the problem, called shortly direct, and (b) free-association with a remote and postponed reference to the problem, called remote, on fluency and originality of ideas in solving ill-structured problems. The research design controlled for possible effects of cognitive style for problem-solving—adaptor versus innovator. The results showed that both groups significantly outscored a control group on fluency and originality. The remote group outperformed the direct and control groups on originality, but not on fluency. Innovators scored significantly better than adaptors in the control group on fluency, but not on originality. No significant difference was found between innovators and adaptors in both direct and remote groups. There was no statistical indication for an interaction effect between treatment and cognitive style. Based upon the results of this study, four implications for learning and instruction have been formulated for designing and developing technological arrangements for learning to solve ill-structured problems. These guidelines will support designers in developing instructional design solutions in educational technology applications.
    09/2007; 40(1):49-63. DOI:10.1080/15391523.2007.10782496
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The study compares the effectiveness of two performance support systems, adaptive and non-adaptive, on learning achievements of engineering students. The research design, in addition, controls for a possible effect of learning style. The analysis reveals that students working with an adaptive performance support system score significantly higher than students using a non-adaptive performance system on a performance test across different learning styles. The only variation in the two experimental conditions, manipulated in the study, is embedded adaptive arrangement based on learning style. Embedded adaptation mode accommodates learning preferences of students through the structure of learning content as an association between types of learning content and different learning styles is assumed. Learning style does not produce a significant difference in the performance achievements of students and there is no indication for an interaction effect between performance supports system as a method of instruction and learning style. These results are explained by two theoretical positions introduced in the background of the study, namely coping behavior and the distinction between level and style type of cognitive constructs.
    International Journal of Continuing Engineering Education and Life-Long Learning 01/2008; 18:351-365. DOI:10.1504/IJCEELL.2008.018837

Full-text (2 Sources)

Available from
Jun 4, 2014