Abstract
Novakian concept mapping has been shown to offer great potential in the undergraduate science classroom as a tool to support student learning. However, a number of papers in the research literature have been less than rigorous in their application of concept mapping. This chapter highlights a number of key questions that researchers should ask themselves when embarking upon a concept mapping intervention in order to optimize the application of the tool. Firstly there needs to be clarity about the purpose of an intervention: Is it designed as a research protocol to obtain generalizable results, or is the intervention only of local interest in a unique context? This raises the question of whether the maps are research artifacts (data) or tools to support development. Secondly, we need to be clear about the type of knowledge being mapped. Is the map of agreed upon curricular knowledge for which there may be a correct response (where scoring of maps may have some utility), or is the map of “yet-to-be-known” knowledge (of personal reflections and values) where scoring would be inappropriate? Thirdly, will the initial maps provided by participants provide the data that is being sought, or will students need feedback and supportive dialogue to help increase the map quality? Finally, appreciating the ways in which the mapping relates to the philosophy of the curriculum is crucial. If the curriculum requires deep, cumulative learning as part of a collaborative learning community, then mapping is likely to be helpful. If the intention is only for individuals to memorize content, then mapping has no real part to play. By considering each of these issues before embarking upon a mapping intervention, the value of the research outputs is likely to be enhanced.