PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 14690643

Concept mapping for meaningful learning.

C Akinsanya·M Williams
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

The complexity of teaching, learning and assessment strategies remains a problem in nurse education especially with the changes in new curricula. This article explains one solution, which was considered and explored prior to implementation for the assessment of an inquiry-based module in nurse education. The overall aim for selecting this method of assessment was to provide consolidation of prior learning from the core content of the module and to give the students an opportunity to gain further, wide and varied knowledge on a number of concepts in a short period. Concept mapping has proved to be one of the most challenging learning experiences for nursing students. It has been identified as a stimulating learning and assessing tool as predominantly acknowledged over the last year, by nursing students on the Inquiry-Based Learning (IBL) BSc and Dip HE nursing education programmes, and also nurse educators who have the responsibility of facilitating the learners.

Explore related subjects

Concept FormationEducation, NursingEducational MeasurementHumansNursing Education ResearchProblem-Based LearningTeaching MaterialsUnited KingdomJournal ArticleReview

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

C Akinsanya, M Williams. 2004. Concept mapping for meaningful learning.. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0260-6917(03)00120-5

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2006

Multimodal similarity and categorization of novel, three-dimensional objects.

Similarity has been proposed as a fundamental principle underlying mental object representations and capable of supporting cognitive-level tasks such as categorization. However, much of the research has considered connections between similarity and categorization for tasks performed using a single perceptual modality. Considering similarity and categorization within a multimodal context opens up a number of important questions: Are the similarities between objects the same when they are perceived using different modalities or using more than one modality at a time? Is similarity still able to explain categorization performance when objects are experienced multimodally? In this study, we addressed these questions by having subjects explore novel, 3D objects which varied parametrically in shape and texture using vision alone, touch alone, or touch and vision together. Subjects then performed a pair-wise similarity rating task and a free sorting categorization task. Multidimensional scaling (MDS) analysis of similarity data revealed that a single underlying perceptual map whose dimensions corresponded to shape and texture could explain visual, haptic, and bimodal similarity ratings. However, the relative dimension weights varied according to modality: shape dominated texture when objects were seen, whereas shape and texture were roughly equally important in the haptic and bimodal conditions. Some evidence was found for a multimodal connection between similarity and categorization: the probability of category membership increased with similarity while the probability of a category boundary being placed between two stimuli decreased with similarity. In addition, dimension weights varied according to modality in the same way for both tasks. The study also demonstrates the usefulness of 3D printing technology and MDS techniques in the study of visuohaptic object processing.

Concept Formation↗
PubMed2006

Infants' perception of information along object boundaries: concavities versus convexities.

Object parts are signaled by concave discontinuities in shape contours. In seven experiments, we examined whether 5- and 6 1/2-month-olds are sensitive to concavities as special aspects of contours. Infants of both ages detected discrepant concave elements amid convex distractors but failed to discriminate convex elements among concave distractors. This discrimination asymmetry is analogous to the finding that concave targets among convex distractors pop out for adults, whereas convex targets among concave distractors do not. Thus, during infancy, as during adulthood, concavities appear to be salient regions of shape contours. The current study also found that infants' detection of concavity is impaired if the contours that define concavity and convexity are not part of closed shapes. Thus, for infants, as for adults, concavities and convexities are defined more readily in the contours of closed shapes. Taken together, the results suggest that some basic aspects of part perception from shape contours are available by at least 5 months of age.

Concept Formation↗