Exploring teacher's perceptions of concept mapping as a teaching strategy in science: an action research approach
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
In order to promote science literacy in the classroom, students need opportunities in which they can personalize their understanding of the concepts they are learning. Current literature supports the use of concept maps in enabling students to make personal connections in their learning of science. Because they involve creating explicit connections between concepts, concept maps can assist students in developing metacognitive strategies and assist educators in identifying misconceptions in students' thinking. The literature also notes that concept maps can improve student achievement and recall. In an effort to explore concept mapping from the perspective of elementary educators, an action research group of 5 educators and myself was established and met regularly from September 1999 until June 2000. All of the educators taught in the Toronto area. These teachers were interested in exploring how concept mapping could be used as a learning tool in their science classrooms. In summary, this study explores the journey of five educators and myself as we engaged in collaborative action research. This study sets out to: (1) Explore how educators believe concept mapping can facilitate teaching and student learning in the science classroom. (2) Explore how educators implement concept mapping in their classrooms. (3) Identify challenges educators experience when they implement concept mapping. (4) Explore factors that impact on facilitating collaborative action research. (5) Provide insight into my growth as an action research facilitator. Much of the current literature focuses primarily on concept mapping at the secondary and university levels, with limited focus on the elementary panel. The research rarely considers teachers' thoughts and ideas about the concept mapping process. In order to effectively explore concept mapping from the perspective of elementary teachers, I felt that an action research approach would be appropriate. Action research enabled educators to debate issues about concept mapping and test out ideas in their classrooms. It also afforded the participants opportunities to explore their own thinking, reflect on their personal journeys as educators and play an active role in their professional development.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,018 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,003 | 0,007 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,005 | 0,004 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,004 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,003 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».