Learning with concept maps
The effect of activity structure and the type of task
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 9894840 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Cristina Amante (0000-0001-6838-8775, Universidad de Extremadura), Manuel Lucero (0000-0002-1542-4653, Universidad de Extremadura), Manuel Montanero ̄fernández (0000-0002-2153-1180, Universidad de Extremadura, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2026 |
| Volume | 54 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Publication date | 2026-06-01 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Instructional Science (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0020-4277 • E-ISSN: 1573-1952 |
| Publisher | Springer Science and Business Media LLC (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1007/s11251-025-09764-1 |
| OpenAlex | W4417322383 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 50 |
A review of the literature reveals a discrepancy about what type of task with concept maps is the most effective for individual learning. Furthermore, to date, no research has compared these tasks in individual and collaborative learning contexts. This paper explores the influence of the different tasks on learning, involving concept maps and summaries. The participants were 226 undergraduates who were randomly assigned to 12 experimental conditions. Two independent variables were considered: the knowledge representation task (fill-in-the-blanks concept map, sort a shuffled concepts-provided map, self-construct a map, write a summary) and the structure of the activity (individual + collaborative, collaborative + individual, and fully individual). In addition to the evaluation of comprehension and delayed recall, 4195 verbal exchanges during the collaborative activities were recorded and analyzed. Results confirm an interaction between the type of task and the structure of the activity. The students who self-constructed complete concept maps and then discussed them in pairs obtained better learning results than those in other conditions. Verbal interaction was much more dialogic in this type of task, with a significantly greater proportion than in the other conditions of in-depth exploratory talk episodes, and a lower proportion of cumulative talk. However, the fill-in-the-blanks and shuffled-concepts conditions provided a greater proportion of superficial exploratory talk, and the collaborative summary condition generated a greater proportion of non-dialogic talk fragments. The findings are discussed in the context of the ICAP (Interactive, Constructive, Active, and Passive learning) framework, cognitive load theory and the sociocultural perspective on dialogic learning
Cognition · Comprehension · Context (archaeology) · Dialogic · Educational psychology · Exploratory research · Metacognition · Perspective (graphical) · sort · Task (project management) · Educational and Psychological Assessments · Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods · Science Education and Pedagogy
The Icap Framework
Learning With Concept and Knowledge Maps
A framework to analyze argumentative knowledge construction in computer-supported collaborative learning
Cognitive Load Theory and the Format of Instruction
From Cognitive Load Theory to Collaborative Cognitive Load Theory
Eight Ways to Promote Generative Learning
Studying and Constructing Concept Maps
Cognitive Load During Problem Solving
Supporting interdisciplinary collaborative concept mapping with individual preparation phase
Explaining the dialogic processes of teaching and learning
How does dialogical talk promote student learning during small group work? An exploratory study
Learning Lessons
Promoting collaboration through resource interdependence to enhance collaborative concept mapping
Collaborative Concept Mapping
| Highly cited | No |
|---|