The Knowledge Arena as an Extension to the Concept Map: Reflection in Action

The concept map is becoming a ubiquitous tool in education. In recent years there has been a growing interest in “diagramming” or “mapping” ideas to be learned (e.g., Jonassen et al., 1998). The approach has been championed by study skills proponents such as Buzan (1993). Maps of concepts and relationships have been used by many researchers and practitioners to help diagnose misunderstanding, improve study methods and glimpse how learners come to know. In other areas, the representation of knowledge in formalisms such as the Net greatly assisted the development of intelligent tutoring systems (e.g., Sowa, 1983). In order to better understand the claims made for its efficacy, reference to how concept maps have been used and defined will lead to a plausible explanation of the process of “off–loading” of concepts during learning or study (McAleese, 1994, 1998). In order to demonstrate the widespread application of supporting learn ers with external “learning spaces” (c.f. ISLEs/ and REALs—Grabinger et al., 1998; Grabinger & Dunlap, 1995; MacFarlane, 1993), consideration will be given in this paper to techniques that formally represent knowledge in Concept–Relationship–Concept “instances” (Fisher et al., 1990). Other techniques such as reflection journals draw on the same process but are not considered in detail here. The importance of self regulation (Zimmerman, 1990) and self-confrontation (McAleese, 1985) is highlighted in this framework. The map as a mirror or an assistant to learners is well documented (e.g., Vizcarro & Leon, 1998); the question of an external representation of thinking, in the form of a map determining what can be learned as well as what might be learned, is not yet fully known.