Concept Mapping and Reading Comprehension

Abstract

This paper describes a concept mapping teaching exercise that was implemented in different stages at both the graduate and undergraduate level. First, a small group of graduate students worked to construct a concept map that illustrated the connections between published work as they prepared to take their qualifying examinations. A similar assignment—visually depicting connections between course readings—was implemented between the midterm and final exam in a large-section online undergraduate course. In the undergraduate course, there was noticeable improvement between midterm and final essay responses in which students compared and contrasted readings, and students reported perceptions of it as a valuable exercise. Structured interviews with both undergraduate and graduate students further confirm that concept mapping can improve learning outcomes at both levels of instruction. The project reveals important differences in the way that both sets of students approach relational exercises involving readings and suggests ways of using concept mapping to enhance students’ retention of the material.

Keywords:

• Concept mapping
• active learning
• pedagogy
• teaching

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the Incubator for Teaching Innovation in the College of Arts and Sciences at the University of South Carolina for their generous support and for CAS Innovative Teaching Associates who provided guidance on the project at an early stage. We would also like to thank Ian Anson and Brady Collins for providing detailed feedback on the manuscript and Abigail Hassett and Li Huang for their contributions—Abigail as an initial project member, and Li as a graduate teaching assistant for POLI 101.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

1 The Appendix contains demographic information about the undergraduate and graduate student population at the University of South Carolina and in the Department of Political Science.

2 The three students consisted of one self-identified female and two male students, of which one was an international and two were non-international students.

3 The additional student was a first-year student (female, non-international) who was interested in taking comparative politics as a second-field specialization. They did not continue to work on the mapping project following the conclusion of the semester.

4 “[I]dentify and describe one way in which the readings are similar (/different). This can include research questions, arguments and theories, type of analysis, sample focus, or findings. Use three of the articles as examples and discuss what they have in common. Be sure to identify the three articles by either the titles or the authors.”

5 Because the purpose of the assignment was educational and did not collect data that were intended for publication or dissemination, it was deemed to not require approval by a Human Subjects Review board (e.g. IRB). However, the outline of a pre-implementation plan was submitted to the Incubator for Teaching Innovation and presented to a collegiate working group in advance. Additional safeguards were put in place that included fully explaining the assignment to students; asking consent to use any included materials; making survey questions optional and/or asking them after exams; and delegating the task of grading essays to ensure that they were not influenced by survey responses.

6 Figure A8 in the Appendix shows the overall difference between midterm and final essay responses.

7 For a description of the differences between mind maps, concept maps, and argument maps, see Davies (2011).

Additional information

Funding

This work was funded by College of Arts and Sciences / Incubator for Teaching Innovation.

Notes on contributors

Matthew Wilson

Matthew Wilson is Associate Professor and Director of Graduate Studies in the Department of Political Science at the University of South Carolina. Their research focuses on comparative political institutions, specifically concerning autocratic regimes and democratization. Courses they have taught include Dictatorship and Democratization, Latin American Politics, Advanced Quantitative Methods, and Comparative Politics.

Christopher Howell

Christopher Howell is a Ph.D. student of Political Science at the University of South Carolina. Their research focuses on political polarization within the United States and its evolution in the 20th century, with a focus on the use of strategic communication threat by political entrepreneurs.

Kelsey Martin-Morales

Kelsey Martin-Morales is a Ph.D. candidate of Political Science at the University of South Carolina. Her research interests include the intersection of democratic backsliding and foreign policy. Current projects that she has worked on explores autocratic policy preferences, development aid, and international organizations.

Sanghoon Park

Sanghoon Park is a Ph.D. student of Political Science at the University of South Carolina. His research interests include the strategic interactions between autocratic leaders and institutions, such as regime change and resource (re)distribution through social policies.