Collaborative concept mapping activities in a classroom scenario

References

• Allert, H., Markkanen, H., and Richter, C. (2006). Rethinking the use of ontologies in learning. In TomadakiE.and ScottP. (Ed.), Innovative approaches for learning and knowledge sharing, EC-TEL2006, (pp. 115–126). Crete: CEUR WS.
   Google Scholar
• Arellano, C., et al., Elkar-CM: a multilingual collaborative concept map editor, 2006. Proceedings of the sixth IEEE international conference on advanced learning technologies, In Kinshuk, R., et al. New York: IEEE Computer Society. 482–483
   Google Scholar
• Ausubel, D. P. (1968). Educational psychology: a cognitive view, New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
   Google Scholar
• Ausubel, D. P. (1977). The facilitation of meaningful verbal learning in the classroom. Educational Psychologist, 12(2), 162–178. doi: 10.1080/00461527709529171
   Google Scholar
• Avouris, N., et al., 2004. ModellingSpace: a tool for synchronous collaborative problem solving, Proceedings of Ed-Media 2004, In Cantoni, L., and McLoughlin, C., Lugano, Switzerland: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). 381–386
   Google Scholar
• Barros, B., and Verdejo, M. F. (1998). Designing workspaces to support collaborative learning. In Del Pobil, A. P., Mira, J., and Ali, M. (Ed.), Tasks and methods in applied artificial intelligence, (pp. 668–677). London: Springer-Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Brown, J. S., Collins, A., and Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32–41. doi: 10.3102/0013189X018001032
   Google Scholar
• Cañas, A., et al., 2010. Livemappers: a learning environment for concept map-based collaborative projects, Proceedings of the fourth international conference on concept mappingViñadelMar, In Sánchez, J., Cañas, A., and Novak, J.. Viña del Mar, Chile: University of Chile
   Google Scholar
• Chang, K. E., Sung, Y. T., and Chen, S. F. (2001). Learning through computer-based concept mapping with scaffolding aid. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 17, 21–33. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2729.2001.00156.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chitra, S., and Aghila, G. (2011). SOMREP: mapped meta information (MMI) for semantic web using ontology mapping patterns. International Journal of Computer Applications, 14(5), 1–5. doi: 10.5120/1844-2106
   Google Scholar
• Etxebarria, I. (2000). Desarrollo moral. In López, F., et al. (Ed.), Desarrollo afectivo y social, (pp. 181–210). Madrid: Piramide.
   Google Scholar
• Gangemi, A., et al., C-ODO: an OWL metamodel for collaborative ontology design, Workshop on social and collaborative construction of structured knowledge, Banff, Canada: CEUR WS2007
   Google Scholar
• Gao, H., et al. (2007). A review of studies on collaborative concept mapping: what have we learned about the technique and what is next?. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 18(4), 479–492.
   Google Scholar
• Herrmann, K., Hoppe, H. U., and Pinkwart, N., 2003. A checking mechanism for visual language environments, Shaping the future of learning through intelligent technologies, Proceedings of the 11th conference on AI-ED, In Hoppe, U., Verdejo, F., and Kay, J., Amsterdam: IOS Press, 97–104
   Google Scholar
• Hoppe, H., and Katrin Gaßner, U., 2002. Integrating collaborative concept mapping tools with group memory and retrieval functions, Proceedings of the international conference on computer supported collaborative learning, In Stahl, G., Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc, 716–725
   Google Scholar
• Jang, S. (2010). The impact of incorporating collaborative concept mapping with coteaching techniques in elementary science classes. School Science and Mathematics, 110(2), 86–97. doi: 10.1111/j.1949-8594.2009.00012.x
   Google Scholar
• Jonassen, D., et al. (1997). Concept mapping as cognitive learning and assessment tools. Interactive Learning Research, 8(3/4), 289–308.
   Google Scholar
• Khamesan, A., and Hammond, N., 2004. Synchronous collaborative concept mapping via ICT: learning effectiveness and personal and interpersonal awareness, Concept maps: theory, methodology, technology. Proceedings of the first international conference on concept mapping, In Cañas, A. J., Novak, J. D., and Gonzáles, F. M., Pamplona: Universidad Pública de Navarra, 385–392
   Google Scholar
• Kim, B., Yang, C.-C., and Tsai, I.-C., 2005. Review of computer-mediated collaborative concept mapping: implication for future research, Proceedings of the conference on computer support for collaborative learning: learning 2005: the next 10 years!, In Hoadley, C. M., and Roschelle, J., Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 291–295
   Google Scholar
• Koper, R. (2004). Technology and lifelong learning [editorial]. British Journal of Educational Technology, 35(6), 675–678. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8535.2004.00425.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koschmann, T. (1996). Computer supported collaborative learning: theory and practice of an emerging paradigm, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Kwon, S. Y., and Cifuentes, L. (2009). The comparative effect of individually-constructed vs. collaboratively-constructed computer-based concept maps. Computer and Education, 52(2), 365–375. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2008.09.012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Layne, L., Gunawardena, C., and Main, C., 2010. Enhancing collaborative problem solving in distance education courses using web-based concept mapping, Proceedings of the fourth international conference on concept mapping, In Sánchez, J., Cañas, A. J., and Novak, J. D., Viña del Mar, Chile: University of Chile, 213–221
   Google Scholar
• Lupion, P., and de Cássia, R. (2010). Handbook of research on collaborative learning using concept mapping, New York: Information Science Reference.
   Google Scholar
• Marshall, B., Hsinchun, C., and Madhusudan, T. (2006). Matching knowledge elements in concept maps using a similarity. Decision Support Systems, 42(3), 1290–1306. doi: 10.1016/j.dss.2005.10.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martinez, R., Kay, J., and Yacef, K., 2010. Collaborative concept mapping at the tabletop, Proceedings of the ACM international conference on interactive tableplots and surfaces., Saarbrücken, Germany: ACM, 207–210
   Google Scholar
• Martinez, R., Kay, J., and Yacef, K. (2011). Visualisations for longitudinal participation, contribution and progress of a collaborative task at the tabletop, Sydney: The University of Sydney. Technical Report 666
   Google Scholar
• Novak, J. D. (1977). A theory of education, Ithaca, NY: Cornell University.
   Google Scholar
• Novak, J. D., and Cañas, A. J. (2008). The theory underlying concept maps and how to construct and use them [online], Technical Report IHMC CmapTools 2006-01 Rev 01-2008, Florida, Institute for Human and Machine Cognition. Available from: http://cmap.ihmc.us/publications/researchpapers/theorycmaps/theoryunderlyingconceptmaps.htm [Accessed 15 June 2010]
   Google Scholar
• Pinkwart, N., 2003. A plug-in architecture for graph based collaborative modeling systems, Shaping the future of learning through intelligent technologies, Proceedings of the 11th Conf on AI-ED, In Hoppe, U., Verdejo, F., and Kay, J., Amsterdam: IOS Press, 535–536
   Google Scholar
• Rueda, U. (2009). Desarrollo de software reutilizable de Mapas Conceptuales y estudio de su aplicación en contextos de aprendizaje y en los Modelos Abiertos de Estudiante, Thesis (PhD). University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU).
   Google Scholar
• Rueda, U., et al. (2009). Learning the attachment theory with the CM-ED concept map editor. Computers and Education, 52(2), 460–469. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2008.09.015
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simone De, C., Schmid, R. F., and McEwen, L. A. (2001). Supporting the learning process with collaborative concept mapping using computer-based communication tools and processes. Educational Research and Evaluation, 7(2–3), 263–283. doi: 10.1076/edre.7.2.263.3870
   Google Scholar
• Soares, A., and Sousa, C. (2008). Using concept maps for ontology development: a case in the work organization domain. In Acev, A. (Ed.), IFIP International federation for information processing, (pp. 177–186). Boston, MA: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Soller, A. (2001). Supporting social interaction in an intelligent collaborative learning system. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 12(1), 40–62.
   Google Scholar
• Soller, A., et al., 1999. What makes peer interaction effective? Modeling effective communication in an intelligent CSCL, Proceedings of the 1999 AAAI fall symposium: psychological models of communication in collaborative systems, In Brennan, S. E., Giboin, A., and Traum, D. Cod, MA: IAAA Press Cape, 116–123
   Google Scholar
• Stahl, G., 2000. A model of collaborative knowledge-building, Fourth international conference of the learning sciences, In Fishman, B., and O'Connor-Divelbiss, S., Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, 70–77
   Google Scholar
• Suthers, D., and Jones, D., 1997. An architecture for intelligent collaborative educational systems, Proceedings AI-ED'97, world conference of the artificial intelligence in education society, In Du Bovlay, B., and Mizoguchi, R., Amsterdam: IOS Press, 55–62
   Google Scholar
• Suthers, D., et al., 2007. Conceptual representations enhance knowledge construction in asynchronous collaboration, Proceedings of the computer supported collaborative learning conference, New Brunswick, NJ: International Society of the Learning Sciences, 704–713
   Google Scholar
• (2004). Learning and learning difficulties: a handbook for teachers, ACER Press.Westwood, P.Victoria
   Google Scholar