Concept-map generation requires age-appropriate instructional support: younger learners profit from high-coherence, pre-structured maps¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · review r2–r3 · q2
Currency · newest study 2021 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? A map coherence × age group interaction showed university students profited more from low-coherence maps requiring self-organization, while high-school students profited more from high-coherence maps. → Garvin Brod 2021 q2 i? Late-elementary children generating entire concept maps without support produced poor maps and did not benefit on a later test, whereas children filling in parts of an existing map did significantly better. → Garvin Brod 2021 (2)

Evidence¶

Garvin Brod 2021¶

Garvin Brod. (2021). Generative Learning: Which Strategies for What Age? Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-020-09571-9

q2 · i? · review · r3

A study comparing college and high-school students found the interaction; university students benefited more from low-coherence maps calling for self-organization, high-school students from high-coherence maps providing structure. Prior knowledge differences were not assessed.

"a study comparing concept mapping among college and high-school students, which revealed a map coherence × age group interaction"

Garvin Brod 2021 (2)¶

Garvin Brod. (2021). Generative Learning: Which Strategies for What Age? Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-020-09571-9

q2 · i? · review · r2

A study with late-elementary children varied support during concept mapping across three experiments: no-support children generated entire maps with poor results, while fill-in children outperformed both no-support and no-mapping controls on retrieval of key concepts.

"Children who only had to fill in parts of an existing concept map (experiments 2 and 3) did significantly better than children in the no-support condition and children who did not work on concept maps at all."

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Age and Developmental Stage — moderator: an instructional effect differs with it

Related Claims¶

• ENA reveals different utterance co-occurrence structures by age: older adults show a stronger active–interactive connection while younger adults' constructive–interactive connection is not statistically confirmed — related
• Age groups differ in ICAP engagement distribution: younger adults engage more in active mode, older adults more in constructive and interactive modes, during collaborative concept-map learning — related
• Younger adults outperform older adults in concept-map performance, and older adults show no concept-map improvement — related
• Younger adults show higher learning performance than older adults in collaborative concept-map learning of psychological concepts, and older adults show no learning gain — related