7-days of FREE Audio papers, translation & more with Prime
7-days of FREE Prime access
7-days of FREE Audio papers, translation & more with Prime
7-days of FREE Prime access
https://doi.org/10.18260/1-2--10185
Copy DOIPublication Date: Sep 3, 2020 |
Citations: 17 |
As part of a concerted effort to improve Biomedical Engineering (BME) education, the Vanderbilt-Northwestern-Texas-Harvard/MIT Engineering Research Center (VaNTH ERC) is investigating alternative methods for assessing students’ conceptual knowledge, and integrating an array of diverse competencies into the curriculum. One potentially useful tool for achieving these goals is concept mapping or the spatial representation of concepts and their interrelationships. This paper describes three studies investigating this potential. In Study One, three groups (i.e., BME undergraduates, graduate students and faculty) constructed concept maps in response to the question, “What are the 10-20 most important concepts in BME?” Group differences were consistent with expert-novice distinctions in structural knowledge. Faculty generated dense networks of higher-order principles (e.g., “the synthesis of engineering and medicine”) and their applications (e.g., “interdisciplinary communication”) while students generated fewer connections among concepts pertaining largely to domain content (e.g., “biotechnology,” “physiology”). Study 2 conducted longitudinal and cross-sectional examinations of the development of expertise. Undergraduates in a yearlong design course responded at two different time points to the question, “What is your current conceptual understanding of what is involved in the BME design process?” Analyses revealed that, relative to maps constructed at the beginning of the course, end of the semester maps used more precise vocabulary, were more coherently constructed, and contained a greater number of connections among concepts. Student maps were also compared to a criterion map created by the course instructor. Study Three will investigate concept mapping as a form of instruction. Learning outcomes of students receiving traditional (i.e., taxonomy-driven presentation of concepts) and innovative (i.e., use of concept mapping as an advance organizer) instruction are being compared. Findings are discussed in terms of their implications for the role of concept mapping as a form of student assessment and instruction, and ultimately, a means to promoting lifelong learning.
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.