Concept mapping is obviously very constructivist. Building charts with bubbles of meaning to the creator(s), starting "where they are" and spreading out from there connecting new information to the existing structure. I like it, for brainstorming. However, I find it way too messy for my tastes as a way to learn everything. I'm sure that it works better for some people, but I much prefer outlines that don't require a "label" be placed on the relationship. That was the sticking point for me. I'm not sure that I'm learning or just getting frustrated when I have to place a word on every link.
I do like the flexibility and agree that it is an invaluable tool for group work. The computer allows the users to gather whole sections and move them to other locations, linking them in a totally new way when called for. Eventually, though, the information needs to be gathered into something more universal. A paper or a chart or something that anyone can easily understand is a better final product than a confusing jumble of information connected according to someone else's thinking patterns.
I also do not understand exactly what Jonassen meant when he said that "the students are teaching the computer."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment