View
1.905
Download
3
Category
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
Citation preview
Lawrie HunterKochi University of Technology
http://lawriehunter.com
Information structures: the essential deep foundation
of concept mapping
Argument mapping
Info-structure mapping
Syntactic mapping
Grammar mapping (pseudo)
Association mapping
No need to take notes (:^0)
All materials can be downloadedfrom Hunter’s websiteshttp://lawriehunter/http://www.core.kochi-tech.ac.jp/hunter/orhttp://slideshare.net/rolenzo/
Wordle for today
wordle.net
Mapping:abstract ideals vs. doable realities
Keywords: mapping, concept mapping, structures
language information<important
English information<important
English information<important
Uses of mapping
uses ofmapping
wittingmindless
Uses of mapping
uses ofmapping
wittingmindless
principles ofmap use?
Uses of mapping
uses ofmapping
witting
principles ofmap use?
Informationtypes Language
patterns
Part 1: the main styles of mapping
Part 2: matching mapping styles to instructional purposes
(1) Novakian mapping, using Cmap tools(2) Hunter's infostructure mapping,
using PowerPoint.
Part 3: deciding mode: electronic vs. hand made
Part 4: using mapping to push the learner to the use of specific language forms and patterns
Part 1: the main styles of mapping
Grammar maps (not maps)Association maps Syntactic mapsInformation structure mapsArgument mapsRhetorical structure maps
Part 1: the main styles of mapping
Grammar maps (not maps)Association maps Syntactic mapsInformation structure mapsArgument mapsRhetorical structure maps
Argument mapping
Info-structure mapping
Syntactic mapping
Grammar mapping (pseudo)
Association mapping
made with CmapTools
Functions of ‘concept maps’
Wealth of tools: the age of GRAPHIC ORGANIZERS
http://www.visual-literacy.org/periodic_table/periodic_table.html
Wealth of tools: the age of GRAPHIC ORGANIZERS
http://www.eduplace.com/graphicorganizer/
Distinguishing maps:Levels of abstraction
Figure: quantum levels of abstraction.From Hunter (2007)
Argument mapping
Info-structure mapping
Syntactic mapping
Association mapping
Grammar mapping (pseudo)
The links are all lines. The links are all associations.
Mind mapping
What are associations?
Example: we associate with eating.
We associate A with B.
What do you associate with ?
What do you associate with ?
Let’s make a mind map!
What do you associate with ?
A baseball reminds me of _______.
Get a free account fromhttp://www.mindmeister.com/
Make maps like this, online.
Horn’s argument
mapping
http://www.stanford.edu/~rhorn/index.htmlhttp://www.macrovu.com/
AusThink argument mapping
http://www.austhink.com/
http://www.austhink.com/
Rationale argument mapping
RST mapping
www.sil.org/~mannb/rst/
RST links are rhetorical devices.
Bill Mann’s Rhetorical Structure Theory (RST) uses various sorts of "building blocks" to describe texts.
The principal block type deals with "nuclearity" and "relations" (often called coherence relations in the linguistic literature.)
Abrams, R. An Overview of Concept Mapping. In Meaningful Learning: A Collaborative Literature Review of Concept Mapping. Retrieved March 18, 2008 at http://www2.ucsc.edu/mlrg/clr-conceptmapping.html
Concepts are placed in [boxes]... Lines are drawn from a concept to a linking word to a concept. Sequences of concepts and linking words do not always form grammatically correct sentences.”
“The basic Novakian concept map... usually starts with a general concept at the top of the map, and then works its way down ... to more specific concepts.
Beyond assocation: Novakian
Novakian maps (Novak & Cañas, 2006) can be used at any level of abstraction.
Argument mapping
Information structure mapping
Syntactic mapping
Grammatical mapping (pseudo)
Association mapping
Figure: quantum levels of abstraction.From Hunter (2007)
<broad
correspond toinformationstructure elements
Hunter’s ISmaps
havegraphicallinks
ISmaps
syntacticmapping
semanticmapping
ISmaps
transcendpragmaticbarriers
ISmaps’range
pragmatics’miniworld
<big
Description Classification
Degreecomparison
Attributecomparison
Sequence Cause-effect
Contrast
!
Hunter’s ISmaps*
*information structure maps
My friend
Canadian
Englishteacher
57
DESCRIPTION
Hunter’s ISmaps*
CLASSIFICATION
Cars
sedansstationwagonscoupes
Hunter’s ISmaps*
<big
old
COMPARISON (relative)
TokyoCalcutta
Hunter’s ISmaps*
COMPARISON (by attribute)
red
M’s car K’s car
white
3 years old
new
Hunter’s ISmaps*
SEQUENCE
find a
bank machine
put in your
bank card
follow the
directions
Hunter’s ISmaps*
SEQUENCE structure signals
ThenFirst and
find a
bank machine
put in your
bank card
follow the
directions
Hunter’s ISmaps*
SEQUENCE
slice a tomato
toast two slices of bread
ThenFirst and
tear some
lettuce
Hunter’s ISmaps*
CAUSE-EFFECT
heavy
rainI...late
for school
bus was cancelle
d
Hunter’s ISmaps*
Use the ISmap links to map text.
<big
Description Classification
Degreecomparison
Attributecomparison
Sequence Cause-effect
Contrast
!
Power generating systems
Generalprocess:
boilNH3
Makesteam
Rotateturbines
Generateelectricity
Boil aliquid
older typeplants
OTECplants
boilH2O
seawaterheat
fossil orN-heat
steam20C
steam500C
lowpower
highpower
zeroenergy cost
highenergy cost
hunter systems
!
!
!
Hunter's ISmapping, using PowerPoint or other graphical software.
Comparison of Novakian and information structure mapping
Novakian mapping, using Cmap tools, a free and very usable software with web sharing built in.
vs.
Yon sama, a Korean actor, is younger and more handsome than Tokoro Joji, a Japanese TV personality.
Make a Cmap and an ISmap of this text:
Yon sama TokoroJoji
actor TV personality
>younghandsome
huntersystems
Korean Japanese
an ISmap of the text:
a Cmap of the text:
Part 2:matching mapping stylesto instructional purposesRepresentations of the information structures underlying the witting use of maps:
Writers work withRhetorical structure Argument structureInformation structureText structureParagraph structureSentence structure
Part 2:matching mapping stylesto instructional purposesRepresentations of the information structures underlying the witting use of maps:
Writers work withRhetorical structure Argument structureInformation structureText structureParagraph structureSentence structure
Mappers makeRhetorical structure maps Argument mapsInformation structure maps Association maps Syntactic mapsGrammar maps (not maps)
mysteryzone
Mapping decision matrix________________________Training
-extensive contained warmups
-for Teacher's observation-L's need support?-L's need constraint?
-for peer commenting-look quickly at shapes only-look carefully at node content and links
Software vs. tangibles
Training
Mapping type
Constraint
Mapping decision matrix
________________________Mapping type
-mind maps -relation maps (Novakian) -structure maps
Software vs. tangibles
Training
Mapping type
Constraint
mind maps
relation maps
structure maps
Mapping decision matrix
________________________Mapping type
1. Mind maps-for amassing 'thoughts'-relations only by association
-for rearranging, clustering, prioritizing (software good for this)
Software vs. tangibles
Training
Mapping type
Constraint
mind maps
relation maps
structure maps
Mapping decision matrix________________________Mapping type
2. Relation maps (Novakian maps)-for relating concepts in articulately related pairs-CMC debate going on now:declarative reading or not?
Software vs. tangibles
Training
Mapping type
Constraint
mind maps
relation maps
structure maps
Mapping decision matrix________________________Mapping type
3. Structure maps (e.g. ISmaps)-for representation of syntactic structures at the level of
-sentence-paragraph-short technical summary articles
-not necessarily one unified map-background information may be
-a separate map-a layer (font color, sidebar, etc.)
-persuasion may be 'picture frames' or title bars or submaps
Software vs. tangibles
Training
Mapping type
Constraint
mind maps
relation maps
structure maps
Mapping decision matrix________________________Mapping type
3. Structure maps (e.g. ISmaps)-for representation of syntactic structures at the level of
-sentence-paragraph-short technical summary articles
-not necessarily one unified map-background information may be
-a separate map-a layer (font color, sidebar, etc.)
-persuasion may be 'picture frames' or title bars or submaps
Software vs. tangibles
Training
Mapping type
Constraint
mind maps
relation maps
structure maps
Mapping decision matrix________________________Constraint
1. Architectural constraint- by size- by content
2. Rhetorical constraint-by rhetorical device limitations
3. Relational constraint-by Novakianism
Software vs. tangibles
Training
Mapping type
Constraint
structural
rhetorical
relational
Part 3:deciding mode:electronic vs. hand made
Software vs. tangibles
-tangibles first-because quick-to encourage revisions (paper is cheap)
-software for presentation, sharing, editing, beauty
Software vs. tangibles
Training
Mapping type
Constraint
Using four types of task constraint which reduce to easily manageable task design elements:
architectural constraint (number of nodes, etc.) rhetorical constraint (type of links) relational constraint (nature of links) degree of abstraction (rhetorical distance) (not today)
Part 4:using mapping to push the learnerto the use of specific language forms and patterns
Pushing the learner________________________Constraint
1. Architectural constraint- by size (number of nodes)- by content (e.g. only noun phrases)
Software vs. tangibles
Training
Mapping type
Constraint
architectural
rhetorical
relational
Pushing the learner________________________Constraint
2. Rhetorical constraint-by rhetorical device limitations-e.g. in a rhetorical structure map,
only allow argument moves as link content
Software vs. tangibles
Training
Mapping type
Constraint
architectural
rhetorical
relational
Pushing the learner________________________Constraint
3. Relational constraint: -by Novakianism
i.e. restrict linking phrase content
e.g. only verbs e.g. only action verbs e.g. only information structure signals (classification, comparison, sequence, cause-
effect)
Software vs. tangibles
Training
Mapping type
Constraint
architectural
rhetorical
relational
Hunter’s framework
Key content
Background Persuasion
Rhetorical structure
Information organization
Information structures
Hunter’s framework
Key content
Background Persuasion
Rhetorical structure
Information organization
Information structures
Thank you for your kind attention,
and thank you in advance for your feedback and suggestions.
Lawrie Hunter
downloads fromhttp://lawriehunter.com
view and download athttp://slideshare.net/rolenzo
Information structures: The essential deep foundation of concept mappingAbstract ideals vs. do-able realitiesSelected domain for this paper: mapping/concept mapping/argument mapping
Concept mapping and concept mapping software have taken solid hold in many realms of education in many countries, primarily for use in representing learner and instructor perceptions of the interrelations between concepts. However, it is not so easy to design effective and motivating mapping tasks, or to choose the appropriate type of mapping for a task/project/curriculum. This paper sets out a set of conceptual tools for the witting use of mapping in curriculum and materials design.
These central questions are addressed:(1) Which kind of mapping to use for different instructional purposes;(2) When to do mapping electronically and when by hand; and(3) How to create curriculum and materials that go beyond "I do mapping in my class" to lead the learner to the use of the specific language forms and patterns appropriate to each type of information.
This paper identifies mapping types and information structures underlying the witting use of maps: rhetorical structure, text structure, paragraph structure and sentence structure. Without incorporating these structures in the framing of task design, the instructor/designer will not be able to control the form of learner output.
This is followed by an analysis of the information-related character of two salient styles of mapping: (1) Novakian mapping, which is the most commonly used mapping in science education today; and(2) Hunter's infostructure mapping, which is a very limited (and thus effective) mapping style for second language learning technical-oriented tasks.
The conclusion includes a description of four types of task constraint which the author has developed for mapping in the teaching of entry and upper advanced EFL technical writing. These constraint types, which reduce to easily manageable task design elements, are: map size; allowable links; rhetorical devices; and degree of abstraction.
Biodata: Lawrie Hunter is a professor at Kochi University of Technology. His infostructure maps provide the underlying structure of "Critical Thinking" (Greene & Hunter, Asahi Press 2002) and "Thinking in English" (Hunter, Cengage 2008). http://www.core.kochi-tech.ac.jp/hunter/
The age of GRAPHIC ORGANIZERSSuggested Reading About Visual Thinking and Learning Ausubel, D. (1968). Educational psychology: A cognitive view. New York: Holt, Reinhart and Winston.
Buzan, T. & Buzan, B. (1993). The mind map book: How to use radiant thinking to maximize your brain's untapped potential. New York: Penguin Books USA Inc.
Buzan, T. (1983). Use both sides of your brain: New techniques to help you read efficiently, study effectively, solve problems, remember more, think clearly. New York: E.P. Dutton.
Jonassen, D.H. (1996). Computers in the classroom: Mindtools for critical thinking. Englewood Cliffs, NJ. Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Novak, J.D. & Gowin, D.B. (1984). Learning how to learn. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Novak, J.D. (1998). Learning, creating and using knowledge: Concept map® as facilitative tools in schools and corporations. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
http://www.inspiration.com/Parents/Visual-Thinking-and-Learning
Recommended