1. Information structures:
the essential deep foundation
of concept mapping
Argument mapping
Info-structure mapping
Syntactic mapping
Association mapping
Grammar mapping (pseudo)
Lawrie Hunter
Kochi University of Technology
http://lawriehunter.com
2. No need to take notes (:^0)
All materials can be downloaded
from Hunter’s websites
http://lawriehunter/
http://www.core.kochi-tech.ac.jp/hunter/
or
http://slideshare.net/rolenzo/
9. Uses of mapping
uses of
mapping
mindless witting
principles of
map use?
10. Uses of mapping
uses of
mapping
witting
Information principles of
types map use?
Language
patterns
11. 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
12. Part 1:
the main styles of mapping
Grammar maps (not maps)
Association maps
Syntactic maps
Information structure maps
Argument maps
Rhetorical structure maps
13. Part 1:
the main styles of mapping
Grammar maps (not maps) Argument mapping
Association maps Info-structure mapping
Syntactic maps
Syntactic mapping
Information structure maps
Argument maps Association mapping
Rhetorical structure maps Grammar mapping (pseudo)
25. RST mapping
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.)
www.sil.org/~mannb/rst/
RST links are rhetorical devices.
26. Beyond assocation: Novakian
“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.
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.”
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
28. 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)
29. Hunter’s ISmaps
have
graphical
links
ISmaps
ISmaps
correspond to
information
structure
elements syntactic semantic transcend
mapping mapping pragmatic
barriers
pragmatics’
miniworld <
broad
ISmaps’
range
39. Use the ISmap links to map text.
Description Classification
Degree Attribute
comparison comparison
<
big
Contrast
! Sequence Cause-effect
40. Power generating systems
General Boil a Make Rotate Generate
process: liquid steam turbines electricity
seawater fossil or
heat boil boil N-heat
NH3 ! H2O
OTEC older type
steam steam
plants
20C ! 500C
plants
low high
power ! power
zero high
energy cost energy cost
hunter systems
41. Comparison of Novakian and
information structure mapping
Novakian mapping, Hunter's ISmapping,
using Cmap tools, vs. using PowerPoint
a free and very usable software or other graphical software.
with web sharing built in.
Make a Cmap and an ISmap of this text:
Yon sama, a Korean actor,
is younger and more handsome than
Tokoro Joji, a Japanese TV personality.
42. an ISmap of the text:
actor TV personality
Korean Japanese
Tokoro
Yon sama
Joji
>
young
handsome
huntersystems
44. Part 2:
matching mapping styles
to instructional purposes
Representations of the information structures
underlying the witting use of maps:
Writers work with
Rhetorical structure
Argument structure
Information structure
Text structure
Paragraph structure
Sentence structure
45. Part 2:
matching mapping styles
to instructional purposes
Representations of the information structures
underlying the witting use of maps:
Writers work with Mappers make
Rhetorical structure Rhetorical structure maps
Argument structure Argument maps
Information structure Information structure maps
Text structure mystery Association maps
Paragraph structure zone Syntactic maps
Sentence structure Grammar maps (not maps)
46. Mapping decision matrix
Software vs. tangibles
Training
________________________ Mapping type
Training Constraint
-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
47. Mapping decision matrix
Software vs. tangibles
Training
mind maps
Mapping type
relation maps
________________________ Constraint
structure maps
Mapping type
-mind maps
-relation maps (Novakian)
-structure maps
48. Mapping decision matrix
Software vs. tangibles
Training
mind maps
Mapping type
relation maps
________________________ Constraint
structure maps
Mapping type
1. Mind maps
-for amassing 'thoughts'
-relations only by association
-for rearranging, clustering, prioritizing (software good
for this)
49. Mapping decision matrix
Software vs. tangibles
Training
mind maps
________________________ Mapping type
relation maps
Mapping type Constraint
structure maps
2. Relation maps (Novakian maps)
-for relating concepts in articulately related pairs
-CMC debate going on now:declarative reading or not?
50. Mapping decision matrix
Software vs. tangibles
Training
mind maps
________________________ Mapping type
relation maps
Mapping type Constraint
structure maps
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
51. Mapping decision matrix
Software vs. tangibles
Training
mind maps
________________________ Mapping type
relation maps
Mapping type Constraint
structure maps
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
52. Mapping decision matrix
Software vs. tangibles
Training
________________________ Mapping type
structural
Constraint Constraint
rhetorical
relational
1. Architectural constraint
- by size
- by content
2. Rhetorical constraint
-by rhetorical device limitations
3. Relational constraint
-by Novakianism
53. Part 3:
Software vs. tangibles
Training
deciding mode: Mapping type
electronic vs. hand made
Constraint
Software vs. tangibles
-tangibles first
-because quick
-to encourage revisions (paper is cheap)
-software for presentation, sharing, editing, beauty
54. Part 4:
using mapping to push the learner
to the use of
specific language forms and patterns
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)
55. Pushing the learner
Software vs. tangibles
Training
________________________ Mapping type
architectural
Constraint Constraint
rhetorical
relational
1. Architectural constraint
- by size (number of nodes)
- by content (e.g. only noun phrases)
56. Pushing the learner
Software vs. tangibles
Training
________________________ Mapping type
architectural
Constraint Constraint
rhetorical
relational
2. Rhetorical constraint
-by rhetorical device limitations
-e.g. in a rhetorical structure map,
only allow argument moves as link content
57. Pushing the learner
Software vs. tangibles
Training
________________________ Mapping type
architectural
Constraint Constraint
rhetorical
relational
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)
58. Hunter’s framework
Key content Background Persuasion
Rhetorical
structure
Information
organization
Information
structures
59. Hunter’s framework
Key content Background Persuasion
Rhetorical
structure
Information
organization
Information
structures
60. Thank you for your kind attention,
and thank you in advance
for your feedback and suggestions.
Lawrie Hunter
downloads from
http://lawriehunter.com
view and download at
http://slideshare.net/rolenzo
61. Information structures: The essential deep foundation of concept mapping
Abstract ideals vs. do-able realities
Selected 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/
62. The age of
GRAPHIC ORGANIZERS
Suggested 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
