Semantic Networking Tools: Mapping the Mind (c)1997



SUBJECT:    Assignment #1, Response Paper #5
COURSE:     MCTE 625 - Survey of Courseware
Textbook:   Computers in the classroom:
            Mindtools for critical thinking
            Jonassen, D. (1996)
Chapter 5:  Semantic Networking Tools:
            Mapping the Mind
Professor:  Dr. George Fornshell
Student:    Leanne C. Boyd
Usercode:   boydl
Due date:   October 26, 1997


     Response to Chapter 5,
     Semantic Networking Tools: Mapping the Mind


     Chapter Five introduces the reader to one of the most 

exciting mindtools, in my estimation. Jonassen states 

that Semantic Networks are "representations of human memory 

structures." As such, the power of the mindtool lies in the 

fact that learners are able to create spatial 

representations of ideas and concepts in a NETWORK, with 

links showing relationships between ideas. Thus, the 

mindtool performs in the same way that the mind performs. 

The computer-based tool of creating a visual network is 

analogous to the human mind's ability to organize, 

structure, label and utilize information or ideas 

(schemas).

     I first noticed that the chapter's overview of a 

"semantic network," and the first diagram, appeared very 

much like an "organization chart" or a technical "flow- 

chart." I soon learned that the semantic network delivers 

much more introspection and information than the average 

organization or flow-chart. While these two tools are also 

used to identify relationships, the goal is usually to 

visually represent surface information and/or basic FACTS. 

They do not involve the use of critical thinking, 

reorganization of information, detailed descriptions of 

concepts, deep processing of knowledge, or any of the other 

valuable offerings of semantic networks.

     For me, the first indication that semantic networks 

could be invaluable tools in my own life was when the 

author showed how this process engages the learner in an 

analysis of their own knowledge structures. This, then, 

enables them to utilize new knowledge in relation to 

EXISTING knowledge. Because I've noticed such a "stepping 

stone effect" in my own paths of learning, I immediately 

recognized the value of semantic networks in my own career. 

     Another important observation concerned essential 

components for higher-order thinking. Jonassen pointed 

out that an awareness of interrelationships in the semantic 

networks -- and an ability to describe them -- is 

quintessential in using this mindtool. It isn't enough to 

know "that" about a subject. To know the "how" you must 

first start with knowing the "why." The reader then learns 

that semantic networking provides the bases for structural 

knowledge. When we begin to understand the 

interrelationships, then we can begin to see the "why" 

behind literally any subject. As an aside note, I 

immediately thought of the young child's constant question 

of "Why?" This is an almost universal happening in the 

lives of young children, and one that drives parents almost 

to distraction! The question never seems to be "who?" or 

even "how?" It is always "WHY?" I began to wonder if this 

capacity for creating and using such a mindtool is inborn 

in the human child.

     All of these questions seem to go back to the initial 

question of LANGUAGE. Stephen Littlejohn, in _Theories of 

Human Communication_, advises that "signs are the basis of 

all communication...A sign designates something other than 

itself, and 'meaning' is the link between an object or idea 

and a sign." (p. 64) The study of signs is called 

'semiotics.' If we dive further into the study of sign 

theory, we find that the field of SEMANTICS is the study of 

how signs relate to things. (p. 68) Finally, we will come 

upon a definition of the word semantics, which refers to 

the ways signs are organized into systems with _other 

signs_. (In semantic networks, we are now talking about 

nodes and links!) A good example of this would be the child 

who holds up two fingers behind a classmate's head, laughs, 

and tells him that the joke is on him. The combination of a 

gesture, a laugh and a taunt (vocal signs), and facial 

expressions, will create a general meaning. This is all 

done in a manner of using mostly nonverbal communication! 

(p. 77) Many times, in the learning process, much of the 

underlying structure of our knowledge is not in the 

category of "verbal." If we are not able to put this 

knowledge into words, either for ourselves or for an 

outward expression, then this is knowledge that is, as our 

book's author calls it, "inert."

     In order to communicate these levels of knowledge to 

ourselves or to others, we must first discover the WHY of 

things. Therefore, semantic networks can become tools for 

organizing all of that multidimensional mass of unconnected 

knowledge, memories and information, in order to problem-

solve and take this information from a base of structural 

knowledge to one of declarative knowledge. In this way, the 

learner begins to utilize "domain knowledge" rather than 

relying on previous experience in order to problem-solve. 

Although I have always called this the stepping stone 

effect, I can see that it was actually an understanding of 

the basic provision of the semantic networking tool.

     Another term for structural knowledge is "cognitive 

structure," which is the pattern of relationships among 

concepts in our memory. Many of the mindtool software 

related to semantic networks allow the learner to perform 

"concept mapping." Used as an evaluation tool, semantic 

networks and/or concept mapping is a not only a method for 

creating relationships, or remembering them, but also 

showing what the learner knows! In this manner, it will 

show a starting point in knowledge, and it will continue by 

showing the changes as more learning occurs. This tool 

literally expands and grows as the learner's base of 

knowledge grows! It has a dimension that is almost 

historian- or diary-like.

     Concept mapping provides very real results for 

students. One outcome for students using concept mapping is 

MEANINGFUL LEARNING. This is further defined as having 

"...enhanced meaning, precision of meaning, improved 

ability to form conceptual relationships, improved clarity 

of reasoning and focus on key ideas, and easier grasp of 

difficult or new concepts..." Concept mapping also helps 

students conduct complex readings more effectively by 

supplying a logical process of thinking through, 

considering, reasoning and assessing the content of the 

readings. This enables them to extricate, coordinate and 

interrelate the concepts. Concept mapping helps develop 

reflective thinking because it make it possible for 

learners to separate information in the order of the 

trivial to the significant. Learners are given a sense of 

confidence in determining, guiding and rearranging 

information. It can help increase concentration. One very 

important benefit is that it can improve motivation for 

_self-conducted learning_. (Todd & Kirk, 1993)

     One assessment of concept mapping that is extremely 

vital in my own work is that of allowing the learner to 

create tools that are personal and explicit visual 

representations of the concepts a person holds. These 

visual tools can expedite the exchange of viewpoints and 

aid in identifying missing links, false relationships, and 

misconceptions. They can render a means for developing 

one's speaking and reasoning skills. (Todd & Kirk, 1993)

     Because I have come from the combined worlds of 

publishing, graphics, multimedia and audio-visual services, 

concept mapping or semantic networks appear to be extremely 

promising to my own way of learning -- and of teaching 

methods of learning to others. This mindtool holds great 

promise for initiating a more visual approach to organizing 

and utilizing information.


---
References:

     Littlejohn, Stephen W. (1996).  Theories of human 

communication. 5th ed. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing.

     Todd, Ross J., & Kirk, Joyce. Concept mapping and the 

development of theoretical knowledge. (1993). Melbourne, 

Australia: Swinburne University of Technology, Australian 

Association for Research in Education (AARE). [On-line]. 

Available: ftp://ftp.swin.edu.au/pub/aare/aare93/conf93/ 

toddr93.280.