Exploring the effects of employing Google Docs in collaborative concept mapping on achievement, concept representation, and attitudes

Abstract

This study investigated the effectiveness of using Google Docs in collaborative concept mapping (CCM) by comparing it with a paper-and-pencil approach. A quasiexperimental study was conducted in a physics course. The control group drew concept maps using the paper-and-pencil method and face-to-face discussion, whereas the experimental group employed Google Docs to create concept maps and used Google Chat for discussion. Learning achievements, physics concept representation, attitudes toward science, and attitudes toward CCM were examined to identify the differences between the two groups and the effectiveness of Google Docs. The results suggested that the use of Google Docs did not significantly affect physics achievement. However, Google Docs fostered physics concept representation and enhanced attitudes toward science. Moreover, the Google Docs group tended to learn more collaboratively. The students in this group also agreed with the superiority of observation and modification functions provided by the real-time co-editing mechanism and revision history.

Cloud-based Collaborative Mind-mapping for Lifelong Learning Analysis in Higher Education

“…Previous studies have reported that collaborative mind-mapping can be used to promote scientific knowledge discourse by co-creation of knowledge in research teams and mutual negotiation of relationships on mind-maps. Previous research has also discovered that having a collaborative visualization of ideas can facilitate co-construction of knowledge and discussion in these types of visualizations are more rich and facilitate a higher level of collaboration among participants [1,3]. Another issue with regards to cloud-based collaborative mind-mapping is most of the tools are unable to provide real-time collaborative mind-mapping.…”

“…The software used allowed collaborative mind-mapping to be carried out in both synchronous and asynchronous manner, which allowed for real-time collaboration and interaction [1]. Furthermore, the tool allowed for tracking of the mind-mapping process in which it allowed maps to be re-visited to an earlier version [2].…”

“…Moreover, this type of mind-mapping allows participants to mutually agree or disagree on a SWOT analysis. In relation, [1] revealed that concept mapping with Google Chat and Docs allowed participants to collaboratively visual each other ideas allowing for negotiation and development of relationship in mind-maps.…”

“…Previous research has indicated that lifelong learning is without its implementation issues, and approaches for eliciting the issues are usually conducted with individual perceptions such as the use of surveys or small-group focus groups. Yet, collaborative approaches that involve larger number of participants are limited [1,2]. Previous studies have reported that collaborative mind-mapping can be used to promote scientific knowledge discourse by co-creation of knowledge in research teams and mutual negotiation of relationships on mind-maps.…”

“…Another issue with regards to cloud-based collaborative mind-mapping is most of the tools are unable to provide real-time collaborative mind-mapping. Here, the lack of real-time collaboration could cause teams to face problems in providing a common understanding in one another ideas in mind-maps [1,2,4]. Furthermore, there are limited studies that study SWOT analysis of lifelong learning environments via cloud-based collaborative mind-mapping [5,6,7].…”