The Use of Mind Maps as an Assessment Tool in a Problem Based Learning Course

Abstract

The use of mind maps as an assessment tool is investigated. The mind map in the current study represents the student knowledge structure at the beginning of the student learning curve unlike previous studies in which the maps are drawn after students have acquired the knowledge already. The study compares the inter-rater reliability of two mind map scoring methods and correlates the marks from these methods with other end of year outcomes. The mind maps were scored independently by three examiners using two mind map scoring rubrics (MMR): a structural and a holistic qualitative rubric. The structural MMR scoring method gave moderate inter-rater reliability with total score ICC values of 0.71 for absolute agreement and 0.57 for consistency between the three examiners. The qualitative MMR scoring method had poor inter-rater reliability with values of 0.33 and 0.32 for absolute agreement and consistency respectively. The concurrent validity with other end of year assessments was poor for both methods. Although the mind map scores did not correlate with other end of year assessments, it is likely that mind maps are assessing a different aspect of the student knowledge construct not assessed by traditional assessments. The inter-rater reliability was better for the structural MMR than the qualitative MMR.

Concept mapping toward competency: Teaching and assessing undergraduate evidence‐informed practice

“…Future intervention studies across several undergraduate institutions should implement better rater training when assessing student concept maps of EIP. The inter-rater reliability of the holistic EIP scoring rubric for concept mapping had poorer results (i.e., 0.41), which is consistent with previous research that had a similar comparison of rubric methods (Mertler, 2000;Zvauya et al, 2017).…”

“…In contrast, analytic rubrics assess a number of predetermined parts of a performance that are then summated to provide an overall average or aggregate score (Mertler, 2000). Previous research on employing these two styles of rubrics has demonstrated higher inter‐rater reliability for analytic rubrics over holistic rubrics (Zvauya et al., 2017).…”

“…Considering the context surrounding the barriers to learning and implementing EIP in health professions expressed in the literature, concept mapping may prove a useful intervention method to teach these concepts within an undergraduate curriculum (Machado & Carvalho, 2020; Schoonees et al., 2017). Evaluation of the success of concept mapping as an educational tool has been studied using rubrics, analytic or holistic, across a number of disciplines including medical education (Zvauya et al., 2017) and marketing/business (von der Heidt, 2015). Holistic rubrics are evaluation tools that use a single measure to assess performance (Mertler, 2000).…”

Empowering Current and Future Educators: Using a Scalable Action Research Module as a Mechanism to Promote High-Quality Teaching and Learning in STEM

“…The ARFA (Supplementary Appendix S2.2) allows for the visualization of changes in participants' cognitive representations of the action research process-a feature that multiple-choice questions lack (Novick, 2001;Burkhard, 2005;Smith et al, 2013;Tversky, 2014;Zvauya et al, 2017). Participants were asked to construct a flowchart that most accurately represented their perception of the action research process, including: 1) generalized steps of the action research process; 2) factors that make for a good action research project; 3) reasons for doing action research; and 4) what action research influences and, in turn, what it is influenced by.…”

Issues and solutions on inventive problems-solving skills (IPSS) in invention course

“…Visual representations are easier for students to grasp than written descriptions or conversational ones (Huxham et al, 2012;Zvauya et al, 2017). As a result, using idea and mind maps in the classroom can help students retain and comprehend knowledge more effectively.…”