See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/269276727

UTILIZING OF CONCEPT MAP IN TEACHING

BIODIVERSITY TO LOWER SECONDARY
STUDENTS FOR SCIENCE CLASSROOM

Conference Paper · June 2014

CITATIONS READS

0 325

1 author:

Nurshamshida md shamsudin
Universiti Teknologi MARA
11 PUBLICATIONS 0 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

PhdMobile VR View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Nurshamshida md shamsudin on 08 December 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 UTILIZING OF CONCEPT MAP IN TEACHING BIODIVERSITY

TO LOWER SECONDARY STUDENTS FOR SCIENCE CLASSROOM

NURSHAMSHIDA MD SHAMSUDIN

AISYAH BINTI ANUAR

ABSTRACT

The objective of this study was to examine the implication of concept mapping on student
achievement in science learning. It is intended to make a comparison between the use of concept
maps in the traditional method of learning and student achievement in science. Samples taken
were 60 students representing the two classes of form 2. One of a class is taken as the
experimental group and the other class taken as a control group. Topic 3 which is biodiversity is
taken to be the topic of testing in this study to test the effectiveness of concept mapping in
learning science. Therefore, the experimental group was taught using concept maps while the
control group taught by traditional method. Before using 2 different ways to the students, they are
required to answer the questions to test their knowledge in this topic. After learning about this
topic using two different ways, students are required to answer the same questions to test the
effectiveness of concept maps in science learning achievement, thus helping to make the
comparison between the use of concept maps and traditional ways. From this study, the effective
use of concept maps that students can make the classification of living organisms, to make
comparisons between monocotyledons and dicotyledons, considering the common characteristics
of each group of animals and plants and can apply the understanding in every situations. This
clearly proves that the concept map is very effective in learning science. Recommendations for
future research are also discussed. In addition, biodiversity concept map book has been to help
teachers and students learn more effectively.

Introduction
Science is a subject that many of students think it is too tough and they are trying to
avoid taking this subject or try not to choose this subject as their major in learning
(Hussin R. , 2008). This phenomenon arises in every school in Malaysia where there is
only two or three classes that learn especially science pure compared the class take the
other subject. Many factors will influence or attract them to interest in science field. One
of the factors is the ways how teachers delivered the content of science in the classroom
for example are teacher shows the video, picture or group work. In the other hand, many
of students think that every single term or sentence in science need to memorize if they
want to success in learning science and get a good result (Douglas Barton, Edward
Seung, Dorjee Sun, 2002).
For developing country like Malaysia, we need to produce many students in science field
to make sure our country achievement in Science and Technology is higher to compete
1  
 
with the other develop countries. Our target also in “Wawasan 2020” must be achieved
on that time. Wawasan 2020 or Vision 2020 is a Malaysian ideal introduced by the
former Prime Minister of Malaysia, Tun Dr.Mahathir bin Mohamad during the tabling of
the Sixth Malaysia Plan in 1991. The vision calls for the nation to achieve a self-sufficient
industrialized nation by the year 2020, encompasses all aspects of life, from economic
prosperity, social well-being, educational world class, political stability, as well as
psychological balance. In the sixth element of this vision state that the establishment of
scientific and progressive society, a society that is innovative and forward-looking, one
that is not only a consumer of technology but also a contributor to the scientific and
technological civilization of the future. It is prove that by the development of science and
technology, our country will be a developing country at that time.
According to Ministry of Education, the purpose for the establishment of science
curriculum in Malaysia is to provide the knowledge and the skill in science and
technology to the student. The curriculum also aims to train the students to solve
problems and make decisions in everyday life based on scientific attitudes and noble
values. It can also enable the students to continue formal and informal further education
in science and technology (Curriculum Development Centre, 2005).
Science was first introduced to students early at primary school where students in
standard 1 until standard 6. In standard 6 they had first introduced with a Primary School
Evaluation Test or Ujian Penilaian Sekolah Rendah (UPSR) where science is one
compulsory subject to all students to proceed for the secondary school. In secondary
school, science is divided in two parts in lower secondary school and upper secondary
school. In lower secondary school, topic in science subject are overall and general like in
primary school, but when in upper secondary school, science is divided into three parts
which is Biology, Physics and Chemistry or called as a pure science. The three parts of
science are narrow and specific by topic learn.
The three parts of science pure gives the many challenges to teachers to deliver the
content. For students, it seems like they need to learn new subjects and the subjects is
tougher compared to science in the lower secondary school. By that, teacher must take
a bigger role to attract them in learning science. However, the frequent changes in
curriculum for science and mathematics subject have become an issue where it has
affects all teachers and students. In 2003, Ministry of Education Malaysia had introduced
learning science and mathematics in English (ETeMS). The overall aim is to enhance

2  
 
the English language skills of Mathematics and Science teachers to enable them to
reach effectively using English as the medium of instruction.
However many negative feedbacks from the school especially in rural school where the
achievement in science and the total number students choose science is decreasing
than before. The big problem is come from the teacher because not all science teachers
able to deliver their teaching in English and it look like students are more confuse and
get misconceptions in science. By that, the Ministry of Education changes the policy of
teaching science into Bahasa Melayu instead of English.In October 2011, the Ministry of
Education launched a comprehensive review of the education system in Malaysia in
order to develop a new National Education Blueprint. This decision was made in the
context of rising international education standards, the Government’s aspiration of better
preparing Malaysia’s children for the needs of the 21st century, and increased public and
parental expectations of education policy. The result is a preliminary Blueprint that
evaluates the performance of Malaysia’s education system against historical starting
points and international benchmarks. The Blueprint also offers a vision of the education
system and students that Malaysia both needs and deserves, and suggests 11 strategic
and operational shifts that would be required to achieve that vision. The Ministry hopes
that this effort will inform the national discussion on how to fundamentally transform
Malaysia’s education system, and will seek feedback from across the community on this
preliminary effort before finalizing the Blueprint in December 2012.
The objective of the blueprint which is want to produce world class students ensure our
country become inventors, innovators, movers and idea busters and not mere
responders to other people’s ideas and thought (New Straits Times, 2013). By that,
many changes have done for example introduce of School Based Assessment (SBA)
which is eliminate the exam-oriented system to the on-going assessment. Other than
that, It appears more viable and comprehensive than Kurikulum Standard Sekolah
Rendah (KSSR) in primary schools and Kurikulum Standard Sekolah Menengah (KSSM)
in secondary schools implemented in 1982 (FA Majid, 2011).
Despite many challenges and difficulties in teaching and learning sciences will be
overcome using concept mapping techniques. Teachers and students should cooperate
together to make sure the achievement of this subject is increasing and achieve the
2020 mission by the launching of a new system education in our country.
Background of Study

3  
 
In one research by Paulette GreeneI in 2011, In order for students to increase their
learning, instruction must be presented in a manner that assists in organizing, storing,
and retrieving information in the brain. One goal of education is to promote the transfer
of knowledge and skills within learning situations (Ausubel, 2000). This concepts need
our brain to shaping or relate all information. Fact connected with the concept of the fact
information or data that helps to think, build and develop a concept. One goal of
education is to promote the transfer of knowledge and skills within learning situations
(Ausubel, 2000). This involves the ability to access one’s own knowledge into relevant
situations (Ausubel, 2000; Novak & Cañas, 2008).
The first idea to build concept mapping is based on Ausubel’s theory of learning which
emphasized the difference between meaningful and rote learning. Ausubel argued that
meaningful learning builds one’s cognitive structure by adding new concepts into one’s
existing conceptual structure. Novak confirmed Ausubel’s stand when he stated that
concept mapping is a major methodological tool of Ausubel’s assimilation theory of
meaningful learning (Ajaja O. Patrick, 2011). In addition, Novak and Musonda suggested
that researchers use concept maps to assess conceptual understanding of students.
Novak and Musonda focused on hierarchical maps featuring central concepts that act as
superordinates and several other concepts that act as subordinates to the central
concepts. The various concepts form nodes and connect through linking phrases (Ziad
Shaker, 2012).Concept mapping is a method to visualize the structure of knowledge.
Since the knowledge expressed in the maps is mostly semantic, concept maps are
sometimes called semantic networks. Often it is claimed that concept mapping bears a
similarity to the structure of long-term memory. Instead of describing all concepts and
their relations in text, one may choose to draw a map indicating concepts and relations
in a graph or network. Visual representation has several advantages. Visual symbols are
quickly and easily recognized, and this can be demonstrated by considering the large
amount of logos, maps, arrows, road signs, and icons that most of us can recall with little
effort. Visual representation also allows the development of a holistic understanding that
words alone cannot convey, because the graphical form allows representations of parts
and whole in a way that is not available in sequential structure of text (Lawson, 1994
cited in Askin Asan, 2007).
Moreover, concept maps are graphical tools for organizing and representing knowledge
(Novak & Cañas, 2008). The concepts are presented in a hierarchical manner with
general concepts at the top of the map and the more specific, less general concepts
4  
 
arranged hierarchically below (Gurlitt & Renkl, 2010;Novak & Cañas, 2008). This
process in the hierarchically arrangement allows for learning new material as it relates to
new ideas in the existing cognitive structure on a substantive, nonverbatim basis (Novak
& Cañas, 2008). Subsequently, meaningful learning is improved by concept mapping as
the learner engages in graphically representing concepts in a hierarchically arranged
structure progressively differentiating among concepts (Ricon, 2010; Tsien, 2007 cited in
Paulette Greene, 2011).
In the traditional ways of teaching, teachers teach the students only using chalk and talk
technique. Teacher will write the content of learning on the blackboard and students just
copy all the content on their books. Teachers always refer their lesson on the textbooks
only. It is not interesting to attract students in learning especially in science. By time
changes, the revolution of science and technologies around the world, the learning
environment process is changes suitable with the new generation nowadays, teacher
cannot use the old method anymore and concept mapping is one of the new teaching
styles, with the helping of concept mapping, all the information in their brain will be
connected with each other.
In science education, concept mapping has been widely recommended and used in a
variety of ways. According to research by Askin Asan, 2007 “ students better remember
information when it's represented and learned both visually and verbally. Concept
mapping tools are based on proven visual learning methodologies that help students
think, learn and achieve. Visual learning is absorbing information from illustrations,
photos, diagrams, graphs, symbols, icons and other visual models. By representing
information spatially and with images, students are able to focus in meaning and
recognize and group similar ideas easily. The use of concept mapping as a learning tool
should therefore be more widely encouraged”.
Lastly, students enrolled in urban school districts that are underperforming in their
science classes are likely to face challenges related to their academic careers. Students
achieving below the basic performance level in middle school are often unprepared for
rigorous high school science courses that are aimed to prepare them in furthering their
education in science related fields (Ruby, 2006). As teachers work towards raising
students’ science achievement, under-prepared students enrolled in urban school
districts continue to fall behind (cited in Dr. Navdeep Kaur Dosanjh, 2011). In other
study, showed the problem-solving strategy improved significantly the achievement of
students in genetics more than the students exposed to the traditional lecture method of
5  
 
teaching. This can be attributed to the fact that problem solving strategy equips students
with both conceptual scientific knowledge and procedural knowledge on how to solve
problems (Nnamdi S. Okoye and Okechukwu, 2006).
Statement of Research Problem
Students always think science as a difficult subject because it requires learners to
employ variety of methods to understand the concepts. Once learners get the concept, it
is easier to them understand and apply the concepts in their learning. Science for
example physics involves the calculations, so that students must understand the
principal to apply in the calculations. Science also involves the experiments.
Experiments as the practical way on the theory that students learn in class. Here,
teachers can evaluate how far students understand the lessons.
It is necessary for science educators to expose students to strategies designed to help
them become clearer concerning their perceptions as they relate to accepted scientific
understanding (Kerlin, McDonald, & Kelly, 2009; O’Reilly & McNamara, 2007). Students,
especially those having difficulty comprehending new material, may need to be shown
how to make connections between known and new information and also need to be
shown how ideas are logically connected in text. Many students have difficulty
understanding science text materials (Yore & Craig, 1990 cited in E. Francine Guastello,
T. Mark Beasley and Richard C. Sinatra, 2000). This is show that many of students have
a big problem to relate the existing information they have with the new information they
gain.
In addition to science instruction being neglected in favor of the tested subjects of
mathematic and reading or language arts, there are a few other reasons why students
may be experiencing difficulty learning science. First, science is a subject that contains
more of rules and principles (Ueckert & Newsome, 2008). If students lack an
understanding of these rules and principles they will struggle to understand the scientific
information. Moreover, these rules and principles are often presented to students as
isolated ideas or concepts. Second, students frequently enter the science classroom
with previously established scientific misconceptions (Thompson & Logue, 2007). These
students experience difficulty replacing the erroneous scientific information with true
scientific facts. Lastly, to understand multifaceted science topics, students must have a
well-established foundation of prior science learning (Buntting, Coll, & Campbell, 2006).
Since science is a subject that builds on itself, if students fail to acquire basic science
content, they will likely struggle with the more complex scientific concepts that follow.
6  
 
Moreover, some science instructors still hold traditional teacher-directed teaching
philosophies that place the learner in a passive learning role. In these teacher-directed
classrooms, students do not actively participate in the acquisition of scientific knowledge
by engaging in meaningful learning (Hill, 2005). Dr. Navdeep Kaur Dosanjh, 2011 cited
that “Ausubel described meaningful learning as the establishment of non-arbitrary
relations among concepts in the learner’s mind. Meaningful learning is achieved if
learners are provided the opportunity to relate new information to ideas they already
know and to do so learners need to be placed in active rather than passive learning
roles”. Unfortunately, students oftentimes are expected to learn through rote
memorization. This type of learning weakens learners because they do not actively
make connections to their prior knowledge (BouJaoude & Attieh, 2008). In addition,
information learned by rote memorization is frequently forgotten (Cardellini, 2004).
Hence, it is important for students to engage in scientific learning that facilitates
meaningful learning.
Furthermore, the concept mapping learning strategy is beneficial in understanding
students’ misconceptions. Student generated concept maps reveal students’ level of
understanding. Teachers and students can analyze concept maps and identify
deficiencies, allowing teachers to show the deficiencies before students attempt to build
scientific knowledge based on inaccurate information. Compared with the old trend of
writing notes, its look like students just write in essays form or point form, teachers
cannot detect the student misconceptions and how far students get the information.
Therefore, the students with the lower ability in learning especially in science founds that
they are difficult to understand the concept compared to the higher ability students. From
several of the studies reviewed, there is indication that concept mapping may be
particularly beneficial for lower ability learners, partly because it does induce the active,
inquiring, orderly approach to learning that is likely a more natural part of the higher
ability student’s approach to learning (Alberto J. Cañas, 2003). On the other hand, when
learners are not yet facile with constructing concept maps, there is some indication that
the cognitive load of creating maps from scratch may hinder learning. When students are
new mappers, other “scaffolded” ways of interacting with concept maps, for example,
filling in the blank content nodes of a concept map already containing the labeled
relationships of a completed concept map, may be beneficial.
According to the Malaysia Education Blueprint 2013-2025 launched by the Deputy Prime
Minister and Education Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin, the risks were reflected
7  
 
through the latest study of the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA)
and Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS). Based on the last
published cycle of TIMSS results 2011, thirty-five and 38 per cent of Malaysian students
failed to meet the minimum proficiency level in Science and Mathematics, which is two to
four fold up from seven per cent and 13%, respectively, in 1999. In addition, almost 60
per cent of the 15 years old Malaysian students who participated in PISA failed to meet
the minimum proficiency level in Mathematics, while 44 and 43 per cent did not meet the
minimum proficiency levels in reading and science, respectively (Bernama, 2006). In the
level of university, for example in Faculty of Education who are taking the bachelor of
education in science show there are the minority group compare to the other’s education
subjects.
This is happen because science is orthodox and taught in traditional approach especially
in Malaysia. Many teachers are using traditional method to deliver the content of science
to students. Concept includes in science sometimes is difficult to understand, if the
teacher only using the traditional ways to deliver the content, it makes students not
understand the concept and get misconception on the information (Paulette Greene,
2011). Science actually is an enjoyable subject hence teacher must change the
traditional method of teaching to the attractive ways for example using movies, using
role model to relate with the process of science or make a field trip to experience the real
situations of science.
Purpose of Study
The purpose of this study is to investigate the effectiveness of using concept mapping
towards the achievement in biodiversity science form 2. The result will be compare with
the traditional method of teaching. The independent variable was defined as instruction
using concept maps. This study attempt to identify effective approach in science
teaching, so this will help teacher, students, parents, school and stakeholder to enhance
the quality of science education.
Research Objectives
The objectives for this study are:
1. To identify the effectiveness of concept mapping towards students’
achievement in biodiversity science form 2.
2. To compare the achievement in science using concept mapping with the
traditional method for form 2 students.results suggest that the proposition

8  
 
 identifying concept map may not be a useful learning strategy for learning
vocabulary and identification terms (Dosanjh, 2011).
Transfer and Metacognition
When students learn about something new and get the new information, they did not
know how to arrange it well in their brain, how to connect the new information with the
existing information before because all the information in their brain not arranged well.
When to recall it back, it so hard to them to take out the correct information. “In the
terminology of Novak (1998), if learners learn meaningfully, the transferability of
knowledge is high. According to Salomon and Perkins (1989), transfer occurs when
previous learning affects subsequent performance on a different task. Whether what is
learned can be applied across many settings or whether learning is always context-
specific are issues raised about transfer. Mayer & Wittrock (1996) have reviewed
different views of transfer. They put their emphasis on the approach of the specific
transfer of general skills and the metacognitive transfer view”( cited in E.Francine
Guastello, T.Mark Beasley, Richard C. Sinatra,2012). In a research by Ajaja O.
Patrick,2011 said that meta cognition which is a strategy used in self directed learning
are mental processes that assist learners to reflect on their thinking by internalizing,
understanding, and recalling the content to be learned (Borich, 2004). They include
invisible thinking skills such as self-interrogation, self-checking, self-monitoring, and
analyzing, as well as memory aids (called mnemonics) for classifying and recalling
content. Metacognitive strategies are most easily conveyed to learners through a
process called mental modeling (Duffy et al. 1988; Rekrut 1999). Mental modeling helps
students internalize, recall, and then generalize problem solutions to different content at
a later time.
In addition, the cognitive perspective on learning can be traced back to early Greek
philosophers’ views on how the mind obtains knowledge and reasoning (Driscoll, 2005).
During the early and middle 1900s, cognitive research accumulated evidence focused
towards behaviorism, individuals responding to reinforcement and punishment in order
to change behavior, skills, and habits (Driscoll, 2005). Continued research in the field of
cognition provided evidence that learning is an active mental process whereby the
individual’s use of mental representations involved a selective interaction between new
learning materials and preexisting ideas (Ozel, 2009; Taylor & MacKenny, 2008).

9  
 
In the other research by Odom and Kelly (2001) examined the effects of concept
mapping instruction and learning cycle on students’ understanding of diffusion and
osmosis in biology among high school students and found that the success of learning
concept mapping was more efficient as a result of combining both procedures together.
While in the study by Tekkaya (2003) investigated the effect of combining contextual
change text and concept mapping strategy with ninth grade biology students and results
verified the high effect of concept mapping in overcoming students’ misconceptions.
Concept Mapping
Concept maps are representative of concepts and their interrelationships that are
intended to represent the knowledge structures that humans store in their minds
(Jonassen, Beissner, & Yacci, 1993 cited in Askin Asan, 2007). Besides that, concept
maps are diagrams indicating inter-relationships among concepts as representation of
meaning or educational framework specific to a domain of knowledge (Novak, 1990).
Okebukola (1997) believed that the maps can be applied to any subject matter or to any
level within the subject (Nnamdi S. Okoye and Okechukwu,2006). In the other research
by Diana C. Rice, Joseph M. Ryan, Sara M. Samson, 2007 said that “concept mapping
as a “metalearning strategy”, the development of which can be traced back to the well-
known work of Ausubel, Novak, and Gowin. The research base on concept mapping
shows that the use of concept maps is not limited to any particular group of learners.
Children as young as primary grades have been found to be capable of developing and
explaining concept maps (Novak & Gowin, 1984; Novak, 1990; White & Gunstone,
1992). A number of researchers have reported the successful development of concept
maps by middle school–age children (Novak & Gowin, 1984; Novak et al., 1983;
Symington & Novak, 1982; White & Gunstone, 1992; Willerman & Mac Harg, 1991). The
works of Anderson and Huang and Novak et al. have also shown that students of
varying ability can become good concept mappers”.On the other side, one such
graphical representation of knowledge comprised of concepts and the relationships
between them, is concept maps. Concept maps consist of concepts enclosed in circles
or boxes, with relationships between concepts indicated by connecting lines that link
them together (Kinchin & Cabot, 2007; Trochim & Trochim, 2006). Words on the linking
lines, referred to as linking words or linking phases depict the relationship between the
concepts (Novak & Cañas, 2006). Concept maps contain “propositions that include two
or more concepts connected, using linking words or phrases to form a meaningful
statement” (Novak & Cañas, 2006). Concept maps include cross-links, described as
10  
 
relationships or links between concepts in different segments or domains of knowledge
in the concept map, helping to distinguish the relationship between a concept in one
domain as related to another domain shown on the map (Novak & Cañas, 2006; Robley,
Whittle, & Murdock-Eaton, 2005).
A key feature of concept maps is that they can be graphically constructed to represent
text structure patterns. Such graphic plans would serve to help students form mental
constructs or schemata of how texts are organized. By mapping ideas onto maps
designed to model text structure patterns, teachers help students visualize relationships
and learn text structures (Bos & Anders, 1990 cited in E. Francine Guastello, T. Mark
Beasley and Richard C. Sinatra,2000).
In addition, Alaiyemola & Okebukola (2005) conduct a study on the effect of concept
mapping on students’ achievement in biology. The results show that the experimental
group achieved significantly better than the control group. The study suggests that the
concept mapping strategy enhanced learning in biology more effectively than traditional
expository teaching. Also, the concept mapping strategy led to a significantly greater
reduction in anxiety level.At last but not least, from the other researcher found that,
educators may use concept maps as formative or summative assessment procedures to
assess students’ understanding of a unit, modify curriculum, and assign grades
(Plummer, 2008). In the Wallace and Mintzes (2003) study involving pretest and posttest
results of concept maps based on marine life zones, findings after instruction indicated
small increases on the objective posttest by the experimental group. However, in
Hollenbeck, Twyman, and Tindal’s (2006) research with sixth grade science students,
results indicated concept maps were not beneficial as an alternative for assessment in
content area domain due to low predictive validity between the mapping and essay
scores.

The effectiveness of Using Concept Mapping in Learning

From the past study, findings show that using concept mapping give much effectiveness
to the students’ achievement in learning. One of the examples from the other study is
using concept map outlines with heterogeneously grouped fifth graders in a public
school by Askin Asan, (2007) which formed three groups: a concept mapping,
cooperative learning group consisting of three smaller groups with 3 students each a
standard concept mapping group of 11 students and a control group of 20 students.
Students in all three groups read the same science unit, but students in the two mapping
11  
 
groups used concept map outlines. Control group students received general classroom
instruction, but without the use of mapping and cooperative learning techniques. The
standard mapping group was guided by the teacher in following procedural steps for
mapping the content, and the cooperative students were told to complete their maps by
contributing to a group effort. She found that students in both the cooperative and
standard mapping groups achieved higher scores than control group students on weekly
vocabulary tests and on a final unit test. She also noted that the high achievers in the
cooperative learning groups were able to use their textbooks to gain information to place
in their concept maps, and the low achievers did not use their textbooks well and
performed very poorly. In the other research by E. Francine Guastello, T. Mark Beasley
and Richard C. Sinatra, (2000) found that low-achieving seventh-grade students from
an urban parochial school were randomly assigned to two equally sized groups. One
group was taught by a reading and discuss, teacher-directed method, and the second
group, given the same type of introductory lesson as the first, followed a model of
concept mapping that connected major and minor concept ideas. A criterion-referenced
test based on the content of a science chapter served as the dependent variable. Prior
to any teaching, a pretest was administered. An analysis of covariance with pretest
scores as the covariate showed a statistically significant difference in comprehension
between the pretest and posttest for the experimental group. Effect size estimates
revealed that concept mapping can be expected to improve comprehension scores of
low-achieving seventh graders by approximately six standard deviations over a
traditional instructional technique. When students lack background information on a topic
to aid comprehension, the active participation in constructing semantic or concept maps
may help students form a cognitive schema to assimilate and relate the new topic
information.Despite the apparent effectiveness of using concept mapping as a learning
strategy, there is still a need for additional research cited in Dr. Navdeep Kaur Dosanjh,
(2011). Some studies have revealed that not all variations of the concept mapping
learning strategy are equally effective (Wang & Dwyer, 2006). There are four types of
concept maps are teacher generated, student generated, concept identifying, and
proposition identifying. Teacher generated concept maps are created entirely by the
teacher and given to the students as a study tool (Lim., 2009). In contrast, student
generated concept maps are created entirely by the students (Harpaz, Balik, &
Ehrenfeld, 2004). Concept identifying concept maps are partially completed concept
maps that students complete by finding the correct concepts to place in the nodes
12  
 
(Wang & Dwyer, 2006). Similarly, proposition identifying concept maps are also partially
completed maps, however rather than finding the correct concepts to place in the nodes,
students complete them by providing linking words between concepts in order to create
propositions or node-link networks (Wang & Dwyer, 2006).
The other research shows the effectiveness of using concept mapping is provide
students with a better understanding of how ideas of science are connected and
organized to important concepts, transferrable from one context to another, and in
distinguishing misconceptions of science ideas (Novak & Cañas, 2006). Besides that,
concept mapping is a meaningful learning aid in the retention of information, and in
maintaining the availability of acquired information which may be accessed later.
Immediately following the initial meaningful learning, new information is easily accessible
(Novak, 2010). Concept mapping also teaching students to learn and remember by
using learning tactics and strategies are important applications of cognitive theories
(Wehry & Goudy, 2006).
According to the other research, concept mapping is a essential components of learning
are the organization of the information to be learned, the learner’s prior knowledge, and
the processes involved in perceiving, comprehending, and storing information (Garner,
2007; Jensen, 2005). Perspectives within the cognitive theory include the memory
system is an active, organized processor of information (Terry, 2006), prior knowledge
plays an important role in learning (Gredler, 2005), and concept mapping strategies
assist in the processing of information (Novak & Cañas, 2008).
On top of that, the various applications of concept mapping include its use as an
instructional tool, an assessment tool and a learning tool. In order to develop a better
organization and sequence in instruction, concept mapping has been used to define
content’s domain and organization in syllabus and curriculum planning (Starr & Krajcik,
2005) as well as content and task analysis (Jonassen, Tessmer & Hannum, 2010).
Willerman and Mac Harg (2000) verify the effectiveness of concept mapping as an
advance organizer at the start of a unit of instruction. Also, with its ability to reveal
conceptual structures in learners’ mind, concept mapping has been proven to be a
useful tool to assess the learner’s achievement (Wallace & Mintzes, 2007; Markham,
Mintzes, & Jones, 2005) or detect learners’ misconceptions (Ross & Munby, 2008).
The other effectiveness of using concept mapping in teaching strategies is teacher will
explore the new method in teaching that have she or he can found it is very attractive
and interesting method to make students understand well in class on what topic they
13  
 
learn (Ruíz-Primo, 2000; Ruíz -Primo & Shavelson, 1996; Yin, Vanides, Ruíz-Primo,
Ayala, & Shavelson, 2005).Using concept mapping also, the data or information to
transfer to student will be simplify just give them an important data that they need to
know and for more understanding teacher also need to elaborate the keyword on the
concept mapping that she or he give to students Stoddart’s, Abrams’s, Gasper’s, and
Canaday’s (2000). Other than that, teacher also can attract students by color the
diagram and draw it with something new like flower or in animal shapeDawkins,
Dickerson, McKinnet, and Butler (2008).
Other than that, the concept mapping is useful to the students who have low ability.
Several theorists have proposed that students with low prior knowledge benefit more
from concept maps than those with high prior knowledge (Snead & Young, 2003). There
is also evidence that low ability students, specifically those with low verbal ability, obtain
greater benefits with graphic representations than high ability students due to students
with low verbal ability being able to construct and understand concept maps better than
deciphering and writing scholarly text (O’Donnell, 2002). However, when young students
are not adequately capable of constructing concept maps, there is indication that the
cognitive load of creating concept maps from scratch may hinder learning (Novak &
Cañas, 2006). By having students fill in the blank content nodes of the concept map
which already display the labeled relationships of a completed concept map may assist
in better understanding of the relationships (Novak & Cañas, 2006).
Furthermore, a concept map can be utilized as an advance organizer presented at the
beginning of a textbook chapter or other instructional unit, or used as a guide for a
lecture that is presented in class (Coffey, 2003). Willerman and MacHarg (1991)
described the significance of concept maps as advance organizers in improving the
science achievement of eighth grade chemistry students. The important relationships
between concept mapping and its grounding in Ausubel’s (1968) assimilation theory of
learning, acting as advance organizers in bridging the gap between the learners’ existing
knowledge structure and newly acquired knowledge, and in fostering meaningful
learning, presents the benefits of concept mapping in the area of learning.
Lastly, students may be asked to generate concept maps as an effective method,
encouraging organizing and systematizing of knowledge (Kim & Olaciregui, 2008). In
education, concept mapping is recognized as a means to support learning, intellectual
analysis, teaching, research, and organization of knowledge resources (Fisher,
Wandersee, & Wideman, 2000). Concept mapping reflects the idea of tapping into and
14  
 
mimicking the systematic workings of the brain, especially the areas of short and long
term memory, by stimulating and supporting students’ intelligent use of innate resources
and influencing their prior knowledge (Fisher, 2000).
Design of Study
The research design used for this research is experimental research. Therefore, this
study applied quantitative research method to obtain the data. This experimental
research method included a pretest and posttest design using an experimental and
control group to examine the effects of the independent variable (concept mapping) on
the dependent variable (student achievement in science). One class will take as an
experimental group (using concept mapping) while the other class will take as control
group (traditional method). Each group completed a pretest and posttest (same test) to
assess knowledge of one topic in science concepts. Following this phase, the
experimental group became teach by concept mapping of biodiversity topic. During the
same time, the control group received study sheets related to biodiversity topic, without
concept mapping. Details of the assessments are described in the instrumentation and
materials section of the study.
Study Population and Sampling
The population for this research is involved form 2 students and only science subject will
be taken. The sample will be chosen by nonrandom sample from two selected class in
form 2. This group chosen because of the topic is under science subject form 2 that
which is biodiversity. The population will be given the valid data about the application of
concept mapping technique in learning science subject in secondary school.
Instruments
The research instrument for this research is concept mapping and a test question use to
define the students’ achievement using the concept mapping method. The test question
is divided into 3 section which are Section A, Section B, Section C and section D.
Section A was contain the questions on the classification of living things that is fill in the
blank. Section B was contain the questions on the comparison between the two groups
of plants. While, Section C includes the questions what are the common characteristics
for each of the two groups of animals and plants. The last part is Section D where the
questions was the multiple choices questions, the questions contains on more to the
critical thinking to make sure students understand well on this topic. The concept
mapping will be used for the one group which is experimental group. At first, all students
from this group will be exposed by new teaching method which is use concept mapping
15  
 
for the third topic of science form 2 which is biodiversity. This topic includes only one
subtopic which is organisms and their classification. Then, the other group will be
teaching by the traditional teaching method without using concept mapping. Before this,
the two group of students were had a pretest to know about their knowledge on this
topic.
Then, the posttest will be distributed to both of the two groups. The test given same with
the pretest before. The questions need students to memorize the classification of living
things that had learned in the class before. The questions of identify the similarities of
the animals or plants given need students to understand the concept of the classification
of each groups of animals and plants. Here, we can see if the students use the concept
mapping technique they will remember and understand all the categories of living things
and the characteristics of each type following the diagram in concept mapping provided
by teacher. Then, the results from the two groups will analyze to show the relationships
of concept mapping towards students’ achievement in learning science.
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS
This instrument is designed and analyzed to help the researcher to answer both
research question 1 and research question 2. The data were analyzed according to the
section of questions answered by respondents. The instrument consists of 4 sections
of questions and the 4 sections of questions were answered research question 1 and
the achievement (marks) of pre-test and post-test using traditional method and concept
mapping method then compared to answer research question 2. They were organized
based on the area as follows:
Questions under Instrument
Section of
No of Research
Question Types of Questions
Questions
s
A
(Completing of Classification of living things
chart)
B Comparisons between RQ 1
(Completing of monocotyledons and
tables) dicotyledons
C Common characteristics for

16  
 
 (Define the groups of living
common things
characte
ristics
between
two
group of
living
organis
ms)
D
(1-20
Question Multiple choices questions
s)
Marks for control group and experimental group RQ 2

Findings based on Instrument

This findings will answered the two research questions. Section A, Section B, Section C
and Section D for the experimental group using concept mapping will answered
the first research question. While, the comparison of achievement between the
experimental group and control group will answered the second research
question.

RQ 1: What is the effectiveness of concept mapping to the students’ achievement in

biodiversity science form 2?

Section A
In this section, students need to complete 13 blank spaces in the chart about the
classification of living organisms. Living organisms classified into two
which are animals and plants.
Table 4.2: Frequency on Performance in Classification of Living Things

Classification of Living Things

17  
 
 No of Students
Scores Grades’ Description
Pre-test Post-test

0 Very Weak 12 0

1–3 Weak 7 6

5–7 Moderate 10 5

8 – 10 Good 1 10

11 - 13 Very Good 0 9

Total 30

Chart 4.1 Percentage of Performance in Classification of Living Things

Table 4.2 and Chart 4.1 showed the frequency and the percentage of respondents who
were able to classify of living things correctly in pre-test and post-test . In pre-
test, 12 persons or 40% of the respondents were performed very weak in
classification of living things. 7 persons or 23% of respondents were performed
weak in classification of living things. 10 persons or 34% of respondents were
performed moderate in classification of living things and only 1 person or 3% of
18  
 
 respondents were performed good in classification of living things. Thus, in the
pretest it can be conclude that most of the respondents were performed very
weak in classification of living things. While, in post-test, 6 persons or 20% of
respondents were performed weak in classification of living things. 6 persons or
20% of respondents were performed weak in classification of living things. 5
persons or 17% of respondents were performed moderate in classification of
living things. 10 persons or 33% of respondents were performed good and 9
persons or 30% of respondents performed very weak in classification of living
things. Thus, in the posttest it can be conclude that most of the respondents were
performed good in classification of living things.
Table 4.3: Frequency of Performance in Comparing between Monocotyledon and
Dicotyledon
Comparison between Monocotyledon and Dicotyledon

No of Students
Scores Grades’ Description
Pre-test Post-test

0 Weak 17 5

1-3 Moderate 13 9

4 Good 0 16

Total 30

Chart 4.2 Percentage of Performance in Comparing between Monocotyledon and

Dicotyledon

Table 4.3 and Chart 4.2 showed the frequency and the percentage of respondents who
were performed in comparing between monocotyledon and dicotyledon. In pre-
test, 17 persons or 57% of respondents were performed weak and 13 persons or
43% of respondents were performed moderate in comparing between
monocotyledon and dicotyledon. Thus, in the pretest it can be conclude that most
of the respondents were performed weak in comparing between monocotyledon
and dicotyledon. While, in post-test 5 persons or 17% of respondents were

19  
 
 performed weak in comparing between monocotyledon and dicotyledon. 9
persons or 30% of respondents were performed moderate and 16 persons or
53% of respondents were performed good in comparing between monocotyledon
and dicotyledon. Thus, in post-test it can be conclude that most of the students
were performed good in comparing between monocotyledon and dicotyledon.
Section C
Table 4.4: Frequency on Performance in Memorization Characteristics for Each Group of
Living Things

Common Characteristics for Each Group of Living Things

No of students
Scores Grades’ Description
Pre-test Post-test

0 Very Weak 3 0

1-5 Weak 8 7

6 - 10 Moderate 17 6

11 - 15 Good 2 8

16 - 20 Very Good 0 4

21 Excellent 0 5

Total 30

Chart 4.3: Percentage on Performance in Memorization

Characteristics for Each Groups of Living Thing

20  
 
Table 4.4 and Chart 4.3 showed the frequency and the percentage of respondents who
were performed in memorization characteristics for each group of living things. In
pre-test, 3 persons or 10% or respondents were performed very weak in
memorization characteristics for each group of living things. 8 persons or 27% of
respondents were performed weak in memorization characteristics for each
group of living things. 17 persons or 57% of respondents were performed
moderate and 2 persons or 6% of respondents performed good in memorization
characteristics for each group of living things. Thus, in the pre-test it can be
conclude that most of the respondents were performed moderate in
memorization characteristics for each group of living things. While, in post-test 7
persons or 23% of respondents were performed weak in memorization
characteristics for each group of living things. 6 persons or 20% of respondents
were performed moderate in memorization characteristics for each group of living
things. 8 persons or 27% of respondents were performed good in memorization
characteristics for each group of living things. 4 persons or 13% of respondents
were performed very good and 5 persons or 17% of respondents were performed
excellent in memorization characteristics for each group of living things. Thus, in

21  
 
 the post-test it can be conclude that most of the respondents were performed
good in memorization characteristics for each group of living things.

Section D
Table 4.5: Frequency on Performance in Answering Multiple Choices Questions

Multiple Choices Questions

No of Students
Scores Grades’ Description
Pre-test Post-test

0 Very Weak 10 0

1-5 Weak 9 8

6 - 10 Moderate 7 5

11 - 15 Good 4 7

16 - 20 Very Good 0 10

Total 30

Chart 4.4: Percentage on Performance in Answering Multiple Choices Questions

22  
 
Table 4.5 and Chart 4.4 showed the frequency and the percentage of respondents’
performance in answering multiple choices questions. In pre-test, 10 persons or
33% of respondents were performed very weak in answering multiple choices
questions. 9 persons or 30% of respondents were performed weak in answering
multiple choices questions. 7 persons or 23% of respondents were performed in
moderate and 4 persons or 14% of respondents were performed good in
answering multiple choices questions. Thus, in the pre-test it can be conclude
that most of the respondents were performed very weak in answering multiple
choices questions. While, in post-test 8 persons or 27% of respondents were
performed weak in answering multiple choices questions. 5 persons or 17% of
respondents were performed in moderate on answering multiple choices
questions. 7 persons or 23% of respondents were performed good and 10
persons or 33% of respondents were performed very good in answering multiple
choices questions. Thus, in the post-test it can conclude that most of the
respondents were performed very good in answering multiple choices questions.

RQ 2: Does the achievement of using concept have good result compare to the
traditional method?

23  
 
 Table : Science’s Grade
Marks (%) Grade’s Description
0 - 29 F
30 - 39 E
40 - 49 D
50 - 59 C
60 - 79 B
80 - 100 A

Table 4: Frequency on Student’s Grade Performance using Traditional Method

No of Students
Grade
Pre-test Post-test
A 2 4
B 3 4
C 3 6
D 7 6
E 12 9
F 3 1
Total 30
Chart 4.5: Percentage on Student’s Grade Performance using Traditional Method

24  
 
Table 4.7 and Chart 4.5 showed the frequency and percentage of respondents’ grade
performance in biodiversity science topic using traditional method of teaching. In
pre-test, 2 persons or 6% of respondents were got grade A in biodiversity
science topic. 3 persons or 10% of respondents were got grade B and grade C in
biodiversity science topic. 7 persons or 24% of respondents were got grade D in
biodiversity science topic. 12 persons or 40% of respondents were got grade E
and 3 persons or 10% of respondents were got grade F in biodiversity science
topic. Thus, in the pre-test it can be conclude that most of the respondents were
got grade E in their biodiversity science topic using traditional method of
teaching. While, in post-test 4 persons or 13% of respondents were got grade A
and grade B in biodiversity science topic. 6 persons or 13% of respondents were
got grade C and grade D in biodiversity science topic. 9 persons or 30% of
respondents were got grade E in biodiversity science topic and only 1 person or
4% of respondents were got grade F in biodiversity science topic. Thus, in the
post-test it can be conclude that most of the respondents were got grade E in
their biodiversity science topic using traditional method of teaching.

Table 4.8: Frequency on Student’s Grade Performance using Concept Mapping Method
25  
 
 No of Students
Grade
Pre-test Post-test
A 0 8
B 0 21
C 3 1
D 9 0
E 12 0
F 6 0
Total 30

Chart 4.6: Percentage on Student’s Grade Performance using Concept Mapping Method

Table 4.8 and Chart 4.6 showed the frequency and percentage of respondents’ grade
performance in biodiversity science topic using concept mapping of teaching method. In
pre-test, 3 persons or 10% of respondents were got grade C in biodiversity science
topic. 9 persons or 30% of respondents were got grade D in biodiversity science topic.
12 persons or 40% of respondents were got grade E and 6 persons or 20% of
26  
 
respondents were got grade F in biodiversity science topic. Thus, in the pre-test it can be
conclude that most of the respondents were got grade E in their biodiversity science
topic using concept mapping of teaching method. While, in post-test 8 persons or 27% of
respondents were got grade A in biodiversity science topic. 21persons or 70% of
respondents were got grade B in biodiversity science topic. Only 1 person or 3% of
respondents were got grade C in biodiversity science topic. Thus, in the post-test it can
be conclude that most of the respondents were got grade B in their biodiversity science
topic using concept mapping of teaching method.
Discussions based on Findings
This discussion summarized the findings based on the research questions. Each
sections will be discussed separately.
Section A
From the finding for the section A, the post-test result show that most of the respondents
were performed good in classification of living things. It is show that majority of
respondents were able to classify of living things. This is supported by Paulette Greene
(2011) that found the similar finding in his research. He explained that students are able
to classify the groups of concept of science involved. Based on the studies by Gonsalves
& Cohen (2010), Griffin & Robinson, 2005 and Marzano, 2007 said that new knowledge
is primarily presented linguistically to students through talking or reading, leaving
students to generate imagery representations or graphic representations on their own.
From the other research by Clark, & Lyons (2010), O’Donnell, Dansereau, & Hall, 2002
said that when students are assisted explicitly in engaging in the creation of graphic
representations, brain activity is increased and stimulated. From Hattie, 2009 said that
graphic representations contains words and phrases and the arrangement of knowledge
through symbols and arrows to represent relationships, students’ will able to understand
of content, recalling of knowledge is enhanced and also they are able to classify the
knowledge of science’s concept into their groups.
Concept mapping is a method to visualize the structure of knowledge. Since the
knowledge expressed in the maps is mostly semantic, concept maps are sometimes
called semantic networks. Often it is claimed that concept mapping bears a similarity to
the structure of long-term memory. Instead of describing all concepts and their relations
in text, one may choose to draw a map indicating concepts and relations in a graph or
network. Visual representation has several advantages. Visual symbols are quickly and
easily recognized, and this can be demonstrated by considering the large amount of
27  
 
logos, maps, arrows, road signs, and icons that most of us can recall with little effort.
Visual representation also allows the development of a holistic understanding that words
alone cannot convey, because the graphical form allows representations of parts and
whole in a way that is not available in sequential structure of text (Lawson, 1994 cited in
askin Asan 2007).
Section B
The level of respondents’ performance in comparing was divided into 3 parts which are
weak, moderate and good. From the finding, the result show that ability of the
respondents to compare the two types of plants is good using the helping of concept
mapping in teaching method. When students understand one of the concepts of science,
it makes easier to them makes comparisons between the two groups. But here, the most
important thing is students must understand the concept first. This is supported by
E.Francine Guastello, T.Mark Beasley and Richard C. Sinatra (2000) found the same
finding in their research. They found that when students understand the concept of
science, they are able to apply it in various ways of situation. From Laurie
Scagnelli,2007 cited in Jonassen, 2001 said that the first step of knowledge is
understand the concept, when respondents understand the concept it makes them
difficult to do misconception of science knowledge. Learning science in meaningful ways
requires intentionally connecting new ideas or concepts and their interrelationships
(Landsberger, 2000). Concept mapping showed that students can make clearly
comparison between the information that arranged in manner ways (Laurie Scagnelli,
2007). Concept mapping, as a tool to help learners organize their cognitive frameworks
into more integrated patterns, has its theoretical strength in meaningful learning to
empower learners with the ability to apply something learned in one situation to another.
The metacognitive view holds that successful transfer occurs when the problem solver is
able to recognize the requirements of the new problem, select previously learned
specific and general skills that apply to the new problem, and monitor their application in
solving the new problem (Ajaja O.Patrick, 2011).
From the finding for the section C, the post-test result show that most of the respondents
were performed good in memorization. It is show that majority of respondents were able
to memorize characteristics for each group of living things. This is supported by Ziad
Shaker (2012) that found the similar finding in his research. The researcher found that
when teacher using the concept mapping as a teaching method, it will impact student’s
memorization also misconceptions in science learning. Novak and Canas (2008) cited
28  
 
the advantages of using concept mapping are understand the complex ways in which
students think and also makes students able to solve the higher order thinking of
problem solving. Concept mapping is a method of chunking information, a method which
enables students to store information in their long-term memories and to recall this
information in the working memory in the same way in which experts do ( Brook and
Shell,2006). Other research findings have suggested that human brains work to organize
information in a hierarchical fashion, so learning strategies that mimic this hierarchical
organization enhance students’ abilities to retain information (Bransford, Brown, &
Cocking, 1999 cited in Ziad Shaker 2012). Concept mapping is a learning strategy that
promotes meaningful learning by requiring students to show the interrelatedness of a
group of concepts and integrating new knowledge with pre-existing knowledge (Plotnick,
2001). Students recall prior knowledge and determine if and how the new information
learned is relevant to their previous understanding of a given topic.
Based on the theories of how students learn from graphical maps may help to
understand the effects of concept maps in increasing recall of verbal information (Nesbit
& Adescope, 2006). Griffin & Robinson (2005) established that introducing a graphical
map as an addition to verbal information presented as text increases recall of
information in both them map and verbal presentations. Visual learning is absorbing
information from illustrations, photos, diagrams, graphs, symbols, icons and other visual
models. By representing information spatially and with images, students are able to
focus in meaning and recognize and group similar ideas easily.
Section D
The level of respondents’ performance in comparing was divided into 5 parts which are
very weak, weak, moderate, good, and very good. From the finding, the result show that
ability of the respondents to answer multiple choices question using the helping of
concept mapping as teaching method is very good. It shows that students will able to
apply the knowledge of science’s concept in the other situation and prove that concept
mapping is a useful tool to increase achievement in learning science. This is supported
by Askin Asan (2007) showed that the correlations between map scores and the scores
on the map-related multiple-choice items were generally high. The strength of the
relationship between concept map scores and multiple-choice scores provides strong
evidence for the content validity of the concept map scores. These results indicate that
students were performing quite similarly on the concept map items and multiple choice
items designed to measure similar content. It can be concluded that the concept map
29  
 
scores were indicators of students’ knowledge of content, which had been emphasized
during instruction. In the other hand, concept mapping tools are based on proven visual
learning methodologies that help students think, learn and achieve (Ricon, 2010; Tsien,
2007).
As a metacognitive tool in science education, students are aided by using concept maps
to understand the science domains they study (Novak & Cañas, 2008). Iuli and Helden
(2004) stated that concept maps have facilitated in promoting reflective thinking and in
providing a summary of a person’s existing knowledge. In science education, concept
mapping has been used to extend students’ prior knowledge, conceptual understanding,
and challenge misconceptions (Novak, 2010).
Traditional method vs Concept Mapping
From the findings for research question 2 for the control group where using the
traditional method of teaching styles, in the pre-test showed that majority of respondents
were get grade E and in the post-test, majority of the respondents got grade E. it was
showed that there was no correlation between the two test. On the other hand, for the
experimental group where using concept mapping as their teaching styles, in the pre-test
showed that majority of the respondents got grade E and in the post-test, majority of the
respondents got grade B. it was showed that there was a high correlation between pre-
test and post-test for the experimental group. The result from the post-test using
traditional method and concept mapping method showed that the correlation of using
concept mapping was high compared to the traditional method. It was showed that
concept mapping is a very useful tool as teaching method.
Some researchers have studied concept maps to determine how well concept maps
correlate with traditional methods of conceptual assessment. Stoddart’s, Abrams’s,
Gasper’s, and Canaday’s (2000) research showed that concept maps correlated to
traditional test scores when comparing tests that require students to apply, rather than to
recall, knowledge. Hoz, Bowman, and Chacham (1997) and Liu and Hinchey (1993)
confirmed correlation between concept maps and traditional method for assessing
students’ conceptual development. In addition, Esiobu and Soyibo (1995 cited in Ziad
Shaker 2012) found in their study of academic achievement for eighth-grade students in
ecology and genetics that the experimental group who used concept maps scored better
than did the control group who did not use concept maps. In a similar study of students
taking a college course in calculus, Park (1993 cited in Nnmandi S. Okoye and
Okechukwu, 2006) also found strong correlation between students’ scores on concept
30  
 
maps and post-instruction tests. “Williams (1998) concluded that concept maps can help
researchers categorize students’ knowledge and do reveal more about students’
knowledge than do pen-and-pencil tests. Along with the previously mentioned
researchers, Francisco, Nakhleh, Nurrenbern, and Miller (2002), Novak and Gowin
(1984), Ruíz-Primo (2000), and Ruíz-Primo and Shavelson (1996) have all supported
using concept maps as evaluation tools to assess students’ learning” (Ziad Shaker,
2012).
Conclusions
This study managed to identify the effectiveness of using concept mapping in biodiversity
science learning. The four effectiveness of using this kind of teaching method was
identified which were classification, comparison, memorization and application. For all
effectiveness comes out with the result of findings show that it is proved. It is showed
that concept mapping is a useful tool to teachers in science learning. In this study also,
the researcher compare the result between the traditional method and concept mapping
method and the result show that, using the concept mapping method will increase the
achievement of students in science learning. Therefore, concept mapping as one of tool
in teaching to promote meaningful learning and improve student’s achievement in
science.

References
Ziad Shaker, (2012), The Use of Concep Maps as a Tool for Understanding Conceptual
Change in Preservice Elementary Taechers on the Concept of Density,
University of North Texas, Denton, Texas, USA.

Joseph D. Novak, (2010), Learning, Creating, and Using Knowledge: Concept Maps as
Facilitative Tools in Schools and Corporation,Cornell University.

Ajaja O.Patrick, (2011), Concept Mapping As a Study Skill: Effects on Students

Achievement in Biology, Delta State University, Abraka, Nigeria.

Askin Asan, (2007), Concept Mapping in Science Class: A Case Study of Fifth Grade
Students, Sultan Qaboos University, Sultanate of Oman.

31  
 
Dr. Navdeep Kaur Dosanjh, (2011), The Effects Of Three Concept Mapping Strategies
On Seventhgrade Students’ Science Achievement At An Urban Middle School,
The University of San Francisco.

Paulette Greene, (2011), Concept Mapping and the Science Achievement of Third
Grade Students, Walden University.

E. Francine Guastello, T. Mark Beasley and Richard C. Sinatra, (2000), Concept

Mapping Effects on Science Content Comprehension of Low-Achieving Inner-
City Seventh Graders.

Jim Vanides, Yue Yin, Miki Tomita, and Maria Araceli Ruiz-Primo, (2006), Using
Concept Maps in the Science Classroom.

Laurie Scagnelli, (2004), Using Concept Maps to Promote Meaningful Learning.

Alberto J. Cañas, (2003), A Summary of Literature Pertaining to the Use of Concept

Mapping Techniques and Technologies for Education and Performance Support,
Pensacola.

Diana C. Ripe, Joseph M.Ryan, Sara M.Samson, (1998), Using Concept Maps to
Assess Student Learning in the Science Classroom: Must Different Methods
Compete?, Midlands Technical College, Columbia.

Nnamdi S. Okoye and Okechukwu, R.N, (2006), The Effect of Concept Mapping and
Problem-Solving Teaching Strategies on Achievement in Genetics among
Nigerian Secondary School Students, Department of Science Education, Delta
State University, Abraka, Nigeria.

Umeh, M.O. (2002). Reducing Teachers Instructional Difficulties on some Content Areas
in Senior Secondary Biology Curriculum for Sustainable Development.
Harpaz, I., Balik, C., & Ehrenfeld, M. (2004). Concept Mapping: An Educational Strategy
for Advancing Nursing Education. Nursing Forum, 39(2), 27–30.

32  
 
Hilbert, T. S., Renkl, A. Kessler, S, & Reiss, K. (2006). Learning From Heuristic
Examples: An Approach to Foster the Acquisition of Heuristic Skill in
Mathematics.

In G. Clarebout, & J. Elen (Eds.) Avoiding Simplicity, Confronting Complexity. Advances

in Studying and Designing Computer-Based Powerful Learning Environment (pp.
135 – 144). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.

Hegarty, M. (2004). Commentary: Dynamic Visualizations and Learning: Getting to the

Difficult Questions. Learning and Instruction, 14, 343–351.

Hegarty, M., & Waller, D. (2005). Individual Differences in Spatial Abilities. In P. Shah, &
A. Miyake (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of visuospatial thinking (pp. 121–
169). Cambridge, UK; New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Hsi, S., Linn, M., & Bell, J. (1997). The Role Of Spatial Reasoning in Engineering and
the Design of Spatial Instruction. Journal of Engineering Education, 86, 151–158.

Jernagan, E. (2006). Visual-Spatial Gender Differences. Retrieved on July 15, 2009.

From: http://jernagan.com/sjsu/270/pdf/jernagan_221_paper.050511a.pdf

John, W. B. (2003). Mind Maps as Classroom Exercise. Retrieved on January 16, 2012.
From: http://www.legacy-
irc.csom.umn.edu/faculty/jbudd/mindmaps/mindmaps.pdf

Kenneth W. H., & Victor Nolet (2000). Curriculum-Based Evaluation. Teaching and
Decision Making, 3rd Edition, chapter4: Thinking About Instruction, 68 – 69

33  
 
 34  
 

View publication stats