Concept Mapping

tool · education · organizing-schema

Novak's visual representation of relationships among concepts.

Concept Mapping was developed by Joseph Novak and his research group at Cornell University in the early 1970s as a tool to externalize and analyze student conceptual understanding, originally in the context of a longitudinal study of children's learning of science concepts. The method was substantially codified in Novak and Gowin's 1984 Learning How to Learn. A concept map represents knowledge as a labeled directed graph: concepts (typically nouns or noun-phrases) are enclosed in boxes or ovals, and propositions are formed by connecting concepts with labeled lines indicating the relationship (e.g., 'plants → produce → oxygen'). Concept maps are typically organized hierarchically with general concepts at top and specific concepts below, and explicitly distinguish concept nodes from linking phrases. Concept Mapping descends from David Ausubel's assimilation theory of cognitive learning (the principal idea: 'the most important single factor influencing learning is what the learner already knows'), and is intended to make subsumption relationships and meaningful learning explicit. Concept Mapping differs from Mind Mapping (Buzan) in being focused on concept relationships with labeled links, hierarchical organization, and a constructivist learning-theoretic foundation, rather than the radial associative structure of mind maps. Cmap Tools (developed by Novak's IHMC, Florida) is the canonical software implementation. Empirical evidence supports concept mapping's value for conceptual learning, particularly when students construct rather than passively consume maps.

Originators

Joseph D. Novak; D. Bob Gowin; intellectual antecedent in David Ausubel's assimilation theory high

Year / Decade

Early 1970s development; 1984 (Learning How to Learn); 2008 (Novak's Learning, Creating, and Using Knowledge 2nd ed.) high

Primary sources

Novak, J.D. & Gowin, D.B. (1984). Learning How to Learn, Novak, J.D. (2010, 2nd ed.). Learning, Creating, and Using Knowledge: Concept Maps as Facilitative Tools in Schools and Corporations, Ausubel, D.P. (1968). Educational Psychology: A Cognitive View high

Core components

Concepts as labeled nodes (boxes or ovals)
Linking phrases on directed edges
Propositions formed by concept-link-concept structure
Hierarchical organization (general at top, specific below)
Connection to Ausubel's assimilation theory
Cmap Tools software (IHMC)
Distinction from Mind Mapping (Buzan)
Application to assessment, teaching, and student-constructed learning artifacts

Primary use case

Science education and conceptual-understanding assessment; concept-based instruction across disciplines; student artifact for demonstrating understanding; basis for some interview-based qualitative research methods (knowledge elicitation); collaborative knowledge construction; integration with knowledge-management practice in organizations.

Common criticisms

Construction quality varies substantially — students often produce maps that capture surface relationships without the conceptual depth Novak's framework intends
assessment of concept maps requires substantial expertise from graders, with inter-rater variability concerns
Cmap Tools and similar software produce maps that may impose structure rather than reveal it
widespread popular conflation with Mind Mapping (Buzan) elides substantive differences in pedagogical intent
works better for hierarchically-structured content than for less-cumulative domains
the underlying assimilation theory (Ausubel) is somewhat dated relative to contemporary cognitive science
commercial certification and consulting ecosystem has shaped some adoption patterns
effectiveness depends substantially on instructional context — student-constructed maps in active-learning settings show better outcomes than maps consumed passively.

Lineage

Siblings: Mind Mapping, Cornell Note-Taking