Nontraditional Pharmacy Students' Experiences with Concept Mapping
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
VISUALIZING UNDERSTANDINGS ONLINE: NONTRADITIONAL PHARMACY STUDENTS’ EXPERIENCES WITH CONCEPT MAPPING DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Cable Thomas Green, M.P.C. ***** The Ohio State University 2003 Dissertation Committee: Professor Thomas McCain, Adviser Approved by Professor Anita Woolfolk Hoy Professor Phillip Smith _____________________ Professor Stephen Acker Adviser Communication Graduate Program Copyright by Cable Thomas Green 2003 ABSTRACT Learning with technology is a challenge for both designers of and students in online degree programs. Due to new accreditation standards, pharmacists are returning to school. Pharmacy professionals, looking to update their skills, understandings and degree, find themselves overwhelmed with new information and are often without the capacity to incorporate it effectively into their practice. The implications for postsecondary education are profound. Information overload is the operative mode in which students and teachers now exist. Learning in this information rich environment requires different tools and pedagogical methods than are currently used in online learning environments. This dissertation is a report of how pharmacists can learn and communicate in new ways to become better practitioners and better learners. The practical work of developing and testing usable knowledge about online learning environments requires a fundamental understanding of the learning and technology experiences students bring with them to their learning environment, conceptual change processes, information visualization tools to help students visualize what they know, and collaborative learning pedagogies to facilitate sharing of students’ understandings. ii This study explores the role of concept mapping as a tool to help students visualize what they know and to communicate their understandings with other students in an online learning community. While the pharmacists did concept map their understandings and acknowledged the benefits of working together, they did not share their concept maps. This study proposes a collaborative online learning community model for nontraditional students to explain these results. The model suggests the following. First, becoming an expert with a new tool takes time, hands on experience and may be a prerequisite to using the tool to learn and communicate in a learning community. Second, for students to move past public presentation of their ideas and into collaborative peer review of others’ understandings, teachers must understand the decision making risk analysis nontraditional students employ. Third, building functional learning communities is difficult and takes time. Further research is needed to determine if these changes in how concept mapping is implemented and prioritized affect nontraditional students’ sharing of understandings in online learning environments. GIF, QuickTime and WAV files are included. iii Dedicated to my lovely Lesley. iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I am most grateful to Dr. Thomas McCain, for his guidance, his wisdom and for continually bringing me back to the “big ideas.” I cannot thank him enough for his thoughtful comments on this dissertation. I especially appreciate his constant care and support since he semi-retired from the University two years ago. I am also indebted to Thom for encouraging me to pursue how educational technologies and collaborative learning can be implemented to help students learn in new and creative ways. I thank Dr. Stephen Acker for always including me in educational technology developments at The Ohio State University, for his critical eye and his wild metaphors. My thanks to Dr. Anita Woolfolk Hoy for opening my eyes to learning theory and concept mapping. Anita also reminds me to never settle for less than my dreams. I am grateful to Dr. Phillip Smith for teaching me how the mind works in conjunction with good design. I also wish to thank Dr. Alan Escovitz for his career advice and for my position in the College of Pharmacy and Dr. Dennis Mungall for allowing my to run my research in our online doctoral program. Without these professors’ generous efforts, this dissertation would not have been possible. v VITA October 8th, 1972………………………………….. Born – Seoul, South Korea 1995……………………………………………. B.S., Lewis and Clark College 1997…………………………… M.P.C. Communication, Westminster College 1997 – 2000…………………………………….. Graduate Teaching Associate The Ohio State University 1997 – 2000………………………….…. Director of Instructional Technology Council of Ohio Colleges of Pharmacy 2000 – Present…………………………… Director of Educational Technology Assistant Professor College of Pharmacy, The Ohio State University FIELDS OF STUDY Major Field: Communication Educational Technology vi TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Abstract……………………………………………………………………………. ii Dedication………………………………………………………………….……... iv Acknowledgments…………………………………………………………………. v Vita………………………………………………………………………………… vi List of Tables………………………………………………………………….…. xv List of Figures…………………………………………………………………... xvi Preface…………………………………………………………………………. xviii Chapters: Chapter 1: Statement of the Problem…………………………………...…….….. 1 Introduction…………………………………..……………………………. 1 Problem Statement………………………………………………………… 4 Purpose of the Study………………………………………………………. 4 Professional Significance of the Study…………………………………… 5 Background of the Study …………………………………………………. 6 The Rise of Nontraditional Students …………..…………………. 6 Profile of Nontraditional Students…….…………………... 7 Pharmacists as Nontraditional Students……………..……………. 8 Pharmacy Accreditation Mandate…………………………. 8 Nontraditional PharmD Program………………..………… 9 Delimitations of the Study……………………………………………….. 11 Summary of the Problem…………………………………………………. 11 vii Chapter 2: Review of the Literature…………………………………...………... 12 Social Construction of Understandings …………………………………. 14 Behaviorism………………………………………………………. 15 Moving Toward Cognitivism…………………………….. 16 Cognitivism……………………………………………………….. 16 Theoretical Foundations of Cognitivism………………… 18 Gestalt Psychology……………………………...… 19 Sign Learning Theory…………………………….. 21 Symbolic Information Processing Theory…….…. 22 Constructivism…………………………………………………… 23 Psychological / Individual Constructivism…….………... 24 Cognitive Development Theory………………….. 25 Social Constructivism……………………………..……… 26 Social Development Theory……………………… 27 Social Learning Theory…………………………… 28 Social Cognitive Theory………………………….. 29 Self Efficacy Theory……………………………… 31 Sociological Constructivism……………………..………. 33 Authentic Learning……………………………….. 34 Situated Learning……………………………..…... 34 Functional Context………………………………... 36 Collaborative Learning Communities……………………..…….. 36 Understanding in Learning Communities……………….. 40 Membership and Participation……………….…… 41 Leveraging Social Construction of Understandings…………….. 42 Collaborative Learning…………………………………….…….. 44 Research on Collaborative Learning…………………….. 46 Beneficial to High Academic Achievers……..….. 47 Problems with Collaborative Learning……………..……. 48 Lack of Exposure…………………………….….… 49 Groupthink………………………………………… 50 Gender…………………………………………….. 51 What makes Collaborative Learning Successful?……….. 51 Positive Interdependence…………………………. 52 Promotive Interaction………………………….….. 53 Individual and Community Accountability………. 54 Interpersonal and Community / Social Skills……. 54 Community Processing……………………...……. 55 Moving Toward Conceptual Change………………………..…… 56 Conceptual Change………………………………………………….……. 56 Cognitive Structure……………………………………….….…… 57 Concepts…………………………………………….……...58 Conceptual Relations…………………………….….……. 59 viii Mental Models……………………………………………. 60 Schema Theory………………………..………….. 62 Manipulating Cognitive Structure……………………………….. 63 Assimilation Theory…………………………..………….. 63 Subsumption…………………………….………… 64 Progressive Differentiation………………..……... 65 Integrative Reconciliation………………..………. 66 Lateral Thinking Theory……………………….………… 67 Cognitive Flexibility Theory…………………….………. 68 Scaffolding Theory……………………………..………… 69 What will Students do with New Information? ………...………. 72 Assimilation………………………………………..……... 72 Accommodation…………………………………..………. 73 Prior Knowledge………………………………….. 74 Credibility………………………………………… 75 Processing Strategies…………………………….. 76 Approaches to Learning………………………………………….. 77 Deep vs. Surface Approaches to Learning…………..…... 77 Deep vs. Surface Recall of Information…………. 79 Strategic vs. Surface Approaches to Learning…………... 79 Learning Approach Combinations……………….………. 80 Typing NonTraditional Students…………………………. 81 Conceptual Change Theories………………………………..…… 82 Conceptual Change Terminology………………….…….. 84 Conceptual Change Model………………………….……. 85 Revised Conceptual Change Model……….……... 87 New Method for Sharing Understandings and Conceptual Changes…………………………………………. 88 Visualization of Conceptual Understandings…………….……………... 89 Information Visualization……………………………….………. 89 Graphic Organizers………………………………..……… 91 Problems with Graphic Organizers…………..…... 91 Research on Information Visualization……………..…… 93 Research on Graphic Organizers……………..….. 94 Research on Visual Collaboration…………..…… 95 Graphic Organizer for Nontraditional Students…….…… 96 Concept Mapping……………………………………………….… 98 Concept Maps as Conceptual Frameworks……………... 100 Research on Concept Mapping………………………….. 102 Deep / Meaningful Learning………………..…… 102 Collaborative Learning………………………..… 103 Validity and Reliability of Concept Mapping………..….104 Digital Concept Maps……………………………….…... 106 Conversion and Storage…………………………. 106