Various attempts have been made to conceptualize the process of creating concept maps. McAleese suggested that the process of making knowledge explicit, using nodes and relationships, allows the individual to become aware of what they know and as a result to be able to modify what they know. Maria Birbili applied the same idea to helping young children learn to think about what they know. McAleese's concept of the knowledge arena suggests a virtual space where learners may explore what they know and what they do not know.
Concept maps are used to stimulate the generation of ideas, and are believed to aid creativity. Concept mapping is also sometimes used for brain-storming. Although they are often personalized and idiosyncratic, concept maps can be used to communicate complex ideas.
Concept maps are widely used in education and business. Uses include:
Peter J. Hager, Nancy C. Corbin. Designing & Delivering: Scientific, Technical, and Managerial Presentations, 1997, p. 163.
Lanzing, Jan (January 1998). "Concept mapping: tools for echoing the minds eye". Journal of Visual Literacy. 18 (1): 1–14 (4). doi:10.1080/23796529.1998.11674524. Although Novak originally started with the idea of hierarchical tree-shaped concept maps. This idea is not continued by the followers of Novak's technique or has either been dropped altogether. ... The difference between concept maps and mind maps is that a mind map has only one main concept, while a concept map may have several. This means that a mind map can be represented in a hierarchical tree structure. /wiki/Doi_(identifier)
Romance, Nancy R.; Vitale, Michael R. (Spring 1999). "Concept mapping as a tool for learning: broadening the framework for student-centered instruction". College Teaching. 47 (2): 74–79 (78). doi:10.1080/87567559909595789. JSTOR 27558942. Shavelson et al. (1994) identified a number of variations of the general technique presented here for developing concept maps. These include whether (1) the map is hierarchical or free-form in nature, (2) the concepts are provided with or determined by the learner, (3) the students are provided with or develop their own structure for the map, (4) there is a limit on the number of lines connecting concepts, and (5) the connecting links must result in the formation of a complete sentence between two nodes. /wiki/College_Teaching
Novak, Joseph D.; Cañas, Alberto J. (2008). The theory underlying concept maps and how to construct and use them (Technical report). Pensacola, FL: Institute for Human and Machine Cognition. 2006-01 Rev 2008-01. Retrieved 24 November 2008. https://cmap.ihmc.us/docs/theory-of-concept-maps.php
Garrido, Piedad; Tramullas, Jesús (September 2004). "Topic maps: an alternative or a complement to concept maps?" (PDF). In Cañas, Alberto J.; Novak, Joseph D.; González García, Fermín María (eds.). Concept maps: theory, methodology, technology: proceedings of the first International Conference on Concept Mapping, CMC 2004, Pamplona, Spain, Sept 14–17, 2004. Pamplona: Dirección de Publicaciones de la Universidad Pública de Navarra. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.469.1803. ISBN 9788497690669. OCLC 433188714. 9788497690669
Novak & Gowin 1984, p. 7. - Novak, J.D.; Gowin, D.B. (1984). Learning How to Learn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 9780521319263. https://archive.org/details/learninghowtolea00jose
Lanzing, Jan (January 1998). "Concept mapping: tools for echoing the minds eye". Journal of Visual Literacy. 18 (1): 1–14 (4). doi:10.1080/23796529.1998.11674524. Although Novak originally started with the idea of hierarchical tree-shaped concept maps. This idea is not continued by the followers of Novak's technique or has either been dropped altogether. ... The difference between concept maps and mind maps is that a mind map has only one main concept, while a concept map may have several. This means that a mind map can be represented in a hierarchical tree structure. /wiki/Doi_(identifier)
Romance, Nancy R.; Vitale, Michael R. (Spring 1999). "Concept mapping as a tool for learning: broadening the framework for student-centered instruction". College Teaching. 47 (2): 74–79 (78). doi:10.1080/87567559909595789. JSTOR 27558942. Shavelson et al. (1994) identified a number of variations of the general technique presented here for developing concept maps. These include whether (1) the map is hierarchical or free-form in nature, (2) the concepts are provided with or determined by the learner, (3) the students are provided with or develop their own structure for the map, (4) there is a limit on the number of lines connecting concepts, and (5) the connecting links must result in the formation of a complete sentence between two nodes. /wiki/College_Teaching
Lanzing, Jan (January 1998). "Concept mapping: tools for echoing the minds eye". Journal of Visual Literacy. 18 (1): 1–14 (4). doi:10.1080/23796529.1998.11674524. Although Novak originally started with the idea of hierarchical tree-shaped concept maps. This idea is not continued by the followers of Novak's technique or has either been dropped altogether. ... The difference between concept maps and mind maps is that a mind map has only one main concept, while a concept map may have several. This means that a mind map can be represented in a hierarchical tree structure. /wiki/Doi_(identifier)
"Joseph D. Novak". Institute for Human and Machine Cognition (IHMC). Retrieved 2008-04-06. https://www.ihmc.us/users/user.php?UserID=jnovak
Ausubel, D. (1968). Educational Psychology: A Cognitive View. Holt, Rinehart & Winston, New York.
Al-Kunifed, Ali; Wandersee, James H. (1990). "One hundred references related to concept mapping", Journal of Research in Science Teaching', 27: 1069–75.
McAleese, R. (1998). "The knowledge arena as an extension to the concept map: reflection in action", Interactive Learning Environments, 6(3), p.251–272.
Birbili, M. (2006). "Mapping knowledge: concept maps in early childhood education" Archived 2010-09-14 at the Wayback Machine, Early Childhood Research & Practice, 8(2), Fall 2006. http://ecrp.uiuc.edu/v8n2/birbili.html
McAleese, R. (1998). "The knowledge arena as an extension to the concept map: reflection in action", Interactive Learning Environments, 6(3), p.251–272.
Novak, Joseph D.; Cañas, Alberto J. (2008). The theory underlying concept maps and how to construct and use them (Technical report). Pensacola, FL: Institute for Human and Machine Cognition. 2006-01 Rev 2008-01. Retrieved 24 November 2008. https://cmap.ihmc.us/docs/theory-of-concept-maps.php
Mazany, Terry. "Science Framework for the 2015 National Assessment of Educational Progress" (PDF). Retrieved 1 November 2020. https://www.nagb.gov/content/nagb/assets/documents/publications/frameworks/science/2015-science-framework.pdf