Mindful Mapping: A Presentation on Graphic Organizers

Mindful Mapping:A Presentation on Graphic Organizers

Trudy GrossDirector of Educational and Special Services

What’s In Use Now

What• 31 responses • 5 no use• 21 paper/pencil• 5 digital

How• Self and google

created• Building the linkages

of words to build better writing

• Speech prep• Unit reviews

Objectives

At the conclusion of this presentation, participants will have• background knowledge on research and

implementation,• information about a variety of multimedia graphic

organizers across platforms and activities,• and ideas for graphic organizers beyond

worksheets including scaffolding the process for students unfamiliar with the strategy.

Evolution of Graphic Organizers

Traditional Multimedia• Students are digital

natives• Availability and

variety of GO software is expanding

• Efficiency, effectiveness, engagement

Web

5

Working Memory

• Central Executive Functions

• Temporary storage and manipulation of material

• Visuospatial sketchpad

• Phonological loop• Episodic memory

Alloway, Gathercole, & Elliott (2010).

Working Memory Challenges

Students with learning disabilities, ADHD, and others experience• Weakness in Executive

Functioning & Working Memory

• Can increase poor student outcomes

• Need to find ways to “off load” EF and WM

Biederman et al. (2004).

Cognitive Load Theory• Goal: retention and

transfer

• Thinking “Weights”

• Intrinsic load: complexity

of information (cannot

change)

Sweller (2010)

Cognitive Load Theory

• Goal: retention and transfer

• Thinking “Weights”

• Intrinsic load: difficulty

and details of concept

(cannot change)• Extraneous load: amount

of processing imposed by

lesson design (can decrease)

Sweller (2010)

Cognitive Load Theory

• Intrinsic load: difficulty and details

of concept (cannot change)• Extraneous load: amount

of processing imposed by

lesson design (can decrease)• Germane load: interest

generated by design of lesson

(can increase)

Sweller (2010)

Application: MindMaple

Purpose and type of graphic organizers implemented in the FUHSD.

Application: Popplet

Application: MindNode

Robinson et al. (2006)

Pedagogical Implications

To increase comprehension of information from text and lectures, teachers should consider

• experimenting with graphic organizer formats such as charts, webs

and iDevice applications or software,

• providing a graphic structure for note taking,

• incorporating a graphic organizer when summarizing a lecture to

reinforce the relationship between facts, events and information,

• and modeling the use of graphic organizers when beginning the

writing process.

References

Alloway, T. P., Gathercole, S. E., & Elliott, J. (2010). Examining the link between working memory behavior and academic attainment in children with ADHD. Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology, 52(7), 632-636. doi:10.1111/j.1469-8749.2009.03603.x

Baxendell, B. (2003). Consistent, coherent, creative: The 3 c’s of graphic organizers. Teaching Exceptional Children, 35(3), 46-53.

Biederman, J., Monuteaux, M. C., Doyle, A. E., Seidman, L. J., Wilens, T. E., Ferrero, F., Morgan, C. L., & Faraone, S. V. (2004). Impact of executive function deficits and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) on academic outcomes in children. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 72(5), 757-766. doi:10.1037/0022-006X.72.5.757

References, continued

Boon, R.T., Fore, C., III., Ayres, K., & Spencer, V.G. (2005). The effects of cognitive organizers to facilitate content-area learning for students with mild disabilities: A pilot study. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 32(2), 101-117.

Ives, B. (2007). Graphic organizers applied to secondary algebra instruction for students with learning disorders. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice (Blackwell Publishing Limited), 22(2), 110–118.

Lee, C.C., & Tan, S.C. (2010). Scaffolding writing using feedback in students’ graphic organizers – novice writers’ relevance of ideas and cognitive loads. Educational Media International, 47(2), 135-152.

References, continued

Lorenz, B., Green, T., & Brown, A. (2009). Using multimedia graphic organizer software in the prewriting activities of primary school students: What are the benefits? Computers in the Schools, 26, 115-129.

McKnight, K. S. (2010). The teacher’s big book of graphic organizers. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Plass, J.L., Moreno, R., & Brunken, R. (2010). Cognitive load theory. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Robinson, D. H., Katayama, A. D., Beth, A., Odom, S., Hsieh, Y. P., & Vanderveen, A. (2006). Increasing text comprehension and graphic note taking using a partial graphic organizer. The Journal of Educational Research, 100(2), 103-110.

References, continued

Stull, A., & Mayer, R. (2007). Learning by doing versus learning by viewing: Three experimental comparisons of learner-generated versus author-provided graphic organizers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(4), 808-820. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.99.4.808

Sweller, J. (2010). Element interactivity and intrinsic, extraneous, and germane cognitive load. Educational Psychology Review, 22(2), 123-138.