Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found athttp://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=tsed20

Download by: [Universiti Sains Malaysia] Date: 25 December 2015, At: 04:19

International Journal of Science Education

ISSN: 0950-0693 (Print) 1464-5289 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tsed20

The Effects of Using Concept Mapping forImproving Advanced Level Biology Students'Lower- and Higher-Order Cognitive Skills

Sharon Bramwell-Lalor & Marcia Rainford

To cite this article: Sharon Bramwell-Lalor & Marcia Rainford (2014) The Effects of UsingConcept Mapping for Improving Advanced Level Biology Students' Lower- and Higher-Order Cognitive Skills, International Journal of Science Education, 36:5, 839-864, DOI:10.1080/09500693.2013.829255

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2013.829255

Published online: 19 Aug 2013.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 553

View related articles

View Crossmark data

The Effects of Using Concept Mapping

for Improving Advanced Level Biology

Students’ Lower- and Higher-Order

Cognitive Skills

Sharon Bramwell-Lalora and Marcia Rainfordb∗aScience Department, Brown’s Town Community College, Brown’s Town, Jamaica;bSchool of Education, The University of the West Indies, Mona, Kingston 7, Jamaica

This paper reports on teachers’ use of concept mapping as an alternative assessment strategy in

advanced level biology classes and its effects on students’ cognitive skills on selected biology

concepts. Using a mixed methods approach, the study employed a pre-test/post-test quasi-

experimental design involving 156 students and 8 teachers from intact classes. A researcher-

constructed Biology Cognitive Skills Test was used to collect the quantitative data. Qualitative

data were collected through interviews and students’ personal documents. The data showed that

the participants utilized concept mapping in various ways and they described positive experiences

while being engaged in its use. The main challenge cited by teachers was the limited time

available for more consistent use. The results showed that the use of concept mapping in

advanced level biology can lead to learning gains that exceed those achieved in classes where

mainly traditional methods are used. The students in the concept mapping experimental

groups performed significantly better than their peers in the control group on both the lower-

order (F(1) ¼ 21.508; p , .001) and higher-order (F(1) ¼ 42.842, p , .001) cognitive items of

the biology test. A mean effect size of .56 was calculated representing the contribution of

treatment to the students’ performance on the test items.

Keywords: Alternative assessment; Concept mapping; Formative assessment; Higher-order

cognitive skills; Lower-order cognitive skills

International Journal of Science Education, 2014

Vol. 36, No. 5, 839–864, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2013.829255

∗Corresponding author. School of Education, The University of the West Indies, Mona, Kingston 7,

Jamaica. Email: marciarainford@gmail.com

# 2013 Taylor & Francis

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

iti S

ains

Mal

aysi

a] a

t 04:

19 2

5 D

ecem

ber

2015

Introduction

Enrollment trends in higher education in the Caribbean and elsewhere reveal that

although the number of students pursuing tertiary education continues to increase,

fewer students register for science programmes than for non-science programmes.

It would seem that comparatively fewer students are considering pursuing science

as a viable career path than business and other options from the social sciences

(National Science Board, 2012; University of the West Indies [UWI], n.d.). At the

secondary level, many students have shied away from doing science as there is wide

spread perception that this is ‘hard’, partly because of the abstract nature of many

science concepts and the large number of concepts they are required to understand.

The difficulties students encounter learning these abstract concepts have been

further exacerbated by inappropriate teaching and assessment techniques which do

not facilitate the development of higher-order thinking and conceptual change.

Some of these higher-order cognitive skills (HOCS) have been flagged as areas for

improvement based on biology students’ performance on the Caribbean Advanced

Proficiency Examinations (CAPE). The 2011 CAPE results revealed percentage

passes of 81.39, 93.42 and 80.90 for Unit 1 chemistry, physics and biology, respect-

ively. However, based on the quality of the responses to examination questions,

biology teachers and examiners for CAPE have raised concerns about the students’

ability to demonstrate higher-order thinking skills such as critical thinking and appli-

cation of knowledge in new contexts. For example, the report for candidates’ perform-

ance on Unit 1, Module 3, question 3 from the June 2011 examination stated

Transcribing data from a graph into a table format and interpreting data, as expected for

Parts (b) (i), (ii) and (iii), were both well done. However, most candidates scored zero for

Part (b) (iv), signalling that development of critical thinking skills is needed. (Caribbean

Examinations Council, 2011, p. 2)

In commenting on the performance on question 6 from the same examination

paper, the report indicated that ‘For Part (a) (ii), while many candidates seemed to

understand what was required, several had difficulties in using their knowledge to

explain the immunological process and simply stated information’ (Caribbean Exam-

inations Council, 2011, p. 2). In the specific recommendations for teachers, the report

indicated that

While factual knowledge is important, such knowledge cannot be readily applied if there

is little or no understanding of the basic principles. The absence of such understanding is

evident in the poor responses to questions requiring some critical thinking or synthesis of

information. (Caribbean Examinations Council, 2011, p. 2)

The comparatively low percentage of candidates who obtained the highest grades of

I–III for CAPE biology seems to support these assertions. For the 2011 examinations,

only 47.19% of the candidates scored grades I–III for Unit 1 biology (Caribbean

Examinations Council).

Cognitive skills have been classified into lower-order and higher-order skills. Zoller

(2002) defines lower-order cognitive skills (LOCS) as simply knowing (i.e. basic recall

840 S. Bramwell-Lalor and M. Rainford

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

iti S

ains

Mal

aysi

a] a

t 04:

19 2

5 D

ecem

ber

2015

of memorized information) or applying basic information to familiar situations.

HOCS are sometimes linked to the skills beyond the comprehension level in

Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives in the cognitive domain (Jackson &

Soyibo, 2002). ‘HOCS’ has been used as an encompassing term that includes activi-

ties requiring critical and evaluative thinking, decision-making and problem-solving

(Zoller & Pushkin, 2007), as well as the ability to transfer learning to other situations

(Kretchmar, 2008). Based on our experiences as science educators at secondary and

post-secondary institutions we have concluded that science students easily grasp

concepts that involve the use of LOCS but have difficulty moving beyond this type

of learning to apply their knowledge and solve problems.

The demand for mastery of these higher-order skills becomes even more critical as

students transition from introductory to advanced level courses in secondary schools

and undergraduate programmes, as they are essential for science career advancement

(Parker & Gerber, 2000; Zohar & Dori, 2003). However, many teachers are not sure

of how to help students to develop these skills. The difference in the required levels of

thinking between lower and upper secondary grades is so wide that many advanced

level science students struggle to maintain the degree of success that they enjoyed

during their lower secondary years of schooling. Many times the expected shift in

thinking is not fully understood by students, and teachers do not necessarily focus

on helping them to recognize the gaps between their performance and the required

standards.

The Caribbean Examinations Council’s grading scheme for CAPE recognizes

Grades I–V as passing grades. Students who are awarded a Grade I have demon-

strated an excellent grasp of the principles, concepts and skills in the syllabus, and

are able to competently apply these to problem situations. On the other hand, those

students who are awarded a Grade V are competent in these skills but only at the

minimum acceptable level. One can infer from this that students who score a Grade

I have demonstrated exceptional competence in HOCS. An analysis of the CAPE

Unit I biology results from 2007 to 2011 indicates that only an average of 18.7% of

the Caribbean students achieved Grade 1. The Unit II results were slightly higher

in that 25.7% of the students who received passing grades earned a Grade 1. Selvar-

atnam and Mavuso (2010) reported that first-year university students in South Africa

lacked relevant skills needed to assimilate scientific concepts and relationships imply-

ing that these skills were not acquired in secondary schools.

It is, therefore, not surprising that many studies have focused on how to improve the

learning outcomes of science students with respect to their application skills (Parker &

Gerber, 2000; Stanger-Hall, 2012; Woolnough, McLaughlin, & Jackson, 1999; Zohar

& Dori, 2003). The reality as suggested by McCaslin and Good (1992) is that often

there is non-alignment between a curriculum’s stated goals and course characteristics

that should demand and support students’ use of HOCS. In other words, there seems

to be gaps between curricular goals, what and how teachers teach, and the learning

outcomes displayed by their students.

The issue of concern, then, is whether current teaching and assessment practices

promote students’ HOCS. Many science educators and researchers do not think

Improving Students’ LOCS and HOCS 841

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

iti S

ains

Mal

aysi

a] a

t 04:

19 2

5 D

ecem

ber

2015

that they do (Arburn & Bethel, 1999; Berenson, 1995; Stanger-Hall, 2012). Bol and

Strage (1996) believe that teaching and assessment methods have traditionally been

directed towards the mastery of content which requires only LOCS, rather than

improving critical thinking skills. This is due in part to the traditional approach to

science teaching which is commonly based on lectures aimed at presenting large

amounts of content in a short time. The development of students’ HOCS requires

strategies where learners are given opportunities to develop knowledge structures or

representations that will allow them to retrieve and use the information in the future.

Various researchers have argued that a major reason for the apparent mismatch

between teaching and the level of learning that is desired from students rests with

assessment (Ennever 2006; Gallagher, 1991; Gottfried & Kyle, 1992; Kahn, 2000).

Silva (2009) points out that teaching and encouraging students to utilize higher-

order thinking skills is necessary but it is difficult to find experienced and qualified tea-

chers to effectively do this. Ennever (2006), Gallagher (1991) and Kahn (2000) found

that the assessment tasks of secondary school science and English teachers were domi-

nated by multiple choice and short answer item-type items that required recognizing,

memorizing and recalling facts, rather than understanding and applying information.

However, research into teaching and learning now points to the significant success

that formative assessment or assessment for learning strategies have on improving

learning outcomes (Gardner, 2006). Furthermore, formative assessment strategies

have been shown to be feasible for administration in different classrooms and

require a redistribution of effort rather than more effort by teachers (Black, Harrison,

Lee, Marshall, & Wiliam, 2003a). We are, therefore, proposing that one of the reasons

why we may not be seeing the desired evidence of learning in Jamaican advanced level

biology students is that current classroom assessment practices are not targeting the

desired knowledge and skills. In recognition of the apparent non-alignment

between science teaching and students’ low display of HOCS, recent studies have

called for teaching and assessment strategies that will allow the development of stu-

dents’ HOCS (Salih, 2010; Zoller & Pushkin, 2007). One alternative assessment

strategy that has been widely described as being suited for improving students under-

standing is concept mapping, a technique which was developed by Joseph Novak and

his colleagues at Cornell University. Novak (1979) described concept mapping as a

technique for externalizing concepts and propositions. The concept maps are draw-

ings or diagrams which show how students think concepts are related as it provides

a record of students’ mental schemata (Angelo & Cross, 1993). The structure of

the map (e.g. hierarchical or linear) is determined by the arrangement of the concepts

and the linking lines (Novak & Canas, 2008). In Novak’s model, the development of

concept maps requires students to organize their thoughts concerning the concepts by

writing or labelling the connections among them. Concept mapping has, therefore,

been described as being effective in enhancing both cognitive and meta-cognitive pro-

cesses in students (Angelo & Cross, 1993; Jegede, Alaiymola, & Okebukola, 1990).

This graphic representation of students’ understanding of the relationships among

concepts helps them to critically examine their own ideas and compare them with

those of other students. It also offers opportunities for teachers to evaluate the

842 S. Bramwell-Lalor and M. Rainford

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

iti S

ains

Mal

aysi

a] a

t 04:

19 2

5 D

ecem

ber

2015

students’ understanding of these relationships and is therefore highly suited for use in

assessment for learning.

Purpose

In this paper, we present our findings from a study that was undertaken to investigate

the outcomes of teachers’ use of concept mapping as an alternative assessment strat-

egy on advanced level biology students’ HOCS. It forms part of a larger study which

examined the effects of using alternative assessment strategies in a formative way, on

the teaching and learning of advanced biology. The central idea proposed in this study

is that students’ HOCS will develop if they are provided with instructional and assess-

ment activities that allow them to use these skills. Studies have been carried out on the

benefits of alternative assessment strategies such as concept maps, on students’ learn-

ing, and potential for improving students’ critical thinking skills in science (Kinchin,

2000; Novak, 1990; Yin, Vanides, Ruiz-Primo, Ayala, & Shavelson, 2005). However,

Clarke (2005) contends that there is relatively limited information on the specific use

of different alternative assessment strategies and the processes in which teachers and

students are engaged. The documented experiences of Caribbean teachers and

students in the use of alternative assessment strategies, and the outcomes of its use

are even more limited. Additionally, there is little empirical research into the effect

of concept mapping on developing students’ HOCS. In this regard, attempts were

made to provide answers to the following research questions.

(a) Does the use of concept mapping as an alternative assessment strategy result in

any significant difference to students’ performance on biology LOCS and

HOCS items?

(b) What are the experiences of students and teachers when concept mapping is used

as an alternative assessment strategy in advanced level biology classes?

The findings of this study on the use of concept mapping strategies in science class-

rooms will assist us in understanding how teachers and students operate within a con-

structivist framework. Furthermore, this paper provides a glimpse of possible tensions

that science students and teachers face, as they move towards engaging with ‘less

used’ alternative types of assessment and how they cope with such tensions. It ulti-

mately will provide evidence of the effect on students’ academic gain if used more

widely and with more diligence.

Theoretical Basis for Alternative Assessment

The clear association between assessment, learning and pedagogy has been well estab-

lished (Biggs, 1996). In this section, we will discuss constructivism as a theoretical fra-

mework for alternative assessment and implications of its use for teaching and

learning. Constructivism is a theory of instruction that addresses the way knowledge

is constructed, placing emphasis on students’ active involvement in the learning

Improving Students’ LOCS and HOCS 843

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

iti S

ains

Mal

aysi

a] a

t 04:

19 2

5 D

ecem

ber

2015

process and is based on the works of theorists such as Piaget (1970), Dewey (1956),

Bruner (1968, 1974) and Vygotsky (1978). Constructivism has been further divided

into two strands: cognitive and social constructivism both of which are relevant for

addressing the use of alternative assessment.

Cognitive theorists such as Piaget advocate that the teacher has a role to play in knowl-

edge construction as students cannot simply absorb information but they must experi-

ence it in some way. The teachers’ role is ‘to help ‘novices’ to acquire ‘expert’

understanding of conceptual structures and processing strategies to solve problems by

symbolic manipulation’ James (2006, p. 55). Elicitation of prior learning by the

teacher through strategies such as classroom dialogue, open-ended protocols and

concept maps are useful in this regard (James, 2006). These serve to scaffold students’

understanding of knowledge structures and so pave the way for application of knowledge

in new or unfamiliar contexts. In this way, teaching and assessment are skewed towards

narrowing the gap between what the learner knows and the desired learning outcomes.

Social constructivism addresses the issue of learning from each other in social con-

texts. Dewey advocated for education to be grounded in real life experiences and

Bruner addressed more specifically the social component of learning. Building on

these ideas, Vygotsy proposed the idea of the ‘Zone of Proximal Development’ refer-

ring to the gap between what learners can do with assistance and what can be done

independently. This gap allows for learning to occur through social engagements

such as peer-led learning and active interactions with the each other and the environ-

ment. Students are therefore actively involved in their own learning which is con-

sidered to be more effective when undertaken in active, interactive and authentic

contexts (Atherton, 2001; Newmann, 1994) and is described as a social collaborative

activity (James, 2006). The teacher is, therefore, instrumental in creating the appro-

priate learning environment for these activities to occur. Scaffolding can be initiated

by the teacher but preferably by the student. In this way, students are involved with

both the development and solving of problems.

Alternative assessment strategies such as peer teaching and assessment and self-

assessment are more student-centred and correspondingly more closely aligned to

the constructivist understanding of teaching and learning (Black & Harrison,

2001a, 2001b; McDonald & Boud, 2003; So, 2004). These types of assessments

are said to provide a more comprehensive picture of students’ understanding and

are widely used by teachers when conducting assessment for learning. Anderson

(1998) provides a framework for understanding the differences between traditional

assessment and alternative assessment. An adaptation of Anderson’s comparison is

represented in Figure 1 to show the differences between these two approaches to

assessment according to six assessment-related descriptors, and their potential for

developing students LOCS and HOCS.

Assessment and Learning

Assessment is a vital link between teaching and learning because it is the tool that tea-

chers use to allow students to demonstrate evidence of their learning (Holmes, 2002).

844 S. Bramwell-Lalor and M. Rainford

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

iti S

ains

Mal

aysi

a] a

t 04:

19 2

5 D

ecem

ber

2015

Traditionally, this evidence has been obtained at the end of instruction by way of

summative assessment. As shown in Figure 1, this approach to assessment which is

primarily conducted for accountability purposes has been aligned to a behaviourist

view of teaching and learning where the focus has been on the outcomes of learning.

One of the concerns raised about the overuse of summative assessment in schools is

the tendency to use items that test only the LOCS (So, 2004). The comprehensive

review of over 250 publications covering a range of countries, school subjects and

age groups by Black and Wiliam (1998) revealed that formative assessment can

result in learning gains with effect sizes as high as 0.7. The report which has so far

been unchallenged supports arguments about the limitations of traditional assessment

and provides evidence of the rich potential of formative assessment for improving

learning. This work has served to stimulate much of the research on assessment

which has sought to provide evidence of how teachers use assessment for learning

strategies to more adequately support teaching and learning over the past decade.

The assessment for learning approach broadens the purpose of assessment to

include a conscious attempt by teachers and students to use assessment to improve

students’ learning. This can be achieved when the assessment information is used

to provide feedback on students’ understanding of concepts.

Formative assessment is used by teachers to identify, and respond to students’

learning with the aim of enhancing that learning while learning is occurring (Black

& Harrison, 2001a, 2001b; Cowie & Bell, 1999). In classrooms featuring formative

Figure 1. Differences in theoretical assumptions between traditional and alternative assessment

Improving Students’ LOCS and HOCS 845

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

iti S

ains

Mal

aysi

a] a

t 04:

19 2

5 D

ecem

ber

2015

assessment, teachers make frequent, interactive attempts to assess their students’

understanding. This enables them to adjust their teaching to better help individual

students to achieve the learning objectives. For example, the assessment information

is used to identify gaps and weaknesses and to determine what adjustments need to be

included in teaching and learning to ensure improved performance. Teachers also

actively involve students in the assessment process, providing them with opportunities

to help develop useful skills such as HOCS (Organisation for Economic Co-operation

and Development, 2005).

Formative assessment is compatible with alternative assessment strategies because

it is largely concerned with the assessment ‘process’ and alternative assessment tasks

can be designed in such ways as to provide information on this ‘process’ (Chiappetta,

Koballa, & Collette, 2002). They also require students to construct their own

responses, and so teachers can use them to gain an understanding of what students

are thinking and how they construct meanings (Chiappetta et al., 2002; Popham,

2010). Teachers can use the information gained from the assessment ‘process’ to

help to coach their students in how to further develop their HOCS. One such activity

that has been associated with the development of students’ HOCS is concept

mapping.

Concept Mapping

Concept mapping can be used as an instructional strategy (Esiobu & Soyibo, 1995),

or as an assessment tool (Rice, Ryan, & Sampson, 1998). During concept map con-

struction, the learner attempts to make links between concepts and generates a visual

picture representing how he/she organizes his/her knowledge structure or conceptual

framework within a domain (Willerman & MacHarg, 1991). In this way, the map can

act as an indicator of the quality of learning and level of thinking of students. So

(2004) points out that the use of concept maps to indicate students’ level of thinking

is advantageous over other methods, in that, it is quicker to construct, more direct and

is less verbal than other types of written work.

There is much variation in how concept mapping techniques can be used to tap

different aspects of student’s cognitive structures. According to Ruiz-Primo (2000),

a concept map assessment could be characterized based on how much information

is provided to the students that directs its ‘degree of directedness’ (Figure 2).

Concept map types can be classified on a continuum ranging from high-directed to

low-directed (Ruiz-Primo, Schultz, Li, & Shavelson, 1998). High-directed concept

mapping tasks provide students with the concepts, connecting lines, linking phrases

and the map structure while low-directed tasks allow students to decide which and

how many concepts they include in their maps and how concepts are related. An

example of a very high-directed mapping technique is ‘fill-in-the-map’, while the ‘con-

struct-a-map’ represents a low-directed map. The low-directed map holds the greatest

promise for fostering and assessing students’ HOCS. Novak and Canas (2008)

explain that in the creation of new knowledge, for example, in a low-directed map,

cross-links often indicate the level of the learners’ creativity and ability to utilize

846 S. Bramwell-Lalor and M. Rainford

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

iti S

ains

Mal

aysi

a] a

t 04:

19 2

5 D

ecem

ber

2015

knowledge. They feel that two features of concept maps that are important in the

facilitation of creative thinking (a component of HOCS) particularly in the hierarch-

ical concept map is the ability to search for and characterize new cross-links.

Several researchers point to the benefits of incorporating concept maps in science

teaching. Stow cited in So (2004) reported findings where students’ concept maps

on the water cycle at the end of an intervention period revealed a greater range of con-

nections and a greater understanding of the grammar needed to complete the label

lines. The conclusion from this study was that concept maps provide opportunities

for students to examine their own progress and identify changes in knowledge

leading to meaningful learning.

Prezler (2004) used concept maps in a cooperative learning setting among college

students and assessed their performance in biology against when they were taught by

traditional methods. The teacher recorded concept terms on the board, circulated

among the groups asking questions and encouraged students to explain their reason-

ing. Prezler reported that students’ scores on a biology test on the related concepts

were higher when they were associated with cooperative concept mapping than

when they were not.

Novak and Canas (2008) feel that the greatest challenge in implementing alterna-

tive assessment strategies such as concept mapping is to change the prevailing model

of teachers as ‘disseminator of information’. They also point out the existing challenge

of changing assessment practices that now rely primarily on multiple-choice tests that

measure mainly rote recall of information, to those tasks that require students demon-

strating their understanding of basic concepts by using them in novel problem-solving

situations.

Methodology

This study employed a mixed methods embedded-experimental design (Creswell &

Plano Clarke, 2007), where the qualitative data played a secondary, supportive role

to the quantitative data (Figure 3). The quantitative aspect of the research employed

a non-equivalent pre-test/post-test control group design (Creswell, 2003; Gay &

Figure 2. Degree of directedness in a concept map assessment task

Source: Ruiz-Primo et al. (1998, p. 3).

Improving Students’ LOCS and HOCS 847

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

iti S

ains

Mal

aysi

a] a

t 04:

19 2

5 D

ecem

ber

2015

Airasian, 2000), on intact class groups, so as not to disrupt normal class activities

(Jackson & Soyibo, 2002).

Description of the Sample

The research population included students who had just embarked on advanced level

studies in biology. The majority of institutions that offer advanced level biology in

Jamaica follow the CAPE biology curriculum. Biology is a two-unit subject and one

unit is usually taught over a period of an entire academic year. Examinations are

written at the end of each unit and students are required to complete two units in

order to complete the programme.

Ninety of these students and their 3 teachers formed the treatment group, and 66

students along with 5 teachers formed the control group. Table 1 shows the distri-

bution of the students by gender. For the qualitative focus of the study data were

obtained from five students and two of the teachers from the treatment group. With

respect to the teachers of the treatment group, Ms Thomas taught at a co-educational

Community College in rural Jamaica. At the time of the study, she was fairly new to

teaching having taught for one year only, but she expressed great eagerness and enthu-

siasm in receiving information on any strategy that would assist her in the teaching–

learning process. Ms Angel, on the other hand, was an experienced advanced level

biology teacher who taught at a co-educational Traditional High school located in

rural Jamaica. The third teacher, Ms Davis was from a Technical High School in

rural Jamaica. She had already been familiar with concept mapping but had never

used it in her teaching before the study.

Figure 3. Embedded-experimental model

Source: Creswell and Plano Clark (2007, p. 68).

848 S. Bramwell-Lalor and M. Rainford

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

iti S

ains

Mal

aysi

a] a

t 04:

19 2

5 D

ecem

ber

2015

Instrumentation

The Biology Cognitive Skills Test constructed by the researchers was used to measure

the students’ academic performance on selected biological concepts. The items on the

test were constructed based on topics in Module one of the CAPE biology Unit I syl-

labus as this was the aspect of the syllabus covered in the first term of the academic

year when the study was conducted. These topics were as follows: Aspects of bio-

chemistry (water, carbohydrates, lipids and proteins), Cell structure, Membrane

structure and function, and Enzymes. The test items were constructed to distinguish

between students’ use of their LOCS and HOCS. We used the two categories

suggested by the CAPE biology syllabus to assist with distinguishing between the

items, namely: Knowledge and Comprehension requiring the use of LOCS and

Use of Knowledge requiring the use of HOCS.

The test had six open-ended and eight multiple-choice items. The multiple-choice

items represented varying degrees of difficulty (based on calculated difficulty index

values), good discriminating power, and adequate coverage of the biology concepts.

The open-ended items were allotted three marks each and the multiple-choice

items one mark each. The maximum score possible on the test was 26 points

(Table 2). In preparing the test, a table of specifications was constructed to ensure

that all topics were assessed and that both types of cognitive items were similarly dis-

tributed between the multiple-choice and open-ended items. The instrument was

piloted among a group of 37 students in order to determine its appropriateness and

reliability. An alpha coefficient of r ¼ .62 was obtained which indicated that there

was a moderate relationship between the items on the test. Furthermore, inter-

marker reliability was performed on the open-ended items to determine consistency

among raters. Spearman’s rho correlation yielded a statistically significant reliability

Table 1. Composition of students in the treatment groups

Gender

Treatment group

TotalConcept mapping Control

Male 35 35 70

Female 55 31 86

Total 90 66 156

Table 2. Distribution of items and points allocated on the biology cognitive skills test

KC items (LOCS) UK items (HOCS)

TOTALMultiple choice Open ended Multiple choice Open ended

Number of items 4 3 4 3 14

Points 4 9 4 9 26

Improving Students’ LOCS and HOCS 849

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

iti S

ains

Mal

aysi

a] a

t 04:

19 2

5 D

ecem

ber

2015

value of 0.84 (p , .000) indicating that the consistency between the two markers

based on the ranks of the scores obtained for the students was excellent (Cicchetti,

1994). Furthermore, a Kappa coefficient of 0.63 (p , .000) indicated good agree-

ment between the two markers (Altman, 1991).

Implementation

The experimental period commenced at the beginning of the school year so that tea-

chers and students of the treatment group could become accustomed to working

with the new methods rather than in the middle of the year when habits and routines

would have already been established (Black, Harrison, Lee, Marshall, & Wiliam,

2003b). It was our intention for the teachers to use the concept mapping strategy

as a formative assessment tool as this is reported as having great potential for facil-

itating learning (Black & Wiliam, 1998). Just before the research period began the

teachers in the experimental group were provided with reading materials about for-

mative assessment and concept mapping. Discussions were held with each teacher

to provide opportunities for clarification of how concept mapping could be used

in regular teaching. Issues such as the sharing of learning objectives, the use of com-

ments rather than grades in providing feedback and the need for providing opportu-

nities for students to work in collaborative environments were discussed. Teachers

were encouraged to incorporate the use of concept maps in ways best suited for

their own classes. We also provided samples of concept maps on the topics that

the teachers would be teaching. They were introduced to possibilities for using

high- and low-directed concept map during instruction (Ruiz-Primo et al., 1998).

The teachers were encouraged to include these strategies as a supplement to their

regular classroom practices. After being clear on the various ways they could use

the maps, they worked out their own implementation schedules based on their indi-

vidual classroom practices. The sequence of topics taught in term one was aspects of

bio-chemistry: water, carbohydrates, lipids, proteins; cells and enzymes for all the

teachers.

The teachers in the experimental groups used the strategy in a variety of ways.

Concept maps were used as a revision/study tool, a teaching tool and for assessment

purposes. The maps ranged from teacher-constructed maps at different stages of com-

pletion to student-constructed maps. Concept mapping was carried out individually,

in groups and as a whole-class exercise at various points in the lesson.

Concept maps were used by the teachers to assess students’ level of thinking. For

the high-directed maps the teachers only looked for correct insertion of the concept

words. On the other hand, for the low-directed maps the teachers looked at how

students arranged their maps (e.g. number of links and cross-links), the number of

concepts they included, how much of the topic content they represented, and how

they used labels to explain the links and cross-links.

The students in the control group were exposed to the same biology curriculum

during the period under study. The topics that they were taught was done over the

same time period as the treatment groups. However, the teachers in the control

850 S. Bramwell-Lalor and M. Rainford

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

iti S

ains

Mal

aysi

a] a

t 04:

19 2

5 D

ecem

ber

2015

group did not utilize concept mapping in their regular instructional practices which

normally involved lectures, discussion and practical work.

It is possible that the presence of the researchers for observations, interviews or to

meet with teachers could have made students feel special (particularly those who were

interviewed) and could have influenced their responses. However, we did everything

possible to encourage cooperating teachers to maintain their normal routines in their

classrooms. The students were not offered any incentives neither were there any per-

ceived benefits for participation in the study.

At the beginning of the term before teaching had started, the pre-test was adminis-

tered by the class teachers for both the experimental and control groups. Teaching

lasted for 14 weeks from September to December. During this time, teachers reported

on their progress via telephone conversations. No attempt was made to interfere with

the teachers’ use of the concept mapping strategy. At the end of the period of instruc-

tion, the post-test was administered by the class teacher. Interviews with the selected

teachers and students also took place separately, during and at the end of the period of

instruction. Interviews gave the researchers the opportunity to explore the experiences

of both the students and their teachers as a result of their being engaged with the

alternative assessment strategies in a formative way in the research process. The inter-

view data could also be used to explain any trends observed in the quantitative data.

The interviews were open ended and guided by an interview schedule (see Appendix 1

for sample questions). Each lasted approximately one hour each and was audio-taped.

For the purpose of analysis, the interview data were transcribed, then coded to ident-

ify common or emerging themes, to look for individual variations, and generally to

extract critical information that indicated how both teachers and students responded

to the use of the alternative assessment strategies.

Results

The first purpose of the study was to find out if there were any significant differences

in the students’ post-test cognitive skills on the biology LOCS and HOCS items based

on their involvement in concept mapping activities. Evident in Table 3 is that there

were differences in the students’ pre-test performance on the test items in favour of

the control group.

The control students’ performance on the items testing LOCS was statistically sig-

nificantly higher than that of their experimental group counterparts at the start of the

experimental period (F(1) ¼ 21.508; p ¼ .000). Table 3 indicates a similar trend in

the results for the HOCS items. The analysis of variance results revealed that these

differences, however, were not statistically significant (F(1) ¼ 1.6; p . .05). These

results suggest that at the start of the experimental period the students were not equiv-

alent with respect to the use of their LOCS, but they exhibited similar HOCS.

After the period under study there was an increase in the students’ post-test per-

formance on the test (Table 3). The table further indicates that the students in the

treatment group made higher mean gains on both items types (LOCS –99.7%;

HOCS –133%) than those in the control group (LOCS –31.6%; HOCS –65.2%).

Improving Students’ LOCS and HOCS 851

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

iti S

ains

Mal

aysi

a] a

t 04:

19 2

5 D

ecem

ber

2015

It is noted that the students in the treatment group had a calculated mean gain that

was almost two times higher on the HOCS items than the students in the control

group.

In order to ascertain whether the differences among the groups’ mean post-test

scores were statistically significant, an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was

carried out using the pre-test scores as covariates. Tables 4 and 5 indicate that the

differences were statistically significant confirming that students in the experimental

group significantly outscored their counterparts in the control group on both the

LOCS and the HOCS items of the post-test.

This improved performance of the students in the experimental group is worth

highlighting particularly because the students in the control group had significantly

outscored them on the pre-test. Although the groups were initially dissimilar in

favour of the control group, the performance of the experimental group was signifi-

cantly higher than their peers at the end of the period under study. When the effect

size (Cohen’s d) was calculated, the results revealed that the students in the exper-

imental group contributed over 50% of the variation seen in the performance on

the post-test items (LOCS ¼ 0.52; HOCS ¼ 0.59). The concept mapping technique

was therefore shown in this study to be a powerful tool in promoting students’ concep-

tual gains in the biology classroom.

Table 3. Descriptive statistics on the pre-test and post-test scores of the students on biology test

items based on treatment

Variables n Item level

Pre-test Post-test

Post-test mean gainMean SD Mean SD

Concept mapping group 90 LOCS 4.87 1.75 9.73 2.02 4.86

HOCS 2.77 1.58 6.45 2.14 3.68

Control group 66 LOCS 6.52 2.69 8.58 2.37 2.06

HOCS 3.13 1.94 5.17 2.17 2.04

Total 156 LOCS 5.56 2.33 9.24 2.24 3.68

HOCS 2.92 1.74 5.90 2.23 2.98

Table 4. ANCOVA on the students’ post-test scores on biology LOCS items based on their

treatments using their pre-test LOCS scores as covariates

Source of variation SS Df MS F

Covariate 146.296 1 146.296 38.497∗

Treatment 119.360 1 119.360 31.409∗

Residual 581.425 153 3.800

Total 14,108.000 156

∗p , .001.

852 S. Bramwell-Lalor and M. Rainford

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

iti S

ains

Mal

aysi

a] a

t 04:

19 2

5 D

ecem

ber

2015

Incorporating Elements of Formative Assessment in the Use of Concept

Mapping

Ms Thomas, being an inexperienced teacher, was more comfortable using the model

maps as guides to make her own concept maps. She reported that she attempted to

incorporate peer assessment, and ‘comments only’ instead of grades with the use of

the concept maps. She also organized the students to work in groups for the explicit

purpose of peer support. However, the concept mapping activity was sometimes left

to the end of the instructional period to ascertain students’ progress after teaching a

topic. She also asked students to construct their own maps but she provided them with

concept labels for use. The maps were not graded. They were, however, sometimes

discussed in class and compared with a teacher-constructed map, after the students

had completed theirs. She reviewed the students’ maps and affixed comments

thereby providing guidance for the students before the final examination. Samples

of concept maps produced by students are given in Appendix 2. The students were

sometimes asked to re-do their concept map which was then reviewed by the

teacher to see whether any improvements had been made. Ms Thomas explained

how this worked.

MT: . . .sometimes I would provide the links, and they would put in the main topics, or sometimes

I would do the main topics and they do the links, sometimes I mix like some names given,

some links and they complete the rest.

INT: so you used it as an assessment tool mainly?

MT: Assessment? Well it wasn’t graded in anyway it was just to. . .at the end of the topic it was just

to ensure that they understood the concept or the topic and then we’d go through after

like. . .if after they’d go home and then they’d take it and then I’d mark it then in class we’d go

through and sometimes I’d give them like the same concept map over and see how much –

how better they would have done after going through.

Concept Maps Used for Summarizing Lessons

Ms Angel took another approach by engaging the entire class in the construction of

the concept map as a summary tool at the end of a topic. As teacher and students dis-

cussed the topic together she constructed the concept map on the white board. From

the outset of the study she had indicated that she would ‘use concept maps at the end

Table 5. ANCOVA on the students’ post-test scores on biology HOCS items based on their

treatment using their pre-test HOCS scores as covariates

Source of variation SS Df MS F

Covariate 156.345 1 156.345 42.842∗

Treatment 83.956 1 83.956 23.006∗

Residual 558.347 153 3.649

Total 6220.750 156

∗p , .001.

Improving Students’ LOCS and HOCS 853

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

iti S

ains

Mal

aysi

a] a

t 04:

19 2

5 D

ecem

ber

2015

of each topic’. She explained that she would ‘teach the class first how to do the map’

and that she would ‘do that with eukaryotic cells’ after which she would ask them to

construct their own for the topic ‘prokaryotic cells’. The whole-class exercise on the

board, therefore, was the attempt to teach and model to the entire class how to con-

struct a concept map. After she felt that the students had learnt how to draw the maps,

she encouraged then to make their own.

Effects of Using Concept Mapping

The teachers mainly saw the use of concept mapping as having a positive impact on

teaching and learning. It facilitated peer assessment and created an environment for

students to learn from each other. Ms Thomas also thought that concept maps

helped students to organize their thoughts by categorizing various bits of information.

In the post treatment interview, she reasoned that this was a benefit to the students as

it prevented them from confusing ideas.

MT: I think it’s a very effective tool . . . with the concept mapping because the topics in biology can

be so wide, . . . it basically allows them to be able to segregate or compartmentalize the latest

information under a given topic and not to jumble everything.

The teachers also found that concept mapping helped them to diagnose weaknesses

and identify students’ misconceptions. For example, in instances where students con-

structed maps from scratch, Ms Thomas was able to identify the weaknesses in their

HOCS (e.g. not being able to link concepts or exercise the ability to select plausible

alternatives). She explained: ‘One of the things I’d do with the concept map – I’d

ask them if they had an essay based on the subject (meaning the concept or

topic). . .how would they put everything on the concept map in an essay?’ However,

this diagnosis was better done under close supervision. Ms Thomas explained that

she preferred to supervise concept mapping activities by letting students do them

during class time, as this would allow her to determine whether the students really

understood the content, and to ensure that they were constructing or completing

the map themselves rather than copying from a textbook.

MT: I think I would always want it to be a class setting because once the students have the

textbooks then its really hard to show who really understands and who does not because

certain students tend to look in textbook to find the answer. If I was supposed to use it

another time. . .then I think I’ll confine it to class – not as a home assignment. . .for the

classroom. . .and I think I would want to go through their answers and give them back until

they know it.

The students also reported positive experiences with the concept mapping strategy.

Rose described concept maps as being ‘like a skeleton . . .it allows me to have a picture

in my mind of what something is like.’ Here, concept maps are viewed as graphic orga-

nizers, serving as learning aids for visual learners in particular. She also expressed the

view that she found concept mapping to be more useful as a revision tool than as an

assessment tool. Mark appeared to agree with Rose’s view and explained:

854 S. Bramwell-Lalor and M. Rainford

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

iti S

ains

Mal

aysi

a] a

t 04:

19 2

5 D

ecem

ber

2015

. . . in a way you have to actually teach yourself, so you understand it more when you have

to . . . because you have to know it more so you study it more so you understand it more so

it works better that way.

Concept mapping was also viewed as being important for the purposes of self-

assessment and as a useful tool to facilitate independent learning. Mark said that

concept mapping is useful as an assessment tool ‘because you will actually know. . .-

what you know and what you don’t know (emphasis) because it comes in details

so you have to know in details what you [are] not understanding’. Rose indicated

that she liked the technique so much that she would continue to use it on her own

initiative.

Constraints Encountered in Using Concept Mapping

The teachers did not fully appreciate the potential for using concept maps for con-

ducting formative assessment and hence improving learning outcomes. Preparing stu-

dents to succeed in the CAPE was paramount in the teachers’ understanding of their

roles and so anything that could be perceived as robbing them of time to ‘cover the

material’ was viewed in a negative light. Ms Thomas outlined the tension that she

felt in doing concept mapping during class time.

MT: I did it. I cannot say that I did it for every class because there are times when I was late and at

that time really when it seemed like finishing was more important . . .than say making sure

they understand and I think that is something. . . as a teacher you have to go through. You

know you want them to understand but then when you see so much to do and the time given,

that part of one gets caught up if you don’t tell yourself that ‘listen you need to make sure they

understand’. A part of me became caught up in finishing and then what I’ll . . .I basically say

then once I finish. . . and – I’d have a bit more time for going through past papers and then I

could try and do the corrections.

In spite of this preferred approach of using non-traditional forms of assessment the

limited time for teaching placed some constraints on the conduct of using concept

maps as a part of routine class activity. She argued that if this were done in class

time it could be viewed by both teachers and students as ‘taking up teaching time’

and so it is usually easier for her to say, ‘go home and do it and then take it back’.

Ms Thomas explained that this would leave her with more classroom time to ‘cover

the material’.

Teachers also reported some amount of tension between engaging in formative

assessment and the students’ desire to see grades on work done. Ms Angel revealed

that the students saw concept map use as not being important to their own develop-

ment particularly as they were not graded. She felt that if the maps were to be used as a

part of their term grade they would place more effort into doing them. Even though

she had taught them how to do the maps in class, they did not make any effort to con-

tinue the practice outside of class time. Ms Angel suggested that the introduction of

strategies like concept mapping should be done in previous grades so that students

would be used to doing them over a longer period of time. She explained that in

Improving Students’ LOCS and HOCS 855

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

iti S

ains

Mal

aysi

a] a

t 04:

19 2

5 D

ecem

ber

2015

sixth form [grades 12 and 13] students become very focused on ‘getting a good

(exam) grade but with minimum effort and no ‘extra work’. This supports Ms

Thomas’ view that these strategies are perceived as not being essential in the learning

process.

Students did not always find the concept mapping activity easy to manage. Mark

expressed some level of difficulty in constructing maps stating: ‘we don’t get as

much clues as when you were in High School so it takes a lot more here now to ...

put in terms and all that’. This comment by Mark describes the use of low-directed

maps that require more thinking and points to the difficulty some students face in

making the transition to the demands of higher-level studies.

Discussion

The findings of this study have revealed several positive outcomes. First, the results of

the study provide some evidence on how to assist students in developing their HOCS.

There was evidence that the use of concept mapping resulted in promoting students’

higher-level thinking on the biology topics taught in this study, a finding supported by

Chiappetta et al. (2002). At the beginning of the study students in the control group

had higher scores on the test than the students in the treatment group. This unex-

pected result could be partly due to differences in how students were taught in pre-

vious grades. At the end of the study period the students in the treatment group

made statistically higher mean gains particularly in their performance on the

HOCS items of the test. Because any pre-existing differences between the scores on

the pre-test were removed by using the ANCOVA test, one can assume that the

only differences that remained on the post-test performance were related to the

effects of the treatment variable. The significant main effect from the ANCOVA

results confirmed that the students’ scores differed according to the type of strategy

that they were engaged in. These findings suggest that the students in the treatment

group had a better understanding on the Biology test concepts, and, therefore, per-

formed better on the post-test than the control group. Their superior performance

was likely to be due to the effects of the strategies utilized in the teaching–learning

process by the treatment group.

These findings receive indirect support from Jackson and Soyibo (2002) who

reported that 132 Grades 12 and 13 Jamaican chemistry students recorded a higher

mean gain (3.92% or 316%) on the HOCS items on a chemistry test, than their com-

parison group (1.18% or 57%) after being exposed to an eclectic instructional

approach. The results in the current study also find some support from one conducted

by Zoller (2002) on 97 first-year university chemistry students in Israel who were

exposed to the traditional lecture method and what Zoller refers to as ‘following the

recipe’-type laboratory activities. When they sat a mid-term exam which had both

LOCS and HOCS items, the students recorded the lowest scores on the HOCS

items. Prezler (2004) similarly obtained success in the improvement of college stu-

dents’ biology understanding after they were engaged in a cooperative concept

856 S. Bramwell-Lalor and M. Rainford

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

iti S

ains

Mal

aysi

a] a

t 04:

19 2

5 D

ecem

ber

2015

mapping workshop. These results seem to be suggesting that traditional teaching and

assessment methods may not be compatible with the fostering of HOCS.

It is noteworthy that even in a context where concept mapping was not effectively

used for the purpose of formative assessment its value is heightened based on the

results reported in this study. The calculated mean effect size (0.56) is certainly

favourable. According to Coe (2002), this effect size implies that the average

student in the treatment group scored higher on the biology test than 73% of the stu-

dents in the control group. This supports the view that concept mapping is very useful

as a meta-cognitive tool and is beneficial in developing students’ HOCS.

Concept maps are suitable for supporting learning as they provide visual pictures of

how students organize their knowledge structure within a particular domain (Willer-

man & MacHarg, 1991). Teachers and students in this study expressed the same view.

Teachers described how their students benefited from concept mapping because they

had a tool to use which helped them to organize their ideas. Students also admitted

that concept maps were able to assist them in presenting their ideas about concepts

in a graphical way. While it is true that some students expressed difficulty in building

and working with concept maps, Novak and Canas (2008) suggest that this might be

as a result of years of rote-mode learning practised in earlier school years. This, there-

fore, is a challenge likely to be encountered by teachers who have an interest in intro-

ducing concept mapping as a method of instruction and assessment. That is, getting

their students to move away from traditional ways of learning which they have been

introduced to since their early childhood school years.

Teachers’ and students’ response to the use of concept mapping provides another

interesting outcome in this study. They viewed the use of the maps as being useful

for improving understanding of biology concepts. This outcome is encouraging as

the improved performance of the students in the treatment group could serve as a

basis for motivating teachers to incorporate more alternative assessment strategies

such as concept mapping in their practice. Myers and MacBeath (2002) caution

against the top-down approach to reforming teachers’ practice as this tends to demor-

alize and dis-empower teachers. Teachers are more likely to adopt new strategies for

use in their classes when they participate in selecting the strategy to be used and there

is evidence of success from using such strategies in contexts such as theirs.

The ways in which concept mapping was used by the teachers, represented various

degrees of directedness (Ruiz-Primo et al., 1998), with the tasks ranging from being

high-directed to low-directed. Low-directed concept maps require more input from

students as they have to provide the correct link words to show relationships

between concepts. Low-directed maps therefore increase opportunities for students

to exercise their creativity and HOCS. As stated earlier, students embarking on

higher-level studies are often faced with the challenge of expressing their ideas in a sys-

tematic and coherent way. One of the students in this study indicated that he found

the low-directed concept mapping strategy more challenging and expressed the

view that he needed more time to develop the skills. In order to keep students motiv-

ated, it may be prudent when introducing concept mapping for teachers to start off

with high-directed concept maps and gradually introduce the low-directed strategy

Improving Students’ LOCS and HOCS 857

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

iti S

ains

Mal

aysi

a] a

t 04:

19 2

5 D

ecem

ber

2015

as students gain confidence from seeing the benefits of concept mapping to enhance

their HOCS.

The students’ concept maps allowed teachers to identify learning gaps, miscon-

ceptions and misunderstandings. So (2004) similarly highlighted the benefits of

concept mapping to teachers with respect to giving insights to the students’ learn-

ing. The teachers in the present study were able to modify their teaching as a result

of information gathered from the students’ concept maps and make relevant

changes to their instruction. Teachers were only able to make limited use of

concept mapping as a formative assessment strategy. The challenges expressed by

the teachers to adjust their practice to embrace and sustain the principles of forma-

tive assessment by embedding assessment in routine classroom instruction and

provide adequate feedback on students’ work, signals the need for additional class-

room-based teacher support in these areas.

The summative exams had a significant negative influence on students’ and tea-

chers’ attempts at utilizing the strategies on a sustained basis. This was perhaps

related to the demands of the syllabus and the short time available to prepare stu-

dents for high-stakes external examinations. A lack of time to incorporate new

kinds of classroom assessments during regular teaching was also one of the con-

straints expressed by 14 third-grade teachers in three schools, who were part of

a project which focused on classroom performance assessments (Shepard, 1995).

Even though the gains experienced by the students in this study were significant

enough to possibly be transferable to their performances on summative exams, tea-

chers and students tended to focus less on the use of concepts maps, particularly as

summative exams drew near. We recognize the deep rooted cultural shifts that must

take place for many Jamaican teachers if they are to be more trusting of the prin-

ciples of formative assessment and assessment for learning. The tension surround-

ing the use of formative assessment in light of approaching high-stakes examination

is not unique to Jamaica but is well documented in the literature (Harlen, 2005;

Volante & Beckett, 2011). Summative high-stakes assessments are required for

transition at every stage of the education system from primary through secondary

to post-secondary. It will take the collective effort of policy-makers, curriculum

developers, teacher trainers and school administrators to encourage and support

and advanced level biology teachers in the regular use of alternative assessment

methods in their classrooms. The results of this study offer significant justification

for making this shift.

Conclusion

In this paper, we have sought to share the outcomes of the use of concept mapping

strategy to improve advanced level biology students’ HOCS. The impact of the use

of concept maps was very promising as the students showed significant gains in the

use of their HOCS in biology. These findings are significant as while the use of

concept mapping in science education is widely documented, there is relatively

little empirical research on its impact on students higher-order thinking skills.

858 S. Bramwell-Lalor and M. Rainford

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

iti S

ains

Mal

aysi

a] a

t 04:

19 2

5 D

ecem

ber

2015

This research, therefore, adds to this body of the literature. In addition, the results

highlight the tensions that emerge when alternative assessment strategies are

implemented in contexts where high-stakes assessments are imminent (Harlen,

2005). It also provides insights into the views of students and teachers engaged

in using concept mapping.

When students are able to improve their HOCS, this will provide the springboard

for them to transfer their knowledge and understanding to everyday life situations.

We, therefore, strongly recommend that teachers explore the use of concept maps

in the teaching of biology and other contexts in an effort to improve students’ under-

standing and HOCS.

References

Altman, D. G. (1991). Practical statistics for medical research. London, England: Chapman and Hall.

Anderson, R. (1998). Why talk about different ways to grade? Shift from traditional assessment to

alternative assessment. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 74, 5–16.

Angelo, T., & Cross, P. (1993). Classroom assessment techniques: A handbook for college teachers (2nd

ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Arburn, T. M., & Bethel, L. M. (1999). Teaching strategies designed to assist community college science

students’ critical thinking. Retrieved from http://www.eric.ed.gov/ (ERIC Document Reproduc-

tion Service No. ED443663).

Atherton, J. (2001). Constructivist theory. Retrieved from www.dmu.ac.uk~jamesa/learning/

constructivism.htm

Berenson, S. (1995). Changing assessment practices in science and mathematics. School Science and

Mathematics, 95(4), 182–187.

Biggs, J. (1996). Enhancing teaching through constructive alignment. Higher Education, 32,

347–364.

Black, P., & Harrison, C. (2001a). Feedback in questioning and marking: The science teacher’s role

in formative assessment. School Science Review, 82(301), 55–61.

Black, P., & Harrison, C. (2001b). Self-assessment, peer-assessment and taking responsibility: The

science students’ role in formative assessment. School Science Review, 83(302), 43–49.

Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C., Marshall, B., & Wiliam, D. (2003a). Assessment for learning: Putting

it into practice. Buckingham: Open University Press.

Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C., Marshall, B., & Wiliam, D. (2003b, April). A successful intervention

– Why did it work? Paper presented at AERA Symposium on Everyday Classroom Assessment.

58.039.

Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black: Raising standards through classroom assessment.

Phi Delta Kappan, 80(2), 139–148.

Bol, L., & Strage, A. (1996). The contradiction between teachers’ instructional goals and their

assessment practices in high school biology classes. Science Education, 80(2), 145–163.

Bruner, J. S. (1968). Toward a theory of instruction. New York: W.W. Norton.

Bruner, J. S. (1974). Beyond the information given: Studies in the psychology of knowing. London: Allen

& Unwin.

Caribbean Examinations Council. (2011, June). Report on candidates’ work in the secondary education

certificate examination general proficiency, Biology.

Chiappetta, E. L., Koballa, T. R., & Collette, A. T. (2002). Science instruction in the middle and sec-

ondary schools (4th ed.). New York: Prentice-Hall Inc.

Cicchetti, D. V. (1994). Guidelines, criteria, and rules of thumb for evaluating normed and standar-

dized assessment instruments in psychology. Psychological Assessment, 6(4), 284–290.

Improving Students’ LOCS and HOCS 859

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

iti S

ains

Mal

aysi

a] a

t 04:

19 2

5 D

ecem

ber

2015

Clarke, S. (2005). Formative assessment in the secondary classroom. London: Hodder Murray.

Coe, R. (2002, September). It’s the effect size, stupid: What effect size is and why it is important.

Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the British Educational Research Association,

University of Exeter, England. Retrieved from www.leeds.ac.uk/educol/documents/

00002182.htm

Cowie, B., & Bell, B. (1999). A Model of formative assessment in science education. Assessment in

Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 6(1), 101–117.

Creswell, J. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (2nd ed.).

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Creswell, J., & Plano Clarke, V. L. (2007). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Thou-

sand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Dewey, J. (1956). The child and the curriculum and the school and society. London: University of

Chicago Press.

Ennever, F. (2006). More than multiple-choice. The Science Teacher, 73(7), 54–56. Retrieved from

Academic Research Library database. (Document ID: 1148188171).

Esiobu, G., & Soyibo, K. (1995). Effects of concept and vee mappings under three learning modes

on student’s cognitive achievement in ecology and genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teach-

ing, 32(9), 971–995.

Gallagher, J. J. (1991). Prospective and practicing secondary school science teachers’ knowledge

and beliefs about the philosophy of science. Science Education, 75(1), 121–134.

Gardner, J. (2006). Assessment and learning. London: Sage Publications, Ltd.

Gay, L. R., & Airasian, P. (2000). Educational research: Competencies for analysis and application (6th

ed.). Columbus, OH: Prentice Hall.

Gottfried, S. S., & Kyle, W. C., Jr (1992). Textbook use and the Biology education desired state.

Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(1), 35–49.

Harlen, W. (2005). Teachers’ summative practices and assessment for learning – Tensions and

synergies. The Curriculum Journal, 16(2), 207–223. doi:10.1080/09585170500136093

Holmes, P. (2002). Teaching, learning and assessment: Complimentary or conflicting categories for school

statistics. Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Teaching Statistics. Retrieved

from http://www.stat.auckland.ac.nz/~iase/publications/1/04_ho.pdf

Jackson, C., & Soyibo, K. (2002). Effects of instruction on performance in chemical energetics. Car-

ibbean Journal of Education, 24, 187–199.

James, M. (2006). Assessment teaching and theories of learning. In J. Gardner (Ed.), Assessment and

learning (pp. 47–60). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Jegede, O. J., Alaiyemla, F. F., & Okebukola, P. A. (1990). The effect of concept mapping on stu-

dents’ anxiety and achievement in biology. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(10),

951–960.

Kahn, E. A. (2000). A case study of assessment in a grade 10 English course. The Journal of Edu-

cational Research, 93(5), 276–286.

Kinchin, I. M. (2000). Using concept maps to reveal understanding: A two-tier analysis. School

Science Review, 81, 41–46.

Kretchmar, J. (2008). Taxonomy of educational objectives – The cognitive domain (p. 1). Great Neck

Publishing. Retrieved from Research Starters – Education database

McCaslin, M., & Good, T. (1992). Compliant cognition: The misalliance of management and

instructional goals in current school reform. Educational Researcher, 21(3), 4–17.

McDonald, B., & Boud, D. (2003). The impact of self assessment on achievement: The effects of

self assessment training on performance in external examinations. Assessment in Education,

10(2), 209–220.

Myers, K., & MacBeath, J. (2002). Series editor’s preface. In A. Harris (Ed.), School improvement:

What’s in it for schools? (pp. ix–x). London: Routledge.

860 S. Bramwell-Lalor and M. Rainford

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

iti S

ains

Mal

aysi

a] a

t 04:

19 2

5 D

ecem

ber

2015

National Science Board. (2012). Science and Engineering indicators 2012. Arlington, VA: National

Science Foundation (NSB 12-01).

Newmann, F. M. (1994). School-wide professional community. Issues in restructuring schools (Issue

Report 6), Spring, Center on Organization and Restructuring of Schools. Madison: Wisconsin

Center for Education Research, University of Wisconsin-Madison. Retrieved from www.wcer.

wisc.edu/archives/completed/cors/Issues_in_Restructuring_Schools/

Novak, J. D. (1979). Applying psychology and philosophy to the improvement of laboratory teach-

ing. The American Biology Teacher, 41(8), 466–474.

Novak, J. D. (1990). Concept mapping: A useful tool for science education. Journal of Research in

Science Teaching, 27, 937–949.

Novak, J. D., & Canas, A. J. (2008). The theory underlying concept maps and how to construct and use

them (Technical Report IHMC CmapTools 2006-01 Rev 01-2008). Florida Institute for

Human and Machine Cognition. Retrieved from http://cmap.ihmc.us/Publications/

ResearchPapers/TheoryUnderlyingConceptMaps.pdf

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2005). Formative assessment:

Improving learning in secondary classrooms. Policy Brief, November. Retrieved from www.oecd.

org/publications/Policybriefs

Parker, V., & Gerber, B. (2000). Effects of a science intervention program on middle-grade student

achievement and attitudes. School Science & Mathematics, 100(5), 36–242.

Piaget, J. (1970). Piaget’s Theory. In P. Mussen (Ed.), Handbook of child psychology (pp. 703–732).

New York: Wiley.

Popham, W. J. (2010). Classroom assessment: What teachers need to know (6th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Prezler, R. (2004). Cooperative concept mapping. Journal of College Science Teaching, 33(6), 30–35.

Rice, D. C., Ryan, J. M., & Samson, S. M. (1998). Using concept maps to assess student learning in

the science classroom: Must different methods compete? Journal of Research in Science Teaching,

35(10), 1103–1127.

Ruiz-Primo, M. A. (2000). On the use of concept maps as an assessment tool in science: What we

have learned so far. Revista Electronica de Investigacion Educativa, 2(1), 29–52. Retrieved from

http://redie.uabc.mx/vol2no1/contents-ruizpri.html

Ruiz-Primo, M. A., Schultz, S. E., Li, M., & Shavelson, R. (1998). Comparison of the reliability and

validity of scores from two concept-mapping techniques. Concept-Map representation of knowledge

structures: Report of year 2 Activities (CSE Technical Report 492). National Center for Research

on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST), Center for the Study of Evaluation

(CSE), Graduate School of Education & Information Studies, University of California, Los

Angeles. Retrieved from http://crest96.cse.ucla.edu/reports

Salih, M. (2010). Developing thinking skills in Malaysian science students via an analogical task.

Journal of Science and Mathematics Education in Southeast Asia, 33(1), 110–128. Retrieved

from http://tinyurl.com/b2oroqy

Selvaratnam, M., & Mavuso, N. (2010). Competence of science foundation students in basic intel-

lectual skills. South African Journal of Science, 106(1), 70–75. Retrieved from http://www.sajs.

co.za

Shepard, L. (1995). Using assessment to improve learning. Educational Leadership, 52(5), 38–43.

Silva, E. (2009). Measuring skills for 21st-century learning. Phi Delta Kappan, 90(9), 630–634.

Retrieved from http://tinyurl.com/byelfc9

So, W. M. W. (2004). Assessing primary science learning: Beyond paper and pencil assessment.

Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 5(8), Article 8. Retrieved from www.ied.

edu.hk/apfslt/v5issue2/sowm/sowm5.htm

Stanger-Hall, K. F. (2012). Multiple-choice exams: An obstacle for higher-level thinking in intro-

ductory science classes. CBE – Life Sciences Education, 11(3), 294–306.

University of the West Indies. (n.d.). UWI Statistical Review 2009–10. Retrieved from http://www.

mona.uwi.edu/opair/statistics/

Improving Students’ LOCS and HOCS 861

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

iti S

ains

Mal

aysi

a] a

t 04:

19 2

5 D

ecem

ber

2015

Volante, L., & Beckett, D. (2011). Formative assessment and the contemporary classroom: Syner-

gies and tensions between research and practice. Canadian Journal of Education, 34(2),

239–255.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Interaction between learning and development (M. Lopez-Morillas,

Trans.). In M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, & E. Souberman (Eds.), Mind in society:

The development of higher psychological processes (pp. 79–91). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univer-

sity Press.

Willerman, M., & MacHarg, R. (1991). The concept map as an advance organizer. Journal of

Research in Science Teaching, 28(8), 705–711.

Woolnough, B. E., McLaughlin, S., & Jackson, S. (1999). Learning by doing – Two classroom

studies of pupils’ preferred ways of learning science. School Science Review, 81(294), 27–34.

Yin, Y., Vanides, J., Ruiz-Primo, M. A., Ayala, C. C., & Shavelson, R. J. (2005). Comparison of two

concept-mapping techniques: Implications for scoring, interpretations, and use. Journal of

Research in Science Teaching, 42(2), 166–184.

Zohar, A., & Dori, Y. (2003). Higher order thinking skill and low achieving students: Are they

mutually exclusive? The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(2), 145–181.

Zoller, U. (2002). Algorithmic, LOCS and HOCS (chemistry) exam questions: Performance and

attitudes of college students. International Journal of Science Education, 24(2), 185–203.

Zoller, U., & Pushkin, D. (2007). Matching higher-order cognitive skills (HOCS) promotion goals

with problem-based laboratory practice in a freshman organic chemistry course. Chemistry Edu-

cation Research and Practice, 8(2), 153–171.

Appendix 1.

Students’ Interview Schedule

W What do you think is the purpose of assessment?

W What types of assessment are ideal to reveal what a student has learnt? (Why?)

W How do you feel about receiving the learning objectives for each lesson?

W Is this something that a teacher should always do?

W What do you think about concept mapping? Rate it on a scale of 1(lowest) -10

(highest).

W Explain in your own words what a concept map is.

W Have you ever used one before?

W Has concept mapping helped you to learn and understand biology better? (How?

Why?)

W What did you use it to do?

W Do you think it has helped your teacher to help you learn better?

W How do you respond to feedback from tests/classwork and coursework?

W Is concept mapping something you would continue on your own?

Teacher’s Interview Schedule

W Did anything change about your teaching as a result of participating in this study?

W Were there any elements of concept mapping that you particularly liked?

W Were there any elements of concept mapping that you did not like?

862 S. Bramwell-Lalor and M. Rainford

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

iti S

ains

Mal

aysi

a] a

t 04:

19 2

5 D

ecem

ber

2015

W How do you usually measure the progress being made by your students?

W How do you normally mark? (right/wrong? Or do you place comments on papers?)

W How did you use the feedback you obtained from your students’ concept maps?

W Did you try the delayed grades/no grades approach? How did that go?

W Can you identify any drawbacks in the use of concept mapping and formative

assessment?

W Did you experience any challenges between formative assessment and summative

assessment?

W Would you continue to use concept mapping in your classrooms?

W Would you encourage other teachers to use this method in their classrooms?

Appendix 2.

Example of a Student-Constructed Map on the Topic Cells

Example of a Student-Constructed Map on the Topic Enzymes (Showing Teacher’s

Feedback)

Improving Students’ LOCS and HOCS 863

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

iti S

ains

Mal

aysi

a] a

t 04:

19 2

5 D

ecem

ber

2015

864 S. Bramwell-Lalor and M. Rainford

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

iti S

ains

Mal

aysi

a] a

t 04:

19 2

5 D

ecem

ber

2015