We had our first online video meeting this afternoon. 13 people took part (three of them voice-only, one text-only) as we walked through Week 1’s concept maps.
Observations
- Some focused on terms and relationships (http://teaching.software-carpentry.org/2012/09/07/week-1-python-libraries/)
- Others were organized around commands and options (http://teaching.software-carpentry.org/2012/09/07/week-1-the-shell-finding-things/)
- And some were… minimalist :-) (http://teaching.software-carpentry.org/2012/09/06/week-1-shell-pipes-and-filters/)
- Sometimes hard to think of contrasting/boundary examples (often introduced with words like “however…”)
Questions
- How useful is a concept map if you didn’t draw it yourself? I.e., is it the artifact, or the process of creating it, that aids learning?
- How much insight does a concept map give you into someone’s understanding of a subject?
- How would you grade a concept map?
- Do you think a robot could grade a concept map?
- Where/how do you start explaining things when there are cycles in the concept map?
- (How) would you use a concept map as a teaching aid?
- Does everyone who understands something have the same concept map in their heads?
Wanted:
- What are some common pitfalls/misconceptions learners have (they don’t show up on traditional concept maps)
- Can we use concept maps to better gauge students’ existing background (what are some other tried and true methods of determining this ourselves?)
Finally, what are some experiments Greg could try out in the two workshops he’s teaching next (York and Oslo)? Please submit ideas as comments on Ben’s blog post.