Abstract
Previous research has indicated that the structure of an individual's knowledge may be just as important as the quantity of knowledge. Given this, using assessment methods that elicit trainee's knowledge structures seems imperative for predicting performance. Unfortunately, incorporation of these methods has been hindered, in part, due to the complexity of methods used to derive a score and the belief that simpler methods of scoring will not provide accurate information about an individual's knowledge. Presented here is a study that investigated whether this claim was true for the structural knowledge elicitation method, concept mapping. Twenty-six participants were run through a same-day training and assessment session. Following, concept maps were scored using a simple method and a complex method. Results indicated that both scoring methods produced significantly higher scores for the trained group and significantly lower scores for the untrained group. In addition, there was a very strong, positive relationship between the two scoring methods. Finally, both methods produced a moderately high correlation with the paper-pencil assessment. Results and implications are discussed further within the paper.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.