Using Mindtool-Based Collaborative Learning Approach for Higher Education to Support Concept Map Construction

  • Chia-Chen Chen
  • Yueh-Min Huang
  • Pei-Hsuan LinEmail author
  • Yu-Lin Jeng
  • Yong-Ming Huang
  • Mu-Yen Chen
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10108)


This study is based on cooperate Concept Map through Mindtool(Coggle) to increase students’ motivation and can learn effectively. According to the Index of Learning Style (ILS) proposed by Felder and Soloman, this study discuss different learning style and teaching strategy impact students’ academic achievement after they learning. The independent variable was teaching strategy from learning style, the dependent variable was academic achievement. The participants were 50 graduate students in Taichung. This research shows that (1) The knowledge can be acquired not only from the classroom educated by teacher, but also exploring voluntarily by learners themselves to enhance their experiential thinking and reflective thinking. (2) This study use rubric method to measure the impact of different learning style and teaching strategy to students’ academic achievement. (3) In accordance with students’ learning contents and views, teachers can provide supplemental materials and instructions and adjust teaching strategy.


Concept mapping Mindtool E-learning Learning style 



The authors thank the support of Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST) of the Republic of China (ROC) to this research under Grant No. MOST 104-2511-S-005-003- and MOST 103-2622-S-005-001-CC3.


  1. 1.
    Hung, J.L., Zhang, K.: Examining mobile learning trends 2003–2008: a categorical meta-trend analysis using text mining techniques. J. Comput. High. Educ. 24(1), 1–17 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hwang, G.J., Wu, P.H.: Advancements and trends in digital game-based learning research: A review of publications in selected journals from 2001 to 2010. British J. Educ. Technol. 43(1), E6–E10 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Jonassen, D.H., Carr, C., Yueh, H.P.: Computers as Mindtools for engaging learners in critical thinking. TechTrends 43(2), 24–32 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kao, G.Y.M., Lin, S.S.J., Sun, C.T.: Breaking concept boundaries to enhance creative potential: using integrated concept maps for conceptual self-awareness. Comput. Educ. 51(4), 1718–1728 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Vygotsky, L.: Mind in society: the development of higher psychological process. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (1978)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hwang, G.J., Shi, Y.R., Chu, H.C.: A concept map approach to developing collaborative Mindtools for context-aware ubiquitous learning. Br. J. Educ. Technol. 42(5), 778–789 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Felder, R.M.: Learning and teaching styles in engineering education. Eng. Education 78(7), 674–681 (1988)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Robertson, J., Howells, C.: Computer game design: opportunities for successful learning. Comput. Educ. 50(2), 559–578 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Vos, N., van der Meijden, H., Denessen, E.: Effects of constructing versus playing an educational game on student motivation and deep learning strategy use. Comput. Educ. 56(1), 127–137 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Venkataraman, S., Sivakumar, S.: Engaging students in group based learning through e-learning techniques in Higher Education System. Int. J. Emerg. Trends Sci. Technol. 2(1), 1741–1746 (2015)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Son, Y.M., Jung, B.S.: Convergence development of video and E-learning system for education disabled students. J. Korea Convergence Soc. 6(4), 113–119 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Shopova, T.: E-learning in higher education environment. In: International Conference the Future of Education, Bulgaria (2012)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Dunn, R., Stevenson, J.M.: Teaching diverse college students to study with a learning-styles prescription. Coll. Student J. 31, 333–339 (1997)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Rochford, R.A.: Assessing learning styles to improve the quality of performance of community college students in developmental writing programs: a pilot study. Community Coll. J. Res. Pract. 27(8), 665–677 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Demirkan, H.: An inquiry into the learning-style and knowledge-building preferences of interior architecture students. Design Stud. 44, 28–51 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Witkin, H.A., Oltman, P.K., Raskin, E., Karp, S.: A manual for the embedded figures test. Consulting Psychologists Press, California (1971)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Felder, R.M., Solomon, B.A.: Index of learning styles (1991). Accessed 10 Aug 2010, 2009
  18. 18.
    Kolb, D.A.: Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1984)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Davidson-Shivers, G.V., Nowlin, B., Lanouette, M.: Do multimedia lesson structure and learning styles influence undergraduate writing performance? Coll. Student J. 36(1), 20–32 (2002)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Carmel-Gilfilen, C.: Uncovering pathways of design thinking and learning: inquiry on intellectual development and learning style preferences. J. Interior Des. 37(3), 47–66 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Novak, J.D., Gowin, D.B.: Learning how to learn. Cambridge University Press, New York and Cambridge (1984)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Norman, D.A.: Things that make us smart: defending human attributes in the age of the machine. Reading. Addison-Wesley Publishing Co, MA (1993)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Burleson, W.: Developing creativity, motivation, and self-actualization with learning systems. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Stud. 63(4–5), 436–451 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Chu, H.C., Hwang, G.J., Liang, Y.R.: A cooperative computerized concept mapping approach to improving students’ learning performance in web-based information-seeking activities. J. Comput. Educ. 1(1), 19–33 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Schwendimann, B.A., Linn, M.C.: Comparing two forms of concept map critique activities to facilitate knowledge integration processes in evolution education. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 53(1), 70–94 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Jonassen, D.H.: Computers as Mindtools for schools, engaging critical thinking. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ (1999)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Yang, K.J., Chu, H.C., Yang, K.H.: Using the augmented reality technique to develop visualization Mindtools for chemical inquiry-based activities. Advanced Applied Informatics, pp. 354–357 (2015)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Hou, H.T., Yu, T.F., Wu, Y.X., Sung, Y.T., Chang, K.E.: Development and evaluation of a web map mind tool environment with the theory of spatial thinking and project-based learning strategy. Br. J. Educ. Technol. 47(2), 390–402 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Andrade, H.G.: Using rubrics to promote thinking and learning. Educ. Leadersh. 57(5), 13–18 (2000)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Mertler, C.A.: Designing scoring rubrics for your classroom. Pract. Assess. Res. Eval. 7(25) (2001). 15 June 2016
  31. 31.
    Ashton, S., Davies, R.S.: Using scaffolded rubrics to improve peer assessment in a MOOC writing course. Dist. Educ. 36(3), 312–334 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Wollenschlager, M., Hattie, J., Machts, N., Moller, J., Harms, U.: What makes rubrics effective in teacher-feedback? Transparency of learning goals is not enough. Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 44–45, 1–11 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Langley, P.W., Simon, H.A., Bradshaw, G.L., Zytkow, J.M.: Scientific Discovery: Computational Explorations of the Creative Processes. MIT Press (1987)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Chia-Chen Chen
    • 1
  • Yueh-Min Huang
    • 2
  • Pei-Hsuan Lin
    • 2
    Email author
  • Yu-Lin Jeng
    • 3
  • Yong-Ming Huang
    • 4
  • Mu-Yen Chen
    • 5
  1. 1.Department of Management Information SystemsNational Chung Hsing UniversityTaichungTaiwan, R.O.C.
  2. 2.Department of Engineering ScienceNational Cheng Kung UniversityTaichungTaiwan, R.O.C.
  3. 3.Department of Information ManagementSouthern Taiwan University of Science and TechnologyTainanTaiwan
  4. 4.Department of Applied Informatics and MultimediaChia Nan University of Pharmacy and ScienceTainanTaiwan
  5. 5.Department of Information ManagementNational Taichung University of Science and TechnologyTaichungTaiwan

Personalised recommendations