2004Journal of Engineering EducationRequires access

Scoring Concept Maps: An Integrated Rubric for Assessing Engineering Education

Mary Besterfield‐Sacre, Jessica Gerchak, Mary Rose Lyons, Larry J. Shuman, Harvey Wolfe

Open publisher page 203 citations

Abstract

Abstract We investigated the use of concept maps to assess “knowledge integration,” by developing a rubric to “score” maps using two samples of students. In 2000, a sample of sophomore, junior and senior industrial engineering students was asked to develop concept maps of that field. This exercise was repeated in 2002 with seniors, half of whom participated as sophomores. The maps were scored using “traditional” counting metrics proposed by other researchers and with a holistic approach developed for the study. The holistic approach indicated that students improved as they matriculated through the program, and also enabled faculty to identify programmatic weaknesses. Although the “traditional” methods provided quantifiable information, closer examination questioned whether that information was representative of students' true conceptual understanding. Consequently, a scoring rubric was developed and tested using attributes of the holistic approach.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Abstract We investigated the use of concept maps to assess “knowledge integration,” by developing a rubric to “score” maps using two samples of students. In 2000, a sample of sophomore, junior and senior industrial engineering students was asked to develop concept maps of that field. This exercise was repeated in 2002 with seniors, half of whom participated as sophomores. The maps were scored using “traditional” counting metrics proposed by other researchers and with a holistic approach developed for the study. The holistic approach indicated that students improved as they matriculated through the program, and also enabled faculty to identify programmatic weaknesses. Although the “traditional” methods provided quantifiable information, closer examination questioned whether that information was representative of students' true conceptual understanding. Consequently, a scoring rubric was developed and tested using attributes of the holistic approach.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 203 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Abstract We investigated the use of concept maps to assess “knowledge integration,” by developing a rubric to “score” maps using two samples of students. In 2000, a sample of sophomore, junior and senior industrial engineering students was asked to develop concept maps of that field. This exercise was repeated in 2002 with seniors, half of whom participated as sophomores. The maps were scored using “traditional” counting metrics proposed by other researchers and with a holistic approach developed for the study. The holistic approach indicated that students improved as they matriculated through the program, and also enabled faculty to identify programmatic weaknesses. Although the “traditional” methods provided quantifiable information, closer examination questioned whether that information was representative of students' true conceptual understanding. Consequently, a scoring rubric was developed and tested using attributes of the holistic approach.

Key concepts: Rubric, Concept map, Strengths and weaknesses, Psychology, Sample (material), Mathematics education, Field (mathematics), Engineering education

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Scoring Concept Maps: An Integrated Rubric for Assessing Engineering Education — Research Paper | ScholarLens