Description
Refine your research question to include the following:Clear conceptualization and operationalization (in other words, measurable variables)A clear proposition within your research question (how are your variables related to each other)Limited only to the variables in the “Assignment Data” excel file, develop a concrete research question which includes a clear proposition (variable relations)Provide the key characteristics for persons with pid’s 5, 11, and 19For example: the characteristics for person 1 (pid 1) is:18 year old, less than HS education, likes baseball, earns 6,000 per year, and has 1 child.My research question: How was anxiety managed before vs after those who take anti-anxiety medication?(might not make sense but would love to do a paper on patients that take medication such as alprazolam, klonopin, etc)
Unformatted Attachment Preview
2
How to Conceptualize
Research:
Getting Started and Advancing
Ongoing Projects
02_Aurini_et_al_Ch_02.indd 8
3/16/2016 6:22:19 PM
how to conceptualize research
9
Learning objectives
By the end of this chapter you will have the tools to:
••
••
••
Identify and conceptualize a research topic
Formulate a research problem
Anticipate potential ‘Who cares?’ questions
Chapter summary
Conceptualization, the art and practice of discovery, is the first and some may argue the most difficult part
of research. This chapter will provide researchers with strategies for conceptualizing qualitative projects,
including how to use the literature effectively and how to formulate a research question.
INTRODUCTION
We tend to gloss over ‘conceptualization’. Conceptualization is the process of not only
selecting a topic, but formulating a defensible and researchable research problem; it is more
than simply generating a list of interesting topics such as academic achievement gaps or
homelessness. If you jump from a topic to data collection, you will likely end up with random bits of information that are of little use to the researcher or your intended audience.
Such projects not only tend to lack analytical focus, but will be plagued by the challenges
associated with the dreaded ‘Who cares?’. Good conceptualization involves moving from a
general topic to a clear research problem.
This chapter outlines concrete tools for conceptualization. We present them as steps, but
fully acknowledge that in reality research happens in a non-linear fashion. We also note
that some approaches are more exploratory, particularly at the beginning stages of a project. However, whether you start off with a perfectly good research question or not, you will
eventually need to complete every step.
1.
2.
Step One: What is the topic? The first step of any project is to determine what you want to study.
Step Two: What is my problem? Why should anyone care about my problem? You must then
establish the problem your project hopes to solve, including filling in a gap or extending the
literature in a new and exciting direction.
STEP ONE OF CONCEPTUALIZATION: WHAT IS MY TOPIC?
the common problem among students is the feeling that one has nothing to say … you find the huge variety
of things that could be said almost as overwhelming as the huge diversity of things that have been said.
(Abbott, 2004: 85)
02_Aurini_et_al_Ch_02.indd 9
3/16/2016 6:22:19 PM
10
jump starting your qualitative research project
By design, researchers are deeply curious about the social world. If you are lucky, you may
start a project with a topic that is inspired by your discipline, subfield, or event such as the
Occupy Wall Street movement. You may even have some general questions in mind such
as identifying the aspects of the Occupy Wall Street movement that were more or less
successful, or whether it constituted a social movement in the first place. In such cases,
you need the tools presented in this chapter to prevent you from relying on a particular
lens simply out of habit. So if your tried and true method is to view such a movement
through the eyes of the participants or as a Marxist, considering an alternative approach
may help you forge an exciting and less travelled intellectual pathway (Abbott, 2004: 86).
Many budding researchers, however, are interested in many topics that may or may
not be related, such as female body builders and cults, or a broad area, such as children’s
afterschool activities. Yet decisions (and sacrifices) have to be made in the interest of
developing a coherent research design. Initially, pinning down a topic is useful for guiding researchers toward the literature and some preliminary sources of data. As we discuss
below, some initial ‘digging’ can provide you with much needed background and inspiration. This part of conceptualization is an important first, but definitely not last, step
toward developing an informative and interesting research project. This ground work not
only saves time and cuts down on mistakes, it will undoubtedly come in handy time and
time again, whether writing your literature review or defending your project at a proposal
defence or to a journal reviewer.
In Table 2.1 we present a toolkit for generating ideas. You should not get too bogged
down about which tool is better or whether you are executing any one of the options
‘perfectly’; instead, see these exercises as brainstorming tools. You may also find some tools
more or less useful than others depending on your approach.
We present five key sources for inspiration that are divided two groups:
a)
b)
Data and theory driven
Researcher driven
Data and theory driven
Data driven conceptualization includes both secondary and primary sources. We discuss
secondary sources first since they will likely be the most accessible option, particularly for
more novice researchers. Secondary sources are generally one step removed from the original event or people and include published academic and professional articles, commonly
referred to as ‘the literature’. Primary sources include materials that are produced by, for,
or about the people, group, organization or event under study by persons who have direct
and intimate knowledge or experiences. We also discuss the possibility of conducting some
preliminary data collection.
02_Aurini_et_al_Ch_02.indd 10
3/16/2016 6:22:19 PM
how to conceptualize research
11
Table 2.1 What is my topic? Sources of inspiration
a) Data and
theory
driven
Type
Example
1) Secondary sources
Journal articles
Academic or professional books
Research reports
2) Primary sources
Online materials (e.g., blogs)
Websites
Government documents or public records
Archival materials
Brochures, reports, posters
Diaries, letters
Media (online, newspapers, magazines and TV)
Pictures or videos
Furniture, statues, clothing
Music, poetry, art
Maps
Transcripts
Academic and professional articles and reports that
are used as primary sources of data
b) Researcher
driven
3) Primary: Preliminary raw data
that you collect or produce
Pilot project
4) Mapping exercises
Mind map
Concept map
Literature map
5) Abbott’s (2004) ‘Lists’
Aristotle’s four causes
Secondary sources: The literature
The literature will be your first and arguably best friend in the development of a research
project. The literature includes three main sources: a) academic journal articles; b) academic
or professional books; and c) research reports. You will obviously need to use these sources
to construct a literature review. However, in this section, we discuss how you can use the
literature as a source of inspiration.
Academic journal articles
The first and most common source is published journal articles. These articles are peer
reviewed and can be accessed through a variety of sources, including JSTOR and Scholars
Portal. The term ‘peer reviewed’ means that the articles have been reviewed usually by
02_Aurini_et_al_Ch_02.indd 11
3/16/2016 6:22:19 PM
12
jump starting your qualitative research project
two or three experts, and have likely been screened by the editor of the journal. While
journals vary in terms of the degree to which articles are scrutinized, and in many cases
rejected, the process provides a measure of quality control. If you are unsure where to
start, ask experts in your field (e.g., your supervisor) or a librarian at your institution for
the most appropriate sources. The journals supported by your discipline’s professional
association(s) are another great starting place. In sociology for example, the American
Sociological Association, Canadian Sociological Association and the European Sociological
Association all host a variety of high quality academic journals.
There are three main types of academic journal articles:
••
••
••
Research articles: Research articles use primary (e.g., interviews conducted by the author) or
secondary (e.g., archival materials) sources of data to advance a particular original idea, argument or theory.
Theoretical articles: Rather than relying on primary or secondary data (though the author may
refer to such data) theoretical articles attempt to advance or critique a particular theoretical
concept or framework, or make an original theoretical contribution to the literature.
State of the field or review articles: This type of article reviews a large body of research
and theoretical articles. Review articles articulate key arguments, sources of data, theories and
debates on a particular topic. They are a wonderful source, particularly for researchers who are
newer to a particular area. Most disciplines also have journals that are specifically devoted to
publishing review articles. Annual Review of Sociology, Annual Review of Economics and Annual
Review of Political Science are a few examples.
Quick tip: How to search for academic journal articles
Searching for articles on your topic is part art, part science. To ‘strike gold’, you will need
to experiment with different terms and combinations. Some of these terms will be obvious (e.g., layperson terms), and others will be added once you become familiar with terms
that are used in the literature. Below we present an example of searches from a project
on school shootings. Start with the most obvious search terms (e.g., school shootings),
then separate key terms on separate rows of the search engines (e.g., ‘school’ on row one
and ‘shooting’ on row two). Use quotation marks to keep key works together (e.g., ‘school
violence’); if not some search engines will simultaneously search for these terms separately
(e.g., you may end up with thousands of articles containing the word ‘school’ and thousands
of articles containing the word ‘violence’ that have nothing to do with school shootings). In
some cases you will be able to search on a key event, person or organization that is related
to your topic (e.g., ‘Sandy Hook’ or ‘Columbine’, two famous school shootings). Once you are
familiar with the literature, you may come across alternative terms related to your topic. In
the case of school shootings some authors have referred to them as ‘rampage shootings’ or
‘organizational deviance’. You may also add in other terms that according to the literature
are related to school shootings (e.g., bullying), but recognize that these searches will likely
yield many articles that have nothing to do with your core topic.
02_Aurini_et_al_Ch_02.indd 12
3/16/2016 6:22:19 PM
how to conceptualize research
13
Example: Search terms
Key
Combination
Key events, people or
organizations
‘‘School shootings’
‘School’ AND ‘shootings’
‘Sandy Hook’
‘School shooters’
‘School’ AND ‘shooters’
‘Columbine’
‘School violence’
‘School’ AND ‘violence’
Academic or professional books
The literature also includes academic or professional books on your topic. Sources include,
but are not limited to, academic presses.
There are four main types of books:
••
••
••
••
Academic or scholarly books: Scholarly books include original research and ‘state of the field’
chapters that marshal a variety of data to frame a particular issue or make an original contribution. Most of these books are published by academic presses (e.g., NYU Press) or foundations
that support scholarly work (e.g., Russell Sage Foundation).
Popular original works: Popular original works target a wider audience, but may still be
authored by experts. More novice researchers should tread a bit more carefully, since they
will likely have fewer tools to evaluate the relative quality of the argument and any data
that the author used. However, there are many wonderful examples of popular books that
are both high quality and accessible. Venkatesh’s (2008) Gang Leader for a Day is a perfect example. His book is popular in its own right, and is featured in the wildly successful
Freakonomics (Levitt and Dubner, 2009). Yet, at the same time the book is grounded in years
of rich field research.
Original or reprinted edited collections: Edited collections can provide a different kind of
breadth by marshalling chapters from a variety of authors and perspectives on a particular
topic. Edited collections can include a series of original contributions such as previously unpublished data, concepts, frameworks or theories. They can also include reprinted material either
in its entirety (e.g., one chapter that has been reprinted from a previously published book or
article) or a summary of an original contribution.
Encyclopaedias: Unlike a traditional encyclopaedia, scholarly encyclopaedias are typically
produced for a particular discipline or sub-field (e.g., Health), or around a particular theme
(e.g., Social Welfare). These sources will not provide you with a comprehensive examination
of any one topic, but will provide you with a summary of hundreds of key terms, concepts,
theories or methods, depending on the focus of the encyclopaedia. Such sources may help
you formulate a handful of working definitions that you can use when discussing your key
terms or concepts. Most also include cross-references and suggestions for further reading.
The SAGE Encyclopedia of Qualitative Research Methods (Given, 2008), The Encyclopedia
of Social Networks (Barnett, 2011) and The Encyclopedia of Housing (Carswell, 2012) are
just a few examples.
02_Aurini_et_al_Ch_02.indd 13
3/16/2016 6:22:19 PM
14
jump starting your qualitative research project
Quick tip: So many books, so little time …
Despite the potential benefits, if you are on a tight timeline (e.g., a proposal deadline) you may
need to initially limit the number of books you read since one book may take as much time as
reading five or six articles on your topic. We are certainly not trying to discourage you from
reading books on your topic, particularly classic, well-cited or award winning books! We are
just noting that if you have a tight timeline, decisions will have to be made. To help you make
such decisions, there are several sources to help you generate a list of ‘must read’ books:
••
••
••
Book reviews: Read book reviews published in academic journals. There are also academic
journals specifically devoted to book reviews. Contemporary Sociology is just one example.
You should never take any one review as the ‘final word’ unless of course the reviewer is
someone you trust. However, a good book review will provide you with a basic summary of
the book and constructive criticism that is grounded within the larger literature.
Well-cited books: Read the handful of books that seem to be continuously cited by
known experts on your topic, including books that are controversial or that have
received a lot of media attention. Reviewing the books (and journal articles for that
matter) that are cited in the academic literature is a good place to start.
Recognized books: Read books on your topic that have been recognized in some
special way (e.g., an award by your discipline’s professional association). You should
also consider books on your topic that have been featured at recent conferences (e.g.,
author meets critic).
Professional reports
Professional reports include published research, theory, review and working papers. Most
government agencies, think tanks, professional associations, advocacy groups or armslength research consortiums produce professional reports that are widely available to the
public online. Examples of such government bodies or organizations include UNESCO,
WHO, the US Census Bureau, and the Ontario Ministry of Education. All of these agencies
post online research articles, executive summaries or press releases that are chock full of
original and secondary data, policy recommendations, and literature reviews.
Now what? How to use the literature to conceptualize
Key takeaways
••
••
••
••
02_Aurini_et_al_Ch_02.indd 14
First identify key theories, terminologies, concepts, methods, data and interpretations presented in
the literature.
Second identify what is not known, missing or problematic in the literature.
Unless you are already very well versed in the literature, your initial review will require a lot of time.
An ongoing ‘small-c’ critical examination of the literature is essential.
3/16/2016 6:22:19 PM
how to conceptualize research
15
The literature, when used properly, can be a powerful conceptualization tool and can. help
you identify theories, terminologies or concepts, methods, or data (Maxwell, 2005: 55).
In Table 2.2 we present key questions to get you thinking about what is known in the
literature (column one). Once you have identified the key questions, theories and concepts
that dominate the literature on your topic, you can start to identify what is not known,
problematic or missing (column two) in a manner that will not only aid in conceptualization, but is critical for developing an informed literature review. In short, these are
questions you will need to answer at some point along your journey. Addressing these
questions early on has additional benefits, most notably when you are ready to start your
literature review. As Maxwell (2013: 40) cautions, a literature review is a ‘dangerously misleading term’. Literature reviews that simply summarize or provide an overview of the
existing literature tend to be descriptive or merely parrot what others have already said
(e.g., repeating the limitations of a particular theory or method). This approach also tends to
be only superficially connected to your project and research questions. By asking and answering the questions in Table 2.2, you will be in good shape to start to develop an original
conceptual framework.
Steps
1.
2.
3.
4.
Search the literature on your topic (see sources above).
First identify key theories, terminologies, concepts, methods, data and interpretations presented
in the literature. Second identify what is not known, missing or problematic in the literature (see
Table 2.2).
Verify that your rendering of the literature is correct. Speak to your supervisor and committee
members. Return to your library search engines (e.g., JSTOR) and plug in key terms that relate
to what you have identified as unknown, missing or problematic just to be sure that you have not
missed an important article or stream of the literature.
Discussed in detail below, start to narrow in on the one or two ‘holes’ that you have identified to
construct your research problem and research questions.
Table 2.2 How to use the literature to conceptualize
What is known?
What is not known, problematic or missing?
What questions have been asked
about my topic?
•• What questions have not been asked on my topic?
•• Is there a time, geography, or location dimension to these
questions and if so, what would happen if I altered it?
•• What would happen if I turned dominant questions around?
(e.g., rather than ask why there are so many high school
drop-outs, ask why there are not more)
•• What if I turned positive questions into negative questions (or
negative into positive)? (e.g., so rather than asking how drop-outs
and graduates are different, ask how they are not different)
(Continued)
02_Aurini_et_al_Ch_02.indd 15
3/16/2016 6:22:20 PM
16
jump starting your qualitative research project
Table 2.2 (Continued)
What is known?
What is not known, problematic or missing?
What major theories have been
used to examine my topic?
•• Do these theories adequately capture the phenomenon under
study?
•• Are there other possible theories that should be considered?
What major concepts have been
used to examine my topic?
•• Do these concepts adequately capture the phenomenon under
study?
•• Are there other possible concepts that should be considered?
How have concepts been
defined?
•• Are there other possible definitions?
•• Are there problems with current definitions?
How have they been measured?
•• Are there other possible ways concepts could have been measured?
•• Are there problems with how concepts have been measured?
What kinds of data have been
used to examine my topic?
•• Are there other possible sources of data?
•• Are there problems with the data that have been used?
What concepts, ideas or
relationships tend to be in the
foreground and background?
•• Should a particular concept be given more or less weight?
•• What would happen if I switched the foreground and background?
What are the dominant
interpretations or findings?
•• Do the dominant interpretations make sense?
•• Is there a reasonable connection between the data and
interpretations?
What relationships have been
examined?
•• Are there other relationships that could be examined?
•• Are the relationships currently under study still the most
important, or should we consider new ones?
What has been the context?
•• Is the context of my study the same?
•• Is the context of my study different?
•• Has the context changed?
What are the major debates on
my topic?
•• Have these debates limited the scholarship on my topic in a
particular manner?
•• Does one side appear to have more credibility?
•• Do the debates focus on the data, theories, interpretations or
some combination of the three?
How have others justified their
study or its contributions?
•• Can I use their rationales (with or without some tweaking) to
justify my study and its contributions?
What do others have to say?
•• Do their findings confirm or disconfirm research from my
discipline?
•• What can I learn or take away from their concepts, data, or
interpretations?
What frameworks, theories or
data am I most comfortable
using to study my topic?
•• What alterative frameworks, theories or data are available on my
topic?
•• How would critics of my approach, or scholars using alternative
frameworks, theories or data examine my topic?
Some researchers may warn you about the dangers of ‘ideological hegemony’ generated
from examining the existing literature too closely (Becker, 1986). And it is true, if you
stick only to ‘what is known’ you may limit your ability to see your topic in a new light.
02_Aurini_et_al_Ch_02.indd 16
3/16/2016 6:22:20 PM
how to conceptualize research
17
Importantly, if you cannot demonstrate how your study addresses an unanswered problem
in the literature, then your study will be of little value to your target audience.
However, we argue that a comprehensive understanding and an ongoing ‘small-c’ critical examination of the existing literature will allow you to more confidently represent
‘what is not known, problematic or missing’ in a manner that will increase your chances of
‘inspect[ing] competing ways of talking about the same subject matter’ (Becker, 1986: 149).
Equally important is that using the literature in the spirit of conceptualization does not
marry a researcher to a particular approach since it is more of a question of what or how
you use the literature, rather than whether you should read the literature in the first place.
Primary: Using raw data
Key takeaways
••
••
••
Examine raw data produced by, for or about the group, organization or event of interest.
Consider how these data or presentation of the literature may be used as data in their own right.
Consider conducting a small pilot project, even at very early stages of the project.
The use of primary sources of data is not limited to the ‘data collection’ phase of a project.
There are two main sources of primary data that are worth considering for conceptualization
purposes. The first source is raw data produced by, for or about the group, organization or event
of interest. Data include online materials, including websites, textbooks, archival materials such
as diaries or pictures, online videos, media reports and magazines. Beyond reviewing primary
data for conceptualization purposes, you can also consider how these data may capture important dimensions of your topic and be used as data in their own right. Meyer et al. (2010), for
example, mapped the growing presence of human rights issues in social science textbooks.
Similarly, Wrigley (1989) conducted a content analysis of over 1,000 articles from popular
literature targeted at parents to understand changing attitudes about children’s development.
You may also want to consider using academic and professional reports as a primary source
of data. Mizruchi and Fein (1999), for example, reviewed key journal articles to examine the
social construction of knowledge. Similarly, Colquitt and Zapata-Phelan (2007) examined
five decades of articles published in a highly influential journal, The Academy of Management
Journal, to develop a taxonomy of the theoretical contributions to the field.
The second source of primary data is raw data that you collect or produce, sometimes referred
to as a ‘pilot project’. Some preliminary fieldwork, interviews or analysis of the materials is an
excellent way to get your feet wet and to work out the direction and focus of your project. Pilot
projects are not only incredibly important to work out key data collection instruments (e.g., an
interview schedule) but can fundamentally shape the scope and direction of a project. You will
need to consider this option with your institution’s research ethics board in mind.
02_Aurini_et_al_Ch_02.indd 17
3/16/2016 6:22:20 PM
18
jump starting your qualitative research project
Researcher driven
Key takeaway
••
Use brainstorming exercises at the early stages of conceptualization to articulate what is known about
a topic, and to identify relationships, processes, concepts or missing information.
Researcher driven sources includes a variety of brainstorming exercises that you develop to generate ideas. Below we present two such ideas, but there are certainly other strategies available.
Early mapping: Mind, concept and literature techniques
‘Mapping’ is routinely used in qualitative research, particularly at the beginning stages
of data analysis. Mapping is a ‘graphical tool for organizing and representing knowledge’
(Wheeldon, 2010: 90). Such visual aids can serve as a powerful tool at many stages of a project by allowing (or forcing) researchers to classify and organize information in manageable
chunks. Faced with mountains of data, including interview transcripts, field notes, documents or pictures and videos, researchers use this technique to sketch-out relationships,
sense-making or organizational processes, and the linkage between data and concept or
theoretical ideas. Importantly, mapping allows researchers to embed these understandings
within a broader contextual framework. Mapping can also encourage researchers to take a
‘reflexive approach to how we are classifying’ (Hart, 1998: 143). Ideally, mapping requires
researchers to think about their classification schemes, and the underlying logic that guides
their decision-making.
For our purposes in this chapter, we articulate the benefits of what we refer to as ‘early
mapping’ techniques for conceptualization. In particular, early mapping can also be used
to develop a research project by allowing researchers to articulate what is known about
the topic, and theorize possible or preliminary relationships, processes or concepts (Daley,
2004; Novak and Gowan, 1984; Novak and Cañas, 2006). Below, we present three kinds of
mapping techniques: Mind and Concept Mapping and Literature Mapping (Table 2.3).
Mind and concept mapping
Though similar, researchers make a distinction between ‘mind’ and ‘concept’ mapping
techniques. Mind maps are usually organized around one central idea, concept or theme,
and tend to be more informal and flexible (Buzan and Buzan, 2000). Concept mapping by
contrast is more structured, and often includes multiple ideas, concepts or themes as well as
people, groups or organizations. Concept maps are developed with a good understanding
of the context in which they will be used.
We caution against getting too bogged down about which method is better or whether
you are doing either one ‘perfectly’ at the conceptualization stage. There are entire books
02_Aurini_et_al_Ch_02.indd 18
3/16/2016 6:22:20 PM
how to conceptualize research
19
written about doing both, and that detail various ways to get the job done (e.g., Kane and
Trochim, 2007). We see it as an exercise in getting the pieces of the puzzle down on paper,
developing a good grasp on the key dimensions related to your project, and thinking about
possible puzzles that still need to be answered (Table 2.3). You will likely need to rework
your mind or concept maps several times as your ideas develop.
Mind maps
Mind maps are perfect for researchers who are newer to a topic. Mind maps allow researchers
to get a handle on the central characteristics, themes or concepts.
Mind maps have the following characteristics:
••
••
••
••
••
Visual representation of key themes, concepts, ideas, organizations, people, units or theories.
Built around one central idea or theme, as a flow chart or a as ‘tree’ diagram (Miles and
Huberman, 1994).
The use of simple lines to articulate connections.
The potential to use different shapes to symbolize different components (e.g., using squares
for organizations; circles for people) or different emphases (e.g., using squares for components
directly related to the core; circles for components on the periphery).
Flexible and less structured.
Concept maps
Concept maps are suitable for researchers who have a reasonable grasp of the literature or
topic under study. Concept maps are more structured and multifaceted, and based on an
understanding of the context that they will be used in (Novak and Cañas, 2006). Concept
mapping includes structuring statements, words, and people, groups or organizations based
on either what is known or theorized about the topic of interest. Concepts maps also include
words, symbols and shapes to explain the nature or strength of relationships between two
or more units. Rather than flowing from one concept or idea, concept maps represent multiple start points which may or may not be related to every other unit.
Concept maps have the following characteristics (Figure 2.1):
••
••
••
••
••
••
A multi-hierarchical representation of information. Hierarchies may be based on relative importance, a process, or moving from the general to the specific.
‘Information’ may include not only key ideas, concepts, characteristics and people, groups or
organizations, but also examples.
The use of boxes, circles or other shapes to differentiate various kinds of information (e.g.,
circles to represent theories and boxes to represent concepts).
The use of cross-links which include simple lines, directional arrows or circles to articulate a
relationship between the various characteristics, outcomes and concepts/ideas or units.
The use of linking words (e.g., more, less), shapes (e.g., squares for countries, circles for economic policies) or symbols (e.g., %, +) to explain or elaborate on a particular relationship.
The structure of the concept map and the nature of the relationships are context dependent.
02_Aurini_et_al_Ch_02.indd 19
3/16/2016 6:22:20 PM
02_Aurini_et_al_Ch_02.indd 20
3/16/2016 6:22:20 PM
Objects
(Things)
Words
begins
with
with
Symbols
Infants
begin
with
Labeled
are
connected
using
Creativity
aids
in
used to
form
needed
to see
Experts
Cognitive
Structure
Effective
Learning
Effective
Teaching
Different
Map Segments
between
Interrelationships
show
Crosslinks
may be
constructed in
Units
of Meaning
are
necessary
for
Propositions
is
needed to
answer
Organized
Knowledge
especially
with
Hierarchically
Structured
are
Linking
Words
is
comprised of
includes
Social
e.g.
Personal
Context
Dependent
are
“Focus
Question(s)”
SOURCE: ‘A Summary of the Literature Pertaining to the Use of Concept Mapping Techniques and Technologies for Education and Performance Support.’ 2003. http://www.
ihmc.us/users/acanas/Publications/ConceptMapLitReview/IHMC%20Literature%20Review%20on%20Concept%20Mapping.pdf
Figure 2.1 A concept map of concept maps
Events
(Happenings)
in
Perceived
Regularities
or Patterns
are
Concepts
add to
Associated
Feelings or Affect
help to
answer
represent
Concept Maps
how to conceptualize research
21
Table 2.3 General steps to mind mapping and concept mapping
Steps
Example
1
You are interested in ‘school readiness’, a term used to
describe children’s literacy, numeracy and socio-emotional
development just before they start school. The research
that you have reviewed documents the antecedents of
school readiness, and its consequences to children’s
academic achievement.
Start with a central theme
Write down all of the characteristics,
people, organizations and so forth
associated with the central theme
You start to develop a list that you rework into several
categories or chunks of information:
Antecedents of school readiness:
Family socioeconomic status – parent education; parent
occupation
Parent involvement/contact
Parenting philosophy
Social, family or other support/networks
Neighbourhood cond
