Schedule: 2009-09-10 (16:30 - 18:00)
Poster Presentations and Commercial Exhibition (Exhibition Hall)

Title: A Decision Matrix for the Use of Mapping and Mapping Software
Authors: Lawrie Hunter
Abstract: There are a great number of mapping software products now available, for the creation of many kinds of map. The most common varieties of map are mind maps, concept maps and argument maps. This richness of offerings, along with task design considerations and the practical concerns of platform, web-readiness, cost and usability, present the course designer with a complex set of considerations.

This poster provides the program designer with a heuristic tool for mapping-related decision making, focusing on the primary issues of (1) map type, (2) content genre and (3) information-related structure. The issues presented in graphical juxtaposition in the poster are described briefly below.

(1) The choice of map type determines the linguistic or information structures which may be mapped. Mind maps (á la Tony Buzan) consist of dyads or trees with all links being associations, undifferentiated and thus masked in vagueness. Hunter's information structure maps have graphically (not textually) differentiated links, with dyad representation confined to the sentence/paragraph level. Novakian concept maps have textually differentiated links, with ongoing debate as to the syntactic range of dyad representation. Argument maps have textually signaled rhetorical devices for links, with dyad content restrained to argument moves. Rhetorical Structure Theory maps have textually signaled rhetorical devices for links, with dyads representing any of (a supposedly exhaustive) 38 rhetorical devices.

(2) Content genre here is taken to consist of essential information, background information and persuasive/poetic rhetoric. This is particularly approachable in the case of informal sci-tech reporting, since in this type of writing essential information is rather easily identified.

(3) The term information-related structures here refers to
(a) rhetorical structures (e.g. argument; e.g. situation-problem-solution-evaluation);
(b) information organization (e.g. general to specific); and
(c) information structures (at the sentence level, identified by Hunter as description, classification, comparison, sequence and cause-effect).

Other more immediately evaluated design issues include the following.
(1) Target content: the linguistic forms desired in the language output generated by the learner when processing the map. Node content refers to the linguistic units which constitute allowable node text. Dyad syntactics refer to the question as to whether a dyad should lend itself to simple reading as a sentence.

(2) Learner profile: learning style; affinity for graphical depictions of information; and experience with a variety of rhetorical styles in the second language.

(3) Learner-task-instructor interface: the way in which the map will be used as an artefact of information or communication. Cognitive weight indicates the change in cognitive load imposed by the introduction of a mapping device in the task/communication scenario. If cognitive weight is a negative value, the use of mapping has reduced cognitive load. Usability, as in the case of web usability, refers to efficiency, effectiveness and appeal of the mapping as a means to achieving a communicative goal. Key computer related issues are platform, webbability and cost.
Keywords: concept mapping, mapping software, map type, information structure, content genre

Main topic: Computer Mediated Communication (CMC)

Biodata: Lawrie Hunter is a professor at Kochi University of Technology. His infostructure maps provide the underlying structure of "Critical Thinking" (Greene & Hunter, Asahi Press 2002) and "Thinking in English" (Hunter, Cengage 2008). His recent work is with link content constraint for target language control. http://www.lawriehunter.com
Type of presentation Poster

Paper category (Other)

Target educational sector Higher education

Language of delivery English

EU-funded project No

Schedule:	2009-09-10 (16:30 - 18:00) Poster Presentations and Commercial Exhibition (Exhibition Hall)
Title:	A Decision Matrix for the Use of Mapping and Mapping Software
Authors:	Lawrie Hunter
Abstract:	There are a great number of mapping software products now available, for the creation of many kinds of map. The most common varieties of map are mind maps, concept maps and argument maps. This richness of offerings, along with task design considerations and the practical concerns of platform, web-readiness, cost and usability, present the course designer with a complex set of considerations. This poster provides the program designer with a heuristic tool for mapping-related decision making, focusing on the primary issues of (1) map type, (2) content genre and (3) information-related structure. The issues presented in graphical juxtaposition in the poster are described briefly below. (1) The choice of map type determines the linguistic or information structures which may be mapped. Mind maps (á la Tony Buzan) consist of dyads or trees with all links being associations, undifferentiated and thus masked in vagueness. Hunter's information structure maps have graphically (not textually) differentiated links, with dyad representation confined to the sentence/paragraph level. Novakian concept maps have textually differentiated links, with ongoing debate as to the syntactic range of dyad representation. Argument maps have textually signaled rhetorical devices for links, with dyad content restrained to argument moves. Rhetorical Structure Theory maps have textually signaled rhetorical devices for links, with dyads representing any of (a supposedly exhaustive) 38 rhetorical devices. (2) Content genre here is taken to consist of essential information, background information and persuasive/poetic rhetoric. This is particularly approachable in the case of informal sci-tech reporting, since in this type of writing essential information is rather easily identified. (3) The term information-related structures here refers to (a) rhetorical structures (e.g. argument; e.g. situation-problem-solution-evaluation); (b) information organization (e.g. general to specific); and (c) information structures (at the sentence level, identified by Hunter as description, classification, comparison, sequence and cause-effect). Other more immediately evaluated design issues include the following. (1) Target content: the linguistic forms desired in the language output generated by the learner when processing the map. Node content refers to the linguistic units which constitute allowable node text. Dyad syntactics refer to the question as to whether a dyad should lend itself to simple reading as a sentence. (2) Learner profile: learning style; affinity for graphical depictions of information; and experience with a variety of rhetorical styles in the second language. (3) Learner-task-instructor interface: the way in which the map will be used as an artefact of information or communication. Cognitive weight indicates the change in cognitive load imposed by the introduction of a mapping device in the task/communication scenario. If cognitive weight is a negative value, the use of mapping has reduced cognitive load. Usability, as in the case of web usability, refers to efficiency, effectiveness and appeal of the mapping as a means to achieving a communicative goal. Key computer related issues are platform, webbability and cost.
Keywords:	concept mapping, mapping software, map type, information structure, content genre
Main topic:	Computer Mediated Communication (CMC)
Biodata:	Lawrie Hunter is a professor at Kochi University of Technology. His infostructure maps provide the underlying structure of "Critical Thinking" (Greene & Hunter, Asahi Press 2002) and "Thinking in English" (Hunter, Cengage 2008). His recent work is with link content constraint for target language control. http://www.lawriehunter.com
Type of presentation	Poster
Paper category	(Other)
Target educational sector	Higher education
Language of delivery	English
EU-funded project	No