- More in-depth exploration is needed to understand why the text-based cognitive tools helped construct arguments more than the concept map
- More research is needed to understand how the role of teaching experiences influence construction arguments


Limitation

Those with no experience constructed better arguments than those who did not 

Claremont Graduate University

- Kay and Klestskin’s multimedia learning resources (5-point Likert scale was used)
Usefulness
Ease of use
Helpfulness on collaboration 
Willingness to use  


Measurement 2 in "Text-Based Cognitive Tool Vs Concept Maps"

- Toulmin’s argumentation model
Measures five variables: 
Claim 
Warrant 
Evidence
Counter-reasoning
Rebuttal
- Inter-rater reliability was determined by having two researchers who graduated with a science education background and experience in argument constructions 

Measurement 1 in "Text-Based Cognitive Tool Vs Concept Maps"

Su, G., &amp; Long, T. (2021). Is the text-based cognitive tool more effective than the concept map on improving the pre-service teachers’ argumentation skills? Thinking Skills and Creativity, 41, 100862. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2021.100862 

Is the text-based cognitive tool more effective than the concept map on improving the pre-service teachers’ argumentation skills?

Pre-service teachers who used cognitive tool (Shimo) performed significantly better in constructing arguments than the pre-service teachers who used Visual Concept map (ProcessOn)

Pre-service Teachers’ Learning/ Constructing Arguments

Pre-service teachers reported that they prefer and are more willing to collaborate and use concept maps over text-based cognitive tools because concept mapping is capable of presenting their thought process

Learn Before

Related

Learn After