Teach and/or support learning
Appropriate methods for teaching, learning and assessing in the subject area in the subject area and at the level of the academic programme
Concept maps are diagrams that show the relationships between ideas. They're made of concepts (usually in bubbles or boxes) connected by arrows or lines showing how they're related. In higher education, concept maps help students organise knowledge, see links between ideas, and build deeper understanding. Students can either study a completed map or create one themselves. This method is used in lectures, assignments, or group projects to boost learning.
The best meta-analysis (Schroeder et al., 2017) found that using concept maps improves learning outcomes moderately overall ➕➕➕➕. Constructing maps has a stronger effect (g = 0.72) than studying them (g = 0.43) ➕➕➕➕. Maps worked well across subject areas, including STEM and non-STEM domains ➕➕➕➕. Concept maps also worked better than outlines or lists ➕➕➕ and benefited students with lower prior knowledge more — probably because they reduce cognitive load ➕➕➕.
An earlier, well-cited meta-analysis by Nesbit and Adesope (2006) found similar results, with a large effect for constructing maps (g = 0.82) ➕➕➕➕➕ and a smaller but still significant effect for studying them (g = 0.37) ➕➕➕. Animated maps showed especially strong effects, although based on a small number of studies ➕➕➕.
Qualitative work (Kinchin et al., 2000) also shows that the structure of maps can reflect levels of student understanding — “spoke” and “chain” maps show surface understanding, while “net” maps show deeper integration of ideas.
This summary is based on two major meta-analyses and one qualitative synthesis. The most rigorous meta-analysis (Schroeder et al., 2017) reviewed 142 effect sizes across over 11,000 students and applied moderator analysis, meeting high GRADE standards (➕➕➕➕) for quality. The earlier meta-analysis by Nesbit and Adesope (2006) reviewed 67 effect sizes from 5,818 learners and also used rigorous methods (➕➕➕). The Kinchin et al. (2000) study provided detailed qualitative insights into how concept maps reflect conceptual understanding but was not a meta-analysis. Together, these sources provide strong and consistent evidence about the impact and use of concept mapping in higher education.
Abrami, P. C., Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Wade, A., Surkes, M. A., Tamim, R., & Zhang, D. (2008). Instructional interventions affecting critical thinking skills and dispositions: A stage 1 meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 78(4), 1102–1134. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654308326084
Kinchin, I. M., Hay, D. B., & Adams, A. (2000). How a qualitative approach to concept map analysis can be used to aid learning by illustrating patterns of conceptual development. Educational Research, 42(1), 43–57. https://doi.org/10.1080/001318800363908
Nesbit, J. C., & Adesope, O. O. (2006). Learning with concept and knowledge maps: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 76(3), 413–448. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543076003413
Niu, L., Behar-Horenstein, L. S., & Garvan, C. W. (2013). Do instructional interventions influence college students’ critical thinking skills? A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 9, 114–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2012.12.002
Reale, M. C., Riche, D. M., Witt, B. A., Baker, W. L., & Peeters, M. J. (2018). Development of critical thinking in health professions education: A meta-analysis of longitudinal studies. Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning, 10(7), 826–833. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cptl.2018.04.019
Schroeder, N. L., Nesbit, J. C., Anguiano, C. J., & Adesope, O. O. (2018). Studying and constructing concept maps: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 30(2), 431–455. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-017-9403-9
Tiruneh, D. T., Verburgh, A., & Elen, J. (2014). Effectiveness of critical thinking instruction in higher education: A systematic review of intervention studies. Higher Education Studies, 4(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.5539/hes.v4n1p1
