CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 929Educational methodologies and cognitive developmentInnovative Teaching and Learning MethodsScience Education and Pedagogy

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 64 of the 65 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Meaningful learning: The essential factor for conceptual change in limited or inappropriate propositional hierarchies leading to empowerment of learners

Open access
Novak, Joseph D.·2002·Science Education
DOI 10.1002/sce.10032
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

The construction and reconstruction of meanings by learners requires that they actively seek to integrate new knowledge with knowledge already in their cognitive structure. Ausubel's assimilation theory of cognitive learning has been shown to be effective in guiding research and instructional design to facilitate meaningful learning (Ausubel, The psychology of meaningful verbal learning, New York: Grune and Stratton, 1963; Educational psychology: A cognitive view, New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1968; The acquisition and retention of knowledge, Dordrecht: Kluwer, 2000). Gowin's Vee heuristic has been employed effectively to aid teachers and students in understanding the constructed nature of knowledge (Gowin, Educating, Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1981). “Situated learning” occurs when learning is by rote or at a lower level of meaningful learning. Concept mapping has been used effectively to aid meaningful learning with resulting modification of student's knowledge structures. When these knowledge structures are limited or faulty in some way, they may be referred to as Limited or Inappropriate Propositional Hierarchies (LIPH's). Conceptual change, or more accurately conceptual reconstrution, requires meaningful learning to modify LIPH's. Collaborative group learning facilitates meaningful learning and new knowledge construction. World‐wide economic changes are forcing major changes in business and industry placing a premium on the power and value of knowledge and new knowledge production. These changes require changes in school and university education that centers on the nature and power of meaningful learning. New computer tools are available to facilitate teaching activities targeted at modifying LIPH's, and aiding meaningful learning in general. © 2002 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Sci Ed 86:548–571, 2002; Published online in Wiley Interscience (www.interscience.wiley.com). DOI 10.1002/sce.10032

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/sce.10032

Cites

64 of 64 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 65 references

1 of the 65 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 23

  1. Bartow S. T.(1981).Misconceptions in science concept learning. Unpublished MS Thesis Cornell University Ithaca NY.
  2. Chi M. T. H.(1994).Barriers to conceptual change in learning science concepts: A theoretical conjecture. Proceedings of the fifteenth annual cognitive science society conference Boulder CO.
  3. Edmondson K., 1992, The history and philosophy of science in science education, 253
  4. Feldsine J. E.Jr.(1987).Distinguishing student's misconceptions from alternative conceptual frameworks through construction of concept maps. In J. D. Novak (Ed.) Proceedings of the Second International Seminar on Misconceptions and Educational Strategies in Science and Mathematics. Ithaca NY: Dept. of Education Cornell University.
  5. Feldsine J. N.(1983).Concept mapping: A method for detection of possible student misconceptions. In H. Helm & J. D. Novak Proceedings of the international seminar on misconceptions in science and mathematics. Ithaca NY Department of Education Cornell University.
  6. Flavel J. H., 1973, In the nature of intelligence
  7. Fuata'i K. A.(1985).Use of vee maps and concept maps in learning form five mathematics. Unpublished M.S. Thesis Cornell University.
  8. Fuata'i K. A., 1998, Learning to solve mathematics problems through concept mapping and Vee mapping
  9. Gonzales F. M., 1993, Serie: Educacion y Futuro no. 18
  10. Gowin D. B., 1981, Educating
  11. Hassard J., 1992, Minds on science
  12. Helm H. & Novak J. D. (Eds.) (1983).Proceedings of the international seminar on misconceptions in science and mathematics. Department of Education Cornell University Ithaca NY.
  13. Macnamara J. T., 1982, Names for things: A study of human learning
  14. Novak J. D.(1983).Overview of the international seminar on misconceptions in science and mathematics. In H. Helm & J. D. Novak (Eds.) Proceedings of the international seminar on misconceptions in science and mathematics (pp.1–4).
  15. Novak J. D., 1994, A view on the current status of Ausubel's assimilation theory of learning, CADMO: Giornale Italiano di Pedagogia, Sperimentale, Didattica, Docimologia, Tecnologia dell'instruzione, 2, 7
  16. Novak J. D. &Iuli R. I.(1995).Meaningful learning as the foundation for constructivist epistemology. In F. Finley D. Allchin D. Rhees & S. Fifield (Eds.) Proceedings of the third international history philosophy and science teaching conference (Vol. 2 pp.873–896). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota.
  17. Novak J. D., 1990, Special issue: Concept mapping, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27, 921
  18. 1989, The Private Universe Project
  19. Sadler P. M., 2000, Assessing science understanding, 249
  20. Toulmin S., 1972, Human understanding
  21. von Glasersfeld E., 1984, The invented reality, 17
  22. 10.1037/11193-000 · DOI
  23. Waterman M. A., 1982, Use of scientific research reports to develop higher‐level cognitive skills, Journal of College Science Teaching, 11, 336

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 301–400 of 929

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Novak, J. D.
Affiliations
Cornell University (US)
Corresponding author
Novak, Joseph D.
ORCID
Novak, Joseph D.
Venue
Science Education
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2002-06-18
Volume
86
Issue
4
Pages
548-571
ISSN
  • 0036-8326 (ISSN-L)
  • 1098-237X
DOI
10.1002/sce.10032
OpenAlex
W2135814321
Cited by
914
References
65
Citations by year
2026: 27 · 2025: 26 · 2024: 27 · 2023: 68 · 2022: 43 · 2021: 38 · 2020: 55 · 2019: 60 · 2018: 53 · 2017: 42 · 2016: 51 · 2015: 53 · 2014: 63 · 2013: 44 · 2012: 45
FWCI
21.75
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor)
Locations
Science Education (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Educational methodologies and cognitive development
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
  • Social Sciences › Education › Science Education and Pedagogy
Keywords
meaningful learning, conceptual change, conceptual reconstruction, situated learning, concept mapping, knowledge construction, student empowerment, computer-assisted instruction

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review