Conference IMCL2007
April 18 -20, 2007 Amman, Jordan
Concept Mapping for Knowledge Transfer in Conceptual Design Izuzi Marlia1, Ahmad Rafi 1 and Peter Woods 1
Multimedia University_1
Key words: Concept Mapping, Knowledge Transfer, Conceptual Design, Interactive Multimedia Abstract: Content development for teaching and learning using interactive multimedia is very demanding nowadays as this method allows a multi-disciplinary, conceptual, processbased, collaborative and iterative environment. Research has shown that the knowledge developed in the design process is rarely captured in a formal way for the benefit of others. Thus the need to identify, capture, represent, transfer and sharing the knowledge are vital. One of the tools that serve this purpose is Concept Map (CM). CM has been used as an externalization tool, a visualization tool and a learning tool in various disciplines. The research will discuss the potential of CM as a vehicle for externalizing “internal” expert knowledge and allowing knowledge to be examined, refined, and re-used in interactive multimedia development.
1 Introduction The demand for interactive content in general has developed interest in teaching- and trainingrelated courses into interactive multimedia content and technology. Most of these courses are available in schools of design, thus marks as another emerging domain within design learning and practices. These multimedia-driven courses, however, require additional skills to better understand not only on the technology but effective ways of best utilising these tools especially to balance between propositional and procedural knowledge. In fact, the whole development phases can be viewed as a combination of a design process, a system development and a creative process. Thus, learning and teaching in design and technology education assures challenging environment for both educators and learners. Lawson (1990) suggested that learners in design and technology should own a good understanding of the technology in its field, a well-developed aesthetic appreciation, and an understanding of the project users’ needs. The development process of interactive application is always collaborative in nature. It combines people from various skills and knowledge - designers, programmers, stakeholders, marketing, user and artist - just to name a few. Thus, learners (designers) in design and technology need a range of abilities and skills - the same abilities as designers and technologists in real life do (Petrina, n.d.). As a result, the expectation of learner’s knowledge and skills will be increasing. “Designers” of interactive application are not only referred to those whom responsible for the interface design or aesthetic direction but involves in designing and developing the interactive part of the application. With numerous knowledge from various disciplines required, managing what one know and what one do not know is very crucial in today’s learning environment. 1(12)
Conference IMCL2007
April 18 -20, 2007 Amman, Jordan
As Knowledge Management (KM) is expending, colleges and universities have significant opportunities to apply KM practice to support every part of their mission (Kidwell, Linde and Johnson, 2000). While one part of KM focuses on technology to provide feasible infrastructure for managing knowledge, the other part of KM focuses in harnessing human capital - a ‘people-focused’. Human in this case is the central ‘actor’ in organizations and society (Wiig, 2004). As such, many practitioners show their interest in Personal Knowledge Management (PKM) as individual’s tool to approach, organize, integrate (Frand & Lippincott, 2005), retrieve, evaluate/access, analyze, present, secure and collaborate around information (Rouser and Dorsey, 2000). It is obvious that designer’s knowledge and understanding often recites ‘inside’ their mind and tacit in nature. Though some thinking output can be visualized in sketches, visualization, written or verbal, the connection and real meaning behind one conceptual idea is difficult to share or reveal. This situation sometimes may lead to conflicting of understanding where mismatch of ideation and output. One possible reason can be concluded that designer’s knowledge is difficult to share by others because they are not accessible and mostly in the form of tacit knowledge. Study has shown that designers create new knowledge and deal with a high degree of tacit knowledge daily (A.Rahman KAA, 2005). Tacit knowledge itself is one of the major issues in KM where the challenges lie on how to make tacit knowledge, which is invisible and intangible into visible and concrete (Rodhain, n.d). Similarly, Ikujiro Nonaka believes that tacit knowledge is the most important basis for the generation of new knowledge and the key to knowledge creation (as cited in Marwick, 2001). Knowledge sharing within communities or between communities can only happen when the socially embedded tacit knowledge is-at least partly-converted into explicit knowledge (Hemmeke and Stary, n.d). Therefore, externalization tool is needed to facilitate this transformation (Fisher, Wandersee and Wideman, 2000). One of the tools that serve this purpose is Concept Mapping (CM) or Cognitive Mapping. CM in KM can be used to transform tacit knowledge into explicit knowledge (Rodhain, n.d). In a learning context, CM is used as a learning tool for learners to visualise, review, capture or develop knowledge (Marshall et.al., 2005). In addition, it is used as PKM visualization tools that support the capture, organization, and presentation of ideas (represented in the form of concepts and relations), searching, zooming and an extensive list of navigational features (Tsui, n.d). Some studies propose conceptual mapping as a vehicle for externalizing “internal” expert knowledge, to allow knowledge to be examined, refined, and reused (Novak and Cañas, 2006). The research will investigate the use of CM to support knowledge transfer in conceptual design of interactive application.
2 Problem Statement In every design process, the most difficult and important process is to conceptualize what we want to create and articulate why we want to do so (Preece, Rogers & Sharp, 2002). A conceptual design represents the structure of the system, as perceived by the user (deltamethod.net). This process includes the construction of conceptual models, that is “ a description of the proposed system in terms of set of integrated ideas and concepts about what it should do, behave and look like, that will be understandable by the users in the manner intended” (Preece, Rogers & Sharp, 2002). Therefore, it is important to make sure a conceptual design is explicit and accessible. A concept itself is an abstract idea or a mental symbol, which are also the basic elements of proposition understanding. Among the skills needed for designers and technologist to deal with conceptual understanding are convergent reasoning and divergent 2(12)
Conference IMCL2007
April 18 -20, 2007 Amman, Jordan
reasoning. Convergent reasoning often refers to synthesis and includes specific to general inductive reasoning while divergent reasoning refers to analysis, usually engages general to specific deductive reasoning (Petrina, n.d). Additionally, designers need visual literacy that allows thinking, understanding, exploring and communicating physical concept. Visual literacy described as the ability to look at visual information with perception (pbs.org) and the ability to transform thoughts and information into images, including the thinking and communication. Effective visual thinking begins with having externalization tools that negotiates between formulating, verifying and modifying representation of thought (Anderson & Lily, 2004). This activity helps in making a cognitive connection to both purposeful and discovered information (Anderson & Lily, 2004). As majority of our brain’s activity deals with processing and analyzing visual images (Remo, Spescha & Meier, 2005), knowledge then needs to be represented so it may be easy to design mechanisms to capture, organize and communicate that knowledge (Acosta, Collazos & Guerrero, 2004). From these various mapping forms, concept maps have enjoyed the greatest benefits of ongoing research and iterative development (Fisher, Wandersee & Wideman, 2000). Originally Joseph Novak introduced CM in 1970s as a learning tool for K - 12 students, based on Ausubel’s learning theory on building connection between ideas. It is also one of the complex mapping techniques available (Eppler, 2001). CM theory, thus has the potential to demonstrate a complex knowledge domain in systematic and structured form, foster creative thinking and collaboration, and has been proven successful in many much usage in learning. In ‘design’ or ‘creating’ in that sense, designers or creator spent more times and deals with he or her thinking internally before reaching to the final output. Knowledge developed during a design project often traps within individual designers and their artefacts due to the oral nature of the design process. The design process itself, always contributes to new development of product, thus foster new knowledge in many ways (Rahman, Sugiyama & Watanabe 2001). In relation to the increasing demand of interaction designers and design research, Zimmerman, Forlizzi and Evenson (2004) discussed the need to share knowledge generated by interaction designers with others. Designers also usually conduct collaborative discussions and verbal critiques that influence the design of the final artefact with others. However, this knowledge is rarely captured in a formal way for the benefit of others (Zimmerman, Forlizzi and Evenson, 2004). Clearly, the need for formal captured form of design knowledge is needed in order to make it accessible by others.
3 Literature Review 3.1 Knowledge and Knowledge Management (KM) Human integrate knowledge in three processes; acquired, articulate and integrate where acquiring, articulating and integrating knowledge are active processes. Knowledge thus, is both process and product of creative action (Petrina,n.d.). KM on the other hand, defined as a “system and managerial approach to collecting, processing and organizing enterprise-specific knowledge assets”. Alternatively, Eppler (2001) argued that knowledge management not only be viewed as a new perspective of information management problems but as a field that can provide new ways of improving knowledge-incentives process, by going beyond the mere administration of electronic information and help individuals make information actionable in new context, connect it with previous experiences, identify relevant experts, and enable organizations-wide learning processes. Remo, Spescha and Meier’s (2005) viewed KM as a dynamic entity that is changeable and adaptive to its context; as a) an object which aims to build information repositories, b) a process where the focus is on optimizing the knowledgeintense processes e.g. identifying, creating and sharing knowledge, c) a capability that focuses 3(12)
Conference IMCL2007
April 18 -20, 2007 Amman, Jordan
on the strategic advantage of knowledge, to build core competencies, and to create intellectual capital, d) a condition of access to information, then KM will focus on methods to identify, retrieve, and gain access to information and 5) a state of knowing and understanding where KM supports individuals to expand their knowledge. 3.2
Knowledge Process
A range of studies identified KM as a “process” which brings introduction to various process models and stages. Developing multimedia is certainly a “process” by itself. It can be viewed as a system development (software engineering), a design process (soft-design) or a combination of both that refers to as a process-based. Many developers adopted lifecycles models in establishing the activities and phases in the developments, such as the waterfall lifecycle model, the spiral lifecycle model, rapid application development (RAD), the star lifecycle model, usability engineering lifecycle (Preece, Rogers & Sharp, 2002), and a preproduction, production and post-production approach from film development. This is due to the distinct nature of multimedia applications: that different approaches are suitable for different types of applications and the differing backgrounds of developers (Lang & Barry, 2001). However, many practitioners prefer to use their own approach to design development due to the reason that designers adopt different approaches to different design situations (Lawson, 1990). Despite the divergence approach adopted, the foundation of every design works remain the same- that design is created for people use, design is a process, creative, collaborative in nature and iterative (Sheneiderman, 2002; Preece, Rogers & Sharp, 2002; Khalid 2005; Khalid, Woods & Rafi, 2006; Marlia & Rafi, 2006). On the other hand, the knowledge spiral or SECI Model by Nonaka accommodates the conversion process of tacit and explicit knowledge. The knowledge transfer as a spiral process where each type of knowledge can be converted; Socialization, Externalization, Combination and Internalization. The SECI model was adopted by Rahman (2005) to study the attitudes of Malaysian’s designers towards knowledge conversion. The result has shown a positive dependency that knowledge upgraded through the spiral while moving through the design cycle. In the context of learning, Khalid, Woods and Rafi (2006) have identified the learning activities in multimedia development process that involved in knowledge spiral model as summarized in Table 1: Knowledge Process Socialization Externalization Combination Internalization
Learning Activities Learners communicating and exchanging their idea verbally, either with peers or teachers. Learners presented their understanding in explicit artefacts – sketches, photographs, written, video, diagram and concept mapping. Explicit artefacts are use as a mean of communication, discussion and exchanging ideas between teachers and learners and between learners and learners. Verbal critique and formative evaluation conducted, the feedback will help learners to improvised and make decision on their design
Table 1: SECI model and learning activities in multimedia development process.
3.3
Knowledge Mapping and Visualization
Visualization is a process of mentally constructing, shaping and understanding information and the ability to externally communicate it that benefits in a method for thinking, conceiving, exploring and proposing ideas (Anderson & Lily, 2004). The groundwork of knowledge visualization can be summarized as a combination of multiple disciplines; graphic design, semiology and linguistics, philosophy of knowledge, human-computer interaction, visual art, 4(12)
Conference IMCL2007
April 18 -20, 2007 Amman, Jordan
cartography, cognitive psychology, cognitive science and information graphics (Judelman, 2004). Burkhard (2004a; 2004b; 2004c) structured the visualization methods into seven main groups that are derived from the practice of architects to visually transfer knowledge (as cited in Remo, Spescha & Meier, 2005); sketches, diagrams, images, maps, objects, interactive visualizations, and stories. Similarly, the development of knowledge mapping has originated independently in many different times and in many different contexts (Fisher, Wandersee & Wideman, 2000). Galloway (n.d) defined mapping as merely an enabler –a vehicle for expressing and releasing the knowledge, creativity, and energy that lies within every group (as cited in Eppler, 2001). The history on knowledge mapping started in 1950s when Gordon Pask studied the Map in conversation (AI) to represent the ideas that emerged in student conversation and to show connection between ideas. From these various mapping forms, concept maps and SemNet® have enjoyed the greatest benefits of ongoing research and iterative development (Fisher, Wandersee & Wideman, 2000). In the context of learning, visual representations of knowledge have been proposed as having the potential to enhance student learning by providing students with multiple representations of knowledge (Kennedy, 2002). Visual mapping of concepts and ideas are used as a part of the design and development tools for graphic and interface designers (drawings and sketches), media producers (story boards) and programmers (flowcharts) and at the same time function as a thinking tool (Kennedy, 2002). Barker and Giller (2002) suggested that the use of visual mapping and formative evaluation in the development phases could alleviate many potential design problems among members (as cited in Kennedy, 2002). Kennedy (2002) explained the potential of using concept mapping to support team communication, achieve congruence of understanding amongst team members both the conceptual needs of the content domain and issues of design in design and development phases in Interactive Multimedia (IMM) and ICT resources. Bollini, and Palma (2004) introduced cognitive maps to web design interface that allows multimodal representation of the information architecture, highlighting hierarchies, the nodes the physical (hypertextual) and conceptual connections between site contents. As a mechanism to represent knowledge, conceptual mapping has been one of the most referenced in the literature. White and Gunstone (1992) discussed the use of concept maps can help students to externalize their knowledge in a domain effectively (as cited in Brüchner & Sascha, 2004) and evoke and support metacognitive activities (Novak, Wurst & Strauss, n.d). Moreover, concept mapping seems to be useful in supporting knowledge management, which is a very important concern in societies with rapidly expanding knowledge resources (Brüchner & Sascha, 2004). Jonassen and Yueh (2001) believe when students engaged in the activity of mapping knowledge, they generally tend to learn more and reflect more upon their own learning than with other study methods. In addition, concept mapping too promotes mindful learning, cognitive flexibility conceptual change and promote deep knowledge restructuring. These findings suggest that concept mapping method has potential to be an individual and collaborative learning tool. Besides, the construction of knowledge representations in concept mapping is likely to have a positive influence not only on acquisition of declarative knowledge but also on performance related to that knowledge base (Fisher, Wandersee & Wideman, 2000). 3.4
Concept Mapping
“Concept” is the underlying basis for creative work, specifies what one wants to accomplish, and how it will be accomplished, that is, a sense of desired results, and enabling processes (Kerne, 2002). Whereas, Novak & Gowin (1985) described CM as a graphical representation of concepts synthetically described (words, concepts) inside a geometrical form (a node) and 5(12)
Conference IMCL2007
April 18 -20, 2007 Amman, Jordan
linked together by lines showing the relations by means of words-links ( as cited in Novak and Cañas, 2006). According to (Rodhain, n.d), CM in KM can be used to transform tacit knowledge into explicit knowledge. In a learning context, CM is used as a learning tool for learners to visually review, capture or develop knowledge (Marshall et.al., 2005). Though, various digital tools available to construct concept maps such as SemNet®, Inspiration , Cmap tools, Decision Explorer, Mindman, VisiMap and InfoMap, ActivityMap,TextVision/TekstNet, SMART Ideas and Mind Mapper (utvente.nl), many researchers believe that a hand-drawn CM is by far the most common form of knowledge mapping currently being used in the classroom (Wandersee & Wideman, 2000). Concept Map as knowledge representation is summarized in Table 2 (Wandersee & Wideman, 2000): Learning strategy Chunking Information
Concept map provides coherent graphic representation about a concept or group of concepts and provide manageable chunk of information that is easily assimilated.
Dual coding Theory (Paivio, 1986; Mayer & Sims, 1994),
Learner can encode information in two distinct information processing systems: i) Represents information verbally ii) Represents information visually Dual coding facilitates ability to both retrieve and apply ideas (Mayer & Sims, 1994). Knowledge map presents a visual image as well as verbal information and therefore presumably taps into this dual-coding system. Knowledge-mapping conventions place bigger ideas above the central concept, smaller ideas below, with moving materials or event sequences on a horizontal plane reading from left to right.
Making relations between ideas explicit
i) content drives relations (Luoma Overstreet’s,1990) ii) Key elements to understanding: set/subset, whole/part, and has characteristic/ characteristic of relations (Fisher, 1988; Hoffman, 1991) iii) The cause/effect relation (Hoffman, 1991) iii) knowledge engineering: identifications of each link is critical in (Cooke and McDonald,1986)
Broadcasting to the subconscious
Constructing a semantic network brings “effects of” benefits(Perkins, 1993) and is broadcast to every subconscious module in the mind (Baars, 1998).
Time on task
Learners typically engage in sustained and high-level thinking and conversation about the topic they are learning and support subsequent reflection and knowledge revision while constructing maps. Table 2: Learning strategy of knowledge representation.
CM as a creativity support tool allows playful explorations in the form of two6(12)
Conference IMCL2007
April 18 -20, 2007 Amman, Jordan
dimensional layouts (Charles Cave Creativity Web). CM used in visualizing creative process can be divided into 2 task; Visualizing Task and Thinking Tasks (Schneiderman, 2002). In a visualizing task, users will organize their knowledge, see relationships and possibly spot what is missing while in a thinking task, a few set of approaches is developed towards brainstorming, lateral thinking by exploring multiple possibilities and allowing many crossreference path (Schneiderman, 2002). CM in design and technology learning allows learners to actively experience, concentrate, practice, present, construct meaning, shape and organise individual direction into their experience (Petrina, n.d).
4 Research Method The research is conducted as a qualitative research as many CM models. The first phase is based on the Grounded Theory formulated from the Human Intelligent study by Gardner, Sternberg and Li (1996). The theory of Multiple Intelligent (MI) suggested factors that influenced individual potential in interactive multimedia environment that able to enhance individual roles in team (Kennedy, 2002). This research is then continued with Robert Sternberg’s Triarchic Theory of Intelligence (Petrina, n.d.) that classified Intelligence into Analytical Intelligence, Creative Intelligence and Practical Intelligence. The importance of this also refers to Li’s (1996) suggestion, a foundational theory of intelligence. Based on the assumption that intelligence has a strong link with symbolic systems, Li suggested that language has led to the creation of concepts that further enhance thinking and learning. The theory defined the concept of conceptual thought and conceptual learning that can lead to creative thinking and knowledge acquisition. Apart from this, Ausubel’s theory on Meaningful Learning is also considered. This theory critically observed on how individual learn using large amounts of meaningful material emphasizes key ideas and presented at the same level of abstraction and generality as the rest of the material (psychology.org). Ausubel introduced the concept of ‘organizers’ as a subsuming bridge between new learning material and existing related ideas. The theory has commonalities with Gestalt theory, schema and Brunel’s ‘spiral learning’ model (psychology.org). While in Information architecture and management, maps are used to give a spatial, visual presentation; they are used also to convey a detailed description for a synoptic, parallel perception of information, replacing a conventional, serial communication (Bollini & Palma, 2004). The theory deals with organizing information for easy retrieval. The Gestalt Principles and Neurosciences (Remo, Spescha & Meier, 2005) can support the understanding how visual information is being processing in human brain. In addition Kuhlthau’s information search process (ISP) theory has similarity with many KM models (Hemmecke & Stary, n.d) where ISP emphasize on searching for meaning, rather than answer - the Initiation, Selection, Exploration, Formulation, Collection and Presentation process. A major experiment will be conducted as a direct and closed observation of participants involved in a two-day workshop. Participants will be selected from second or final year students involved in interactive multimedia development. The workshop will focus on the CM formulation based of problem solving approach, both from individual and collaborative perspective and recorded throughout. Despite of various digital CM applications, this experiment will critically observe on non-digital (hand-drawn) CM. The experiment is developed based on Basque and Lavoie’s model (2006) namely pre-defined nodes, pre-defined links, pre-defined node types, pre-defined link types and freestyle. A nonstructured interview will be carried out after the workshop session ended for both originator and interpreter of CM to define the knowledge transfer process that occurred.
7(12)
Conference IMCL2007
April 18 -20, 2007 Amman, Jordan
5 Current Stage Pilot experiments were conducted in two semesters to establish the groundwork and direction of the research. CM has been implemented in conceptual design to formulate knowledge domain understanding, knowledge elicitation process and as a guide to the ideation process, visual and interactivity formulation. Figure 1 illustrates one sample outcome of the experiment:
Figure 1: Ideation Process (Acknowledgement: Wong Hui Xian, copyright of FCM, MMU®)
A Questionnaire with Likert scale of 1 to 5 was issued to 66 learners to establish the general assumption of using CM in interactive multimedia development process (n=66). The first phase results demonstrated a positive acceptance among learners on using concept mapping as a creative problem solving, a flow of ideation and a learning tool in interactive development process (Table 3). As a creative problem solving, CM ability to allow explicit relationship among concepts scored the highest. CM too shown its potential as a storytelling to explain idea to guide ideation process while encouraged learners to be a critical thinker. CM AS CREATIVE PROBLEM SOLVING 1. CM is interesting 2. CM helps understand better 3. CM allows to see things critically 4. CM helps to see things from various perspectives 5. CM freely expressed thinking 6. CM allows to see how things relate to each other 7. CM helps defined problem definition and preparation 8. CM useful in visualizing thinking 9. CM allow easier collaboration with friends 10. CM helps explaining understanding to lecturers 11. CM helps organized learning 12. CM allows awareness of main ideas and supporting ideas 13. CM allows to focus on what to do
8(12)
Conference IMCL2007
April 18 -20, 2007 Amman, Jordan
FLOW OF IDEATION 1. CM helped focused in ideation process 2. CM use and draw as ideation flow 3. CM in ideation process can guide visual development 4. CM can be a storytelling to explain ideas 5. CM as reference to stay focus with idea developed
LEARNING TOOL 1. CM as graphic organizer of content 2. CM to demonstrate understanding 3. CM encourage to be critical thinker 4. Constructing CM engage their learning
Table 3: The Results (pilot study)
6 Expected Contributions The result of the research is expected to contribute significantly in design and technology education, particularly in interactive multimedia development process. The research will represent knowledge developed during the design process in a formal way and allow it to be captured, examined and shared among learners, thus support the knowledge transfer process. Learners, at the same time can benefit from the creative process they were engaging, achieve a meaningful learning and function as a creative thinker in developing interactive application.
7 Conclusion This paper has discussed and suggested useful theories of CM in which some of these were tested the experiment. It is clearly shown that a strong relationship of CM functions established between technology and learners particularly as a personal knowledge management tool to handle visualisation of knowledge. Besides, CM too has been widely accepted as a learning tool in many teaching and learning environments. The potential of CM in learning and managing knowledge has suggested interest to other related experiments such as experiential learning with multimedia. The ability to capture and manage the tacit knowledge can foster knowledge creation, knowledge transfer and knowledge sharing, at the same time contribute to reusable learning object and best practice in design knowledge.
9(12)
Conference IMCL2007
April 18 -20, 2007 Amman, Jordan
References: [1] Acosta, E., C., Collazos, A., C., and Guerrero, A., L., (2004), StoryMapper: A Multimedia tool to Externalize Knowledge, Proceedings of the XXIV International Conference of the Chilean Computer Science Society (SCCC’04), p.p 292-300, retrieved June 17, 2005 http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/iel5/9447/29997/01372113.pdf?isnumber=&arnumber=1372113 [2] Anderson, E. and Lily, B (2004) Visualization in the Design Process: Introducing two and three dimensional sketching techniques to enhance creative thinking and communication , International Engineering and Product Design Education Conference, 2-3 September 2004, The Netherlands, retrieved July 24, 2006 from http://www2.io.tudelft.nl/iepde04/Documents%20for%20Downloads/Final%20Papers/KB_Anderson.pdf [3 ] Basque, J. and Lavoie, C.,M., (2006), Collaborative Concept Mapping in Education: Major Research Trends, Concept Maps: Theory, Methodology, Technology Proc. of the First Int. Conference on Concept Mapping A. J. Cañas, J. D. Novak, F. M. González, Eds. Pamplona, Spain 2004, retrieved January 27, 2006 from http://cmc.ihmc.us/cmc2006Papers/cmc2006-p192.pdf [4] Bollini, L. and Palma, G., (2004), Cognitive Maps: New Paradigms in Information architecture and Interface Design for the Web. The Opsis Identifier Descriptive Model for web information architecture based on cognitive maps: Designing –X a case study, Concept Maps: Theory, Methodology, Technology Proc. of the First Int. Conference on Concept Mapping A. J. Cañas, J. D. Novak, F. M. González, Eds. Pamplona, Spain 2004, retrieved January 27, 2006 from http://www.seewhatyouknow.com/newcmap/Concept%20Masp%20&%20Web%20Information%20Architecture .cmc2004-107.pdf [ 5] Brüchner, K., and Sascha, S., (2004) Using concept Maps for Individual Knowledge Externalization in Medical Education, Concept Maps: Theory, Methodology, Technology Proc. Of the First Int. Conference on Concept Mapping A.J Cañas, J.D. Novak, F. M. González, Eds. Pamplona, Spain 2004, retrieved June 6, 2005 from http://cmc.ihmc.us/papers/cmc2004-203.pdf [6] Collage of Agricultural, Consumer and Environmental Sciences, University of Illinois At Urbana Campaign (2002), retrieved July 26, 2006 from http://classes.aces.uiuc.edu/ACES100/ [7] Eppler, J., M, (2001) Making Knowledge visible through Knowledge Maps: Concepts, Elements, Cases , Proceeding of the 34th Hawaii International Conferences on system sciences-2001, retrieved July 31, 2006 from http://csdl2.computer.org/comp/proceedings/hicss/2002/0981/04/09814030.pdf, [8] Frand, J. and Lippincott, A, (2005) Personal Knowledge Management: Managing Information Overload , A workshop for Prefessional Development Program, January 20, 2005, retrieved December 14, 2005 from http://www.anderson.ucla.edu/documents/areas/fac/isrp/pkm_jan05.pdf [9] Fisher, M., K., Wandersee, H., J., and Wideman, G., (2000), Enhancing cognitive Skills for Meaningful Understanding of domain Specific Knowledge,retrieved July 31, 2006 from http://www.sci.sdsu.edu/CRMSE/Fisher_aaas2000.html [10] Hemmecke, J., and Stary, C., (n.d), A Framework for the Externalization of Tacit Knowledge Embedding Repertory Grids, retrieved June 6, 2005 from http://www.hemmecke.de/jeannette/ material/Paper_OKLC2004_HemmeckeStary.pdf [11] Jonassen, H., D., Carr, C., and Yueh, P., H., (2001), Computers as Mindtools for Engaging Critical Thinking and Representing Knowledge, retrieved August 31, 2005 from http://www.coe.missouri.edu/~jonassen/Mindtools.pdf [12] Judelman, B., G., (2004) Knowledge Visualization: Problems and Principles for Mapping the Knowledge Space, Msc Thesis Dissertation, University of Lübeck, Germany, retrieved April 12, 2006 from http://www.gregjudelman.com/media/judelmanThesis2004.pdf [14]Kennedy, M., D., (2002) Visual Mapping: A Tool for Design, Development and Communication in the Development of IT-Rich Learning Environments , ASCILITE 2002 Conference, 8-11 December 2002, Auckland, New Zealand, retrieved July 24, 2006 from http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/auckland02/proceedings/papers/150.pdf [15] Kerne, K., (2002), Concept-context-Design: A Creative Model for the Development of Interactivity, Proceedings of the 4th conference on Creativity & Cognition, retrieved December 14, 2005 from http://delivery.acm.org/10.1145/590000/581739/p192kerne.pdf?key1=581739&key2=4094282711&coll=GUIDE&dl=GUIDE&CFID=15799705&CFTOKEN=92540 746 [16] Khalid, Izuzi., Wood.Peter and Rafi. Ahmad (2006, February 21-23). Knowledge Externalization Using concept Mapping. International Conference on Knowledge Management in Institutes of Higher Learning, Bangkok,Thailand. [17] Kidwell, J. J., Linde, K M. V and Johnson, L. S., (2000), Applying Corporate Knowledge Management Practices in Higher Education, EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY, NUMBER 4, retrieved December 14, 2005 from http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/EQM0044.pdf 10(12)
Conference IMCL2007
April 18 -20, 2007 Amman, Jordan
[18] Khalid, Izuzi. (2005, July 7-9). Preliminary Research: Multimedia Annotation as Knowledge Sharing Tool in Collaborative Learning Environment. International Conference on Knowledge Management 2005 (ICKM’05), Kuala Lumpur,Malaysia. [19] Lambe, P. (2002), Personal Knowledge Management: a DIY Guide to Knowledge Management-Part 2 , Graphicon’2001, Straits Knowledge 2002, retrieved December 12 2005 from http://greenchameleon.com/thoughtpieces/pkm.pdf [20] Lang, M., and Barry, C. (2001). Techniques and Methodologies for Multimedia Systems Development: A survey of Industrial Practice, retrieved April 20 2006 from http://www.is.nuigalway.ie/mlang/research/IFIP_WG82_2001.pdf [21] ]Lawson, B., (1990), How Designers Think, Butterworth Architecture. [22] Marlia, Izuzi., and Rafi. Ahmad (2006, June 6-8). Personal Knowledge Management in Learning: Exploring Concept Mapping for Creative Process Knowledge Management International Conference and Exhibitions, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia [23]Marshall, B., Zhang, Y., Chen, H., Lally.A, Shen,R., Fox, E. and Cassel, N., L., (2005), Convergence of Knowledge Management and E-Learning: the GetSmart Experience , retrieved August 29, 2005 from http://feathers.dlib.vt.edu/~rshen/ConceptMap/MarshallB_GetSmart.pdf [24] Marwick, D. A., (2001), Knowledge Technology , IBM Systems Journal, Vol. 40, No. 4, pp 814 to pp 830, retrieved August 29, 2005 from http://www.research.ibm.com/journal/sj/404/marwick.pdf [25] Novak, D. J. and Cañas J. A., (2006), The Theory Underlying Concept Maps and How to Construct them retrieved July 24, 2006 from http://cmap.ihmc.us/Publications/ResearchPapers/TheoryCmaps/TheoryUnderlyingConceptMaps.htm [26] Novak, J., Wurst, M., Fleischmann, M., and Strauss, W., (n.d) Discovering, visualizing and Sharing Knowledge through Personalized Learning Knowledge Maps, retrieved April 12, 2006 from http://awake.imk.fraunhofer.de/papers/awake_for_amkm.pdf [27] Petrina, S., (n.d.), Organizing Knowledge for Instruction, Curriculum Instruction for Teacher, p.p 54-87 (in press), retrieved August 3, 2005 from http://www.curricstudies.educ.ubc.ca/programs/tsed/research/articles/c&i.pdf [28] Preece, J., Rogers, Y., and Helen, S., (2002), Interaction Design Beyond Human-Computer Interaction, USA, John Wiley & Son. [29] Rahman KAA, 2005, Knowledge Conversion in Design Management Practices: An Attitude Study of Designers in Malaysian Industrial Cluster, E-Proceeding ICACA, Sarawak. [30] Rahman KAA, Sugiyama K, Watanabe M. 2001. Design Management Style Practice That Contribute Towards Knowledge Conversion, A Preliminary Study From Industrial Design Perspective In Malaysia. Bulletin of The 5th Asian Design Conference. Korea. [31] Remo, A.,B., Spescha, G., and Meier, M., (2005), “A-ha!”: How to visualize Strategies with Complementary Visualizations , Conference on Visualising and Presenting Indicator Systems, 14-16 March 2005, Neuchatel (CH), retrieved July 15, 2006 from http://www.bfs.admin.ch/bfs/portal/de/index/themen/nachhaltige_entwicklung/uebersicht/blank/visualising_indic ators/04/04_01.ContentPar.0006.DownloadFile.tmp/Burkhard_Spescha.pdf [32] Rodhain, F., (n.d),Tacit to explicit: transforming Knowledge through Cognitive Mapping- An experiment, , retrieved July 6, 2005 from http://delivery.acm.org/10.1145/300000/299614/p51rodhain.pdf?key1=299614&key2=9200282711&coll=&dl=ACM&CFID=15151515&CFTOKEN=6184618 [33] Rouser, K. and Dorsey, A (2000), Strong Threads of Learning – Knowledge Transfer Within Communities of Practice, retrieved November 21 from http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/iel5/8871/28027/01252248.pdf?isnumber=&arnumber=1252248 [34] Schneiderman, B., (2002) Creativity Support Tools- Establishing a framework of Activities for Creative Work , October 2002/Vol.45, No.10 Communication of the ACM, p.p 116 – 120, retrieved July 26, 2006 from http://delivery.acm.org/10.1145/580000/570945/p116schneiderman.pdf?key1=570945&key2=0237193511&coll=portal&dl=ACM&CFID=15151515&CFTOKEN=6 184618 [35] Tsui, E., J (n.d), Technologies for Personal and Peer-to-Peer (P2P) Knowledge Management, retrieved April 18, 2006 from http://www.csc.com/aboutus/lef/mds67_off/uploads/P2P_KM.pdf [36]Wiig, K.(2004), People-Focused Knowledge Management, UK: Elsiever Butterworth – Heinemann. [37] Young, P., (n.d) Visual Thinking Tools, retrieved July 27, 2006 from http://coe.sdsu.edu/eet/articles/VisThinkTools/start.htm [38] Zimmerman, J., Forlizzi,J., and Evenson,S. (2004), Discovering and Extracting Knowledge in the Design Project, Conference of the Design Research Society Proceedings (Futureground 04), Melbourne, Australia, November 2004, retrieved July 26, 2006 from http://goodgestreet.com/docs/forlizziFG.pdf [39] www.pbs.org/weta/myjourneyhome/teachers/glossary.html, retrieved July 26, 2006 [40] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visual_literacy , retrieved July 27, 2006 [41] http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/SA_NCS_Visual_Arts:Glossary , retrieved July 27, 2006 [42] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visual_thinking, retrieved on July 27, 2006 11(12)
Conference IMCL2007
April 18 -20, 2007 Amman, Jordan
[43] http://www.deltamethod.net/8ConceptualDesign_index.htm, retrieved September 13, 2006 [44] http://users.edte.utwente.nl/lanzing/cm_home.htm, retrieved September 14, 2006 [45] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~caveman/Creative/,retrieved September 14, 2006
Author(s): Marlia, Izuzi Multimedia University, Faculty of Creative Multimedia Jalan Multimedia, 63100 Cyberjaya, Selangor Darul Ehsan, Malaysia
[email protected] Rafi, Ahmad (Phd) Multimedia University, Faculty of Creative Multimedia Jalan Multimedia, 63100 Cyberjaya, Selangor Darul Ehsan, Malaysia
[email protected] Woods, Peter (Professor) (Phd) Multimedia University, Knowledge Management Centre Jalan Multimedia, 63100 Cyberjaya, Selangor Darul Ehsan, Malaysia
[email protected]
12(12)
