Meta Sketch Maps

JOAN MARIE GIAMPA, DA

META SKETCH MAPS Meta sketch maps n 1. A structural foundation for mapping words and pictures. 2. A platform or stage for the brain to act out thoughts using words and pictures. A meta cognitive view of the brain that utilizes empathy as the basis for problem solving, critical analysis idea manufacturing.

joan@joanmariegiampa.com

Learning is finding out what you already know. Doing is demonstrating that you know it.

Teaching is reminding others they know just as well as you. You are all learners, doers, and teachers. (Bach, p. 58)

I Am a Classroom Researcher Teaching is challenging. It requires me to be meta-cognitive about what I am doing in order to engage, solve problems, and critically analyze Joan Marie Giampa, DA

today’s complex and technological educational environment. One thing is for sure—change is constant and today’s learners are technologically wired—

technology in the classroom has become a seamless operation. Patricia Cross (1986), describes the classroom researcher as defined by Boyer in Scholarship Reconsidered: The Priorities of the Professorate (1990, p. 61), as “one who is involved in the evaluation of his or her own teaching and learning.”

What is most important is that I am conscious about what I am doing in the classroom. Schulman (1998) calls this type of observation “a going Meta,” when he stated that: The scholarship of teaching (SOTL) is not synonymous with excellent teaching, it requires a kind of “going meta” in which faculty frame and systematically investigate questions related to student learning—conditions under which it occurs, what it looks like, how to deepen it and so forth. The scholarship of teaching is a condition. It is the mechanism in which teaching itself advances, through which teaching can be something other than a seat of the pants operation, with each of us out there making it up as we go. (p. 4) My teaching style is student-centered and I am a cognitive coach—an inquiry-based instructor in that I engage students by questions, scenarios or problems for the purpose of: active learning, in which students solve problems, answer questions, formulate questions of their own, discuss, explain, debate, or brainstorm during class; cooperative learning, in which students work in teams on problems and projects under conditions that assure both positive interdependence and individual accountability; and inductive teaching and learning, in which students are first presented with challenges (questions or problems) and learn the course material in the context of addressing the challenges through, problembased learning, project-based learning, and discovery learning. I use classroom assessment techniques, (CATs), (Angelo & Cross, 1996)—a series of tools and practices designed to give teachers accurate information about the quality of student learning. Information gathered is not used for grading 1

or teacher evaluation. Instead, (CAT) s is used to facilitate dialogue between students and teacher on the quality of the learning process and how to improve it. As authors Angelo & Cross (1996) affirmed, in their book Classroom Assessment Techniques: Teaching without learning is just talking. CATs provide both teachers and students with ‘in process information on how well students are learning what the curriculum intends. The three basic questions CATs ask are: 1. What are the essential skills and knowledge I am trying to teach?

2. How can I find out whether students are learning them?

3. How can I help students learn better?

The classroom assessment process assumes that students need to receive feedback early and often, that they need to evaluate the quality of their own learning, and that they can help the teacher improve the strength of instruction. (p. 86) When I utilize classroom research and assessment, I become the student and the student becomes my teacher. Classroom research helps me to understand how students learn and have been essential in the development and understanding of how and why I use visual note-mapping as the primary learning tool in my classroom today.

How De Vinci’s Sketch Notes Applies To today’s Multi-Modal Learners Leonardo de Vinci visually mapped information by linking words and pictures. As a result, de Vinci’s sketch notes are a historical recording of his “real time” thoughts. I find that teaching students to visually map Figure 1. Leonardo da Vinci, sketch journal.

what they are learning with words and pictures promotes deep learning and creativity in the classroom.

Words combined with pictures can be a powerful tool for memory recall.

2

My sketch journals are filled with words and pictures that are visual records of my thinking and learning. I can instantly recall my thinking process when I have pictures paired with words. I use visual mapping for idea development, writing and lecturing. I teach my students these skills for the same reason. Science instructors are beginning to see the benefits of words with drawings in the classroom. A recent study by cognitive psychologists on the benefits of drawing and learning reveals that:

Sketch notes on CIP map development (drawing on napkin glued into sketch journal), Dr. Joan Marie Giampa, 2013.

Freehand drawing can inspire students to learn and retain information, and can help them engage with the educational materials, when they might not pay attention otherwise. Freehand drawing or doodling can also help them later to recall and communicate what they have learned (Ainsworth, S., Prain, V., & Tytler, R., 2011).

Ainsworth (2011) also reveals that when students add drawing into their note taking they enjoyed what they were learning: Students applied more effort to learning when they read and then drew pictures of their understanding of the text. The amount of enjoyment they derived from the activity was "striking," when compared to just reading or from reading and then writing summaries. She said that in her experience it was both more effective and enjoyable to learn through drawing.

Figure 3 is an example of a student “case in point” (CIP) map—the basic map to my new series of meta-sketch maps. The subject for this map is Chapter 2 in Drawing on the Right side of the Brain (Edwards, 2013). The words combine with the pictures to tell a unique story about what the student has learned from the chapter reading. The symbols 3 Side of The Brain, Figure 3. Case in point map of student chapter reading, Drawing on Right (Edwards, 2012).

she drew reflect her deep learning in that she makes visual metaphors about her subject matter—which happens to be childhood symbols. Childhood symbols are memories of what we think something looks like. The visual metaphors in this journal entry are a combination of two pictures to invent a whole new idea. She draws a face with a blindfold and combines it with the words “trying to see”.

When my students visually map their thinking before a critique or class discussion, they tend to internalize information quicker and use their learning of the subject matter in “real time”. Their discussions are richer and filled with original thoughts that derive from meta-cognitive thinking as illustrated in the mapping process.

Once the students read and meta-sketch map their readings, they break up into groups and develop group maps using the same process by developing a group CIP. The group CIP is then drawn on a whiteboard by all group members. The white board drawings help them to further internalize what they are learning, present their findings in front of the group with confidence and engage in a lively discussion. The evidence is clear that meta-sketch mapping before a lecture group discussion, peer review or critique, greatly Figure 4. White board CIP after group CIP discussion.

improves how a student learns. Students who have

meta-sketch mapped their thinking about a subject before discussions; tend to exude more confidence when presenting their knowledge by formulating richer thoughts about their subject matter.

How I Discovered Visual Mapping In 2002, I attended a teaching seminar that demonstrated how mind mapping and concept mapping can be applied to the writing process. I left that seminar with an idea for applying mapping in my design course for brainstorming, writing and critiquing. I developed mapping strategies over the next six years for using these kinds of maps. I quickly realized the benefits of visual mapping and how it Figure 5. Concept map/mind map combination.

helps student learn and visualize ideas. Mind maps 4

and concept maps were better for critiquing and the organization of existing knowledge.

Both kinds of maps worked great for a while. Yes they reflected thinking about subject matter, but they did not reflect deep thinking and the maps were acting more like a repetition of existing knowledge. At this time, the students went along with the assignment, but I did not feel as if they were Figure 6. Concept map of student paper.

really helping them to learn. Corbin (1992) discusses the problem with students who

appear to be paying attention by parroting back information in this statement: Another realization came when I started to explore why students had so much difficulty applying newly learned concepts to novel situations and problems. I discovered that students were capable of paraphrasing and parroting back information but had little understanding of the material.

This has led to a long-term study of students' understanding in my classes. Retrieved October 20, 2005 from http://kml. Carnegiefoundation.org/gallery/bcerbin/ Resources/Course Portfolio/course_portfolio.htm All three issues: prior knowledge, paraphrasing and appearances were evident in what the students were handing back to me for their weekly assignments. The maps were now acting as the visual evidence that I needed to make changes in my own curriculum. Although I thought the maps were helping students organize information, I did not see deep learning taking place with these maps. The answers came when I started using thinking maps by David Hyerle in 2008. In using thinking maps, I was able to connect meta-cognition and learning.

Thinking Maps Thinking maps transform information into rich patterns of knowledge by mapping the verbal (words and phrases) and non-verbal (pictures and symbols) thinking processes of an individual or group of individuals. Thinking maps are a conceptual tool developed by David Hyerle in 1993, for constructing knowledge and connecting ideas in visual form. Thinking maps transform information into active knowledge using a rich integration of modalities—visual, spatial, verbal, and numerical to create 5

conceptually rich models of their meaning (Hyerle, 2009). Thinking maps are a common visual language for learning which have a consistent design, but are highly flexible which makes them ideal for the art classroom. Thinking maps are a universal language that help individuals connect conceptually to each other visually the same way artists connect perceptually through visual imagery. Hyerle (1993) defines thinking maps in the following way: Thinking maps are useful as practical tools for students completing routine assignments, yet most effective for students as they face complex and controversial problems that are framed by personal and cultural values. When used interactively and with an open environment in the classroom, thinking maps are practical philosophical tools for negotiating meanings and entering the interrelationships within the belief systems of others. (p. 16) Hyerle (1993) develops six of his eight maps from Albert Upton’s (1961) theory of six cognitive skills: defining “things” in context, describing, classifying, part-whole spatial reasoning, sequencing, and analogous thinking.

Hyerle connects Upton’s six cognitive thinking Figure 7. David Hyerle’s Thinking maps.

processes to a specific thinking map. The eight

maps include the Circle Map (defining things in context), Bubble Map (describing), Double Bubble Map, Tree Map (classifying), Brace Map (part-whole spatial reasoning), Flow Map (sequencing), MultiFlow Map, and the Bridge Map (analogous thinking). Hyerle adds two more maps to equal his eight maps: the Multi Flow Map for cause and effect and the Double Bubble Map for comparison and contrasting.

Thinking maps are built with extension lines, frames (frames of reference), circles, and boxes.

Each element has a specific meaning. Lines are considered extension lines. Extension lines extend or link bubbles, words, and boxes within each map. They represent connections between ideas and mental isolation. Circles are symbols that contain “things” or “qualities of things”. Boxes are used like circles, 6

but can also be used as a stage to place information or as frames in a “frame of reference” that encloses each type of map.

Frame of Reference The box that may be included around the entire map is a “frame of reference”, also known as the meta-cognitive frame. Hyerle (1993) describes the frame of reference: The frame is a square drawn around any of the eight thinking maps. It is the meta-cognitive graphic that represents several questions: What is my frame of reference for the information shown in the maps? From whom did I get this information? What is influencing my interpretation or opinion? What are the frames that my classmates and my teacher have for their opinions? (p. 129) Each map has a frame that asks the learner to reflect on the thinking process specific to that thinking map. For example, the bubble map frame asks what influences certain qualities. The frame acts like a reflective prompt (a mirror) for the learner and asks the learner to consider the anthropological construct of personal, interpersonal, and socio-cultural influences that surround the information inside the map (Lakoff, 1980; Filmore, 1976). The frame of reference asks the learner to answer what prior knowledge, experiences, emotions, customs, beliefs, values and cultural influences are shaping an understanding of the thing, idea, topic, or concept being considered in the main progress.

Understanding the frame of reference entails understanding that the basic structure comes from frame semantics. According to Filmore (1976), a frame semantic is: The basic idea is that one cannot understand the meaning of a single word without access to all the essential knowledge that relates to that word. For example, one would not be able to understand the word "sell" without knowing anything about the situation of commercial transfer, which also involves, among other things, a seller, a buyer, goods, money, the relation between the money and the goods, the relations between the seller and the goods and the money, the relation between the buyer and the goods and the money and so on. (p. 21-32) Frame semantics is an important concept in the art class room. Artists need to be meta-cognitive of their thinking processes in order to develop richer ideas and critically analyze their work.

Circle map

7

The circle map (figure 9) is the most basic thinking map, and the user usually begins the process of working out ideas by starting with the circle map. The circle map is used by learners for understanding meanings within different contexts and for identifying one’s prior knowledge about an Figure 8. Circle map.

idea. By constructing knowledge in this way, the map is a construction of

thoughts about a subject rather than a definition. It is a wide array of ideas rather than a specific meaning. The map shifts the student from reiterating knowledge to assimilating prior experiences and knowledge with new information (Hyerle, 1993).

The circle map consists of two concentric circles and a square surrounding the map called a frame. The idea or thing is put in the center circle and this can be anything from words, phrases, numbers, or drawings and other types of visuals. The outer circle is for generating ideas and words without showing connections in order to establish context about a specific topic (the word in the center circle). For example, if you were making a circle map for a logo design, you would put the name of the logo in the middle circle. The surrounding circle would be all the information gathered about the logo such as color, content, company information, words, phrases, numbers, and drawings, which help to construct or define in context (ideas).

For the art student, circle maps can be used to analyze artworks, art books, studio work, or computer graphics and art critiques. The circle map can also be used in the art classroom for brainstorming ideas and analyzing artworks prior to an art critique. The circle map helps students to connect with each other during group projects and group discussions.

Teaching Art with Thinking Maps I applied thinking maps in the art classroom in many ways. For example, during a brainstorming session (idea generation), students come up with a list of words which are then narrowed down to several key words or ideas. The key words are then placed inside a circle map. The circle map is expanded and new and existing knowledge about the subject is generated. A frame of reference is established around the map to reveal why the students thinks the way they do about the subject and what influences their thinking. The frame helps to open dialogue with other students and establish a common 8

thread for discussion in relation to their values and belief systems. The circle map can be used to identify factors that can be expanded further with a bubble map. The bubble map can be utilized to expand a word or idea by developing more qualities from each of the key words identified in the circle map.

By making the critique visual and organizing it into maps, the ideas are now taking on a visual structure representing new knowledge that can be gleaned by all participants in the session. The session becomes visible and allows all participants an equal share of information.

This equal visual sharing of information is what makes thinking maps a universal language that connects the users to one another during group discussions. This is important in an art classroom environment where group participation is a central component during art critiques and discussions about work in progress.

Artists who work together on design teams

Figure 9. Circle map of student story.

benefit by using thinking maps as a tool for negotiating meanings in problem solving and idea processing. The maps reveal similarities in thinking processes and the surrounding frames help to link these ideas together through personal, interpersonal, and socio-cultural influences. When students begin to use the thinking maps as tools for constructing knowledge, they will also understand how their personal, interpersonal, and social-cultural knowledge influences their construction of knowledge (Hyerle, 1993, p. 128).

Artists and designers spend a great deal of time brainstorming ideas, and thinking maps are an ideal tool for structuring on paper how artists think while leaving evidence in visual form of their thinking process. Thinking maps can be used in the art classroom to help students connect to what Hyerle (2009) refers to as the wall of text by stating: One of the main reasons that learners, young and old, often have writers block or their thinking is “blocked� is what I offer as a guiding metaphor for information: the WALL OF TEXT. The linear wall of text does not explicitly show the rich networks and patterns of thinking that the author is presenting implicitly within the linear representations. When visual tools are presented alongside text or used by the learners to find patterns embedded in the wall of text, then the rich 9

foundational structures of knowledge is unveiled. (p. 10) Students write a” wall of text” (stream of consciousness) when they are critically analyzing an art work at the beginning of a critique. For example, when art students have a critique of their work, they can write freely—without structure about works being examined. This would be considered “the wall of text”. Next the student can circle key words in the text to construct a circle map. The key words can become categories on a radial tree map or adjectives for a bubble map that radiates qualities about

Figure 10. Wall of text and circle map of student analysis of 7 principals of design.

each of the ideas presented in the artwork. The maps help to organize information from the wall of text and make it a visual snapshot of organized patterns.

The maps visually represent the thinking process in an organized way that everyone can see and then talk about. It helps to bridge the gap between thoughts to paper, making thinking maps visually 10

exciting diagrams that are easily read by all participants in the critique. By developing the maps, the students have visual evidence of conceptual thoughts about visual images. This cycle loops into new discussions and the maps become an important part of the artwork as they demonstrate and connect new ideas being discovered within the work. The frame of reference is the area of the map where metacognition develops.

Metacognition & the Need for Transition on the Use of Thinking Maps Meta-cognition is the capacity to monitor and regulate one's own thinking or mental activity.

Research indicates that meta-cognition plays a key role in learning, and a parallel research literature focuses on how to improve meta- cognitive abilities, (Brown, 1992, p. 141). Thinking maps introduces metacognition by using the frame of reference, but I usually found that students struggled with how to implement the frame of reference without some sort of prompting from me.

Over the years, I refined the use of thinking maps and how they fit into my teaching methodology and curriculum. A gradual progression of how I used thinking maps led to using an adapted version of Hyerle’s (1993) thinking maps in 2008. In 2008 while teaching students how to brainstorm for their visual metaphor project, I discovered something big about visual mapping.

I was drawing out their thoughts on the white board and realized my students would always get stuck after brainstorming for ideas.

Once they landed on what I called the “nugget” they would ultimately ask me what next. That day I drew a picture of a funnel with a nugget.

I realized that the end of a brainstorming session produced a nugget. I understood the process of what we were doing by drawing Figure 11. Old student sample of thinking map. A radial and bubble map.

symbols and connecting them to our process.

The “nugget” idea grew into a dissertation on visual metaphor and over the next several years. I appropriated from Hyerle’s bridge map (a map for making analogies), and it became the genesis of my dissertation—sinking maps: a conceptual tool for visual metaphor (Giampa, 2012). . “Sinking maps” is 11

a tool that teaches students how to construct a visual metaphor by conceptually mapping their sensory perceptions (e.g., taste, touch, smell, sound, and sight) to build visuals from words which generate visual metaphors. During this phase of my teaching, visual mapping became integrated into idea development.

And the idea of integrated mapping started to grow. The maps took on a life of their own after the dissertation. They became an important part of every aspect of my teaching.

For a while, Hyerle’s maps seemed to answer all my needs but his maps became stagnant. I kept trying to make the maps perform operations beyond what they were built to do such as critical analysis and problem solving. I needed a platform for visual mapping that would engage students and help them to write out meta-cognitive thoughts. I wanted to invent a set of maps that were relevant to the art classroom. I began by looking to older versions of their circle maps for answers.

In reviewing older version of their circle maps, I started to piece the puzzle together. I threw out what was not working and kept what was working. The wall of text was something I implemented in 2008. It was standard operating procedure in all critiques and class discussions. The students were tasked to write for a certain period of time about the subject without concern for grammar or punctuation and then circle the main points in their writing.

Before beginning any mapping session in the past I would remind the students that the frame of reference (Hyerle, 1993) is the most important part of the map—the area where metacognition takes place. It required me to explain each time in great detail that a frame of reference is their personal, interpersonal and social-cultural context about their subject they are mapping. Some students went along with this formula but some resisted because it did not make any sense to them. They did not understand how to write their thoughts about what they are thinking about.

I knew all the reasons for metacognitive thinking and how it applies to learning but they struggled with how to write metacognitive thoughts and I struggled with teaching them how to write metacognitive thoughts. In reviewing the maps, I noticed a pattern that some of the mappers were using to work with the circle maps. A student’s map in the spring of 2012 pointed me in the right direction. I realized what I wanted to keep and what I wanted to toss. I also realized that I did not want to use Hyerle’s circle map any longer—since it was not serving my purpose of trying to get them to write their metacognitive thoughts. I needed a set of maps that would perform a function. I needed my own maps, and the summer of 2103 I researched and developed my own maps for visual thinking called metasketch mapping.

12

Meta-Sketch Maps Are Born!

During the summer of 2013, I researched and built my own series of maps. My goal was to build a series of maps that were more suited to the needs of my students and their creative process. Just like Hyerle (1993) did with his Thinking Maps and the circle map, I wanted to build a basic map. But I wanted metacognition to be the key component and the main part of the framework.

I went back to earlier ideas on my use of maps. Maps are great for group discussions since thinking is visible and can be easily shared with others who have gone through the Figure 11. Digram of a sight map.

same mapping process. Individuals

who link visual ideas in a group process can easily funnel down ideas as a group to create shared ideas. Sharing ideas becomes a metaphorical process where two or more cognitive thoughts merge and become a whole new thought. This process is also called conceptual blending and visual metaphor.

Because these maps are based on the sense of sight I began my development of them by drawing an eye.

My original basic map was called a sight map. It evolved over the next few months into what today is called a “case in point� map (CIP). I wanted to build a map that would encompass all areas of learning and creativity in the art classroom. I researched everything I could find on metacognitive learning, critical reading, critical thinking, problem solving , inquiry based learning, visual note-taking, subject, content, form, Fibonacci, organic unity, rubrics, visual metaphor, metaphor, principals of art, and empathy to name a few. In my quest to come up with the perfect map to help students plot out their thinking visually, I went back to my roots of graphic design and visual note taking and what I

Figure 13. Fibinocci thoughts.

13

learned as a student thirty five years ago in a text called Rapid Viz by Kurt Hanks, 1980.

Hanks developed a technique he called visual note taking. In researching the development of visual notetaking I found a book called the Sketch Note Handbook (Rhoades, 2013) and the idea of combining pictures and words with the mapping emerged. My own journal was full of these very same mapping operations. So it was only natural to incorporate them into the mapping platform I was building.

I felt the maps needed a basic structure or platform to be performed on—a stage for their brain to act and a cast to coincide with the stage. At times it felt like I was writing a post dissertation on visual mapping. At one point in the summer, I was convinced that the answers to everything I was trying to invent lay dormant in the Fibonacci spiral and the study of aesthetics principals as recorded in my sketch journal.

14

I wanted the design of the Fibonacci spiral to play a large part in the design of my basic map construct. I connected the construction of the Fibonacci and its central nucleus to subject area of the map. I then connected this central nucleus to the idea that circle maps (Hyerle, 1993) have a main idea or subject. Circle maps are meta-cognitive frames of reference that link and merge thoughts in a group situation. So the big idea came down to combining all these ideas together and the idea of splitting the maps into cognitive and meta-cognitive sections emerged. I realized that the wall of text was the subject area of the map and the cognitive area. I just needed to establish the meta-cognitive area of the map. Many versions of this idea ensued and it is easier to show them using my own sketch notes then to write out how the process developed.

The following 10 pages of meta-sketches are the progression of the maps during their inception in the summer of 2013. There were many more pages but too many to include.

15

16

Figure 14. Diagram and explanation of the final case in point map.

17

In the end it came down to simplification—the funneling down of all research, previous maps and drawings to create a generic mapping platform that is an umbrella for: thinking, meta-thinking, problem solving, critical analysis, critical reading, visual note taking, selfregulation, inquiry based learning, group discussions, class discussions, peer discussions, idea development, visual metaphor and Figure 15. White Board drawing on lecture after explanation of CIP to students.

presentation. Thus the “case in point” (CIP)

map was born.

CIP is simple in its construct and is built to be like a platform for thought. It has five basic components: subject, case, bullet, point and bullet points. Because of its simplicity, it can be easily adapted to include active, cooperative and inductive learning. This makes if a platform for teaching and learning. The CIP platform is a guide for learners to use for generating visual thinking about subject. It is simple in construct thereby making it pliable in its agency.

Figure 16. Definitions of the group members in a CIP mapping session.

18

Case

In point

The case is stagnant and the point is dynamic. The maps are “snapshots of your brain on art�

The map encases thought. The case is a chamber for its bullets which encase the gunpowder of metacognition an umbrella for critical thinking, analysis, problem solving, metaphor, visual metaphor, meta-memory and meta-knowing. The CIP becomes a stage—a visual platform where bullets act out their thoughts and feelings and where kinetic thinking, iconic alphabets, and visual truth emerge. Meta sketch maps are a platform that houses a visual society of players representing Figure 16. CIP map from student in drawing 101 course.

19

iconic symbols of contemporary thinking and a new visual syntax.

The bullets fires off explosive thoughts, feelings, emotions, and can think, feel and imagine. The bullet smells, tastes, touches, hears and sees all that is going on around it. The bullet has empathy and is sensitive to its environment. If you are the bullet, then what are you thinking about?

The maps actually evolved into what I call a mapping platform and the umbrella term for the platform is called sketch-mapping.

Naming the Map Just like naming a painting the naming of the map was important to its meaning. I went from sight to inquiry to Fibonacci to Meta- and landed on case in point for the basic map of the series. The umbrella term for the maps is meta-sketch maps.

Case in point so described the map that it also helped me to find more meaning in the map itself.

I explored the bullet and the casing inside the bullet. I explored how bullets fire and how gunpowder explodes. My thoughts were exploding like the bullet explodes onto the points side of the map and leaves behind residual marks—the gunpowder of creativity!

Meta-sketch Map Key Case in Point Map Case in point n. An example or instance that illustrates a point being that is being discussed.

A metaphorical term used to describe the conceptual blending of the terms “case” and “point”— for the production of metacognition.

The “case in point map [CIP]” is the basic “META map” of the series. The left side of the map is the “case” which houses the subject of the map. The right side of the map is the “in point” which houses the “bullets” and the “meta-thinking” that surrounds the “bullets”.

Case The left side of the map is where you state your case. The case is the subject or topic of your writing.

Think of it as a large amount of text or drawings without concern for grammar or proper sentence and paragraph structure. You are unloading your mind and “thinking with your pencil”. Think of it as a wall of text or free flowing dump of information.

Your writing should include observations about subject, content, form and ideas that are relevant to the 20

subject. All subjects are areas of study. All areas of study are "things" that we are interested in "figuring out". There is no way to figure out something without thinking.

You can start with the general and move to the specific. After stating your case, review and circle main points. These are called “bullets”. The “bullets” are transferred over to the “in point” side of the map.

In Point “In point” derives from the ancient Anglo-Norman French en point or en bon point, in which point could variously mean a condition, state, situation, or plight. This is the right side of the map where you place your bullets. Bullets are circled words or ideas inside the case that become “bullet points” inside the “in point” side of the map.

Bullet Bullets are points of view derived from the subject. The first bullet on the “in point” side of the map is always the subject of the map. It is located in the upper right hand corner of the map and is larger than the other bullet points. Bullets are gleaned from building subject knowledge in the case. There is a point to all this! The bullets are instruments that help to produce “meta thinking” and meta-sketching.

Meta-thinking and meta-sketching are small packets of text and visual symbols (the size of a tea bag) that encapsulate the author’s inner dialogue with the “bullet”.

Group Map Group maps are a combination of individual “case in point maps”, “peer maps” or “how what why maps”. Individual maps are used for discussions that lead to the conceptualization of the “group map”. Ideally, groups consist of three to five members. Each group member has a specific role and is assigned a task: Role

Task

Scribe

Writes out case notes as the group uncovers information from the individual maps.

Mapper

Transfer bullets to point side of map. The mapper draws meta-sketches and writes Meta-thoughts from the group discussion.

Presenter

Shores up the entire discussion and presents information to class.

Group Presentation The white board map is a compilation of group meta-thinking and meta-sketches from the “in point” side of the map. “Group maps” can be either “case in point” maps or a “how? What? Why?” maps.

Maps are presented to the class after the group meeting. The group works together to draw a white board version of their group “in point” map. The groups can opt to take an Iphone picture of a complex map and project it from the computer in front of the class.

21

Peer Maps Peer maps are maps that follow a list of criteria or inquiry questions that are relevant to the “case”. The questions usually accompany the individual task at hand.

The “case “in a peer map can be a storyboard, script, paper, or artwork. Peer mapping usually consists of two and sometimes three people who exchange work for review during the idea and production stages of a project, paper, script or storyboard.

Class Map The “class map” is a large map that is used at the beginning of a class discussion to discover existing knowledge or the end of a class discussion to shore up a series of small group discussions. The class map is developed on a white board in front of the class during class discussions by the “meta-coach”.

After all evidence is presented by each group, the class then works together with the “meta-coach” to “meta-map” the “bullet” points.

The” meta-coach” listens intently and records key concepts. The key concepts are developed into “bullets” usually determined by class participants. Text and sketches are transcribed as class participants “meta-speak” about “bullets” in the “in point” side of the map. This is the shoring up of the discussion and each participant has an opportunity to participate in meta-group thinking.

How? What? Why? Map The How? What? Why? Map is the basic critique map. The map is constructed like a CIP map with the exception of the case side. The case side has three subjects (how, what and why) which formulate organic unity.

Organic Unity is an inseparable dynamic interrelationship between subject, form and content in composition. The how is the form, the what is the subject and the why is the content of the composition.

The mapper should have a basic knowledge of the formal elements and principals of design in order to write about form.

MAP COMPONENTS Case The left side of the map is where you state your case. The case is the subject or topic of your writing.

Think of it as a large amount of text and small drawings without concern for grammar or proper sentence and paragraph structure. You are unloading your mind and “thinking with your pencil”.

Your writing should include observations about subject, content, form and ideas that are relevant to the subject. All subjects are areas of study. All areas of study are "things" that we are interested in "figuring out". There is no way to figure out something without thinking.

22

You can start with the general and move to the specific. After stating your case, review and circle main points. These are called “bullets”. The “bullets” are transferred over to the “in point” side of the map.

In Point “In point” derives from the ancient Anglo-Norman French en point or en bon point, in which point could variously mean a condition, state, situation, or plight. This is the right side of the map where you place your bullets.

Bullet Bullets are circled words or ideas inside the case that become “bullet points” inside the “in point” side of the map. Bullets are points of view derived from the subject. The first bullet on the “in point” side of the map is always the subject of the map. It is located in the upper right hand corner of the map and is larger than the other bullet points. Bullets are gleaned from building subject knowledge in the case.

There is a point to all this! The bullets introduce “meta thinking” and the idea of “meta-talk”.

Bullet Point of View The “bullet point of view” is where you have fun with your “meta thinking”. Think of it as having a conversation with the “bullet” as the bullet. Instead of being an observer and having a conversation with self, you become bullet or the object you are studying. You see the world from the “bullets point of view”. And as you become the “bullet” you question your surroundings from the perspective of the bullet commonly known as “empathy”.

Empathy Empathy from the “bullets point of view” means understanding the point of view of the bullet by thinking or feeling for the bullet. This is the part where you step inside the bullet and become the “bullet”. It sounds kind of Zen, but the idea is gleaned from the world of the “Para-normal”. You are now a “bullet psychic”!

An example would be if you were studying a painting about a fish. You might have a bullet in your map called fish. Imagine yourself becoming a fish. How do you feel about being a fish? What do you hear, taste, touch, see and smell. Are you happy, sad or indifferent in this state of fish-dom? Do you like your surroundings? Is it dark and cold in the tank of life? Does the world seem big or small or scary? You can go anywhere with this kind of thinking. You can replace the fish with any subject.

MAP TERMINOLOGY Organic Unity Every design has three major components: Subject, Form and Content known as organic unity. Organic unity is finished and total completeness—an inseparable dynamic interrelationship between subject,

23

form and content in a work of art—a living organism. Organic unity asks us to answer these three questions: How? What? Why? Subject asks “what”—person, place, thing or form.

Form asks “how”—elements and principals of organization Content asks “why” –the psychological or emotional properties felt or implied.

The artist is motivated by feelings about the subject (WHAT?). The artistic elements—line, shape, and principals, balance and harmony—are manipulated to create form (HOW?) The work produces content (WHY?) that parallels the artist’s feelings about subject.

Subject (what) The what of a work of art; in representational art is the subject. Subject is person, object, theme or idea. When subject is form then it would be the elements of art.

The “case” area of the map is essentially the subject. All subjects are areas of study. All areas of study are "things" that we are interested in "figuring out". All fields of study have been advanced insofar as we have discovered ways to figure out whatever is being studied. There is no way to figure out something without thinking.

Form (how) Form is the elements and principals of art. How the elements are arranged in a work of art. The arbitrary or inventive arrangement of all the elements--according to the principals of organization--that that promotes unity in an art work. In video and film that which refers to an imaginative treatment of forms that gives a sense of intervals of time or motion.

Elements of Art 2D  Line  Shape  Texture  Value  Color 3D



Space



Time

Principals of Organization Harmony  Repetition  Rhythm  Pattern  Closure  Shared edges  Overlapping  Transparency  Interpenetration Variety  contrast,  elaboration Balance  Symmetrical  Approximate Symmetrical  Asymmetrical  Radial Proportion  Scale  Golden mean Dominance Movement Economy Perspective Kinetic

4D Motion

24

Content (why) All "content" in school is content in a subject. All subjects are areas of study. All areas of study are "things" that we are interested in "figuring out". The why of a work of art deals with psychological or emotional properties that are felt or implied. The content is the expression, essential meaning, significance, or aesthetic value of a work of art. Content refers to the sensory, subjective, psychological, or emotional properties we feel in a work of art, as opposed to our perception of its descriptive aspects alone.

Content can have these qualities to it: Emotion Emotion is a state of consciousness in which various internal sensations are experienced.

Emotion can be produced by a thought, memory or external motivator and can change our physical state. Universal emotions are love, hate, fear, sorrow and fear, happy, excited, nervous, disgusted, scared and overjoyed.

Feelings Feelings are something we experience as a result of external stimuli by reacting with one of your five senses or can come from physical sensations of hunger, thirst, tickle, itch, tingle, temperature, pain, sense of balance, and the sense of time.

Difference between emotions and feelings The difference between feelings and emotions is that feelings have to be triggered by an external motivating factor whereas emotions can be completely internalized. Feelings are thought to be short- term states such as someone startling you, whereas emotions are said to be long term states such as being in love or feeling traumatized by events from the past.

Intuition Intuition is the ability to understand something immediately, without the need for conscious reasoning.

Metaphor A figure of speech that describes a subject by asserting that is, on some point of comparison, the same as another otherwise unrelated object.

Meta-coach The group coordinator and coach for developing META-Maps.

Meta-speak Meta-speak are similar to “meta-think� except it happens during group and class discussions where your thoughts about your thinking become vocal.

25

Meta Thinking Higher thinking is known as “meta” thinking or metacognition. “Meta” means higher and “cognition” means thinking. Think of it as having a conversation with self or self-talk.

Simply put it is “thinking about thinking”. We are thinking at a higher level when we meta-think.

Meta-thinking by definition is evolving and currently can be an umbrella term for: meta memory; knowing that you know something to be true or false, meta comprehension; knowing that you understand what you know , problem solving; what you do when you don’t know what you are doing, and critical thinking; the art of making sense out of ideas.

The area surrounding the bullets is where you write or sketch out “meta-think” which are thoughts about what you think, believe, remember and know to be true. You are “thinking with your pencil”. Meta-talk enables you to move beyond existing knowledge to a place where you discover new issues, ideas and questions about what you are thinking about. You are asking yourself questions. You are discussing how you feel personally, interpersonally and socio-culturally about the bullet.

The point to all this writing and drawing is to get to a higher ground in your thinking by having a conversation with self. Meta-thinking is usually a silent activity with self. It becomes “meta-talking” when your thoughts become verbal.

Meta-sketch Meta-sketching is like meta-thinking except drawings and symbols replace text.

Visual metaphor A visual metaphor is a bi-directional thought. For example: ‘the warts on her nose look like a big green pickle”. You might say she has a nose that looks like a green pickle. Thus the visual metaphor of a warty nose is made from a pickle and a nose.

L-Mode Thinking (verbal) Verbal

Using words to name, describe, define

Analytic

Figuring things out step-by-step and part-by-part.

Symbolic

Using a symbol to stand for something. For example the + stands for the process of addition.

Abstract

Taking out a small bit of information and using it to represent the whole

Temporal

Keeping track of time, sequencing on thing after another; doing first things first, second things second, etc.

Literal

Adhering to a factual meaning of words or text; difficulty understanding metaphors.

Rational

Drawing conclusions based on reason and accepted facts.

26

Digital

Using numbers as in counting.

Logical

Drawing conclusions based on logic; one thing following another in step-by-step order.

For example, a mathematical theorem or a well-stated argument.

Linear

Thinking in terms of linked ides, one thought directly following another, often lending to a convergent conclusion. The linear process can be brought to a halt by missing data.

R-Mode Thinking L-Mode Thinking (visual) Non-Verbal

Using visual, nonverbal cognition to process perceptions

Synthetic

Putting parts together to form wholes. Perceiving things in context.

Actual, real

Relating to things as they are, in reality, at the present moment.

Analogic

Seeing likenesses among things; understanding metaphoric relationships.

Non temporal

Lacking sense of time passing.

Imaginative

conjuring mental visual images, real or imagines.

Nonrational

Not requiring a basis of reason or facts; willingness to suspend judgment.

Spatial

Seeing where things are located in space, in relation to other things, and how parts go together to form a whole.

Intuitive

Making leaps of insight, often based on incomplete patterns, hunches, feelings, visual images, or visual connections. Able to jump across missing data.

Holistic

Seeing whole things all at once, in reality, and in all of their complexity; perceiving overall patterns and structures, often leading to divergent conclusions.

Testing the Sketch Maps After the CIP map was developed I was able to test it in the fall 2013 drawing, design and multimedia courses. The CIP was an immediate success. The students were engaged. But the real excitement took place when the teams got together and mapped their ideas with group CIP’s.

I got the idea to have them draw their point side of the maps on the white board after their group meeting. Each team came up with group points and drew their results on the white board with colored markers. It is and continues to be a huge success! The drawings and words produced great ideas and helped them to discuss their learning in real time. It also helped them to connect and engage with each

27

other beyond my expectations when it was expanded into the group map and classroom white board mapping that follows.

Active & Cooperative Learning The meta-sketch map is used to facilitate active learning, in which students solve problems, answer questions, formulate questions of their own, discuss, explain, debate, or brainstorm during class; cooperative learning, in which students work in teams on problems and projects under conditions that assure both positive interdependence and individual accountability; and inductive teaching and learning, in which students are first presented with challenges (questions or problems) and learn the course material in the context of addressing the challenges. Inductive methods include inquiry-based learning, case-based instruction, problem-based learning, project-based learning, discovery learning, and just-in-time teaching (Feldmam, R. Retrieved September 30, 2013, from http://www4.ncsu.edu/unity/lockers/users/f/felder/public/Student-

28

Centered.html).

Visual mapping is an instructional method that engages students in the learning process (Prince, 2004, p. 1) or anything course-related that all students in a class session are called upon to do other than simply watching, listening and taking note (Feldman, 2009).

Visual mapping is a shift from the conventional linear way of taking notes as taught in schools to one more in tune with the way your brain naturally functions and one that will give you much better intellectual and creative reward. In short, active learning requires students to do meaningful learning activities and think about what they are doing.

Visual mapping creates a visual history of “real time learning”. Visual mapping reinforces learning by making a record of the learning process for deeper discussions and richer presentations.

The CIP mapping platform divides thought into the two distinct sides of cognition and metacognition. When two pictures merge to become a new idea it is a visual metaphor. Consequently when a word and a picture become a thought it too is a metaphor but a new kind of metaphor—the visual note taking metaphor— tiny symbols that represent thought like an ear with muscles attached to it.

My Own Mapping As I was doing the research I was mapping my own thoughts. My sketch notes evolved into research maps and eventually into the lecture notes for the upcoming semester when I tested the maps.

29

Future Research In today’s visual culture, there has never been more of a need to help students develop visual sketch noting and visual mapping. Students today are primarily visual learners and as such they need to develop their sketch mapping skills so they can connect linear information with visual symbols.

Students must become familiar with drawing symbols for communicating.

I would like to propose a course where students can learn the art of meta-sketch mapping and develop their own iconic alphabet for learning, note taking and presentations. There are universal standards and conventions in iconography and cultural symbolism and students could benefit by learning to construct their own symbols so they can use them to connect to what they are learning and with one another.

30

References Ainsworth, S., Prain, V., & Tytler, R. (2011). Drawing to Learn in Science. Science, 333(6046), 10961097.

Boyer, E. (1990), Scholarship Reconsidered: The Priorities of the Professorate, the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.

Cross, P. & Steadman, M., (1986) Classroom Research: Implementing the Scholarship of Teaching, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Chickering, A., and Z. Gamson, “Seven Principles for Good Practice,” AAHE Bulletin, Vol. 39, ED 282 491, March 1987, pp. 3–7.

Dade, C (2005). Educating the net generation: Neomillennial learning styles ch. 15 p. 2. Retrieved September 30, 2013, from http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/pub7101.pdf.

Felder, R. M. R. Brent, R (2009). "Active Learning: An Introduction." ASQ Higher Education Brief, 2(4), August 2009.

Felder, R. Student centered teaching and learning. Retrieved September 30, 2013 from http://www4.ncsu.edu/unity/lockers/users/f/felder/public/Student-Centered.html.

Giampa, J. (2012). A conceptual tool for mapping visual metaphor. (Doctoral dissertation).

Hanks, K., (1980). Rapid Viz: A new method for the rapid visualization of ideas. Kaufman, Inc, Los Altos, California.

Hyerle, D. (1993). Thinking maps as tools for multiple modes of understanding (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved November 19. 2010, from ProQuest Digital dissertations Rohde, M., 2013. The sketchnote handbook: the illustrated guide to visual note taking. Peachpit Press, Pearson Education.

Database. (AAT9430774) Prince, M. J. (2004). Does active learning work? A review of the research.

J. Engr. Education, 93(3), 223-231.

Bach, R. (1977). Illusions: the adventures of a reluctant messiah. Dell publishing corporation, New York, New York.

Schulman, New Elaborations on the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 1998 How People Learn, National Research Council, How People Learn, 2000.

31