Concept Mapping: A Tool for Active Learning and Critical Thinking

What Is Concept Mapping?

Concept maps visually represent knowledge structures by linking ideas, processes, or concepts using connecting lines, directional arrows, and explanatory labels (Eppler, 2006).

In educational settings, concept maps can serve as both a learning aid and a diagnostic tool. By making the architecture of thought explicit, concept mapping supports meaningful learning, deeper understanding, and metacognitive awareness.

Below is an example of a simple concept map about a “Concept Map.”

Why Use Concept Maps in a Critical Thinking Course?

In my Critical Thinking course at NYU, concept mapping is not only a means of visualizing knowledge but also a way for students to actively construct frameworks of understanding, moving beyond passive information absorption toward a more inquiry-driven learning process. Furthermore, structured graphic representations reduce cognitive load by distributing mental work across visual and verbal modalities (Sweller, 2010; Paivio, 1986).

In the course, concept maps contribute directly to the learning goals by fostering clarity, organization, and logic in student reasoning. As Dwyer (2017) notes in Critical Thinking: Conceptual Perspectives and Practical Guidelines, mapping techniques serve as “cognitive scaffolds that facilitate the construction and evaluation of arguments, and support the development of higher-order thinking skills” (p. 49).

Using Concept Maps for Logical Argumentation

While concept maps are useful for capturing broad conceptual structures, argument maps take this visualization further by honing in on logical reasoning. Argument mapping is a technique that represents the structure of an argument using boxes (propositions) and arrows (inferential links). Each box might represent a claim, reason, objection, or rebuttal, and the arrows make clear how these propositions relate.

Dwyer (2017) highlights that argument maps simplify the reading and assimilation of complex arguments by “removing the need for attention switching from paragraph to paragraph” (p. 50). As students work with arguments visually, they not only identify logical structures but also engage in revision and critique. Argument mapping helps make flaws in reasoning more visible and easier to repair.

Below is an example of an argument map I created using a Zoom Whiteboard.

Access the map on Zoom whiteboard (needs NYU credential).

Tools for Collaborative Mapping

Various online tools make it easier to plan collaborative mapping activities into both in-person and asynchronous online courses. For example, Zoom Whiteboard, Google Slide, Lucidchart, Canva, Miro, and Padlet all allow for the collaborative creation and sharing of visual frameworks. In my course, we use Lucidchart, Padlet, and Zoom Whiteboard extensively.

Two Examples of Mapping Assignments from Critical Thinking Course

These assignment examples were posted on my NYU Brightspace course site discussion forum. Student submissions were shared and discussed in both online asynchronous and in-person classes.

Example 1: Developing your own framework of thinking process

“Based on our discussion of frameworks for thinking and cognitive processes that are involved in, or necessary for, critical thinking, develop your own framework of thinking processes by creating a concept map.

This map should include the processes and skills that you consider most important for critical thinking. Additionally, explain why you chose to include or exclude certain processes.

You can create the concept map a) using the draw feature in the google document/slides, b) using a tool that you are already familiar with, such as Visio, Lucid, Canva, Microsoft Word etc., or c) draw on a paper and upload a (scanned) picture of the diagram. 

To share your concept map, attach a screen capture or file, or share the link to the map if it's accessed online.” 

---

Example 2: Argument Mapping

“Last week, we practiced creating a concept map.

This week, our main textbook has introduced argument mapping, along with examples. For this task, select a dominant idea within your field of study - it could be a concept, assumption, theory, etc. Then, create an argument map based on this idea and share it with your class. This exercise will also help you prepare for your midterm paper.

This time, choose and utilize a tool renowned for its efficiency in creating maps - no manual drawing. Include at least 5 boxes in your map. It's crucial nowadays to be adept with modern cognitive tools to boost your critical thinking skills.

I strongly recommend the following tools:

• Zoom Whiteboard (https://www.zoom.com/en/products/online-whiteboard/): This tool is also free, accessible with your existing NYU Zoom account (sign in through SSO). Despite its name, this is a standalone application not linked to video conferencing. After logging into your Zoom account, select “New Whiteboard” from the Whiteboard menu.

• Lucid (Lucidchart.com): Sign up for free using your nyu.edu email to access the education version. If this is your first encounter with Lucid, click the “Sign Up for free” button and create an account with your NYU email. It will inquire if you're a student, then grant access to the Education version.

Feel free to use other preferred software or tools, such as Canva, Google Docs or Slides, Visio, Miro, etc. Just ensure that your map effectively displays the structure and flow of your argument.

Post the screen capture or/and the link to your argument map to the discussion board. Briefly explain the idea you selected, as well as how you planned and organized your argument map.”

Concept and argument mapping are cognitive tools that cultivate transferable skills in reasoning, communication, and information literacy. By helping students make their thinking visible, these strategies encourage deeper engagement and critical reflection. The integration of visual mapping into your class learning activity can enhance both learning outcomes and student confidence.

---

References

Dwyer, C. P. (2017). Critical thinking: Conceptual perspectives and practical guidelines. Cambridge University Press. Available online via NYU Library, Course Reserve, and Brightspace course site.

Eppler, M. J. (2006). A comparison between concept maps, mind maps, conceptual diagrams, and visual metaphors as complementary tools for knowledge construction and sharing. Information Visualization, 5(3), 202–211. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.ivs.9500126

Nesbit, J. C., & Adesope, O. O. (2006). Learning with concept and knowledge maps: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 76(3), 413–448. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543076003413

Novak, J. D., & Cañas, A. J. (2008). The theory underlying concept maps and how to construct and use them. Technical Report IHMC CmapTools 2006-01 Rev 01-2008, Institute for Human and Machine Cognition.

van Gelder, T. (2007). The rationale for Rationale™. Department of Philosophy, University of Melbourne. https://www.rationaleonline.com

Sweller, J. (2010). Cognitive load theory: Recent theoretical advances. In J. Plass, R. Moreno, & R. Brünken (Eds.), Cognitive load theory (pp. 29–47). Cambridge University Press.

Paivio, A. (1986). Mental representations: A dual coding approach. Oxford University Press.