|Year : 2018 | Volume
| Issue : 2 | Page : 122-126
Effectiveness of mind mapping as a learning tool among dental students
Mohnish Muchhal, Basavaraj Patthi, Ashish Singla, Ritu Gupta, Ravneet Malhi, Devanshu Chaudhary
Department of Public Health Dentistry, D. J. College of Dental Sciences and Research, Modinagar, Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh, India
|Date of Submission||15-Jan-2018|
|Date of Acceptance||10-Apr-2018|
|Date of Web Publication||24-May-2018|
Dr. Mohnish Muchhal
Department of Public Health Dentistry, D. J. College of Dental Sciences and Research, Modinagar, Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh
Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None
Introduction: The foremost goal of our education system is to develop the students' skills to reach information rather than transferring the present information. Instead of understanding and applying the concepts (meaningful learning), students used to memorize the facts. Therefore, long-term independent learning process is required for the students. Aim: This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of mind mapping as a learning tool and to assess its information retrieval potential among dental students over conventional system of learning. Materials and Methods: An interventional study was conducted among 90 students of BDS 3rd year students. A questionnaire consisting of questions related to oral hygiene index (OHI) and OHI-simplified (OHI-S) was distributed to them. Data were analyzed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) 18.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA) and descriptive and analytical tests including mean, standard deviation, and Chi-square test. Results: Of the 90 students, only 82 students responded to the questionnaire generating a response rate of 89.5%. The mean score of students in the mind map (MM) group was significantly higher than the conventional group (posttest – 13.60 ± 0.99 vs 8.73 ± 2.13, P = 0.001). Gain in knowledge score was 7.74 vs. 3.43; statistically significant difference was found between the two groups for the gain in knowledge score as well as in mean percentage gain in knowledge score. Conclusion: Specific and prudent thinking with self-efficacy should be the purpose of education system rather than making the students literate only. This requires shifting of traditional teaching method with innovative method, and MM is one of the innovative as well as attractive processes of teaching which further help the students to learn the subject more effectively in a creative way.
Keywords: Education, learning, memory, retention, teaching
|How to cite this article:|
Muchhal M, Patthi B, Singla A, Gupta R, Malhi R, Chaudhary D. Effectiveness of mind mapping as a learning tool among dental students. J Indian Assoc Public Health Dent 2018;16:122-6
|How to cite this URL:|
Muchhal M, Patthi B, Singla A, Gupta R, Malhi R, Chaudhary D. Effectiveness of mind mapping as a learning tool among dental students. J Indian Assoc Public Health Dent [serial online] 2018 [cited 2020 Sep 24];16:122-6. Available from: http://www.jiaphd.org/text.asp?2018/16/2/122/233070
| Introduction|| |
Over the last few decades, education system has come a long way for keeping in pace with this digital era. It has greatly evolved from the blackboard-oriented, teacher-centered approach to the many clicking and modern learning technologies such as mnemonics, charts, and maps. Numerous teaching techniques such as didactic learning, web-based learning, problem-based learning, evidence-based learning, and case-based learning have been developed in the recent years, and some may develop their own innovative methods. Developing the students skills to reach information rather than transferring the present information is the foremost goal of our education system.,,,,, However, rather than understanding and applying the concepts (meaningful learning), students used to memorize the facts. Hence, there is need to prepare the students for life-long, self-directed learning process. Self-directed learning process can be developed by bottom-up approach, where rich experiences turn into essential learning and then students will be able to think and develop ideas. Although various methods are available for the meaningful learning with conceptual framework.
But still, student faces major problem during their course in organizing and retaining information regarding the subject. As lecture is traditional teaching–learning method, but with which involves one way process of knowledge transmission from the teacher to the student due to which students are lacking behind in their creative abilities. There is immediate need to use the advanced and student-centered educational methods over the conventional methods. Therefore, a new strategy called “Mind mapping” has been introduced by British psychologist named, Buzan T during the end of 1960s. Since its inception, it has been used multidimensionally in various streams of learning in order to build and achieve good results. In the learning process, mind mapping is an enormously appreciable technique, to be learnt and used by the students frequently. This technique permits individuals to “organize facts and thoughts” in a map format containing a “central image in which the main themes radiating from the central image, branches with key images and key words, plus branches creating a connected nodal structure.”,
Few studies suggest that in improving the individual's ability to remember and recall the facts in a better way. Mind mapping proves to be valuable tool for studying, summarizing information, retaining and recall information., As there is only one study among dental professionals regarding this technique till now, we have undertaken this present study so that the dental students can effectively apply mind map (MM) in their routine note making as it promotes students' deep learning and also increases their productivity and it holds promise for better integration of clinical cases along with the theoretical knowledge likely to be encountered during their routine clinical practice.
To evaluate the effectiveness of mind mapping as a learning tool and to assess its information retrieval potential among dental students over conventional system of learning.
| Materials and Methods|| |
The study was conducted in a Dental College at Modinagar which is located in the western part of Uttar Pradesh, India.
An interventional questionnaire-based study was carried out among 90 students of BDS 3rd year from a Dental College in western Uttar Pradesh, India. Ethical approval was obtained from the Institutional Review Board. Informed consent was attained from all the study participants before the study. Participation in the study was voluntary, and confidentiality of data was maintained. Students were randomly divided into two groups: mind mapping group, i.e., test group (45 students) and conventional group, i.e., control group (45 students).
The questionnaire was self-administered and was explained to all the participants. Students were requested to complete the questionnaire within the stipulated time of 45 min. The questionnaire used in the study consisted of two parts. The first part included the participants' demographic data and the second one included the questions related to oral hygiene index (OHI) and OHI-simplified (OHI-S). The second part of the questionnaire consisted of 15 multiple choice questions from the selected topic (OHI and OHI-S) designed by the researchers and experts in the field of dental public health. The questionnaire was delivered to each participant by a third party who was new to the study participants.
Researcher had two training sessions before the intervention for the test group. In the first session, a general or brief introduction about MM, its preparation, uses, and the difference from the routine conventional method of reading was explained to the test group.
In the 2nd session, the application of MM [Figure 1] in their routine dental education and maximum retrieval of information was explained to them. After the training session, both the groups were given a pretested questionnaire. Both groups were allotted a time period of 45 min, and on the 7th day, again the same questionnaire was distributed to check the knowledge gain and retention. On the same day, participants were asked to rate regarding the perception and feedback of the teaching methods by another questionnaire which was graded in Likert scale ranging from 1 to 4 by the participants under various parameters. Each correct response carried 1 point and wrong response carried 0.
Thus, knowledge of the participants was measured as scaled variables (numerical), and mean scores were calculated. Each question reflected a similar level of difficulty, and intergroup scores were compared. The knowledge gain was considered to be the primary outcome variable, and it was compared among the two groups.
A pilot study was conducted among 10 students who were not included in the main study and comprised 11% of the study sample for reliability and validity. Reliability was measured through test-retest, and it showed that measured kappa (κ) is 0.88 and weighted kappa (κ) is 0.92. Internal consistency measured through Cronbach's alpha (α) was found to be 0.76. Construct validity was assured using spearman's correlation coefficient (P < 0.001).
The analysis was performed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) 18.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA) and descriptive and analytical tests including mean, standard deviation, and Chi-square test. The difference in the mean knowledge score between the groups, before and after the intervention, was calculated.
Mann–Whitney U-test and Wilcoxon signed rank test were applied for the percentage knowledge gain and for the assessment of knowledge gain. Chi-square test was applied for comparison of the rating of the teaching method by the participants under various parameters. P ≤ 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
| Results|| |
The questionnaire-based study was carried out among the 90 students of BDS 3rd year regarding the information retrieval potential. A total of 82 undergraduates completed the questionnaire, generating the response rate of 91.1%.
The study sample comprised of around 51.2% males and 48.8% females. The mean age of the individuals was 20.97 ± 1.14 years [Table 1].
Intergroup comparison of gain in the knowledge scores (pre- and post-intervention) among the mind mapping and conventional study groups showed that for the mind mapping group, gain in knowledge score was 7.74 whereas for the conventional group, it was 3.43 and statistically significant difference was found (P < 0.001) between the two groups for the gain in knowledge score as well as in mean percentage gain in knowledge score [Table 2].
|Table 2: Intergroup comparison of gain in the knowledge scores (pre- and postintervention) among the mind mapping and conventional study groups|
Click here to view
Intragroup comparison of gain in the knowledge scores (pre- and post-intervention) among the mind mapping and conventional study groups showed that for the mind mapping group, the preintervention score was 6.09 and postintervention score was 13.60, and the difference was statistically significant (P < 0.001). For the conventional group, the preintervention score was 5.29 and postintervention score was 8.73, and the difference was statistically significant [Table 3].
|Table 3: Intragroup comparison of gain in the knowledge scores (pre- and postintervention) among the mind mapping and conventional study groups|
Click here to view
It was found that overall, significantly higher proportions of students have given the very good and/or excellent rating to MM method, when compared to the text method of learning. For the objective clear or not, 83.3% gave excellent rating to mind mapping while for the conventional, 75% gave poor rating whereas in case of interest variable, 89.3% gave excellent rating to mind mapping and for the conventional group, 85% showed poor rating. Around 85.2% of the participants in MM group reported excellent rating in relation to understanding the concept whereas only 14.8% of conventional group gave it as an excellent rating. Among the mind mapping group, 91.7% stated excellent rating in terms of objective achieved whereas among conventional group, only 8.3% rated it as excellent. About 80.6% of participants overall rated mind mapping to be excellent and 19.4% among conventional group rated to be excellent [Table 4].
|Table 4: Comparison of the rating of the teaching methods given by the participants under various parameters|
Click here to view
| Discussion|| |
For the students, education is the integral part in their life, and they have to reach the highest peak of knowledge through the shorter time span. Moreover, they have to read the extensive literature in their field which creates the retaining problems. However, to overcome this, many new technologies have come in the modern era.
Various teaching methods have their own potential and limitations; hence, evaluation has become the necessary part of education system as it directly affects the ability of the students. The present study offers insight into the comparison of mind mapping with conventional method of teaching. In our work, mind mapping method was more persuasive as compared to the conventional method based on the individual's response in case of retrieving information, and significant difference was found between both the groups. Among the various advanced technologies, the MM technique is such kind of innovative technique, which has created interest among the students.
Through this study, it was seen that the mean score of students in the MM group was significantly higher than the conventional group. The findings are consistent with the study conducted by Kalyanasundaram et al. in 2017 and Eshwar et al. in 2016 where they found that mind mapping technique was more potent than the traditional method of reading textbooks as well as over lecture-based learning, respectively.
Even Wickramasinghe et al. in 2008 and Deshatty and Mokashi  in 2013 also concluded through their studies that MM is an effective learning tool for medical students. It was found through this study that pretest score of MM group (6.09 ± 2.04) was somewhat higher than the conventional group (5.29 ± 2.52) which are in agreement with the study done by Eshwar et al. in 2013.
The present study comprehensively assessed the comparison of the rating of two teaching methods, i.e., conventional and mind mapping by the students on various parameters such as objective, interest, confined to the topic, easy understanding of the topic, retention, and objectives achieved. It was found that overall rating of MM was having better scores than conventional method of learning at significant level.
Hence, we can say that MM is deeper learning method for the reflective thinking as well as for retaining the information. There is need to set up more efforts to strengthen the educational system by undertaking the more studies to evaluate the MM method.
Till date, very limited studies have been done regarding this concept. There was not much literature available for comparison of this study which proved a major limitation. Further studies involving larger sample size should be carried out to elucidate the knowledge and importance of mind mapping in comparison to conventional method of reading.
- It should be included in education system as it is easy to learn and understand so that students can apply for multiple purpose and enhance their theoretical knowledge Mind mapping can be easily learnt as well as it can be easily taught to undergraduate students
- who have no previous background in mind mapping and doing so requires no cost or expensive equipment
- It should be applied for any project involving large amounts of information, including teaching and other presentations, researching and writing, brainstorming, and project planning and management
- It improves the academic performance through both written and practical work by providing students with the ability to plan and structure their projects more effectively
- Mind maps act as an optional tool for summarizing problem-based learning discussion and may be also used to complement the learning process in problem-based learning based on students' learning needs
- Mind mapping targets the visual-spatial intelligence and results in the creation of a visual aid to support the enhancement of other intelligences
- Educators can explore the resources in the appendix and consider the multitude of cross-curricular possibilities for application in their personal investigation into the value of mind mapping for their students.
| Conclusion|| |
Specific and prudent thinking with self-efficacy should be the purpose of education system rather than making the students literate only. This requires shifting of traditional teaching method with innovative method, and MM is one of the innovative as well as attractive processes of teaching which further helps the students to learn the subject more effectively in a creative way. Moreover, it is an easy method of retaining the information at relative lesser or no cost. Hence, it is suggested that MM should be used as a learning tool in dentistry along with conventional method of reading.
Financial support and sponsorship
Conflicts of interest
There are no conflicts of interest.
| References|| |
Tee TK, Azman MN, Mohamed S, Mohamad MM, Yunos JM, Yee MH, et al
. Buzan mind mapping: An efficient technique for note-taking. Int J Soc Hum Sci Eng 2014;8:28-31.
Eshwar S, Jain V, Rekha K, Manvi S. Comparison of mind mapping and lecture based teaching learning method among dental undergraduates using solo taxonomy in Bangalore. India Res Rev J Dent Sci 2016;4:169-77.
D'Antoni AV, Zipp GP, Olson VG. Interrater reliability of the mind map assessment rubric in a cohort of medical students. BMC Med Educ 2009;9:19.
Kim S, Phillips WR, Pinsky L, Brock D, Phillips K, Keary J, et al.
A conceptual framework for developing teaching cases: A review and synthesis of the literature across disciplines. Med Educ 2006;40:867-76.
Barrows HS. Practice-Based Learning: Problem-Based Learning Applied to Medical Education. Springfield, IL: Southern Illinois University, School of Medicine; 1994.
Dolmans DH, De Grave W, Wolfhagen IH, van der Vleuten CP. Problem-based learning: Future challenges for educational practice and research. Med Educ 2005;39:732-41.
Metzdorff MT. Evidence-based medicine: What it is, what it isn't, and are we practicing it? J Trauma Acute Care Surg 2013;75:927-35.
Deshatty DD, Mokashi V. Mind maps as a learning tool in anatomy. Int J Anat Res 2013;1:100-3.
Kalyanasundaram M, Abraham SB, Ramachandran D, Jayaseelan V, Bazroy J, Singh Z, et al.
Effectiveness of mind mapping technique in information retrieval among medical college students in Puducherry – A pilot study. Indian J Community Med 2017;42:19-23.
] [Full text]
Spoorthi BR, Prashanthi C, Pandurangappa R. Mind Mapping- an effective learning adjunct to acquire a tsunami of information. Int J Sci Res 2013;3:1-5.
Adodo SO. Effect of mind-mapping as a self-regulated learning strategy on students' achievement in basic science and technology. Mediterr J Soc Sci 2013;4:163-72.
Wickramasinghe A, Widanapathirana N, Kuruppu O, Liyanage I, Karunathilake IM. Effectiveness of mind maps as a learning tool for medical students. Southeast Asian J Med Educ 2008;1:30-2.
[Table 1], [Table 2], [Table 3], [Table 4]