Table 3 Coding categories used for the analysis of the video tapes and the field notes
From: Integration of clinical and basic sciences in concept maps: a mixed-method study on teacher learning
Concept map | Discipline of each participant | |
|---|---|---|
Category | Description | Examples |
Motivation | Positive and negative drive to adopt concept mapping. | It is great fun, this way of working. (E) |
Understanding of the goal of the cooperative learning task in order to stay on track. | My enthusiasm is reduced because I still do not understand the goal of concept mapping. (R) | |
Exchange of information | Explanations and explications without involvement from others, e.g., explications of the participant’s own contribution to the concept map | The basic science categorization is good to know but you should not really apply it. (E) |
For me, the concept map is upside down. (E) | ||
Interaction | Active involvement reflected in questions participants ask each other, asking for and giving clarifications | I do not know whether this results in blood in faeces. You know that. (R) |
Now I am completely confused: how do you use secretor and osmotic? Up to 2 hours ago, it was our main device. This distinction can’t be that weird? (R) | ||
Decision making | Negotiations about how to structure the concept map, implying what to adopt in the map. | Let’s distinguish pathogenesis and pathophysiology. Okay, this categorization does not commit us to anything. (E) |
Let’s stop with expanding the concept map. Every concept covers more detailed concepts. (E) | ||