EDP Sciences logo
Subscriber Authentication Point
Rechercher
Menu
Accueil Tous les numéros Volume 17 / Numéro 2 (Mai 2016) Pédagogie Médicale, 17 2 (2016) 95-107 References
Free Access
Issue
Pédagogie Médicale
Volume 17, Number 2, Mai 2016
Page(s) 95 - 107
Section Recherche et Perspectives
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/pmed/2016031
Published online 5 décembre 2016
  1. Jonassen DH, Marra RM. Concept mapping and other formalisms as mindtools for representing knowledge. Association for Learning Technology Journal 1994;2:50-6. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  2. Novak JD. Concept mapping: a useful tool for science education. J Res Sci Teach 1990;27:937-49. [Google Scholar]
  3. Chang Y-H, Chang C-Y, Tseng Y-H. Trends of science education research: An automatic content analysis. J Sci Educ Technol 2010;19:315-31. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  4. Pudelko B, Young M, Vincent‐Lamarre P, Charlin B. Mapping as a learning strategy in health professions education: a critical analysis. Med Educ 2012;46: 1215-25. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Demeester A, Vanpee D, Marchand C, Eymard C. Formation au raisonnement clinique: perspectives d’utilisation des cartes conceptuelles. Pédagogie Médicale 2010;11:81-95. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
  6. Daley BJ, Torre DM. Concept maps in medical education: an analytical literature review. Med Educ 2010;44:440-8. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Biggs J. Enhancing teaching through constructive alignment. High Educ 1996;32:347-64. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  8. Schmidt HG, Rotgans JI, Yew EH. The process of problem‐ based learning: what works and why. Med Educ 2011;45:792-806. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Zwaal W, Otting H. The impact of concept mapping on the process of problem-based learning. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based Learning 2012;6:7. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  10. Gijselaers W. Perspectives on problem-based learning. New York (NY) : Springer, 1995. [Google Scholar]
  11. Institute of Human and Machine Cognition (IHMC). Pensacola (FL). CMap Tools software and research. 2016 [On-line] Disponible sur : http://cmap.ihmc.us/ [Google Scholar]
  12. Rochette A, Bélisle M, Laflamme A, Doucet M, Chaput M, Fillion B. Étude descriptive de l’utilisation des cartes conceptuelles comme stratégie pédagogique en sciences de la santé. Pédagogie Médicale 2010;11:97-109. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
  13. Tobias S, Duffy TM. Constructivist instruction: Success or failure? New York (NY): Routledge, 2009. [Google Scholar]
  14. Merriam SB. Case study research in education: A qualitative approach. San Francisco (CA): Jossey-Bass; 1988. [Google Scholar]
  15. Klein G, Hoffman RR. Macrocognition, mental models, and cognitive task analysis methodology. In: Schraagen JM, Militello LG, Ormerod TC, Lipshitz R, editors. Naturalistic decision making and macrocognition. Hampshire (UK): Ashgate Publishing; 2008, 57-80. [Google Scholar]
  16. Norman G. Teaching basic science to optimize transfer. Med Teach 2009;31:807-11. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Woods NN, Brooks LR, Norman GR. The value of basic science in clinical diagnosis: creating coherence among signs and symptoms. Med Educ 2005; 39:107-12. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Charlin B, Boshuizen H, Custers EJ, Feltovich PJ. Scripts and clinical reasoning. Med Educ 2007;41: 1178-84. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Young JQ, Van Merrienboer J, Durning S, Ten Cate O. Cognitive Load Theory: Implications for medical education: AMEE Guide No. 86. Med Teach 2014; 36:371-84. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Anderson LW, Krathwohl DR, Bloom BS. A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives: New York (NY): Adison Wesley Longman, 2001. [Google Scholar]
  21. Yin R. Case study research: Design and methods. Beverly Hills (CA): Sage Publishing, 1994. [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.