1 of 21

Master of Education

ENHANCING SCIENCE CONCEPTUAL UNDERSTANDING THROUGH MIND MAPPING AMONG YEAR SIX DUAL LANGUAGE PROGRAMME PUPILS

Presentor: Philipda Wong Lo Ping ((E60109240043)

Chapters 1, 2 & 3 | Project Proposal Presentation

2 of 21

PRESENTATION OVERVIEW

01

Chapter 1

Introduction — Background, Problem Statement, Objectives & Research Questions

02

Chapter 2

Literature Review — Conceptual Understanding, Mind Mapping, Theoretical Frameworks

03

Chapter 3

Methodology — Research Design, Sample, Instruments, Data Collection & Analysis

3 of 21

CHAPTER 1 | Background of the Study

CONTEXT

• Malaysia's Dual Language Programme (DLP)

• Science taught in English to strengthen English proficiency

• Aims to prepare pupils for global academic demands

• Selected schools implement DLP under MOE (2021)

CHALLENGE IDENTIFIED

• Cognitive overload: processing science content + English simultaneously

• Pupils struggle with scientific terminology in English (Lim & Tan, 2022)

• Heavy reliance on memorisation over meaningful understanding

PROPOSED

SOLUTION

Structured &

Teacher-Guided

Mind Mapping

Strategy

Grounded in:

• Multimedia Learning Theory (Mayer, 2020)

• Cognitive Load Theory (Sweller et al., 2023)

4 of 21

CHAPTER 1 | Statement of the Problem

Year 6 DLP pupils showed limited Science conceptual understanding when taught in English.

1

Difficulty identifying main ideas from extended explanations

2

Struggled to connect related scientific concepts

3

Low confidence explaining ideas in English

4

Inconsistent performance in written assessments

Root Cause: Conventional note-taking was insufficient for organising complex bilingual scientific information (Sweller et al., 2023)

5 of 21

CHAPTER 1 | Objectives & Research Questions

RESEARCH OBJECTIVES

RO1

Determine the level of Science conceptual understanding among Year Six DLP pupils prior to the implementation of the structured and teacher-guided mind mapping strategy.

RO2

Implement the structured mind mapping strategy in selected Science lessons

RO3

Examine the effectiveness in improving pupils' conceptual understanding

RO4

Explore pupils' engagement and learning behaviours during intervention

RESEARCH QUESTIONS

RQ1

What is the level of Science conceptual understanding among Year Six DLP pupils prior to the implementation of the structured and teacher-guided mind mapping strategy?

RQ2

To what extent does the mind mapping strategy improve Science conceptual understanding?

RQ3

How does mind mapping influence pupils' engagement and learning behaviours during lessons?

6 of 21

02

CHAPTER 2

Review of

Related Literature

Conceptual Understanding • Mind Mapping • Theoretical Foundations • Empirical Evidence

7 of 21

CHAPTER 2 | Science Conceptual Understanding

What is Conceptual Understanding?

Ability to grasp relationships among ideas and apply knowledge meaningfully — not just memorise isolated facts (Mayer, 2020)

SELECT

Identify relevant information

ORGANISE

Build coherent structure

INTEGRATE

Connect to prior knowledge

APPLY

Transfer to new contexts

Pacaci (224)

The use of a structured comparison task and visual representation showed a great improvement in conceptual learning in contrast to typical teaching methods.

Schroeder et al. (2022)

Participants relying on concept maps were better retaining and transferring knowledge than those basing their revision on a text format.

Sweller et al. (2023)

Limited working memory — structured design essential for schema construction

DLP CHALLENGE:

Bilingual instruction adds cognitive load — language processing interferes with conceptual reasoning (Graham et al., 2022; Lim & Tan, 2022)

8 of 21

Figure 2.1 shows the conceptual framework guiding this study. The independent variable is structured teacher-guided mind mapping. This strategy helps pupils organise concepts visually. Improved organisation leads to better conceptual understanding and increased engagement.

Figure 2.1 Conceptual Framework

9 of 21

CHAPTER 2 | Theoretical Foundations

MULTIMEDIA LEARNING THEORY

Mayer (2020)

Learners process info through VISUAL and VERBAL channels. Mind mapping integrates both — keywords (verbal) + spatial layout (visual) — strengthening encoding and retrieval.

COGNITIVE LOAD THEORY

Sweller et al. (2023)

Reduce EXTRANEOUS load (unnecessary complexity) → Support GERMANE processing (schema construction). Mind mapping provides scaffold that organises information systematically.

HOW MIND MAPPING ADDRESSES THESE THEORIES

Visual Organisation

Hierarchical branches reduce cognitive overload

Dual Coding

Keywords + spatial layout activate both channels

Schema Building

Links between concepts build lasting understanding

Active Learning

Pupils engage deeply with content construction

10 of 21

CHAPTER 2 | Empirical Evidence on Mind Mapping

Research supports the effectiveness of mind mapping in Science education:

Rahman & Ismail (2023)

Mind mapping significantly improved academic achievement in Science among Malaysian primary pupils.

Zhang & Wong (2025)

Mind mapping enhanced engagement and conceptual connections in bilingual Science instruction.

Nesbit and Adesope (2006) Meta-analysis

Mind mapping lead to positive effects of graphic organizers.

Schroeder et al. (2022)

The active construction of conceptual representations acted positively on learning outcomes.

Gap identified: Limited studies on teacher-guided, structured mind mapping in Malaysian DLP Science classrooms — justifying this action research.

11 of 21

03

CHAPTER 3

Research

Methodology

Research Design • Sample • Instruments • Data Collection • Analysis

12 of 21

CHAPTER 3 | Research Design

RESEARCH APPROACH

Practitioner-led, systematic and reflective process to improve professional teaching practice (Kemmis & McTaggart, 1988). Researcher is also the classroom teacher.

RESEARCH DESIGN

Single-group Pre-test

& Post-test Design

Primarily quantitative approach. Measures performance before and after the intervention to determine improvement (Creswell & Creswell, 2018).

RESEARCH PROCEDURE FLOW

PRE-TEST

Baseline conceptual understanding

INTERVENTION

(4 Weeks)

Structured mind mapping lessons

POST-TEST

Measure improvement

ANALYSIS

Descriptive & inferential statistics

13 of 21

CHAPTER 3 | Action Research Cycle

Figure 3.1 Action Research Cycle (Plan–Act–Observe–Reflect)

14 of 21

CHAPTER 3 | Research Setting & Participants

RESEARCH SETTING

National primary school, Sibu, Sarawak, Malaysia — DLP participating school

Topic taught: Topic 3 — Microorganisms (Year 6 Science syllabus)

Lesson frequency: 2 times/week, 60 minutes each

20

Pupils

Year 6 DLP class

55%

Male

11 pupils

45%

Female

9 pupils

12

Years old

All participants

Convenience sampling

Researcher is the classroom teacher — allows study within existing learning environment

WHY MICROORGANISMS TOPIC?

Multiple interconnected concepts (types, characteristics, growth factors, effects)

Requires understanding relationships — not just memorising isolated facts

Ideal for mind mapping to visually organise and connect related ideas

15 of 21

CHAPTER 3 | Data Collection Instruments

Section A:

Objective Questions—assess factual understanding

Section B:

Short structured questions — assess conceptual understanding

Section C:

Extended Response Question — assess higher-order thinking

Score: 20 | Same format, reordered for post-test

Concept Accuracy — 0 to 4

Hierarchical Organisation — 0 to 4

Relational Links — 0 to 4

Elaboration & Examples — 0 to 4

Maximum score = 16 | Evaluated Week 1 & Week 4

VALIDITY & RELIABILITY

Content Validity

Instruments reviewed by 2 experienced Science teachers for syllabus alignment

Test–Retest Reliability (Pre-test & Post-test)

The same test was administered twice to ensure consistency of pupils’ scores.

Inter-Rater Reliability (Mind Map Rubric)

Two raters scored the mind maps using the rubric to ensure consistency in scoring

16 of 21

CHAPTER 3 | Data Collection Procedure

Figure 3.4 Data Collection Procedure of the Study

17 of 21

INSTRUMENT 1: Pre-test / Post-test

18 of 21

INSTRUMENT 1: Pre-test / Post-test

19 of 21

INSTRUMENT 2: Mind Map Rubric

Criteria

0

1

2

3

4

Concept Accuracy

No correct concepts

Few correct concepts

Some correct concepts

Mostly correct concepts

All concepts accurate

Hierarchical Organisation

No organisation

Poor organisation

Basic organisation

Clear hierarchy

Well-structured hierarchy

Relational Links

No links

Few links

Some links

Clear links

Multiple meaningful links

Elaboration

No details

Limited details

Some examples

Adequate examples

Detailed explanations

Maximum score = 16

20 of 21

CHAPTER 3 | Data Analysis & Ethical Considerations

DATA ANALYSIS APPROACH

Descriptive Statistics

Mean scores, standard deviations, percentages

Pre-test & post-test comparison

Week 1 vs Week 4 mind map rubric scores

Inferential Statistics

Paired-sample t-test

Significance level: p < 0.05

Determines if improvement is statistically significant

Supporting Qualitative

Selected pupil mind maps examined

Illustrates improvements in relational connections

Depth of conceptual elaboration tracked

ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS

Parental consent obtained before commencing the study

Pupils informed about voluntary participation

Anonymised identities — identification codes used instead of names

Data used solely for academic research purposes

21 of 21

THANK YOU!