LAUSR

Back in the early 1970s, Joseph Novak introduced the technique of concept mapping as part of a study into students’ learning of science. Concept maps provide students with the opportunity to develop ideas by reflecting on their own understanding and to build on that understanding by thinking about ideas and the connections between them. Our departing Editor-in-Chief, Ian Kinchin, who has served this journal so admirably in recent years, has been a pioneer in teaching and research about concept maps. I first encountered such ideas as a newly qualified teacher in 1998 at a conference run by the Association for Science Education. Soon after, in the year 2000 (Kinchin 2000), Ian introduced readers of this journal to a number of classroom applications of concept mapping, including activating students’ prior knowledge, identifying misconceptions, providing focus for discussion, and enabling students to think and to learn collaboratively. In 2003 (Kinchin 2003), he reinforced the importance of concept maps in provoking meaningful discussion. And in 2006 (Kinchin 2006), in response to the proliferation of PowerPoint in school classrooms, he used ideas from concept mapping to suggest how to design PowerPoint presentations for effective learning. In 2011 (Kinchin 2011), his article about visualising knowledge structures in biology reminded us that concept maps can support ‘big picture’ thinking for teachers, ensuring that ‘big ideas’ do not get lost in a ‘sea’ of facts’ in an overcrowded curriculum. And yet, as Ian recognises in his article in this issue, concept maps are still to be adopted by a majority of biology teachers. In part, this may be because teachers see concept maps as outcomes which need to be evaluated, scored and assessed. Indeed, they can enable teachers to understand their students’ understanding, something which is apparent in the article by Bergan-Roller et al., also in this issue. But Ian reminds us of something that is fundamental to learning biology through concept mapping: ‘the dialogue that is stimulated probably represents the most valuable aspect of mapping’. Such dialogue, and exploratory talk more generally, are arguably the most valuable tools we have in any learning context. Indeed, talk and dialogue characterised meetings of the Editorial Board under Ian’s leadership, representing his truly democratic and inclusive approach, and making it a pleasure to be an Associate Editor. It is now my privilege to take over as Editor-in-Chief, and on behalf of the Royal Society of Biology, I would like to applaud the tremendous impact that Ian has had on the Journal of Biological Education and on biology education as a whole (he may not remember his provocation to readers in 1997 (Kinchin 1997) to consider whether biological education was in ‘decline or stasis’). His first article for the journal (that I can find!) was in 1987 (Kinchin 1987), and 33 years later he leaves the journal in very good health.