Concept Map Assessment of Classroom Learning: Reliability, Validity, and Logistical Practicality John R. McClure, 1 Brian Sonak, 2 Hoi K. Suen 2 1 Department of Educational Psychology, Center for Excellence in Education, Northern Arizona University, P.O. Box 5774, Flagstaff, Arizona 86011-5774 2 Department of Educational Psychology, Pennsylvania State University, State College, Pennsylvania 16802 Received 13 January 1997; revised 17 November 1997; revised 23 March 1998; accepted 27 April 1998 Abstract: The psychometric characteristics and practicality of concept mapping as a technique for classroom assessment were evaluated. Subjects received 90 min of training in concept mapping techniques and were given a list of terms and asked to produce a concept map. The list of terms was from a course in which they were enrolled. The maps were scored by pairs of graduate students, each pair using one of six different scoring methods. The score reliability of the six scoring methods ranged from r = .23 to r = .76. The highest score reliability was found for the method based on the evaluation of separate proposi- tions represented. Correlations of map scores with a measure of the concept maps’ similarity to a master map provided evidence supporting the validity of five of the six scoring methods. The times required to provide training in concept mapping, produce concepts, and score concept maps were compatible with the adoption of concept mapping as classroom assessment technique. © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 36: 475–492, 1999 In December 1990, the Journal of Research in Science Teaching presented a special issue devoted to the topic of concept mapping. In the lead article of this issue, Novak (1990) outlined the potential uses of concept mapping for the improvement of learning and teaching in science classrooms. From Novak’s remarks, we may organize the potential of concept mapping to im- prove science education into four categories: (a) as a learning strategy, (b) as an instructional strategy, (c) as a strategy for planning curriculum, and (d) as a means of assessing students’ un- derstanding of science concepts. This article is concerned with the last of these four categories. In the same special issue of the Journal of Research in Science Teaching, Wallace and Mintzes (1990) presented evidence for the concurrent validity of concept map assessments of students’ learning, and concluded that concept mapping tasks are a valuable tool for education- al researchers. However, use of concept maps to assess students’ understanding and learning was not a new idea. Novak (1990) described the development of concept maps in the late 1960s and JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN SCIENCE TEACHING VOL. 36, NO. 4, PP. 475–492 (1999) © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. CCC 0022-4308/99/040475-18 Correspondence to: J.R. McClure