Informational texts, such as those found in science education, have historically been reserved for secondary students. With the increased emphasis on elementary students' academic accountability, these high impact instructional strategies must also be utilized to support subject matter comprehension for younger students. This causal-comparative study, grounded in cognitive learning theory, sought to discover if 2 years of implementation and use of Thinking Maps, a visual tool program, had an effect on student achievement in elementary science as measured by Georgia's statewide assessment known as the Criterion-Referenced Competency Test (CRCT). Achievement data of 2 groups that received Thinking Maps instruction for 2 years was compared to 1 group that did not. An analysis of covariance was used to analyze the assessment data. The findings suggest that the students who did not use Thinking Maps performed significantly better than those who did use Thinking Maps, even though both groups showed positive mean score gains from 2010 to 2012 on the science portion of the CRCT. Limitations of the study, such as the lack of randomization and manipulation of the independent variable, suggest that further research is needed to fairly evaluate the program and its effectiveness. Also, the instructional setting and amount of time used for science instruction in the elementary classroom warrants additional investigation. Findings related to the implementation and use of graphic tools such as Thinking Maps will help school systems choose professional learning opportunities and effective instructional strategies to develop content literacy. [The dissertation citations contained here are published with the permission of ProQuest LLC. Further reproduction is prohibited without permission. Copies of dissertations may be obtained by Telephone (800) 1-800-521-0600. Web page: http://bibliotheek.ehb.be:2222/en-US/products/dissertations/individuals.shtml.]