Journal of Research in Science, Mathematics and Technology Education

Impact of Fathom on Statistical Reasoning among Upper Secondary Students

Nanteni Ganesan 1,
Kwan Eu Leong 1 *
1 University of Malaya* Corresponding Author
Download PDF
Journal of Research in Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, Volume 3, Issue 2, May 2020, pp. 35-50
OPEN ACCESS VIEWS: 685 DOWNLOADS: 631 Publication date: 15 May 2020
ABSTRACT
The teaching and learning of statistical reasoning is becoming challenging due to the change in the  perspective emphasizing on the deeper understanding rather than basic statistics computations. As suggested by researchers, implementing technologies able to develop student interest in the topics leads to deeper  understanding. Hence, this study used dynamic software, Fathom for teaching statistical reasoning. The purpose of this study is to examine the statistical reasoning understanding among upper secondary students after using dynamic software, Fathom. The sample consists of seventy -two students randomly assigned to control and experimental groups. The experimental group underwent an intervention where they learnt statistical reasoning using Fathom while the control group learnt statistical reasoning using traditional learning method not involving  Fathom. Statistical Reasoning Assessment (SRA) was used in this study as the instrument for measuring  statistical reasoning. The research hypothesis data were analyzed using MANCOVA test.  The findings showed a significant difference across four statistical reasoning constructs namely Describing Data, Organizing Data, Representing Data and Analyzing and Interpreting Data between students in the control and experimental groups. Furthermore, the results of the analysis emphasized that the students who learned statistical reasoning using Fathom performed better than students in the control group. In brief, the upper secondary students’ statistical reasoning enhanced after implementing Fathom.   
KEYWORDS
Data, Fathom, Graphs, Statistics Constructs, Statistical Reasoning, Technology.
CITATION (APA)
Ganesan, N., & Leong, K. E. (2020). Impact of Fathom on Statistical Reasoning among Upper Secondary Students. Journal of Research in Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 3(2), 35-50. https://doi.org/10.31756/jrsmte.321
REFERENCES
  1. Accrombessy, F. (2006). An evaluation study of the process of reform of statistics teaching at the secondary level in
  2. Benin: Assessment and perspectives. Paper presented at the Seventh International Conference on Teaching
  3. Statistics.
  4. Ben-Zvi, D., Gravemeijer, K., & Ainley, J. (2018). Design of Statistics Learning Environments. In D. Ben-Zvi, K. Makar, & J. Garfield (Eds.), International handbook of research in Statistics Education (pp. 473-502). Cham:
  5. Springer International Publishing.
  6. Brahier, D. J. (2016). Teaching secondary and middle school mathematics. New York, NY: Routledge.
  7. Bruno, A., & Espinel, M. C. (2009). Construction and evaluation of histograms in teacher training. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 40(4), 473-493. doi: 10.1080/00207390902759584
  8. Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Handbook of research on teaching (pp. 171-246). Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.
  9. Chan, S. W., Ismail, Z., & Sumintono, B. (2016). A Framework for Assessing High School Students' Statistical Reasoning. PloS One, 11(11), e0163846.
  10. Chance, B., & Rossman, A. (2006). Using simulation to teach and learn statistics. Paper presented at the Seventh International Conference on Teaching Statistics.
  11. Chua, Y. P. (2012). Effects of computer-based testing on test performance and testing motivation. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(5), 1580-1586.
  12. Ciancetta, M. A. (2007). Statistics students reasoning when comparing distributions of data. Citeseer.
  13. Clark, J., Kraut, G., Mathews, D., & Wimbish, J. (2007). The fundamental theorem of statistics: Classifying student understanding of basic statistical concepts. Unpublished manuscript. Retrieved from http://www1. hollins. edu/faculty/clarkjm/stat2c. pdf
  14. Cooper, L., & Shore, F. (2008). Students’ misconceptions in interpreting center and variability of data represented via histograms and stem-and-leaf plots. Journal of Statistics Education, 16(2), 1-13.
  15. DelMas, Garfield, J., & Ooms, A. (2005). Using assessment items to study students’ difficulty reading and interpreting graphical representations of distributions. Paper presented at the Fourth Forum on Statistical Reasoning, Thinking, and Literacy (SRTL-4).
  16. Eichler, A., & Zapata-Cardona, L. (2016). Empirical research in statistics education. In Empirical Research in Statistics Education (pp. 1-37). Springer.
  17. Franklin, C., Kader, G., Mewborn, D., Moreno, J., Peck, R., Perry, M., & Scheaffer, R. (2005). A curriculum framework for K-12 statistics education. GAISE report, American Statistical Association.
  18. Gal, I., & Garfield, J. B. (1997). The assessment challenge in statistics education (Vol. 12). IOS Press.
  19. Galotti, K. M. (2008). Cognitive psychology in and out of the laboratory (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
  20. Garfield, Joan. (2002). The challenge of developing statistical reasoning. Journal of Statistics Education, 10(3), 58-
  21. 69.
  22. Garfield, Joan, & Ben-Zvi, D. (2008). Developing students' statistical reasoning. Springer.
  23. Hall, & Heyde, C. C. (2014). Martingale limit theory and its application. Academic Press.
  24. Jones, G. A., Thornton, C. A., Langrall, C. W., Mooney, E. S., Perry, B., & Putt, I. J. (2000). A framework for characterizing children's statistical thinking. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 2(4), 269-307.
  25. Lane, D. M., & Peres, S. C. (2006). Interactive simulations in the teaching of statistics: Promise and pitfalls. Paper presented at the Seventh International Conference on Teaching Statistics.
  26. Lane-Getaz, S. J. (2006). What is statistical thinking, and how is it developed. Thinking and reasoning about data and chance: Sixty-eighth NCTM Yearbook (pp. 273-289). Reston, VA: NCTM.
  27. Loveland, J., & Schneiter, K. (2014). Teaching Statistics with Lectures or Activities: A Comparative Study. Paper presented at the Ninth International Conference on Teaching Statistics (ICOTS9, July, 2014), Arizona, USA.
  28. Meletiou, M., & Lee, C. (2002). Student understanding of histograms: A stumbling stone to the development of intuitions about variation. Paper presented at the The Sixth International Conference on Teaching Statistics (ICOTS6). https://www.stat.auckland.ac.nz/~iase/publications/1/10_19_me.pdf
  29. Meletiou, M., & Stylianou, D. A. (2003). Graphical representation of data: The effect of the use of dynamical statistics technological tool. Retrieved from
  30. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/3463/fc7cbe9424dd8b4608e4466b4904e50c3052.pdf
  31. Mevarech, Z. R. (1983). A deep structure model of students' statistical misconceptions. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 14(4), 415-429. doi: 10.1007/bf00368237
  32. Mills, J. D. (2004). Students' attitudes towards Statistics: Implications for the future College Student Journal, 38(3).
  33. Mooney, E. S. (2002). A framework for characterizing middle school students' statistical thinking. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 4(1), 23-63.
  34. Pollatsek, A., Lima, S., & Well, A. D. (1981). Concept or computation: Students' understanding of the mean. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 12(2), 191-204. doi: 10.1007/bf00305621
  35. Pratt, D., & Ainley, J. (2008). Introducing the special issue on informal inferential reasoning. Statistics Education Research Journal, 7(2), 3-4.
  36. Saldanha, L., & Thompson, P. (2002). Conceptions of sample and their relationship to statistical inference. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 51(3), 257-270.
  37. Sorge, C., & Schau, C. (2002). Impact of engineering students’ attitudes on achievement in statistics: A structural model. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association. New Orleans.
LICENSE
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.