LEARNING TO REASON ABOUT DISTRIBUTION

The purpose of this chapter is to explore how informal reasoning about distribution can be developed in a technological learning environment. The development of reasoning about distribution in seventh-grade classes is described in three stages as students reason about different representations. It is shown how specially designed software tools, students’ created graphs, and prediction tasks supported the learning of different aspects of distribution. In this process, several students came to reason about the shape of a distribution using the term bump along with statistical notions such as outliers and sample size. This type of research, referred to as “design research,” was inspired by that of Cobb, Gravemeijer, McClain, and colleagues (see Chapter 16). After exploratory interviews and a small field test, we conducted teaching experiments of 12 to 15 lessons in 4 seventh-grade classes in the Netherlands. The design research cycles consisted of three main phases: design of instructional materials, classroom-based teaching experiments, and retrospective analyses. For the retrospective analysis of the data, we used a constant comparative method similar to the methods of Glaser and Strauss (Strauss & Corbin, 1998) and Cobb and Whitenack (1996) to continually generate and test conjectures about students’ learning processes.

[1]  Dani Ben-Zvi,et al.  Junior high school students' construction of global views of data and data representations , 2001 .

[2]  Anna Sfard,et al.  Steering (Dis)Course between Metaphors and Rigor: Using Focal Analysis to Investigate an Emergence of Mathematical Objects , 2000 .

[3]  A. Su,et al.  The National Council of Teachers of Mathematics , 1932, The Mathematical Gazette.

[4]  Arthur Bakker,et al.  The Early History of Average Values and Implications for Education , 2003 .

[5]  James J. Kaput,et al.  Authentic Inquiry With Data: Critical Barriers to Classroom Implementation , 1992 .

[6]  L. Schauble,et al.  Structuring Error and Experimental Variation as Distribution in the Fourth Grade , 2003 .

[7]  K.P.E. Gravemeijer,et al.  Developing realistic mathematics education , 1994 .

[8]  Anselm L. Strauss,et al.  Basics of qualitative research : techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory , 1998 .

[9]  Daniel C. Edelson Design Research: What We Learn When We Engage in Design , 2002 .

[10]  Susan Jo Russell,et al.  Children's Concepts of Average and Representativeness. , 1995 .

[11]  Paul Cobb,et al.  Individual and Collective Mathematical Development: The Case of Statistical Data Analysis. , 1999 .

[12]  Susan N. Friel,et al.  Making sense of graphs: Critical factors influencing comprehension and instructional implications. , 2001 .

[13]  Myrdene Anderson,et al.  Educational perspectives on mathematics as semiosis : from thinking to interpreting to knowing , 2003 .

[14]  Paul Cobb,et al.  A method for conducting longitudinal analyses of classroom videorecordings and transcripts , 1996 .

[15]  Heinz Steinbring,et al.  Epistemological investigation of classroom interaction in elementary mathematics teaching , 1997 .

[16]  Judith S. Zawojewski,et al.  Mean and Median: Are They Really So Easy?. , 2000 .

[17]  Paul Cobb,et al.  Learning About Statistical Covariation , 2003 .

[18]  Hans Freudenthal,et al.  Revisiting mathematics education : China lectures , 1991 .

[19]  Luciano Meira,et al.  The Microevolution of Mathematical Representations in Children's Activity , 1995 .