A validity problem in Kapur's standard deviation transfer item brackets its transfer findings as working hypotheses¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · theoretical r3 · q1
Currency · newest study 2018 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q1 i? The commentary argues that Kapur's transfer item on the standard deviation is not answerable by students who have just learned about SD and depicts a distribution the author found hard to imagine, so the transfer findings must be bracketed as working hypotheses. → Arthur Bakker 2018

Evidence¶

Arthur Bakker 2018¶

Arthur Bakker. (2018). Discovery learning: zombie, phoenix, or elephant? Instructional Science, 46, 169–183. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-018-9450-8

q1 · i? · theoretical · r3

The author's expert critique of the sprint-versus-swim item Kapur (2018) used with 14 to 15-year-olds who had just learned the standard deviation. He argues students cannot yet answer it, citing statistics education literature showing even university students and statistics teachers struggle with SD in relation to distribution and mean. This is an interpretive argument, not a tested result.

"For me the validity problem of using such a task implies that the findings on transfer in this paper have to be bracketed, and cannot be more than working hypotheses."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Productive Failure Improves Conceptual Learning — related
• Guidance during initial problem solving does not translate into better learning from subsequent instruction — related
• Direct instruction may create a lock-in that constrains search for novel solutions — related
• Bilinguals may have a specific advantage in transferring understanding of novel symbolic rules to new contexts — related