Mathematical understanding ability and proving ability were fairly strongly associated¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2011 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? A chi-square association analysis found a fairly high association between MUA and MPA (χ2cal = 10.8 > χ2tab = 9.48, contingency coefficient C = 0.54 from Cmax = 0.816). → Maya and Sumarmo 2011

Evidence¶

Maya and Sumarmo 2011¶

Rippi Maya, Utari Sumarmo. (2011). Mathematical Understanding and Proving Abilities: Experiment With Undergraduate Student By Using Modified Moore Learning Approach. IndoMS. J.M.E, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 231-250. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1078509

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Contingency table association analysis (Table 8/9) on the MLA class data of the 56-student study; the null of no association was rejected at the 0.05 level with dk = 4. The contingency coefficient is a printed association statistic, not a standardised effect size.

"it were found χ2 cal = 10,8 and χ2 tab, = 9,48 with dk = 4 and 0,05 . Because of χ2 cal > χ2 tab. so H0 was rejected. That was meant there was fairly high association between MUA and MPA with coefficient o f contigency C = 0,54"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• More MLA students reached medium/high understanding scores while conventional students did so more often on proving scores — related
• Modified Moore learning approach and conventional teaching produced no significant difference in undergraduate mathematical understanding or proving ability in advanced abstract algebra — related
• Proof construction was more difficult than mathematical understanding tasks, with students showing seven recurring proof difficulties — related