Student groups' TinkerPlots text boxes for one student's data were mostly literal reports of plot aspects, and comparison text boxes for the two scenarios mostly made basic rather than reasoned comparisons¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · design r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2015 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Of 36 groups creating TinkerPlots plots and text boxes for the single student, most showed literal reporting of plot aspects (code 1) or sequential description of explicit information (code 2), with only one group relating information in an argument (code 3). → Lyn D English and Jane M Watson 2015 q2 i? Of 31 pairs producing comparison plots and text boxes for the two scenarios, most made basic statements comparing the plots (code 2), while at code 3 two or more comparison statements were linked to give reasons for the differences in the two plots. → Lyn D English and Jane M Watson 2015 (2)

Evidence¶

Lyn D English and Jane M Watson 2015¶

Lyn D English and Jane M Watson. (2015). Exploring variation in measurement as a foundation for statistical thinking in the elementary school. International Journal of STEM Education (2015) 2:3. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-015-0016-x

q2 · i? · design · r2

SOLO-based coding of TinkerPlots plots and text boxes created by 36 student groups for the single-student measurement data. Table 6 reports 8% code 0, 50% code 1, 39% code 2, 3% code 3. Groups' text mostly focused on "single isolated aspects of their plots (code 1)."

"The codes for levels of understanding displayed again reflected the SOLO hierarchy with some groups not providing interpretable text (code 0), some groups focusing on single isolated aspects of their plots (code 1), other groups describing sequentially several aspects of their plots appropriately (code 2) and one group going further to relate the information in an argument (code 3)."

Lyn D English and Jane M Watson 2015 (2)¶

Lyn D English and Jane M Watson. (2015). Exploring variation in measurement as a foundation for statistical thinking in the elementary school. International Journal of STEM Education (2015) 2:3. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-015-0016-x

q2 · i? · design · r2

Hierarchical coding of comparison plots and text boxes produced by 31 pairs of students contrasting the single-student and class data sets in TinkerPlots. Code 1 considered class data only; code 2 made basic comparisons; "two or more of the comparison statements were linked to give reasons for the differences in the two plots" at code 3.

"At code 3, two or more of the comparison statements were linked to give reasons for the differences in the two plots."

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Statistical Reasoning — outcome: instruction changes it

Related Claims¶

• Students produced a wide range of self-chosen hand-drawn representations, mostly frequency-based, but most summary statements only described the graph rather than its message — related
• On assessment item Q10, describing a TinkerPlots plot, 32% of students achieved the maximum score of 4 and 70% achieved half marks or better — related