Prospective high school mathematics teachers’ didactic-mathematical knowledge about the sampling distribution of the mean
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15359/ru.37-1.3Keywords:
distribution of the sample mean, didactic-mathematical knowledge, prospective high-school teachers, evaluationAbstract
[Objective] The aim of this study is to evaluate the didactic-mathematical knowledge of prospective Spanish teachers about the sampling distribution of the mean – specifically, basic knowledge about content, as well as epistemic and cognitive aspects of didactic knowledge. [Methodology] A sample of prospective teachers were asked to solve a problem presented to students in the university’s entrance exams, to identify the concepts, properties and procedures required for its solution, and to describe the foreseeable errors of the students in this process. [Results] The results obtained showed very good levels of common mathematical knowledge, although some errors were observed, such as confusing population distributions with sampling distributions. The participants were reasonably competent in analyzing the mathematical objects (concepts, procedures and properties) required to solve the proposed task, but the level of competence in identifying possible student errors in solving the task was lower. [Conclusions] The study identifies areas for improvement in the training of prospective teachers about the sampling distribution of the mean, which should be well understood when making inferences. Such training should emphasize the difference between the three probability sampling distributions and the difference between statistics and parameters, since prospective teachers do not recognize the possibility of this type of error by their students.
References
Abu-Ghalyoun, O. (2021). Pre-service teachers’ difficulties in reasoning about sampling variability. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 108(3), 553-577. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-021-10067-8
Batanero, C., Begué, N., Borovcnik, M., & Gea, M. M. (2020). Ways in which high-school students understand the sampling distribution for proportions. Statistics Education Research Journal, 19(3), 32-52.
Batanero, C., López-Martín, M. M., Gea, M. M., & Arteaga, P. (2018). Conocimiento del contraste de hipótesis por futuros profesores de educación secundaria y bachillerato. Publicaciones, 48(2), 73-95. https://revistaseug.ugr.es/index.php/publicaciones/article/view/8334/7735
Batanero, C., Tauber, L. M., & Sánchez, V. (2004). Students’ reasoning about the normal distribution. En D. Ben-Zvi, & J. Garfield (Eds.), The challenge of developing statistical literacy, reasoning and thinking (pp. 257-276). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-2278-6_11
Begué, N., Batanero, C., Ruiz, K., & Gea, M. M. (2019). Understanding sampling: A summary of the research. Boletín de Estadística e Investigación Operative, BEIO, 35(1), 49-78.
Beswick, K., & Goos, M. (2018). Mathematics teacher educator knowledge: What do we know and where to from here? Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 21(5), 417-427. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-018-9416-4
Espinel, M. C., Ramos, R. M., & Ramos, C. E. (2007). Algunas alternativas para la mejora de la enseñanza de la inferencia estadística en Secundaria. Números. Revista de Didáctica de las Matemáticas, 67, 15-23. https://ensciencias.uab.cat/article/view/v11-n3-mumbru/2418
Gal, I., & Geiger, V. (2022). Welcome to the era of vague news: a study of the demands of statistical and mathematical products in the COVID-19 pandemic media. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 111, 5-28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-022-10151-7
Godino, J. D. (2009). Categorías de análisis de conocimientos del profesor de matemáticas. Unión, 20, 13-31.
Godino, J., Batanero, C., & Font, V. (2007). The ontosemiotic approach to research in mathematics education. ZDM - Mathematics Education, 39(12), 127-135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-006-0004-1
Godino, J., Batanero, C., & Font, V. (2019). The ontosemiotic approach: Implications for the prescriptive character of didactics. For the Learning of Mathematics, 39(1), 38-43.
Godino, J. D., Giacomone, B., Batanero, C., & Font, V. (2017). Enfoque ontosemiótico de los conocimientos y competencias del profesor de matemáticas. Bolema, 31(57), 90-113. https://doi.org/10.1590/1980-4415v31n57a05
González, Y., & Ojeda, A. M. (2017). Comprensión de la distribución normal en bachillerato. En L. A. Serna (Ed.), Acta Latinoamericana de Matemática Educativa (pp. 207-217). Comité Latinoamericano de Matemática Educativa.
Haller, H., & Krauss, S. (2002). Misinterpretations of significance: A problem students share with their teachers? Methods of Psychological Research, 7(1), 1-20.
Harradine, A., Batanero, C., & Rossman, A. (2011). Students and teachers’ knowledge of sampling and inference. En C. Batanero, G. Burrill, & C. Reading (Eds.), Teaching statistics in school mathematics-Challenges for teaching and teacher education (pp. 235-246). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1131-0
Inzunsa, S., & Jiménez, J. V. (2013). Caracterización del razonamiento estadístico de estudiantes universitarios acerca de las pruebas de hipótesis. Revista Latinoamericana de Investigación en Matemática Educativa, 16(2), 179-211. https://doi.org/10.12802/relime.13.1622
Kula, F., & Koçer, R. G. (2020). Why is it difficult to understand statistical inference? Reflections on the opposing directions of construction and application of inference framework. Teaching Mathematics and its Applications, 39(4), 248-265. https://doi.org/10.1093/teamat/hrz014
Llinares, S. (2018). Mathematics teacher’s knowledge, knowledge-based reasoning, and contexts. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 21(1), 1-3. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-018-9399-1
Liu, Y., & Thompson, P. W. (2009). Mathematics teachers’ understandings of proto-hypothesis testing. Pedagogies: An International Journal, 4(2), 126-138. https://doi.org/10.1080/15544800902741564
López-Martín, M. M., Batanero, C., & Gea, M. M. (2019). ¿Conocen los futuros profesores los errores de sus estudiantes en la inferencia estadística? Bolema: Boletim de Educação Matemática, 33, 672-693. https://doi.org/10.1590/1980-4415v33n64a11
Lugo-Armenta, J. G., & Pino-Fan, L.R. (2021). Inferential statistical reasoning of math teachers: experiences in virtual contexts generated by the COVID-19 pandemic. Education Sciences, 11, 363. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11070363
Makar K., & Rubin A. (2018) Learning about statistical inference. En D. Ben-Zvi, K. Makar, & J. Garfield (Eds.), International Handbook of Research in Statistics Education. Springer International Handbooks of Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-66195-7_8
Mendenhall, W., Scheaffer, R. L., & Lyman, R. (2006). Elementos de muestreo. Paraninfo.
Ministerio de Educación, Cultura y Deporte. (2015). Real decreto 1105/2014, de 26 de diciembre, por el que se establece el currículo básico de la educación secundaria obligatoria y del bachillerato. MECD.
Ministerio de Educación y Formación Profesional. (2022). Real Decreto 217/2022, de 29 de marzo, por el que se establece la ordenación y las enseñanzas mínimas de la Educación Secundaria Obligatoria. MEFP.
Muñiz-Rodríguez, L., Alonso, P., Rodríguez-Muñiz, L. J., & Valcke, M. (2016). Is there a gap in initial secondary mathematics teacher education in Spain compared to other countries? Revista de Educación, 372, 106–132. https://doi.org/10.4438/1988-592X-RE-2015-372-317
Onyancha, B. N., & Ogbonnaya, U. I. (2022). Undergraduate students’ proficiencies in solving bivariate normal distribution problems. Journal of Pedagogical Sociology and Psychology, 4(1), 20-34. https://doi.org/10.33902/JPSP.202212259
Pino-Fan, L. R., & Godino, J. D. (2015). Perspectiva ampliada del conocimiento didáctico-matemático del profesor. Paradigma, 36(1), 87-109.
Pino-Fan, L., Assis, A., & Castro, W. F. (2015). Towards a methodology for the characterization of teachers' didactic-mathematical knowledge. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 11(6), 1429-1456. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2015.1403a
Scheiner, T., Montes, M. A., Godino, J. D., Carrillo, J., & Pino-Fan, L. R. (2019). What makes mathematics teacher knowledge specialized? Offering alternative views. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 17(1), 153-172. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-017-9859-6
De Vetten, A., Schoonenboom, J., Keijzer, R., & Van Oers, B. (2018). Pre-service primary school teachers’ knowledge of informal statistical inference. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 22(6), 639–661. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-018-9403-9
Vallecillos, A. (1999). Some empirical evidence on learning difficulties about testing hypotheses. Bulletin of the International Statistical Institute: Proceedings of the Fifty second Session of the International Statistical Institute (pp. 201-204). International Statistical Institute https://www.stat.auckland.ac.nz/~iase/publications/5/vall0682.pdf
Watson, J. M., & Callingham, R. (2013). Likelihood and sample size: The understandings of students and their teachers. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 32(3), 660–672. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2013.08.003
Weiland, T. (2017). Problematizing statistical literacy: An intersection of critical and statistical literacies. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 96(1), 33–47. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-017-9764-5
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
1. Authors guarantee the journal the right to be the first publication of the work as licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
2. Authors can set separate additional agreements for non-exclusive distribution of the version of the work published in the journal (eg, place it in an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
3. The authors have declared to hold all permissions to use the resources they provided in the paper (images, tables, among others) and assume full responsibility for damages to third parties.
4. The opinions expressed in the paper are the exclusive responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the opinion of the editors or the Universidad Nacional.
Uniciencia Journal and all its productions are under Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas 4.0 Unported.
There is neither fee for access nor Article Processing Charge (APC)
