Skip to main content

Assessment of Student Learning Achievement in Regression Tasks

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
New Ecology for Education — Communication X Learning
  • 750 Accesses

Abstract

Many students are under the illusion that the use of IT can accomplish statistical calculations without the need for statistical thinking but the regression models they built are infeasible for making prediction. It is therefore in the present study to assess the operational level of students’ statistical thinking in regression modelling. A sample of students was selected to attempt the seven questions on an individual basis. A qualitative analysis of students’ responses to each of the questions was performed within the assessment framework of Putt et al. as checking which of the four levels of statistical thinking the students had: idiosyncratic thinking, transitional thinking, quantitative thinking and analytical thinking. The analysis results show that most students attained either quantitative thinking or analytical thinking when handling more technical tasks, but not the tasks of reasoning about data; reasoning about results; and reasoning about conclusions. These reasoning tasks demand statistical communication that should be emphasized and monitored throughout Statistics lessons and written works should be assigned to students so that teachers can provide feedback on their writings, as helping them conceptualize material, make links among concepts and internalize thinking.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • American Society for Quality. (2016). Statistical thinking everywhere. Retreived from http://www.asq.org/index.aspx

  • American Statistical Association. (2014). Curriculum guidelines for undergraduate programs in statistical science. Retreived from http://www.amstat.org/education/curriculumguidelines.cfm

  • Biggs, J. B., & Collis, K. F. (1982). Evaluating the quality of learning: The SOLO taxonomy. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bishop, G., & Talbot, M. (2001). Statistical thinking for novice researchers in biological science. In Proceedings of IASE Round Table Conference on Training Researchers in the Use of Statistics (pp. 215–226). Tokyo: International Association for Statistical Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bude, L. (2006). Assessing students’ understanding of statistics. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Teaching Statistics. Brazil: International Association for Statistical Education. Retreived from http://iase-web.org/documents/papers/icots7/6G3_BUDE.pdf

  • Campbell, S. K. (2004). Flaws and fallacies in statistical thinking. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chance, B. L. (2002). Component of statistical thinking and implications for instruction and assessment. Journal of Statistics Education, 10(3). Retreived from https://ww2.amstat.org/publications/jse/v10n3/chance.html

  • Cook, R. D., & Weisberg, S. (1999). Graphs in statistical analysis: Is the medium the message? The American Statistician, 53(1), 29–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Curcio, F. R. (1997). Comprehension of mathematical relationships expressed in graphs. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 18(3), 382–393.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gal, I. (1998). Assessing statistical knowledge as it relates to student’s interpretation of data. In S. P. Lajoie (Ed.), Reflections on statistics: Learning, teaching and assessment in grades K-12 (pp. 275–298). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoerl, R., & Snee, R. (2012). Statistical thinking: Improving business performance (2nd ed.). New Jersey: Wiley.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Horton, N. J., & Hardin, J. S. (2015). Teaching the next generation ofstatistics students to think with “data”: Special issue on statistics and the undergraduate curriclum. The American Statistician, 69(4), 259–265.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, G., Thornton, C., Langrall, C., Mooney, E., Perry, B., & Putt, I. (1998). Students’ statistical thinking. In Proceedings of the 19th Annual Meeting of the North America Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (pp. 371–376, 1998). Columbus, OH: ERIC Clearinghouse for Science, Mathematics, and Environmental Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lajoie, S. P., & Romberg, T. A., (1998). Identifying an agenda for statistics instruction and assessment in K-12. In S. P. Lajoie (Ed.) Reflections on statistics: Learning, teaching and assessment in Grades K-12, (pp. xi–xxi). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Li, K. W., & Goos, M. (2015). A study on students’ attitudes towards teacher’s intervention in statistical computing laboratory. In K. C. Li, T. L. Wong, S. K. S. Cheung, J. Lam, & K. K. Ng (Eds.), Transforming educational practices with technology (pp. 116–126). Heidelberg: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Putt, I., Perry, B., Jones, G., Thornton, C., Langrall, C. & Mooney, E. (2000). Primary school students’ statistical thinking: A comparison of two Australian states. In Proceedings of the 23th Annual Conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (pp. 519–526). Australia: Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, R. T. (1980). The computer in the school: Tutor, tool, tutee. New York: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wainer, H. (2013). Medical illuminations: Using evidence, visualisation and statistical thinking to improve health care (p. 2013). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wells, H. G. (1903). Mankind in the making. New York: A Public Domain Book.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The author would like to thank Professor S.H. Hou and the anonymous reviewers who gave valuable feedback on an earlier version of the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ken Li .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this paper

Cite this paper

Li, K. (2017). Assessment of Student Learning Achievement in Regression Tasks. In: Ma, W., Chan, CK., Tong, Kw., Fung, H., Fong, C. (eds) New Ecology for Education — Communication X Learning. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-4346-8_7

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-4346-8_7

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-10-4345-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-10-4346-8

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics