Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Structure by Design: Reasoning About Covariation with TinkerPlots

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Structuring the Thesis

  • 2675 Accesses

Abstract

What is an appropriate structure for reporting a study of the development of students’ understanding of covariation when using exploratory data analysis software, TinkerPlots Dynamic Data Exploration, following a pragmatist paradigm, and adopting educational design research methodology?

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 139.99
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

References

  • van den Akker, J., Gravemeijer, K., McKenney, S., & Nieveen, N. (Eds.). (2006). Introducing educational design research. In Educational design research (pp. 3–7). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bannan-Ritland, B. (2003). The role of design in research: The integrative learning design framework. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 21–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boaz, A., & Ashby, D. (2003). Fit for purpose? Assessing research quality for evidence based policy and practice. ESRC UK Centre for Evidence Based Policy and Practice: Working Paper 11. Retrieved from https://www.eldis.org/document/A65620.

  • Collins, A., Joseph, D., & Bielaczyc, K. (2004). Design research: Theoretical and methodological issues. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(1), 15–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fitzallen, N. (2006). A model of students’ statistical thinking and reasoning about graphs in an ICT environment. In P. Grootenboer, R. Zevenbergen & M. Chinnappan (Eds.), Identities, cultures and learning spaces. Proceedings of 29th annual conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia, Canberra (pp. 203–210). Sydney: MERGA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fitzallen, N. (2008). Validation of an assessment instrument developed for eliciting student prior learning in graphing and data analysis. In M. Goos, R. Brown, & K. Makar (Eds.), Navigating currents and charting directions. Proceedings of the 31st annual conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia, Brisbane, June 28–July 1 (pp. 203–209). Sydney: MERGA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fitzallen, N. (2012). Interpreting graphs: Students developing an understanding of covariation. In J. Dindyal, L. P. Cheng, & S. F. Ng (Eds.), Mathematics education: Expanding horizons. Proceedings of the 35th annual conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia, Singapore, July 2–6 (pp. 290–297). Sydney: MERGA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fitzallen, N. (2013). Characterising students’ interaction with TinkerPlots. Technology Innovations in Statistics Education, 7(1), Article 2. Retrieved from http://www.escholarship.org/uc/item/1074n1dp.

  • Fitzallen, N. (2016). Interpreting association from graphical displays. In B. White & J. Clarke (Eds.), Opening up mathematics education research. Proceedings of the 39th annual conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia, Adelaide, July 3–7 (pp. 220–227). Sydney: MERGA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fitzallen, N., & Brown, N. (2006). Evaluating data-analysis software: Exploring opportunities for developing statistical thinking and reasoning. In N. Armstrong & C. Sherwood (Eds.), IT’s up here for thinking. Proceedings of the Australian Computers in Education Conference, Cairns, October 2–4, 2006. Retrieved from http://acce.edu.au/conferences/2006/papers/evaluating-data-analysis-software-exploring-opportunities-developing-statist.

  • Fitzallen, N., & Watson, J. (2014). Developing a sequence of learning experiences in statistics. In N. Fitzallen, R. Reaburn, & S. Fan (Eds.), The future of educational research: Perspectives from beginning researchers (pp. 263–278). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Greenwood, D. J., & Levin, M. (2003). Reconstructing the relationships between universities and society through action research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The landscape of qualitative research: Theories and issues (pp. 131–166). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33(7), 14–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelly, A. E. (2003). Research as design. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 3–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Konold, C. (2007). Designing a data analysis tool for learners. In M. Lovett & P. Shah (Eds.), Thinking with data (pp. 267–291). New York: Taylor and Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mackenzie, N., & Knipe, S. (2006). Research dilemmas: Paradigms, methods and methodology. Issues in Educational Research, 16(2), 193–205. Retrieved from http://www.iier.org.au/iier16/mackenzie.html.

  • National Research Council [NRC]. (2002). Scientific research in education. In R. J. Shavelson & L. Towne (Eds.), Committee on scientific principles for education research. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. Retrieved from www.nap.edu/catalog/10236.html.

  • Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, D. C. (2006). Assessing the quality of design research proposals: Some philosophical perspective. In J. van den Akker, K. Gravemeijer, S. McKenney, & N. Nieveen (Eds.), Educational design research (pp. 93–99). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reeves, T. (2006). Design research from a technology perspective. In J. van den Akker, K. Gravemeijer, S. McKenney, & N. Nieveen (Eds.), Educational design research (pp. 52–66). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seeto, D., & Herrington, J. (2006). Design-based research and the learning designer. In Proceedings of the 23rd annual ASCILITE conference: Who’s learning? Whose technology? Sydney, December 3, 2006 (pp. 741–745). Retrieved from http://www.ascilite.org/conferences/sydney06/proceeding/pdf_papers/p177.pdf.

  • Shavelson, R. J., Phillips, D. C., Towne, L., & Feuer, M. J. (2003). On the science of education design studies. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 25–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tukey, J. W. (1977). Exploratory data analysis. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watson, J., & Fitzallen, N. (2016). Statistical software and mathematics education: Affordances for learning. In L. D. English & D. Kirshner (Eds.), Handbook of international research in mathematics education (3rd ed., pp. 563–594). New York: Taylor & Francis.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Education, College of Arts, Law, and Education, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia

    Noleine Fitzallen

Authors
  1. Noleine Fitzallen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Noleine Fitzallen .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Tasmania, Launceston, Tasmania, Australia

    David Kember

  2. School of Education, Acadia University, Wolfville, Nova Scotia, Canada

    Michael Corbett

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Fitzallen, N. (2018). Structure by Design: Reasoning About Covariation with TinkerPlots. In: Kember, D., Corbett, M. (eds) Structuring the Thesis. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-0511-5_9

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-0511-5_9

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-13-0510-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-13-0511-5

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation