Developing a Modelling Approach to Probability Using Computer-Based Simulations

  • Theodosia ProdromouEmail author
Part of the Advances in Mathematics Education book series (AME)


The introduction of digital technology into secondary schools is ideally suited for supporting students as they manipulate and portray data in a range of different representations to draw inferences from it without relying on a classical understanding of probability theory. As a result, probability is overlooked from school curricula and is gradually becoming almost a non-existent topic. The aim of recent curricula (e.g. ACARA 2010) to support the parallel development of statistics and probability and then progressively build the links between them seems utopic since statistics prevails over probability in mathematics curricula. In this chapter, it is argued that it is worthwhile to consider an alternative approach for teaching probability—presenting probability as a modelling tool, which reflects the mindset of an expert when using probability to model random behaviour in real-world contexts.

This chapter discusses results from two recent research studies (Prodromou 2008, 2012) that investigated middle school students’ understanding of probability as a modelling tool. Within this chapter, the students’ reasoning will be considered from different perspectives:
  1. (1)

    How students articulated fundamental probabilistic concepts associated with the construction of univariate probability models when using probability to model random behaviour.

  2. (2)

    Students’ discussion as they engaged in exploring recently developed computer-based simulations which treat probability as a modelling tool.


In this chapter, references will be limited to students in Grades 6 to 9. Prodromou’s research studies address four research questions as follows: (1) How do middle school students use probability to model random behaviour in real-world contexts? (2) What connections do they build among fundamental probabilistic concepts when treating probability as a modelling tool? (3) How do they synthesize the modelling approach to probability with the use of distributions while concurrently making inferences about data? (4) What activities can be designed to support the proposed alternative approach for teaching probability?

The results of this study provide answers to the aforementioned research questions and suggest that the way students express the relationship between signal and noise is of importance while building models from the observation of a real situation. This relationship seems to have a particular importance in students’ abilities to build comprehensive models that link observed data with modelling distributions.


Modelling Probability Middle school Computer-based simulations Random behaviour Signal Noise Data 


  1. Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (2010). Australian Curriculum: Mathematics. Version 1.1. Online:
  2. Batanero, C., Henry, M., & Parzysz, B. (2005). The nature of chance and probability. In G. A. Jones (Ed.), Exploring probability in school: challenges for teaching and learning (pp. 15–37). New York: Springer. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Borovcnik, M. (2011). Strengthening the role of probability within statistics curricula. In C. Batanero, G. Burrill, & C. Reading (Eds.), Teaching statistics in school mathematics—challenges for teaching and teacher education, a joint ICMI/IASE study: the 18th ICMI study (pp. 71–83). New York: Springer. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chaput, M., Girard, J.-C., & Henry, M. (2011). Frequentist approach: modelling and simulation in statistics and probability teaching. In C. Batanero, G. Burrill, & C. Reading (Eds.), Teaching statistics in school mathematics—challenges for teaching and teacher education, a joint ICMI/IASE study: the 18th ICMI study (pp. 85–95). New York: Springer. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. De Moivre, A. (1967/1756). The doctrine of chances: or a method of calculating the probabilities of events in play. New York: Chelsea (original work published in 1756, London: A. Millar). Google Scholar
  6. Henry, M. (2001). Autour de la modélisation en probabilités [Around modelling in probability]. Besancon: Presses Universitaires Franc-Comtoises. Google Scholar
  7. Hoerl, R. W., & Snee, R. D. (2001). Statistical thinking: improving business performance. Pacific Grove: Duxbury. Google Scholar
  8. Laplace, P. S. (1995/1814). Théorie analytique des probabilités [Analytical theory of probabilities]. Paris: Jacques Gabay (original work published 1814). Google Scholar
  9. Makar, K., Bakker, A., & Ben-Zvi, D. (2011). The reasoning behind informal statistical inference. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 13(1), 152–173. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Makar, K., & Rubin, A. (2009). A framework for thinking about informal statistical inference. Statistics Education Research Journal, 8(1), 82–105. Online: Google Scholar
  11. von Mises, R. (1952/1928). Probability, statistics and truth (J. Neyman, O. Scholl, & E. Rabinovitch, Trans.). London: William Hodge and Company (original work published 1928). Google Scholar
  12. Moore, D. S. (1990). Uncertainty. In L. S. Steen (Ed.), On the shoulders of giants: new approaches to numeracy (pp. 95–137). Washington: National Academic Press. Google Scholar
  13. Pratt, D. (2011). Re-connecting probability and reasoning about data in secondary school teaching. Paper presented at 58th ISI World Statistics Congress, Dublin, Ireland. Online:
  14. Prodromou, T. (2007). Making connections between the two perspectives on distribution. In D. Pitta-Pantazi & G. Philippou (Eds.), Proceedings of the fifth congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education, Larnaca, Cyprus (pp. 801–810). Online: Google Scholar
  15. Prodromou, T. (2008). Connecting thinking about distribution. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Warwick, Warwick, UK. Google Scholar
  16. Prodromou, T. (2012). Students’ construction of meanings about the co-ordination of the two epistemological perspectives on distribution. International Journal of Statistics and Probability, 1(2), 283–300. doi: 10.5539/ijsp.v1n2pxx. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Prodromou, T., & Pratt, D. (2006). The role of causality in the co-ordination of the two perspectives on distribution within a virtual simulation. Statistics Education Research Journal, 5(2), 69–88. Online: Google Scholar
  18. Prodromou, T., & Pratt, D. (2009). Student’s causal explanations for distribution. In V. Durand-Guerrier, S. Soury-Lavergne, & F. Arzarello (Eds.), Proceedings of the sixth conference of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education, Lyon, France (pp. 394–403). Google Scholar
  19. Renyi, A. (1992/1966). Calcul des probabilitiés [Probability calculus] (L. Félix, Trans.). Paris: Jacques Gabay (original work published 1966). Google Scholar
  20. Robson, C. (1993). Real world research. Oxford: Blackwell. Google Scholar
  21. Shaughnessy, J. M., & Ciancetta, M. (2001). Conflict between students’ personal theories and actual data: the spectre of variation. In Second round table conference on research on statistics teaching and learning, Armidale, New South Wales, Australia. Google Scholar
  22. Smith, T. M. F. (1999). Discussion. International Statistical Review, 67(3), 248–250. Google Scholar
  23. Sorto, M. A. (2006). Identifying content knowledge for teaching statistics. In A. Rossman & B. Chance (Eds.), Working cooperatively in statistics education. Proceedings of the seventh international conference on teaching statistics, Salvador, Brazil. Voorburg: International Statistical Institute [CDROM]. Online: Google Scholar
  24. Tukey, J. W. (1977). Exploratory data analysis. Reading: Addison-Wesley. Google Scholar
  25. Wild, C., & Pfannkuch, M. (1999). Statistical thinking in empirical enquiry. International Statistical Review, 67, 223–266. Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of New EnglandArmidaleAustralia

Personalised recommendations