Difference between revisions of "Cobb, McClain, & Gravemeijer (2003)"

From MathEd.net Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>Raymond Johnson
(summarized DE methodology)
imported>Raymond Johnson
(finished outline, added DR category)
Line 10: Line 10:


==Outline of Headings==
==Outline of Headings==
* The Design Experiment Methodology
* The Design Experiment Methodology
* Data Sources and Method of Analysis
* Data Sources and Method of Analysis
 
* The Setting of the Design Experiment
* Classroom Organization
* The Hypothetical Learning Trajectory
** Potential Endpoints
** Starting Points
** The Conjectured Learning Route and Means of Support
*** Cross
*** Grids
*** Two Equal Groups
*** Four Equal Groups
* The Actual Learning Trajectory
** Social and Sociomathematical Norms
** Comparing Univariate Datasets
** Inscribing Bivariate Data
** Reducing Scatter Plots to Lines
** Negotiating the Median
** Reading Stacks and Slices as Distributions
* What We Learned from the Design Experiments
** Structuring and Organizing Bivariate Data
*** Starting points: univariate datasets as distributions
*** Developing ways of inscribing bivariate data
*** Stacked data as bivariate distributions
*** Scatter plots as bivariate distributions
** Initial Steps Toward Statistical Inference
* Conclusions


==Summary==
==Summary==
Cobb, McClain, and Gravemeijer conducted a 14-week design experiment with a group of 8th grade students to yield a learning trajectory for statistical covariation. The researchers looked both at the learning of the classroom community as well as individual students, and considered their own learning as integral in the experiment. Cobb et al. conducted the design experiment in three parts: planning for the experiment, experimenting in the classroom, and conducting a retrospective analysis ({{Cite|Cobb|2000}}; {{Cite|Confrey & Lachance|2000}}; {{Cite|Simon|2000}}). [[Gravemeijer (2004)]] provides the basis for the preparation stage, with thought experiments about mathematical activity and discourse that might take place under various instructional designs. These conjectures about the trajectories for student learning and the means to support it compose what [[Simon (1995)]] called a hypothetical learning trajectory. The goal of the experiment is not to see if the proposed instruction is effective, but to iteratively test and modify the conjectures as the experiment progresses ({{Cite|Brown|1992}}; {{Cite|Cobb|2001}}; {{Cite|Collins|1999}}; {{Cite|Suter & Frechtling|2000}}). The researchers did this in what [[Gravemeijer (1994)]] calls ''minicycles'' of design occur almost daily. The retrospective analysis of the planned versus actual learning trajectory helps inform a domain-specific instructional theory that can then be used to plan instruction in other classrooms. These local instructional theories describe a demonstrated plan for learning significant mathematical ideas and the means by which learning is supported and organized. Although the design experiment is conducted in the unique constraints of a single classroom, the local instructional theory is what can make the research generalizable ({{Cite|Steffe & Thompson|2000}}) and the basis for further theory refinement ({{Cite|Stigler & Hiebert|1999}}).
Cobb, McClain, and Gravemeijer conducted a 14-week design experiment with a group of 8th grade students to yield a learning trajectory for statistical covariation. The researchers looked both at the learning of the classroom community as well as individual students, and considered their own learning as integral in the experiment. Cobb et al. conducted the design experiment in three parts: planning for the experiment, experimenting in the classroom, and conducting a retrospective analysis ({{Cite|Cobb|2000}}; {{Cite|Confrey & Lachance|2000}}; {{Cite|Simon|2000}}). [[Gravemeijer (2004)]] provides the basis for the preparation stage, with thought experiments about mathematical activity and discourse that might take place under various instructional designs. These conjectures about the trajectories for student learning and the means to support it compose what [[Simon (1995)]] called a hypothetical learning trajectory. The goal of the experiment is not to see if the proposed instruction is effective, but to iteratively test and modify the conjectures as the experiment progresses ({{Cite|Brown|1992}}; {{Cite|Cobb|2001}}; {{Cite|Collins|1999}}; {{Cite|Suter & Frechtling|2000}}). The researchers did this in what [[Gravemeijer (1994)]] calls ''minicycles'' of design occur almost daily. The retrospective analysis of the planned versus actual learning trajectory helps inform a domain-specific instructional theory that can then be used to plan instruction in other classrooms. These local instructional theories describe a demonstrated plan for learning significant mathematical ideas and the means by which learning is supported and organized. Although the design experiment is conducted in the unique constraints of a single classroom, the local instructional theory is what can make the research generalizable ({{Cite|Steffe & Thompson|2000}}) and the basis for further theory refinement ({{Cite|Stigler & Hiebert|1999}}).


Line 43: Line 65:
[[Category:2003]]
[[Category:2003]]
[[Category:Statistics]]
[[Category:Statistics]]
[[Category:Design Research]]

Revision as of 04:23, 1 September 2014

Learning About Statistical Covariation

Abstract

In this article, we report on a design experiment conducted in an 8th grade classroom that focused on students' analysis of bivariate data. Our immediate goal is to document both the actual learning trajectory of the classroom community and the diversity in the students' reasoning as they participated in the classroom mathematical practices that constituted this trajectory. On a broader level, we also focus on the learning of the research team by documenting the conjectures about the students' statistical learning and the means of supporting it that the research team generated, tested, and revised on-line while the experiment was in progress. In the final part of the article, we synthesize the results of this learning by proposing a revised learning trajectory that can inform design and instruction in other classrooms. In doing so, we make a contribution to the cumulative development of a domain-specific instructional theory for statistical data analysis.

Outline of Headings

  • The Design Experiment Methodology
  • Data Sources and Method of Analysis
  • The Setting of the Design Experiment
  • Classroom Organization
  • The Hypothetical Learning Trajectory
    • Potential Endpoints
    • Starting Points
    • The Conjectured Learning Route and Means of Support
      • Cross
      • Grids
      • Two Equal Groups
      • Four Equal Groups
  • The Actual Learning Trajectory
    • Social and Sociomathematical Norms
    • Comparing Univariate Datasets
    • Inscribing Bivariate Data
    • Reducing Scatter Plots to Lines
    • Negotiating the Median
    • Reading Stacks and Slices as Distributions
  • What We Learned from the Design Experiments
    • Structuring and Organizing Bivariate Data
      • Starting points: univariate datasets as distributions
      • Developing ways of inscribing bivariate data
      • Stacked data as bivariate distributions
      • Scatter plots as bivariate distributions
    • Initial Steps Toward Statistical Inference
  • Conclusions

Summary

Cobb, McClain, and Gravemeijer conducted a 14-week design experiment with a group of 8th grade students to yield a learning trajectory for statistical covariation. The researchers looked both at the learning of the classroom community as well as individual students, and considered their own learning as integral in the experiment. Cobb et al. conducted the design experiment in three parts: planning for the experiment, experimenting in the classroom, and conducting a retrospective analysis (Cobb, 2000; Confrey & Lachance, 2000; Simon, 2000). Gravemeijer (2004) provides the basis for the preparation stage, with thought experiments about mathematical activity and discourse that might take place under various instructional designs. These conjectures about the trajectories for student learning and the means to support it compose what Simon (1995) called a hypothetical learning trajectory. The goal of the experiment is not to see if the proposed instruction is effective, but to iteratively test and modify the conjectures as the experiment progresses (Brown, 1992; Cobb, 2001; Collins, 1999; Suter & Frechtling, 2000). The researchers did this in what Gravemeijer (1994) calls minicycles of design occur almost daily. The retrospective analysis of the planned versus actual learning trajectory helps inform a domain-specific instructional theory that can then be used to plan instruction in other classrooms. These local instructional theories describe a demonstrated plan for learning significant mathematical ideas and the means by which learning is supported and organized. Although the design experiment is conducted in the unique constraints of a single classroom, the local instructional theory is what can make the research generalizable (Steffe & Thompson, 2000) and the basis for further theory refinement (Stigler & Hiebert, 1999).


Corrolary

APA
Cobb, P., McClain, K., & Gravemeijer, K. (2003). Learning about statistical covariation. Cognition and Instruction, 21(1), 1–78. doi:10.1207/S1532690XCI2101_1
BibTeX
@article{Cobb2003,
abstract = {In this article, we report on a design experiment conducted in an 8th grade classroom that focused on students' analysis of bivariate data. Our immediate goal is to document both the actual learning trajectory of the classroom community and the diversity in the students' reasoning as they participated in the classroom mathematical practices that constituted this trajectory. On a broader level, we also focus on the learning of the research team by documenting the conjectures about the students' statistical learning and the means of supporting it that the research team generated, tested, and revised on-line while the experiment was in progress. In the final part of the article, we synthesize the results of this learning by proposing a revised learning trajectory that can inform design and instruction in other classrooms. In doing so, we make a contribution to the cumulative development of a domain-specific instructional theory for statistical data analysis.},
author = {Cobb, Paul and McClain, Kay and Gravemeijer, Koeno},
doi = {10.1207/S1532690XCI2101\_1},
journal = {Cognition and Instruction},
number = {1},
pages = {1--78},
title = {{Learning about statistical covariation}},
url = {http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1207/S1532690XCI2101\_1},
volume = {21},
year = {2003}