assessing Teachers’ Discourse about the
Pre-k–12 Guidelines for Assessment and
instruction in statistics education (GAISE)
Randall e. groth
Salisbury University
regroth@salisbury.edu
ABSTRACT
This paper starts from the premise that teachers’ discourse communities influence how ideas for reform are implemented. In order to understand some of the discourse surrounding the reforms proposed by GAISE, an online focus group activity was conducted. The focus group consisted of pre-service and practicing teachers responsible for teaching statistics at various grade levels. Focus group discourse was used to formulate a set of working hypotheses about actions that need to be taken to facilitate the implementation of GAISE. Working hypotheses emphasized that statistics educators need to play roles in developing teachers’ content knowledge, helping teachers understand the differences between mathematics and statistics, deepening teachers’ pedagogical knowledge, building teachers’ curricular knowledge, and influencing the writing of state-level standards.
Keywords: Statistics
education research; Educational standards; Teachers’ perceptions;
Qualitative research; Focus groups
__________________________
Statistics
Education Research Journal, 7(1), 16-39, http://www.stat.auckland.ac.nz/serj
Ó International
Association for Statistical Education (IASE/ISI), May, 2008
REFERENCES
Cobb,
G. W., & Moore, D. S. (1997). Mathematics,
statistics, and teaching. American
Mathematical Monthly, 104(9), 801-823.
Conference
Board of the Mathematical Sciences. (2001). The mathematical education of
teachers. Providence, RI: American Mathematical Society.
Darling-Hammond,
L. (2006). No Child Left Behind and high school reform. Harvard
Educational Review, 76, 642-667.
Davis, B., & Simmt, E. (2003). Understanding learning systems: Mathematics education
and complexity science. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 34(2), 137-
167.
Fennell, F. (2007). Focal points – where we are, and what’s next? NCTM News Bulletin, 43(7), 3.
Franklin, C. A., & Garfield, J. B. (2006). The GAISE project: Developing statistics education guidelines for grades Pre-K-12 and college courses. In G. F. Burrill (Ed.), Thinking and reasoning with data and chance: Sixty-eighth annual yearbook of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (pp. 345-375). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
Franklin, C. A., Kader, G., Mewborn, D., Moreno, J., Peck, R., Perry, M., & Scheaffer, R. (2007). Guidelines for assessment and instruction in statistics education (GAISE) report: A pre-K–12 curriculum framework. Alexandria, VA: American Statistical Association.
[Online: http://www.amstat.org/education/gaise/]
Franklin, C. A., & Mewborn, D. S. (2006). The statistical education of grades Pre-K-12 teachers: A shared responsibility. In G. F. Burrill (Ed.), Thinking and reasoning with data and chance: Sixty-eighth annual yearbook of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (pp. 335-344). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
Fuller, T. D., Edwards, J. N., Vorakitphokatorn, S., & Sermsri, S. (1993). Using focus groups to adapt survey instruments to new populations: Experience from a developing country. In D. L. Morgan (Ed.), Successful focus groups: Advancing the state of the art (pp. 89-104). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Greenbaum, T. L. (1993). The handbook for focus group research. New York: Lexington Books.
Greeno, J. G. (2003). Situative research relevant to standards for school mathematics. In J. Kilpatrick, W. G. Martin, & D. Schifter (Eds.), A research companion to Principles and Standards for School Mathematics (pp. 304-332). Reston, VA: NCTM.
Groth, R. E. (2006). Analysis of an online case discussion about teaching stochastics.
Mathematics Teacher Education and Development, 7, 53-71.
Groth, R. E. (2007). Case studies of mathematics teachers’ learning in an online study
group. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 7(1).
[Online: http://www.citejournal.org/vol7/iss1/mathematics/article1.cfm]
Joinson, A. N. (1998). Causes and effects of disinhibition on the Internet. In J. Gackenbach (Ed.), The psychology of the Internet (pp. 43-60). New York: Academic Press.
Lambdin, D. V., & Preston, R. V. (1995). Caricatures in innovation: Teacher adaptation to an investigation-oriented middle school mathematics curriculum. Journal of Teacher Education, 46(2), 130-140.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lesh, R., & Lovitts, B. (2000). Research agendas: Identifying priority problems and developing useful theoretical perspectives. In A. E. Kelly & R. A. Lesh (Eds.), Handbook of research design in mathematics and science education (pp. 45-72). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Lloyd, G. M., & Behm, S. L. (2005). Preservice elementary teachers’ analysis of mathematics instructional materials. Action in Teacher Education, 26(4), 48-62.
Ma, L. (1999). Knowing and teaching elementary mathematics: Teachers’ understanding of fundamental mathematics in China and the United States. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Moore, D. (1992). Teaching statistics as a respectable subject. In F. Gordon & S. Gordon (Eds.), Statistics for the twenty-first century (pp. 14-25). Washington, D.C.: Mathematical Association of America.
Morgan, D. L. (1997). Focus groups as qualitative research (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Muhr, T. (2004). User’s Manual for ATLAS.ti 5.0. Berlin: ATLAS.ti Scientific Software Development.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (1989). Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (1991). Professional standards for teaching mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (1995). Assessment standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (2006). Curriculum focal points for prekindergarten through grade 8 mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
Putnam, R. T., & Borko, H. (2000). What do new views of knowledge and thinking have to say about research on teacher learning? Educational Researcher, 29(1), 4-15.
Remillard, J. T., & Bryans, M. B. (2004). Teachers’ orientations toward mathematics curriculum materials: Implications for teacher learning. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 35(5), 352-388.
Ross, J. A., McDougall, D., & Hogaboam-Gray, A. (2002). Research on reform in mathematics education, 1993-2000. Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 48(2), 122-138.
Rossi, P. H., Wright, J. D., & Anderson, A. B. (Eds.). (1983). Handbook of survey research. New York: Academic Press.
Rossman, A., Chance, B., & Medina, E. (2006). Some important comparisons between statistics and mathematics, and why teachers should care. In G. F. Burrill (Ed.), Thinking and reasoning with data and chance: Sixty-eighth annual yearbook of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (pp. 323-333). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
Schoen, H. L., Fey, J. T., Hirsch, C. R., & Coxford, A. F. (1999). Issues and options in the math wars. Phi Delta Kappan, 80, 444-453.
Schoenfeld, A. H. (2004). The math wars. Educational Policy, 18(1), 253-286.
Sowder, J. T., & Schappelle, B. (Eds.). (2002). Lessons learned from research. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
Spillane, J. P., & Zeulli, J. S. (1999). Reform and teaching: Exploring patterns of practice in the context of national and state mathematics reforms. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 21(1), 1-27.
Stewart, K., & Williams, M. (2005). Researching online populations: The use of online focus groups for social research. Qualitative Research, 5(4), 395-416.
Stigler, J. W. & Hiebert, J. (1999). The teaching gap: Best ideas from the world’s teachers for improving education in the classroom. New York: Free Press.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. London: Sage.
Thomas, R. M. (2005). High-stakes testing: Coping with collateral damage. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Tyack, D., & Cuban, L. (1995). Tinkering toward Utopia: A century of public school reform. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Usiskin, Z., & Dossey, J. (2004). Mathematics education in the United States 2004: A capsule summary fact book. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
Vaughn, S., Schumm, J. S., & Sinagub, J. (1996). Focus groups in education and psychology. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Watson, J. M., & Moritz, J. B. (2000). Developing concepts of sampling. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 31(1), 44-70.
Randall E. Groth
Salisbury University
Seidel School of Education and Professional Studies
1101 Camden Ave.
Salisbury, MD 21801
USA