statistical inference at work: Statistical

process control as an example

 

arthur bakker

Freudenthal Institute, Utrecht University & Institute of Education, University of London

a.bakker@fi.uu.nl

 

Phillip kent

Institute of Education, University of London

p.kent@ioe.ac.uk

 

jan Derry

Institute of Education, University of London

j.derry@ioe.ac.uk

 

richard noss

Institute of Education, University of London

r.noss@ioe.ac.uk

 

Celia hoyles

Institute of Education, University of London

c.hoyles@ioe.ac.uk

 

ABSTRACT

 

To characterise statistical inference in the workplace this paper compares a prototypical type of statistical inference at work, statistical process control (SPC), with a type of statistical inference that is better known in educational settings, hypothesis testing. Although there are some similarities between the reasoning structure involved in hypothesis testing and SPC that point to key characteristics of statistical inference in general, there are also crucial differences. These come to the fore when we characterise statistical inference within what we call a “space of reasons” – a conglomerate of reasons and implications, evidence and conclusions, causes and effects.

 

Keywords: Statistics education research; Context; Evidence; Hypothesis testing; Space of reasons

 

 

__________________________

Statistics Education Research Journal, 7(1), 130-145, http://www.stat.auckland.ac.nz/serj

Ó International Association for Statistical Education (IASE/ISI), May, 2008

 

 

 

REFERENCES

 

Abelson, R. P. (1995). Statistics as principled argument. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Bakker, A., & Derry, J. (2008). Understanding statistical concepts in inferential terms. Manuscript in preparation.

Bakker, A., Derry, J., & Konold, C. (2006). Technology to support diagrammatic reasoning about center and variation. In A. Rossman & B. Chance (Eds.), Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Teaching Statistics: Working Cooperatively in Statistics Education, Salvador, Brazil. [CDROM]. Voorburg, The Netherlands: International Statistical Institute.     

[Online: http://www.stat.auckland.ac.nz/~iase/publications/17/2D4_BAKK.pdf]

Bakker, A., Hoyles, C., Kent, P., & Noss, R. (2006). Improving work processes by making the invisible visible. Journal of Education and Work, 19, 343-361.

Batanero, C. (2000). Controversies around the role of statistical tests in experimental research. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 2, 75-97

Ben-Zvi, D. (2006). Scaffolding students’ informal inference and argumentation. In A. Rossman & B. Chance (Eds.), Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Teaching Statistics: Working Cooperatively in Statistics Education, Salvador, Brazil. [CDROM]. Voorburg, The Netherlands: International Statistical Institute.

      [Online: http://www.stat.auckland.ac.nz/~iase/publications/17/2D1_BENZ.pdf].

Biehler, R. (1982). Explorative Datenanalyse – Eine Untersuchung aus der Perspective einer deskriptiv-empirischen Wissenschaftstheorie [Exploratory data analysis - An investigation from the perspective of a descriptive empirical scientific theory] Bielefeld, Germany: Universität Bielefeld.

Caulcutt, R. (1995). The rights and wrongs of control charts. Applied Statistics, 44, 279-288.

Christensen, R. (2005). Testing Fisher, Neyman, Pearson, and Bayes. The American Statistician, 59, 121-126.

Cobb, G. W. (1999). Discussion of "Let’s use CQI in our statistics programs.” The American Statistician, 53, 16-21.

Frick, R. W. (1998). Interpreting statistical testing: Process and propensity, not population and random sampling. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 30, 527-535.

Hoyles, C., Bakker, A., Kent, P., & Noss, R. (2007). Attributing meanings to representations of data: The case of statistical process control. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 9, 331-360.

Konold, C., & Lehrer, R. (in press). Technology and mathematics education: An essay in honor of Jim Kaput. In L. D. English (Ed.). Handbook of international research in mathematics education (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.

Konold, C., & Pollatsek, A. (2002). Data analysis as the search for signals in noisy processes. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 33, 259-289.

Lave, J. (1988). Cognition in practice: Mind, mathematics and culture in everyday life. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

McDowell, J. (1996). Mind and world (2nd ed.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Makar, K., & Rubin, A. (2007, August). Beyond the bar graph: Teaching informal statistical inference in primary school. Paper presented at the Fifth International Research Forum on Statistical Reasoning, Thinking and Literacy (SRTL-5), University of Warwick, UK.

Noss, R., Bakker, A., Hoyles, C., & Kent, P. (2007). Situating graphs as workplace knowledge. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 65, 367-384.

Noss, R., & Hoyles, C. (1996). Windows on mathematical meanings: Learning cultures and computers. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Noss, R., Pozzi, S., & Hoyles, C. (1999). Touching epistemologies: Meanings of average and variation in nursing practice. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 40, 25-51.

Nunes, T. A., Schliemann, D., & Carraher, D. W. (1993). Street mathematics and school mathematics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Oakland, J. S. (2003). Statistical process control (5th ed.). Amsterdam: Butterworth-Heinemann.

Paparistodemou, E., & Meletiou-Mavrotheris, M. (2007, August). Enhancing reasoning about statistical inference in 8 year-old students. Paper presented at the Fifth International Research Forum on Statistical Reasoning, Thinking and Literacy (SRTL-5), University of Warwick, UK.

Pfannkuch, M. (2006). Informal inferential reasoning. In A. Rossman & B. Chance (Eds.), Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Teaching Statistics: Working Cooperatively in Statistics Education, Salvador, Brazil. [CDROM]. Voorburg, The Netherlands: International Statistical Institute.

[Online: http://www.stat.auckland.ac.nz/~iase/publications/17/6A2_PFAN.pdf]

Rubin, A., Hammerman, J. K. L., & Konold, C. (2006). Exploring informal inference with interactive visualization software. In A. Rossman & B. Chance (Eds.), Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Teaching Statistics: Working Cooperatively in Statistics Education, Salvador, Brazil. [CDROM]. Voorburg, The Netherlands: International Statistical Institute.

[Online: http://www.stat.auckland.ac.nz/~iase/publications/17/2D3_RUBI.pdf]

Säljö, R. (2003). Epilogue: From transfer to boundary-crossing. In T. Tuomi-Gröhn & Y. Engeström (Eds.), Between school and work: New perspectives on transfer and boundary-crossing (pp. 311-321). Amsterdam: Elsevier.

Smith, J. P. (1999). Tracking the mathematics of automobile production: Are schools failing to prepare students for work? American Educational Research Journal, 36, 835-878.

Steen, L. A. (2003). Data, shapes, symbols: Achieving balance in school mathematics. In B. L. Madison & L. A. Steen (Eds.), Quantitative literacy: Why literacy matters for schools and colleges (pp. 53-74). Washington, DC: The Mathematical Assiociation of America. Retrieved October 27, 2007 from http://www.maa.org/ql/qltoc.html

Techno-mathematical Literacies Project (2003-2007). www.lkl.ac.uk/technomaths

Wild, C. J., & Pfannkuch, M. (1999). Statistical thinking in empirical enquiry. International Statistics Review, 67, 223-248.

Zieffler, A., Garfield, J., & delMas, R. (2007, August). Studying the development of college students’ informal reasoning about statistical inference. Paper presented at the Fifth International Research Forum on Statistical Reasoning, Thinking and Literacy (SRTL-5), University of Warwick, UK.

 

Arthur Bakker

University of London

London Knowledge Lab

23-29 Emerald Street

London WC1N 3QS

United Kingdom

 

Currently working at:

Utrecht University

Freudenthal Institute

PO Box 9432

3506 GK Utrecht

The Netherlands