Situating Qualitative Modes of inquiry within the discipline of statistics education research

 

 

Randall E. Groth

Salisbury University

regroth@salisbury.edu

 

ABSTRACT

 

Qualitative methods have become common in statistics education research, but questions linger about their role in scholarship. Currently, influential policy documents lend credence to the notion that qualitative methods are inherently inferior to quantitative ones. In this paper, several of the questions about qualitative research raised in recent policy documents in the U.S. are examined. Each question is addressed by drawing upon examples from existing statistics education research. The examples illustrate that qualitative methods can be used profitably to study statistical teaching and learning, and that in some cases qualitative methods are preferable to quantitative ones. By using the examples presented, qualitative researchers in statistics education can begin to more strongly situate their work within scholarly discourse about empirical research.

 

Keywords: Qualitative research; Rigor; Scientific research; Generalizability; Exploratory studies; Subjectivity

 

__________________________

Statistics Education Research Journal, 9(2), 7-21, http://www.stat.auckland.ac.nz/serj

Ó International Association for Statistical Education (IASE/ISI), November, 2010

 

REFERENCES

 

Batanero, C., Estepa, A., Godino, J. D., & Green, D. R. (1996). Intuitive strategies and preconceptions about association in contingency tables. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 27(2), 151-169.

Ben-Zvi, D., & Garfield, J. (Eds.) (2004). The challenge of developing statistical literacy, reasoning, and thinking. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.

Biggs, J. B., & Collis, K. F. (1982). Evaluating the quality of learning: The SOLO taxonomy. New York: Academic.

Biggs, J. B., & Collis, K. F. (1991). Multimodal learning and quality of intelligent behavior. In H. A. H. Rowe (Ed.), Intelligence: Reconceptualization and measurement (pp. 57–66). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Canada, D. (2006). Elementary pre-service teachers' conceptions of variation in a probability context. Statistics Education Research Journal, 5(1), 36-63.

[Online: http://www.stat.auckland.ac.nz/~iase/serj/SERJ_5(1)_Canada.pdf]

Cobb, P. (1999). Individual and collective mathematical development: The case of   statistical data analysis. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 1(1), 5-43.

Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of qualitative research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Cronbach, L. J. (1975). Beyond the two disciplines of scientific psychology. American Psychologist, 30(2), 116-127.

Davies, D., & Dodd, J. (2002). Qualitative research and the question of rigor. Qualitative Health Research, 12(2), 279-289.

Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2005). Introduction: The discipline and practice of qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed.) (pp. 1-32). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Golafshani, N. (2003). Understanding reliability and validity in qualitative research. The Qualitative Report, 8(4), 597-607.

Groth, R. E. (2003). High school students’ levels of thinking in regard to statistical study design. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 15(3), 252-269.

Holcomb, J. (2002). The ethics of comparison: A statistician wrestles with the orthodoxy of a control group. In P. Hutchings (Ed.), Ethics of inquiry: Issues in the scholarship of teaching and learning (pp. 19-26). Menlo Park, CA: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.

Jones, G. A., Thornton, C. A., Langrall, C. W., Mooney, E. S., Perry, B., & Putt, I. (2000). A framework for characterizing children's statistical thinking. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 2(4), 269-307.

Lankshear, C., & Knobel, M. (2004). A handbook for teacher research: From design to implementation. Berkshire: Open University Press.

Lewis, J. (2008). Through the looking glass: A study of teaching. In A. H. Schoenfeld (Ed.), A study of teaching: Multiple lenses, multiple views. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, Monograph Number 14 (pp. 1-12). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

Lloyd, G. M., & Behm, S. L. (2005). Preservice elementary teachers' analysis of mathematics instructional materials. Action in Teacher Education, 26(4), 48-62.

Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Mooney, E. S. (2002). A framework for characterizing middle school students’ statistical thinking. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 4(1), 23-63.

Morse, J. M., Barrett, J. M., Mayan, M., Olson, K., & Spiers, J. (2002). Verification strategies for establishing reliability and validity in qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 1(2), 13-22.

National Mathematics Advisory Panel. (2008). Foundations for success: The final report of the National Mathematics Advisory Panel. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.

[Online: http://www.ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/mathpanel/report/final-report.pdf]

National Research Council. (2002). Scientific research in education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. (2002). Pub. L, No. 107-110, 115 Stat. 1425.

Pfannkuch, M. (2006). Comparing box plot distributions: A teacher’s reasoning. Statistics Education Research Journal, 5(2), 27-45.

[Online: http://www.stat.auckland.ac.nz/~iase/serj/SERJ5(2)_Pfannkuch.pdf]

Pfannkuch, M., & Horring, J. (2004). Developing statistical thinking in secondary school: A collaborative curriculum development. In G. Burrill & M. Camden (Eds.), Curricular development in statistics education: International Association for Statistics Education 2004 Roundtable, (pp. 163-173). Voorburg, The Netherlands: International Statistical Institute.

[Online: www.stat.auckland.ac.nz/~iase/publications/rt04/5.1_Pfannkuch&Horring.pdf]

Reading, C., & Reid, J. (2006). An emerging hierarchy of reasoning about distribution: From a variation perspective. Statistics Education Research Journal, 5(2), 46–68. [Online: http://www.stat.auckland.ac.nz/~iase/serj/SERJ5(2)_Reading_Reid.pdf]

Rossi, P. H., Wright, J. D., & Anderson, A. B. (Eds.). (1983). Handbook of survey research. New York: Academic Press.

Ryan, K. E., & Hood, L. K. (2004). Guarding the castle and opening the gates. Qualitative Inquiry, 10(1), 79-95.

Scheaffer, R., & Smith, W. B. (2007). Using statistics effectively in mathematics education research: A report from a series of workshops organized by the American Statistical Association with funding from the National Science Foundation. Alexandria, VA: American Statistical Association.

[Online: http://www.amstat.org/education/pdfs/UsingStatisticsEffectivelyinMathEdResearch.pdf ]

Schoenfeld, A. H. (2007). Method. In F. K. Lester, Jr. (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 69-107). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.

Schoenfeld, A. H. (Ed.) (2008). A study of teaching: Multiple lenses, multiple views. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, Monograph 14. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

Shaughnessy, J. M. (2007). Research on statistics learning and reasoning. In F. K. Lester (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 957-1009). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.

Silver, E. S. (2004) Ella minnow pea: An allegory for our times? Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 35(3), 154-156.

Simon, M. (1995). Reconstructing mathematics pedagogy from a constructivist perspective. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 26(2), 114-145.

Simon, M. A. (2004). Raising issues of quality in mathematics education research. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 35(3), 157-163.

Stake, R. E. (2005). Qualitative case studies. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed.), pp. 443-466. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Stake, R. E., & Trumbull, D. J. (1982). Naturalistic generalizations. Review Journal of Philosophy and Social Science, 7(1/2), 1-12.

Steffe, L. P., & Thompson, P. W. (2000). Teaching experiment methodology: Underlying principles and essential elements. In A. E. Kelly & R. A. Lesh (Eds.), Handbook of research design in mathematics and science education (pp. 267-306). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Teppo, A. R. (Ed.). (1998). Qualitative research methods in mathematics education. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, Monograph 9. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

Watson, J. M. (2007). Exploring beginning inference with novice grade 7 students. Statistics Education Research Journal, 7(2), 59-82.

[Online: http://www.stat.auckland.ac.nz/~iase/serj/SERJ7(2)_Watson.pdf]

Watson, J. M., Collis, K. F., Callingham, R. A., & Moritz, J. B. (1995). A model for assessing higher order thinking in statistics. Educational Research and Evaluation, 1(3), 247-275.

Watson, J. M., & Moritz, J. B. (2001). Development of reasoning associated with pictographs: Representing, interpreting, and predicting. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 48(1), 47-81.

What Works Clearinghouse. (2008). Procedures and standards handbook. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education Institute of Education Sciences.

[Online: http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/references/idocviewer/Doc.aspx?docId=19&tocId=3]

Wild, C. J., & Pfannkuch, M. (1999). Statistical thinking in empirical enquiry. International Statistical Review, 67(3), 223-265.

 

Randall E. Groth

Salisbury University

Department of Education Specialties

1101 Camden Ave.

Salisbury, MD 21801