EFFECT OF CALCULATOR
TECHNOLOGY

ON STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT

IN AN INTRODUCTORY
STATISTICS COURSE

Linda Brant Collins

University of Chicago

collins@galton.uchicago.edu

Kathleen CAGE MITTAG

University of Texas at San Antonio

kmittag@utsa.edu

SUMMARY

We report on a study of the relationship between calculator technology and student learning in two introductory statistics class sections taught by the same instructor at the University of Texas at San Antonio. At the introduction of hypothesis testing and confidence intervals, one class section (A) was given graphing calculators capable of inferential statistics to use for a few weeks. At the same time, the other class section (B) was given non-inferential graphing calculators. Data were collected on all test grades and daily quiz grades for both class sections. The students were allowed to use the inferential calculators on only the examination covering hypothesis tests and confidence intervals and on the final examination. Both sections received the same tests. We found that although use of the calculator with inferential capabilities is associated with improved scores on the inferential examination, the improvement is not significant once we adjust for performance on previous tests. Still, we note that on final examination questions specifically utilizing the calculator inference functions, the two classes perform similarly. In fact, both classes had trouble with “calculations” while at the same time answering “concept” questions fairly well. The inferential calculator did not appear to give students any clear advantage or disadvantage in their performance on examinations.

** Keywords:** Statistics
education research; Introductory statistics; Graphing calculator; Inferential
calculator; Student achievement

**__________________________**

*Statistics Education Research
Journal, 4(1), 7-15, http://www.stat.auckland.ac.nz/serj*

*Ó International
Association for Statistical Education (IASE/ISI), May, 2005*

REFERENCES

Campbell, P., & Stewart, E.L. (1993). Calculators
and computers. In R. Jensen (Ed.), *Early
Childhood Mathematics, NCTM Research Interpretation Project* (pp. 251-268).
New York: Macmillan Publishing Company.

Carlson, M. P. (1995). A successful transition to a
calculator integrated college algebra curriculum: Clues, surveys, and trends.
In P. Bogack (Managing Ed.), E. D. Fife, & L. Husch (Eds.), *Proceedings of the Seventh Annual
International Conference on Technology in Collegiate Mathematics* (pp.
73-77). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Group.

Cobb, G. W. (1993). Reconsidering statistics education:
A National Science Foundation conference, *Journal
of Statistics Education,* *1*(1).
[Online: www.amstat.org/publications/jse]

Demana, F., & Waits, B. K. (1990). Implementing the
Standards: The role of technology in teaching mathematics, *Mathematics Teacher*, *83*,
27-31.

Dunham, P. H. (1993). Does using calculators work? the
jury is almost in. *UME Trends*, *5*(2), 8-9.

Dunham, P. H. (1996). Looking for trends: What’s new in
graphing calculator research? In P. Bogack (Managing Ed.), E. D. Fife, & L.
Husch (Eds.), *Proceedings of the Eighth
Annual International Conference on Technology in Collegiate Mathematics*
(pp. 120-124). Reading, MA: Addison Wesley Publishing Company.

Dunham, P. H., & Dick, T. P. (1994). Research on
graphing calculators. *Mathematics Teacher*,
*87*, 440-445.

Fey, J. T., & Good, R. A. (1985). Rethinking the
sequence and priorities of high school mathematics curricula. In C. R. Hirsch
& J. Zweng (Eds.), *The secondary
school mathematics curriculum, 1985 yearbook *(pp. 43-2). Reston, VA:
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

Francis, B. (1997). Graphs of binomial and Poisson
distributions on a graphical calculator. *Teaching
Statistics*, *19*(1), 24-25.

Garfield, J. (1995). How students learn statistics. *International Statistical Review*, *63*(1), 25-34.

Gilchrist, W. (1986). Teaching statistics to the rest
of humanity. In R. Davidson & J. Swift (Eds.), *Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Teaching Statistics
*(pp. 494-497). Victoria, British Columbia, Canada: University of Victoria
Conference Services.

Gnanadesikan, M., Scheaffer, R. L., Watkins, A. E.,
& Witmer, J. R. (1997). An activity-based statistics course. *Journal of Statistics Education,* *5*(2).

Graham, A. (1996a). Following form with a graphic
calculator. *Teaching Statistics*, *18*(2), 52-55.

Graham, A. (1996b). The TI-83 and TI-92 calculators. *Teaching Statistics*, *18*(3), 94-95.

Graham, A. T., & Thomas, M. O. J. (2000). Building
a versatile understanding of algebraic variables with a graphic calculator. *Educational Studies in Mathematics*, *41*(3), 265-282.

Harvey, J. G., Waits, B. K., & Demana, F. D.
(1995). The influence of technology on the teaching and learning of algebra. *Journal of Mathematical Behavior*, *14*, 75-109.

Hembree, R., & Dessart, D. J. (1986). Effects of
hand-held calculators in precollege mathematics education: A meta-analysis. *Journal for Research in Mathematics
Education*, *17*, 83-89.

Hennesey, S., Fung, P., & Scanlon, E. (2001). The
role of the graphic calculator in mediating graphing activity. *Education in Science and Technology*, *32*, 267-290.

Hogg, R.V. (1992). Towards lean and lively courses in
statistics. In F. Gordon & S. Gordon (Eds.), *Statistics in the twenty-first century [MAA Notes No. 26]* (pp.
3-13). Washington, DC: Mathematical Association of America.

Kemp, M., Kissane, B., & Bradley, J. (1998).
Learning undergraduate statistics: The role of the graphics calculator. In B.
Parker (Ed.), *Proceedings of the
International Conference on the Teaching of Mathematics* (pp. 176-178).
Reading, MA: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.

Mittag, K. C., & Eltinge, E. (1998). Topics
coverage in statistics courses: A national Delphi study. *Research in the Schools*, *5*(1),
53-60.

Moore, D. S. (1992). Teaching statistics as a
respectable subject. In F. Gordon, & S. Gordon (Eds.), *Statistics in the Twenty-First Century [MAA Notes, No. 26]* (pp.
14-25). Washington, DC: Mathematical Association of America.

Moore, D. S., Cobb, G. W., Garfield, J., & Meeker,
W. (1995). Statistics education fin de siecle. *The American Statistician*, *49*(3),
250-260.

Neter, J. (1989). Undergraduate statistics service
courses in the years ahead. In J. Bolinger & R. Brookmejer (Eds.), *American Statistical Association, 1989
Proceedings of the Section on Statistical Education* (pp. 29-31).
Alexandria, VA: American Statistical Association.

Pirie, W. R. (1989). Undergraduate statistics programs:
Challenges for the 1990’s. In J. Bolinger & R. Brookmejer (Eds.), *American Statistical Association 1989 Proceedings
of the Section on Statistical Education* (pp. 32-33). Alexandria, VA:
American Statistical Association.

Quesada, A. R., & Maxwell, M. E. (1994). The
effects of using graphing calculators to enhance college students’ performance
in precalculus. *Educational Studies in
Mathematics*, *27*, 205-215.

Rinaman, W. C. (1998). Revising a basic statistics
course, *Journal of Statistics Education*,
*6*(2). [Online:
www.amstat.org/publications/jse]

Singer, J. D., & Willet, J. B. (1990). Improving
the teaching of applied statistics: Putting the data back into data analysis. *The American Statistician*, *44*(3), 223-230.

lINDA bRANT COLLINS

Department of Statistics

University of Chicago

5734 S. University Ave

Chicago, IL 60637

United States of America