Difficulties in learning (and thus teaching) statistical inference are well reported in the literature. We argue the problem emanates not only from the way in which statistical inference is taught but also from what exactly is taught as statistical inference. What makes statistical inference difficult to understand is that it contains two logics that operate in opposite directions. There is a certain logic in the construction of the inference framework, and there is another in its application. The logic of construction commences from the population, reaches the sample through some steps and then comes back to the population by building and using the sampling distribution. The logic of application, on the other hand, starts from the sample and reaches the population by making use of the sampling distribution. The main problem in teaching statistical inference in our view is that students are taught the logic of application while the fundamental steps in the direction of construction are often overlooked. In this study, we examine and compare these two logics and argue that introductory statistical courses would benefit from using the direction of construction, which ensures that students internalize the way in which inference framework makes sense, rather than that of application.
During the global pandemic, a drastic change in higher-level education took place in assessment. The traditional closed book format had to evolve to a technology-mediated open book assessment for engineering students in a vector calculus course. It became evident that the traditional format was no longer in line with the modern world both functionally and didactically. Such change in the assessment places a responsibility upon us as teachers for constructive alignment of the teaching and learning environment. In this paper, we identify four categories of pedagogical implications and conclude with concrete suggestions for classroom practice.
Abstract.The purpose of the current study was to explore the relationship between self-efficacy and achievement in the derivative concept in university level. University students from education, engineering and science faculties attended the study. 1660 students' data were gathered and the study has demonstrated that the there is a moderate and positive relationship between university students' self-efficacy levels and their achievement in derivative concept. It is suggested that university level students' self-efficacy levels be addressed when considering their achievement in the derivative concept.
Through the global pandemic, the single greatest challenge at universities has been the move towards digital assessment. In this classroom note, we describe our new no-exam assessment setup in a Statistics course for third-year bachelor Mechanical Engineering students. The main idea is to assess the students based on selfgenerated problems. Crucially, we supported students by providing a very clear structure of the course material, learning objectives, and requirements. At the same time, we left sufficient space for the students to tune the final assignment to their interests, creativity, and mathematical skills. In our experience, this setup makes assessment meaningful and enjoyable for both the students and the teacher and does not need to demand excessive time investment on the teacher's side. We strongly believe that approaches like ours will have potential lasting effects on the diversity of assessment, quality of learning, and, last but not least, the appeal of Statistics for future engineers.
Matematikte örnek kullanımı ve örneklerin matematik öğretimine katkısı ulusal ve uluslararası alanyazında son yıllarda ilgi gören çalışma başlıklarıdır. Uluslararası alanyazında örneklerle ilgili sınıflandırmalar ve kuramsal çerçeve oluşturma çalışmaları yaygın olarak mevcuttur. Ulusal alanyazında ise örnek kullanımı sınırlı şekilde incelenmektedir. Bu çalışmada örnek kullanımının matematikte ve matematik öğretimindeki tarihsel gelişimi ve pedagojik sınıflandırma çalışmaları incelenmiştir. Ayrıca matematikte örnekler ile ilgili geliştirilen kuramsal çerçeveler derlenmiş ve konu ile ilgili ulusal çalışmalar incelenmiştir. Bu çalışmanın sonuçlarına göre ulusal alanyazında son yirmi yılda konuya olan ilgi artmış olsa da yapılan çalışmaların sınırlı sayıda olduğu ve genellikle ortaöğretim ve lisans seviyelerinde incelendiği belirlenmiştir. İncelenen ulusal çalışmalarda, matematik öğretiminde sınırlı ve zengin olmayan örnek kullanımı dikkat çekicidir. Ayrıca bu çalışmada elde edilen bulgular doğrultusunda ileride yapılacak çalışmalar için kimi önerilerde bulunulmuştur. En temel öneriler ise çalışmaların daha yaygın olarak kitaplarda ve derste zengin örnek kullanımının ve bunun matematik öğrenmeye katkısının incelenmesi ve ilköğretim seviyesinde yapılacak çalışmaların daha yaygınlaştırılmasıdır.
This study has been conducted with the aim to examine the examples of Abelian and non-Abelian groups given in the abstract algebra course books in the university level. The non-examples of Abelian groups serve as examples of non-Abelian groups. Examples with solutions in the course books are trusted by the students and hence miscellaneous of those are required to clarify the subject in enough detail. The results of the current study show that the examples of Abelian groups are about the same among three course books, including number sets only with known operations. The examples of non-Abelian groups are rare in comparison and encapsulate the nonnumeric sets which are novel to students. The current study shows the mentioned examples are not sufficiently examined in the course books. Suggestions for the book writers are given in the study. Mainly it is suggested that more and various examples of Abelian and especially non-Abelian groups should be included in the course books.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.