How Students Learn Statistics Revisited: A Current Review of Research on Teaching and

Learning Statistics
Author(s): Joan Garfield and Dani Ben-Zvi
Source: International Statistical Review / Revue Internationale de Statistique , December
2007, Vol. 75, No. 3 (December 2007), pp. 372-396
Published by: International Statistical Institute (ISI)

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/41509878

REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
https://www.jstor.org/stable/41509878?seq=1&cid=pdf-
reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

International Statistical Institute (ISI) is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and
extend access to International Statistical Review / Revue Internationale de Statistique

This content downloaded from

198.54.66.65 on Wed, 23 Aug 2023 11:41:52 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 International Statistical Review (2007), 75, 3, 372-396 doi:10.1111/j.l751-5823.2007.00029.x

How Students Learn Statistics Revisited:

A Current Review of Research on
Teaching and Learning Statistics

Joan Garfield1 and Dani Ben-Zvi2

1 University of Minnesota, USA

2 University of Haifa, Israel

Summary
This paper provides an overview of current research on teaching and learning statistics, summa-
rizing studies that have been conducted by researchers from different disciplines and focused on
students at all levels. The review is organized by general research questions addressed, and suggests
what can be learned from the results of each of these questions. The implications of the research are
described in terms of eight principles for learning statistics from Garfield (1995) which are revisited
in the light of results from current studies.

Key words: Statistics education; statistical reasoning; teaching and learning statistics.

1 Introduction: The Expanding Area of Statistics Education Research

Fifteen years ago the research related to teaching and learning statistics was reviewed and a
subsequent paper was published in this journal (Garfield, 1995). In the years since that paper
was published, there has been a proliferation of research studies across many disciplines, as
well as new scientific conferences and publications devoted to research in statistics education.
Therefore, it seems appropriate to revisit the 1995 paper, to see what new relevant knowledge
has been accumulated since then, and to re-examine the links between research and teaching
practice. This paper is an attempt to do just that.
Today, statistics education can still be viewed as a new and emerging discipline, when compared
to other areas of study and inquiry. This new discipline has a research base that is often
difficult to locate and build upon. For many people interested in reading this area of scholarship,
statistics education research can seem to be an invisible, fragmented discipline, because studies
related to this topic of interest have appeared in publications from diverse disciplines, and
are more often thought of as studies in those disciplines (e.g. psychology, science education,
mathematics education, or in educational technology) than in the area of statistics education. In
2002 the Statistics Education Research Journal (SERJ, http://www.stat.auckland.ac.nz/seij) was
established, and the statistics education discipline now has its first dedicated scientific journal
in which to publish high-quality research. This should make it easier for future researchers to
become acquainted with the discipline and locate studies for literature reviews, and for teachers
of statistics to look for research relevant to the teaching and learning of statistics.

© 2007 The Authors. Journal compilation © 2007 International Statistical Institute. Published by Blackwell Publishing Ltd, 9600 Garsington Road,
Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Mam Street, Maiden, MA 02148, USA.

This content downloaded from

198.54.66.65 on Wed, 23 Aug 2023 11:41:52 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 How Students Learn Statistics Revisited 373

In addition to SERJ, recent research studies related to statistics ed

in conference proceedings such as The International Conference
(ICOTS, http://www.stat.auckland.ac. nz/~iase/conferences.php),
Psychology of Mathematics Education (PME, http://igpme.org),
Research Group of Australasia (MERGA, http://www.merga.net.au),
on Mathematics Education meetings (ICME, http://www.mathuni
national Statistical Institute (ISI, http://isi.cbs. nl). The numerous p
from these conferences reflect the fact that there now exists a
psychologists, and statisticians who are involved in scholarship
learning of statistics. In addition, more graduate students are comp
departments that relate to teaching and learning statistics. Over 44
been reported since 2000 (see http://www.stat.auckland.ac. nz/iasedi
There is much to learn from the abundant studies in the curre
important contributions to understanding the nature and developm
reasoning and what it means to understand and learn statistical conce
an overview of the more current research (Section 2), summarizing
been conducted by researchers from different disciplines (psycholo
educational psychology, and statistics education). We organize th
the general research questions addressed, and suggest our view of w
results.
We then provide a summary of a newer focus of research that exa
statistical literacy, reasoning and thinking (Section 3). This is followe
research on reasoning about three "big ideas" in statistics to illustra
studies to the emerging knowledge about teaching and learning stat
we chose to focus on for this paper are three of the foundational sta
centre and variability. For more information on research on additio
(2007) and Garfield & Ben-Zvi (2005). We also use this focus of r
concepts to illustrate the complexity of studying and developing a st
concepts and provide implications for teaching these "big ideas"
general implications from the research in terms of teaching and ass
eight principles for learning statistics (Section 5).

2 Recent Research on Teaching and Learning Statistics

2. 1 What are Some of the Errors and Misconceptions in Reason

and Probability?

Much of the literature summarized in previous reviews (e.g.

Shaughnessy, 1992; Garfield, 1995; Shaughnessy et al., 1996) sum
primarily by psychologists on how people make judgments and
uncertainty (e.g. Kahneman et al ., 1982). A focus of these stud
common faulty heuristics, biases, and misconceptions found in
(e.g. the representativeness heuristic, availability heuristic, law
fallacy, equiprobability bias, and correlation fallacy). Subsequent res
for training individuals to reason more correctly. Some critics (e.g.
1999) argued that the cause of many identified misconceptions w
to use proportional reasoning, required by many of these problems
They suggested using frequency approach (using counts and ratios r

International Statistical Review (2007), 75, 3, 372-396

© 2007 The Authors. Journal compilation © 2007 International Statistical Institute

This content downloaded from

198.54.66.65 on Wed, 23 Aug 2023 11:41:52 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 374 J. Garfield & D. Ben-Zvi

decimals) and observed that subjects performed

rather than fractions or decimals.
Recognizing these persistent errors, researcher
and adults correctly use statistical reasoning,
Sedlmeier, 1999). Researchers still continue to
statistical reasoning. Most of these studies focus
O'Connell, 1999; Hirsch & O'Donnell, 2001; Ba
However, other studies have examined miscon
such as contingency tables (Batanero et al., 1996)
significance tests (e.g. Falk & Greenbaum, 1995),
(e.g. Garfield, 2003; Tempelaar et al., 2006).

2. 1. 1 What can we learn from these studies?

The main message from this body of resear

about statistical ideas is widespread and persis
experienced researchers), and quite difficult to c
intuitions used by students and adults that are s
the best statistics instruction. In addition, stu
from item to item or topic to topic, dependin
experience with the context. Although some typ
there is no strong evidence that the results wer
be generalized beyond the specific types of prob

2.2 How do School Students Come to Underst

In contrast to studies on misconceptions and fa

training to overcome or correct these types of p
how to develop good statistical reasoning and und
and secondary mathematics classes. Research
children understand basic concepts related to dat
to the mathematics curricula for elementary
and 1990s (e.g. NCTM, 2000). These studies rev
concepts that were believed to be fairly elem
Shaughnessy, 1992, 2007; Mokros & Russell, 1
1997; Bright & Friel, 1998). Not surprisingly, mo
understanding of data analysis has been condu
have focused their studies on foundational con
distribution, centre and variability (e.g. Cobb
focus of these studies was to investigate how stu
their reasoning develops when using carefully de
Studies focused on students in K-12 classes,
statistical ideas such as data (e.g. Ben-Zvi &
Pfannkuch, 2006; Prodromou & Pratt, 2006; Re
Ben-Zvi, 2004b; Hammerman & Rubin, 200
probability (e.g. Abrahamson et al., 2006; Prat
(Steffe & Thompson, 2000; Cobb et al., 2003a)
researchers and teachers teach and/or closely o
and tools help develop understanding of a statist

International Statistical Review (2007), 75, 3, 372-396

© 2007 The Authors. Journal compilation © 2007 International Statistical In

This content downloaded from

198.54.66.65 on Wed, 23 Aug 2023 11:41:52 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 How Students Learn Statistics Revisited 375

Saldanha & Thompson, 2003; Shaughnessy et al., 2004). Section 4

much of the work related to developing students' reasoning about
distribution, centre and variability.
Interest in probability continues among mathematics educators, pri
difficulties students have in understanding these concepts at differe
misconceptions about probability, and the role of computer tool
reasoning about chance and uncertainty (see Jones et al ., 2007).
research studies in this area, Jones (2005) remarks that there is a need
development of students' reasoning and to find ways to link ideas of c
studying probability as a formal mathematics topic. This type of wo
by Konoid who is developing the Model Chance software, and co
software with young children (Konoid et al ., 2007).

2.2.1 What can we learn from these studies?

The studies focused on developing students' reasoning about da

these ideas are often more complex and difficult for students to lear
involving elementary and secondary school students that focus on un
concepts (e.g. Ben-Zvi & Amir, 2005; Cobb et al ., 2003b; Pfannkuch,
designed sequences of activities using appropriate technological tools
reasoning and understanding over substantial periods of time (B
suggest some possible sequences of activities that can help students d
concepts such as distribution, variability and co- variation, and offer
instructional activities and technological tools that may facilitate stud
More implications are included in Section 4 of this paper.

2.3 How do Pre-Service and Practicing Teachers Develop an Und

A newer line of research that has also been the focus of studies by
the study of pre-service or practicing teachers' knowledge of statist
that understanding develops in different contexts (e.g. Makar &
Pfannkuch, 2006). Some studies of pre-service K-12 teachers focu
students majoring in elementary or mathematics education and how
about statistics (e.g. Groth & Bergner, 2005).
In one study, Groth & Bergner (2005) examined the use of met
student understanding, and were disappointed to note that students
had completed a course in statistics have limited and often incorrect n
Leavy (2006) examined pre-service teachers' reasoning about the conce
one group the pre-test and post-test design that took place during a
methods course, participants worked in small groups on two statistic
the collection, representation, analysis and reporting of data involvin
She found that many teachers appeared to be gaining in their ability t
in comparing groups while others failed to use the relevant cont
comparing groups of data (see also Ciancetta, 2007).
Stohl (2005) summarizes studies that examine teachers' unders
probability. She addresses problems resulting from mathematics teac
approach to thinking about probability and suggests ways to better pr
and teach this challenging topic.

International Statistical Review (2007), 75, 3, 372-396

© 2007 The Authors. Journal compilation © 2007 International Statistical Institute

This content downloaded from

198.54.66.65 on Wed, 23 Aug 2023 11:41:52 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 376 J. Garfield & D. Ben-Zvi

Some studies on practicing teachers examin

statistics as a result of workshops or in-serv
& Confrey (2005) and Hammerman & Rubin
basic statistical analysis, such as comparing t
compare individual data points rather than gro
carefully designed instruction using innovat
Curriculum Press, 2006; http://www.keypress.c
2005; http://www.keypress.com/x5715.xml)
Studies also focus on how teachers teach and
statistics (e.g. Canada, 2004, 2006; Makar &
2006).

2.3.1 What can we learn from these studies?

The studies focused on pre-service and in-service K-12 teachers suggest that both have many
difficulties in understanding and teaching core ideas of probability and statistics. The studies
suggest that further explorations are needed in the issues of developing teacher knowledge
of statistics as well as methods of helping teachers to understand the big ideas of statistics. A
current joint IASE-ICMI study is focused on this issue (see http://www.ugr.es/~icmi/iase_study).
Efforts such as the TEAM project (Franklin & Mewborn, 2006) have attempted to bring
mathematics educators and statisticians together to create new ways to prepare future K-12
teachers of statistics, by making sure that these students have a course in statistics as part of their
requirements, taught in methods that emphasize conceptual understanding, data exploration, and
use of appropriate technology. How to help practicing teachers develop a better knowledge of
statistics is still an area that needs to be further explored.

2.4 How do Tertiary Students Learn Statistics?

Researchers across many disciplines have long been interested in the teaching and learning of
statistics in college classes perhaps because of the tremendous numbers of students who enrol
in introductory statistics course as a requirement for their degree programs. Some of the studies
on tertiary-level students examined a particular activity or intervention; others have looked at
use of a technological tool or teaching method (e.g. Noll, 2007). Several statisticians who teach
statistics have focused their attention on studying students' learning in their classes (e.g. Wild
et al ., 1997; Chance, 2002; Lee et al ., 2002). Most of these studies involve the researchers' own
classes, sometimes examining one class, or involving multiple classes at the same institution.
Because of the large number and variety of studies in tertiary settings, this section is subdivided
into several subsections that correspond to important questions regarding the teaching and
learning of statistics after secondary school.

2.4.1 How can technology be used to promote statistical reasoning?

One of the major areas of current interest is the role technological tools (such as computers,
graphing calculators, software, and Internet) can play in helping students develop statistical
literacy and reasoning. Research on simulation training indicates that even a well-designed
simulation is unlikely to be an effective teaching tool unless students' interaction with it is
carefully structured (Lane & Peres, 2006). Simulations, however, can play a significant role in
enhancing students' ability to study random processes and statistical concepts (Lane & Tang,
2000; Mills, 2004; Lane & Peres, 2006).

International Statistical Review (2007), 75, 3, 372-396

© 2007 The Authors. Journal compilation © 2007 International Statistical Institute

This content downloaded from

198.54.66.65 on Wed, 23 Aug 2023 11:41:52 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 How Students Learn Statistics Revisited 377

Using a collaborative classroom research model that implemen

data in three different institutions, delMas et al. (1999) studied the
about sampling distributions, using a simulation program and re
found that student performance on a specially designed post test to
about sampling distributions improved as the activity was changed
the activity and having students make and test conjectures about di
distributions from various populations. Lunsford et al. (2006) replica
type of undergraduate course and found similar results.
Lane & Tang (2000) compared the effectiveness of simulations for
to the effectiveness of a textbook, while Aberson et al. (2000) studie
interactive tutorial used to present the sampling distribution of the
In a study of students' reasoning about the standard deviation,
manipulate a specially designed software tool to create histograms w
possible standard deviation, given a set of fixed bars. He identified
students understand and misunderstand the standard deviation, such
spreading butter, being evenly distributed in a graph. He also found
reasoning about bars in a histogram having density, in that they re
particular interval on a graph.

2.4.2 How effective is online instruction?

Another topic of interest to statistics educators has been the use o

in a Web-based course or "hybrid/blended" course, in which a signif
learning activity has been moved online, making it possible to redu
in the classroom. For example, Utts (2003) and Ward (2004) foun
performance for students in a hybrid versus a traditional course, and
were not resulting in decreased student performance, although Utts
students in the hybrid courses. However, no significant differences
not imply that there were no real differences in student outcomes fo
methods.

2. 4. 3 What do students remember after taking statistics?

Mathews & Clark (2003) and Clark et al. (2003) investigated hig
grade in their first statistics course) from four tertiary institutions
mean, standard deviation and the Central Limit Theorem. Their inte
the first six weeks of the term after the completion of the statistics
tended to have relatively unsophisticated understandings of the con
deviation and fragmentary recall of the Central Limit Theorem.

2.4.4 How effective is active learning in teaching statistics?

Keeler & Steinhorst (1995), Giraud (1997), and Magel (1998) inve
of cooperative learning in teaching statistics at their institutions, a
results. Keeler & Steinhorst (1995) found that when students worked
were higher and more students stayed in the course than in a previ
found that using cooperative groups in class to work on assignment
than students in a lecture class. Magel (1998) found that implementi

International Statistical Review (2007), 75, 3, 372-396

© 2007 The Authors. Journal compilation © 2007 International Statistical Institute

This content downloaded from

198.54.66.65 on Wed, 23 Aug 2023 11:41:52 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
378 J. Garfield & D. Ben-Zvi

large lecture class also led to improved test sco

that did not use group work.
Meletiou & Lee (2002) organized their curr
Learning-Exercises model emphasizing statis
towards investigating conjectures and discov
on their understanding at the beginning and
observed on tasks requiring statistical reason
have been drawn at random from a particular p

2.4.5 How can formal statistical ideas be deve

Building on collaborative classroom research

Lesson Study to design, test and revise a le
variability, building formal ideas from info
idea that teachers can conduct their own classr
problem in their class, trying an activity or set
to evaluate, reflect and revise the activity.
A group of novice and experienced teachers
students' informal intuitions about variability,
Their study suggested a sequence of activities t
the concept of variability and measures such as
Schwartz et al. (2007) used a similar approach to
knowledge, using specific activities to motiv
reasoning about particular statistical concepts.

2. 4. 6 Can training improve students ' statistic

In one type of study, students are trained in a

their performance on different outcome measu
college students to sort statistics word problem
the problem could be solved by ¿-test, correlat
features (i.e. the problem's cover story). In this
of structural awareness (i.e. sorting word pro
end rather than the beginning of their first sta
working on can be solved using the same metho
skill in statistical problem solving. Lovett (20
find out what ideas and strategies students
found that feedback could be given to help stud
data analyses. Meyer & Lovett (2002) develope
scaffolding to guide students in analysing data

2.4. 7 What is the role of affect in learning sta

Several researchers have explored factors relat

of these studies have examined non-cognitive v
about statistics, (e.g. Schau & Mattern, 1997;
included development of instruments to asse
reasoning). Studies have also examined relatio
(e.g. mathematics background, statistics attitud
taking statistics in education or psychology

International Statistical Review (2007), 75, 3, 372-396

© 2007 The Authors. Journal compilation © 2007 International Statistical

This content downloaded from

198.54.66.65 on Wed, 23 Aug 2023 11:41:52 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 How Students Learn Statistics Revisited 379

Scott, 1997). In addition, some of these studies examined what grad

psychology or the social sciences know and understand while or
Huberty et al., 1993; O'Connell & Corter, 1993; Finney, 2000; Ea

2.4.8 How does students ' reasoning develop during a statistics c

In a recent study, Zieffler (2006) studied the growth in the stude

data over an introductory statistics course. He found that most of
as measured by four administrations of a bivariate reasoning sc
formally studied a unit on bivariate data. His results suggested tha
designed to help students develop their general statistical reasoning,
about distributions of bivariate data before they formally studied th
use of similar longitudinal studies, administering a set of items at th
order to model the growth of students' reasoning during instruction
the recent report on Statistics in Mathematics Education Research (
study, Zieffler et al. (2007) explore the growth in students' statisti
14- week class that embedded a sequence of simulation activities de
inferential reasoning. They found that students' reasoning did not
way throughout the course. They also found that in some cases stude
(such as sampling distribution) developed before the formal study
previous results by Zieffler (2006) about bivariate reasoning.

2.5 What Can we Learn from These Studies?

The many studies that focus on teaching and learning statistics at

point out the many difficulties tertiary students have learning, rem
and point to some modest successes. These studies also serve to
problems faced by college statistics instructors such as how to inco
learning in a large class, whether or not to use an online or "hybrid"
type of software tool as more effective than another.
Many of these studies set out to answer a question such as "w
these studies reveal that it is difficult to determine the impact of a
instruction tool on students' learning in a course due to limitations i
used. While teachers would like research studies to convince th
method or instructional tool leads to significantly improved st
evidence is not actually available in the research literature. The resul
studies are usually limited to that particular course setting and can
courses. For example, if one study compared a particular type of act
course, results cannot be generalized to active learning versus a "tr
the variety of methods of implementing "active learning" and the v
Though not based on comparative experiments, some recent c
while not trying to be comparative, suggest some practical im
example, developing a deep understanding of statistics concep
should not be underestimated. Research suggests that it takes time
trajectory, and appropriate technological tools, activities, and d
deep understanding. Good reasoning about important concepts can
using activities and tools given enough time and revisiting of these
The research studies on attitudes and anxiety suggest that the
predictors of how well students do in a statistics course, that ther

International Statistical Review (2007), 75, 3, 372-396

© 2007 The Authors. Journal compilation © 2007 International Statistical Institute

This content downloaded from

198.54.66.65 on Wed, 23 Aug 2023 11:41:52 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 380 J. Garfield & D. Ben-Zvi

from beginning to end of a first course in stati

difficulties in students' reasoning and poor at
not show that if students are good in mathemat
to succeed in statistics, which is contrary to ma
not be strong in mathematics may work hard, e
introductory statistics course. Variables such as
may be better predictors.
These studies suggest the types of negative v
statistics, how difficult they perceive the subjec
one's course or the field in general. Neverthe
cultivate more positive beliefs about the value of
that students come to statistics courses with a g
what statistics is about, and their own ability or
One consistent problem in many of the quantitat
with the lack of high quality and consistent mea
It is very common for these studies to use f
measures. These measures are often problema
evidence of validity and reliability and do not
to the wider community (Garfield, 2006). In t
carefully developed and studied (e.g. delMas et al
teacher-made measures.
In recent years there has also been more attention paid to distinguishing and defining learning
outcomes in introductory statistics courses, and the frequently used terms for these outcomes
refer to statistical literacy, statistical reasoning and statistical thinking. Clarifying desired learning
outcomes can also help researchers better develop and use appropriate measures in their studies,
and to align these measures with learning goals valued by the statistics education community.

3 Distinguishing between Statistical Literacy, Reasoning and Thinking

Although statistics is now viewed as a unique discipline, statistical content is most often taught
in the mathematics curriculum (at elementary and secondary school level) and in departments of
mathematics (tertiary level). This has led to exhortations by leading statisticians, such as Moore
(1998), about the differences between statistics and mathematics. These arguments challenge
statisticians and statistics educators to carefully define the unique characteristics of statistics,
and in particular, the distinctions between statistical literacy, reasoning and thinking (Ben-Zvi
& Garfield, 2004). Garfield & Ben-Zvi (in press) present the following definitions:

Statistical literacy is a key ability expected of citizens in information-laden societies, and

is often touted as an expected outcome of schooling and as a necessary component of adults'
numeracy and literacy. Statistical literacy involves understanding and using the basic language
and tools of statistics: knowing what basic statistical terms mean, understanding the use of simple
statistical symbols, and recognizing and being able to interpret different representations of data
(Garfield, 1999; Snell, 1999; Rumsey, 2002). There are other views of statistical literacy such
as Gal's (2000, 2002), whose focus is on the data consumer: Statistical literacy is portrayed
as the ability to interpret, critically evaluate, and communicate about statistical information
and messages. Gal (2002) argues that statistically literate behaviour is predicated on the joint
activation of five interrelated knowledge bases (literacy, statistical, mathematical, context and
critical), together with a cluster of supporting dispositions and enabling beliefs.

International Statistical Review (2007), 75, 3, 372-396

© 2007 The Authors. Journal compilation © 2007 International Statistical Institute

This content downloaded from

198.54.66.65 on Wed, 23 Aug 2023 11:41:52 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 How Students Learn Statistics Revisited 381

Figure 1. The overlap and hierarchy of statistical literacy, reasoning and thinking(Artist
edu/artist).

Statistical reasoning is the way people reason with statistical ideas and make sense of statistical
information. Statistical reasoning may involve connecting one concept to another (e.g. centre
and spread) or may combine ideas about data and chance. Statistical reasoning also means
understanding and being able to explain statistical processes, and being able to interpret statistical
results (Garfield, 2002).
Statistical thinking involves a higher order of thinking than statistical reasoning. Statistical
thinking is the way professional statisticians think (Wild & Pfannkuch, 1999). It includes
the knowing how and why to use a particular method, measure, design or statistical model;
deep understanding of the theories underlying statistical processes and methods as well as
understanding the constraints and limitations of statistics and statistical inference. Statistical
thinking is also about understanding how statistical models are used to simulate random
phenomena, understanding how data are produced to estimate probabilities, recognizing how,
when, and why existing inferential tools can be used, and being able to understand and utilize
the context of a problem to plan and evaluate investigations and to draw conclusions (Chance,
2002).
Statistical literacy, reasoning and thinking are unique areas but there is some overlap and a
type of hierarchy, with statistical literacy providing the foundation for reasoning and thinking
(see Figure 1). A summary of additional models of statistical reasoning and thinking can be
found in Jones et al. (2004).
There is now a growing network of researchers interested in studying the development of
students' statistical literacy, reasoning and thinking (e.g. SRTL - The International Statistical
Reasoning , Thinking, and Literacy Research Forums, http://srtl.stat.auckland.ac.nz/). The topics
of these research studies conducted by members of this community reflect the shift in emphasis
in statistics instruction, from focusing on procedural understanding, i.e. statistical techniques,

International Statistical Review (2007), 75, 3, 372-396

© 2007 The Authors. Journal compilation © 2007 International Statistical Institute

This content downloaded from

198.54.66.65 on Wed, 23 Aug 2023 11:41:52 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 382 J. Garfield & D. Ben-Zvi

formulas, computations and procedures, to dev

literacy, reasoning and thinking.
Current research studies address this shift by
referred to as the "big ideas". This research fo
being paid in the educational research commun
research and instruction, and therefore, assess
et al., 2000; Wiggins, 1998). The following
research on reasoning about three of the key
amount of research in these areas illustrates t
reasoning about these ideas. For more summ
implications for teaching these big ideas, se

4 Research on Developing Reasoning abo

4. 1 How Can We Develop Students ' Reason

The research literature provides a strong c

the simplest forms, is much more complex an
Although little of the research includes tertia
level students and pre-college-level teachers de
some common misconceptions, and incomple
apply to college students (see Bakker & Gra
A major outcome of several studies on how st
not to see a data set (statistical distribution) as
Hancock et al, 1992). Students need to make
as a group of individuals - each with its own c
a group with emergent properties that often a
& Higgins, 2003). To be able to think about
constructed by the student (Hancock et al ., 19
Several other studies focused on how studen
as characteristics of a distribution and look at
structure or a conceptual entity. For examp
that students need a notion of distribution bef
centre and perceive them as a "representatives
One of the difficulties in learning about grap
between case-value plots, where a bar or line r
a bar represents multiple cases. These differen
to try to describe shape, centre and spread of c
that bars in a histogram indicate the magni
studies as well as others have suggested that st
compare and reason about multiple representat
2005).
Research studies also suggest that students tend to see and use graphs as illustrations rather than
as reasoning tools to learn something about a data set or gain new information about a particular
problem or context (Wild & Pfannkuch, 1999; Konoid & Pollatsek, 2002). Current research
on student statistical understanding of distribution (e.g. Ben-Zvi & Amir, 2005; Watson, 2005;
Pfannkuch, 2006; Pfannkuch & Reading, 2006; Prodromou & Pratt, 2006; Reading & Reid,
2006) recommends a shift of instructional focus from drawing various kinds of graphs and

International Statistical Review (2007), 75, 3, 372-396

© 2007 The Authors. Journal compilation © 2007 International Statistical Institute

This content downloaded from

198.54.66.65 on Wed, 23 Aug 2023 11:41:52 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 How Students Learn Statistics Revisited 383

learning graphing skills to making sense of the data, for detecting a

confirming or generating hypotheses, for noticing the unexpected a
in the data.
The research studies summarized reveal the complexities of deve
standing of distribution as an entity with characteristics, and view a
rather than as individual cases. It is suggested that instructors move a
how to construct graphical representations of data to a focus on wha
regard to a question of interest and how we may examine different gr
to learn more. These studies also point to the need to spend ample tim
as an important, foundational concept in statistics (Wild, 2006).

4.2 How Can We Develop Students ' Reasoning about Centre?

How students understand ideas of centre has been of central interest in the research literature.
Research on the concept of average or mean was at first the most common topic studied on
learning statistics at the school level (see Shaughnessy, 1992; 2003; Konoid & Higgins, 2003).
The studies suggested that the concept of the average is quite difficult to understand by children,
college students and even elementary school pre-service and in-service teachers (Russell, 1990;
Groth & Bergner, 2006).
What do students remember about the mean? In general, it appears that many students,
who complete introductory statistics courses, are unable to understand the idea of the mean.
Mathews & Clark (2003) analysed audio-taped clinical interviews with eight college freshmen
immediately after they completed an elementary statistics course with a grade of "A". The point
of these interviews was not to see how quickly isolated facts could be recalled, nor was the
point to see how little students remember. Rather, the goal was to determine as precisely as
possible the conceptions of mean, standard deviation and the Central Limit Theorem, which the
most successful students had, shortly after having completed a statistics course. The results are
alarming since these top students demonstrated a lack of understanding of the mean, and could
only state how to find it arithmetically. Interviewing along the same lines a larger (n = 17) and
more diverse sample of college students from four distinct campuses, Clark et al. (2003) found
overall the same disappointing results.
Difficulties in determining the medians of data sets have also been documented by research.
Elementary school teachers have trouble finding out the medians of data sets presented
graphically (Bright & Friel, 1998). Only about one-third of 12th-grade students in the US who
took the National Assessment of Education Progress (NAEP) test were able to determine the
median when given a set of unordered data (Zawojewski & Shaughnessy, 2000).
Another focus of research has been on the challenge of choosing an appropriate measure of
centre to represent a data set. NAEP data confirm that school students frequently make poor
choices in selecting measures of centre to describe data sets (Zawojewski & Shaughnessy, 2000).
Choosing an appropriate measure of centre was also a challenge for high school students' school
statistics course (Groth, 2003). A problem-solving clinical interview was used where students
were given a problem that involved determining the typical value within a set of incomes. A
different problem was set in a signal-versus-noise context (Konoid & Pollatsek, 2002). Several
patterns of thinking emerged in the responses to each task as students used either formal measures
or more informal strategies and displayed varying amounts of attention to both data and context
in formulating responses to both problems.
Similar results were found by Callingham (1997) who administered an item containing a data
set structured so that the median would be a better indicator of centre than the mean, to a group

International Statistical Review (2007), 75, 3, 372-396

© 2007 The Authors. Journal compilation © 2007 International Statistical Institute

This content downloaded from

198.54.66.65 on Wed, 23 Aug 2023 11:41:52 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
384 J. Garfield & D. Ben-Zvi

of pre-service and in-service teachers. Callingh

instead of the more appropriate median.
In a study on the statistical reasoning of p
comparing and contrasting mean, median an
reasoning levels (unistructural, multistructural
illustrates that attaining a deep understanding
non-trivial matter and that there are comple
carefully developed.
The typical value interpretation of the arithm
in curriculum materials and in research lite
have provided insights about students' thinking
& Russell (1995) studied the characteristics o
of "average" as a representative number sum
interviewed, using a series of open-ended probl
notion of mathematical representativeness. The
value problems by: (i) locating the most freque
(iii) examining the data and giving a reasonable
or (v) looking for a point of balance within the
which school students are (or are not) developin
concept of average, even after they have maste
Patterns of thinking about average in differen
studied 15 high school students. He used prob
the typical value within a set of incomes and
noise context (Konoid & Pollatsek, 2002). Anal
some students attempted to incorporate formal
strategies. Students displayed varying amounts o
responses to both problems.
The research studies cited suggest a need fo
students have in understanding and reasoning a
level. The studies imply that it is important
statistical intuitions about data and context in
centre, helping them move from informal not
and median. Furthermore, it is recommende
measures of centre in relation to other core
sampling and informal ideas of inference.

4.3 How Can We Develop Students' Reasonin

Recent discussions in the statistics education c

statistics text books, instruction, public discour
measures of centre at the expense of variab
a growing consensus to emphasize general di
spread and the connections among them in s
suggested to focus students' attention on th
different contexts, such as variability in a part
and sampling (Shaughnessy et al ., 1999; G
review of several studies by Konoid & Pol
of an average understood as a central tende
International Statistical Review (2007), 75, 3, 372-396
© 2007 The Authors. Journal compilation © 2007 International Statistical

This content downloaded from

198.54.66.65 on Wed, 23 Aug 2023 11:41:52 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 How Students Learn Statistics Revisited 385

(p. 263). Their metaphor for data as signal and noise implies th
see statistics as "the study of noisy processes - processes that h
(p. 260).
Despite the widespread belief in the importance of this concept, current research demonstrates
that it is extremely difficult for students to reason about variability and that we are just beginning
to learn how reasoning about variability develops (Garfield & Ben-Zvi, 2005). Understanding
variability has both informal and formal aspects, moving from understanding that data vary (e.g.
differences in data values) to understanding and interpreting formal measures of variability (e.g.
range, interquartile range and standard deviation). While students can learn how to compute
formal measures of variability, they rarely understand what these summary statistics represent,
either numerically or graphically, and do not understand their importance and connection to
other statistical concepts. Two additional factors make the understanding of the concept even
more complex: (a) variability may sometimes be desired and be of interest, and sometimes
be considered error or noise (Konoid & Pollatsek, 2002; Gould, 2004); (b) the multi-faceted
interconnectedness of variability to concepts of distribution, centre, sampling and inference
(Cobb et al., 2003b).
These difficulties in understanding variability are evident, in some interview studies of
introductory statistics students' conceptual understanding of the standard deviation, (Matthews
& Clark, 2003; delMas & Liu, 2005). DelMas & Liu's study included a computer environment
designed to promote students' ability to coordinate characteristics of variation of values about the
mean with the size of the standard deviation as a measure of that variation. delMas & Liu found
that students moved from simple, one-dimensional understandings of the standard deviation
that did not consider variation about the mean to more mean-centred conceptualizations that
coordinated the effects of frequency (density) and deviation from the mean.
A variety of contexts have been used in statistics education to study students' reasoning about
variability at all age levels. For example, in a study of elementary students, Lehrer & Schäuble
(2007) contrast students' reasoning about variability in two contexts: (a) measurement and (b)
"natural" (biological). When fourth-graders were engaged in measuring the heights of a variety of
objects, distribution emerged as a coordination of their activity. They were able to invent statistics
as indicators of stability (e.g. centre corresponded to "real" length) and variation of measure
(e.g. spread corresponded to sources of error such as tool, person, trial-to-trial). In the context
of natural variation activity (growth of plants), these same students (now fifth-graders) had
difficulties handling sources of natural variation and related statistics. Activities that promoted
investigations of sampling (e.g. "what would be likely to happen to the distribution of plant
heights if we grew them again"), and comparing distributions (e.g. how one might know whether
two different distributions of height measurements could be considered "really" different) were
found useful in developing students' understanding of variability.
The advantage in discussing ideas of variability in connection with ideas of centre was
described by Garfield et al. (2007). In this study with undergraduate students, results indicated
that students could develop ideas of a lot or a little variability when asked to make and test
conjectures about a series of variables measuring minutes per day spent on various activities
(e.g. time spent studying, talking on the phone, eating, etc.). They also found that by having
students reason about the distributions of these variables informally they could move them to
comparisons of formal measures of variability (e.g. standard deviation, range and interquartile
range).
Other contexts where students' reasoning about variability were examined include variability in
a univariate data set (Konoid & Pollatsek, 2002; Petrosino et al., 2003; Ben-Zvi, 2004a; Groth,
2005), bivariate relationships (Cobb et al., 2003b; Hammerman & Rubin, 2003), comparing
groups (Biehler, 2001; Lehrer & Schäuble, 2002; Ben-Zvi, 2004b; Makar & Confrey, 2005;
International Statistical Review (2007), 75, 3, 372-396
© 2007 The Authors. Journal compilation © 2007 International Statistical Institute

This content downloaded from

198.54.66.65 on Wed, 23 Aug 2023 11:41:52 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 386 J. Garfield & D. Ben-Zvi

Ciancetta, 2007), measures of spread such as t

sampling contexts (Chance et al ., 2004; Readi
The research studies on understanding varia
reasoning about this important idea across an en
formal ideas and measures. Carefully designed ac
this process and to help students come to vie
statistics and to recognize the different "faces"
variability between two data sets, variability as

4.4 What can We Learn from the Research on

and Variability?

What has been striking over 25 years of research

ages in understanding concepts related to distrib
may be able to construct graphs and compute sim
they need help in developing an understanding o
reason about them in an integrated way.
The research suggests that careful attention
informal and intuitive ways, leading to mor
press). For example, first introducing students i
sampling distribution, in the context of explorin
experiments, before later formally studying
the context of the Central Limit Theorem. A
compare groups using boxplots, where students
later learning formal methods of making infere
2007).
Another implication is that these concepts be encountered by students together, combining
ideas of distribution, centre and spread, rather than as separate, isolated topics. Examples of
sequences of ideas, or learning trajectories that lead from informal to formal understanding of
these and other concepts, as well as activities designed to guide students to a better understanding
of these concepts, can be found in Garfield & Ben-Zvi (in press).

5 General Implications of the Research Literature for Teaching Statistics

Research studies across the disciplines that relate to statistics education provide valuable
information for teachers of statistics. For example, some of the studies reveal the types of
difficulties students have when learning particular topics, so that teachers may be aware
of where errors and misconceptions might occur and how students' statistical reasoning
might develop, but also what to look for in their informal and formal assessments of their
learning.
We think that the research literature is especially important to consider because it contradicts
many informal or intuitive beliefs held by teachers. For example, that students earning a grade
of A in a statistics class understand the basic ideas of statistics (e.g. Clark et al., 2003; Mathews
6 Clark, 2003), or that students' reasoning about statistics is consistent from topic to topic (e.g.
Konoid, 1995). In addition, even the most clever and carefully designed technological tool or
good instructional activity will not necessarily lead students to correctly understand and reason
about an abstract statistical concept (e.g. Chance et al., 2004).

International Statistical Review (2007), 75, 3, 372-396

© 2007 The Authors. Journal compilation © 2007 International Statistical Institute

This content downloaded from

198.54.66.65 on Wed, 23 Aug 2023 11:41:52 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 How Students Learn Statistics Revisited 3 87

5.1 Principles for Learning Statistics

After reviewing the research related to teaching and learning st

Garfield (1995) proposed 10 principles for learning statistics. Desp
of studies since that paper was published, we believe that these princi
are also consistent with recent publications on student learning,
(Bransford et al., 2000), which focus on promoting learning for under
student-centred learning environments and rethinking what is taugh
it is assessed. These principles have been regrouped into eight rese
about student learning of statistics.

5.1.1 Students learn by constructing knowledge

Teaching is not telling, learning is not remembering. Regardless of

book tells them something, students will understand the material only
their own meaning for what they are learning. Moreover, ignori
"disproving" the students' current ideas will leave them intact - and t
veneer of course content (Bakker & Gravemeijer, 2004; Lehrer & S
Students do not come to class as "blank slates" or "empty vessels"
instead, approach learning activities with significant prior knowledge. I
they interpret the new information in terms of the knowledge they
their own meanings by connecting the new information to what they
et al ., 2000). Students tend to accept new ideas only when their old id
shown to be inefficient for purposes they think are important.

5.1.2 Students learn by active involvement in learning activities

Research suggests that students learn better if they are engaged

struggle with their own learning. For this reason, if no other, studen
they work cooperatively in small groups to solve problems and learn
their approach among conflicting ideas and methods (e.g. Keeler &
1997; Magel, 1998). Small-group activities may involve groups of three
in class to solve a problem, discuss a procedure, or analyse a set of
used to work on an in-depth project outside of class. Group activities
students to express their ideas both orally and in writing, helping th
in their own learning. However, just being active and having a good t
learning. Good learning activities are carefully designed and the teach
to listen, probe, sum up and assess the main points (e.g. Courtney et a
Perkins & Saris, 2001; Chick & Watson, 2002).

5.1.3 Students learn to do well only what they practice doing

Practice may mean hands-on activities, activities using cooperative s

the computer. Students also learn better if they have experience applyi
If they practice only calculating answers to familiar, well-defined prob
are likely to learn. Students cannot learn to think critically, analyse i
ideas, make arguments and tackle novel situations, unless they are per
do those things over and over in many contexts. Merely repeating and
to lead to improved skills or deeper understanding (e.g. Watson, 2004;
2004; Pfannkuch, 2005).

International Statistical Review (2007), 75, 3, 372-396

© 2007 The Authors. Journal compilation © 2007 International Statistical Institute

This content downloaded from

198.54.66.65 on Wed, 23 Aug 2023 11:41:52 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 388 J. Garfield & D. Ben-Zvi

5.1.4 It is easy to underestimate the difficulty

probability and statistics

Many research studies have shown that ideas o

students to learn and often conflict with many
chance (Shaughnessy, 1992, 2007; delMas et a

5.1.5 It is easy to overestimate how well stud

A few studies have shown that although studen

or perform calculations correctly, they may st
students who receive top grades in a class may
statistics (e.g. Clark et al ., 2003; Mathews &

5.1.6 Learning is enhanced by having student

reasoning

Several research studies in statistics as well as in other disciplines show that students' errors in
reasoning (sometimes appearing to be misconceptions) are often strong and resilient - they are
slow to change, even when students are confronted with evidence that their beliefs are incorrect
(Bransford et al ., 2000).
Students seem to learn better when activities are structured to help students evaluate the
difference between their own beliefs about chance events and actual empirical results. If students
are first asked to make guesses or predictions about data and random events, they are more likely
to care about and process the actual results. When experimental evidence explicitly contradicts
their predictions, students should be helped to evaluate this difference. In fact, unless students
are forced to record and then compare their predictions with actual results, they tend to see in
their data confirming evidence for their misconceptions of probability (e.g. Shaughnessy, 1977;
Konoid, 1989; Jones et al ., 1999). Research in physics instruction also points to this method of
testing beliefs against empirical evidence (e.g. Clement, 1987).

5.1.7 Technological tools should be used to help students visualize and explore data , not just to
follow algorithms to pre-determined ends

Technology-based instruction appears to help students learn basic statistics concepts by

providing different ways to represent the same data set (e.g. going from tables of data to
histograms to boxplots) or by allowing students to manipulate different aspects of a particular
representation in exploring a data set (e.g. changing the shape of a histogram to see what happens
to the relative positions of the mean and median). Instructional software may be used to help
students understand abstract ideas. For example, students may develop an understanding of
the Central Limit Theorem by constructing various populations and observing the distributions
of statistics computed from samples drawn from these populations (e.g. Ben-Zvi, 2000). The
computer can also be used to improve students' understanding of probability by allowing them
to explore and represent statistical models, change assumptions and parameters for these models
and analyse data generated by applying these models (Biehler, 1991; Jones et al ., 2007).
Innovative new visualization software, such as Fathom (Key Curriculum Press, 2006; http://
www.keypress.com/x5656.xml) and TinkerPlots (Konoid & Miller, 2005; http://www.keypress.
com/x5715.xml) are available to students at all levels to explore data and learn to reason
statistically.

International Statistical Review (2007), 75, 3, 372-396

© 2007 The Authors. Journal compilation © 2007 International Statistical Institute

This content downloaded from

198.54.66.65 on Wed, 23 Aug 2023 11:41:52 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 How Students Learn Statistics Revisited 389

5.1.8 Students learn better if they receive consistent and helpful f

Learning is enhanced if students have ample opportunities to expr

on their ideas. Feedback should be analytical, and come at a time wh
it (see Garfield & Chance, 2000). There must be time for students t
receive, make adjustments, and try again. For example, evaluation o
used as a way to give feedback to students while they work on a pro
as a final judgment when they are finished with the course. Since
involves more than mastering facts and calculations, assessment sh
to reason, communicate and apply their statistical knowledge. A va
should be used to capture the full range of students' learning,
on projects, minute papers (e.g. Angelo & Cross, 1993) reflectin
material from one class session, or essay questions included on exam
proficient in developing and choosing appropriate methods that are
key course goals, and should be skilled in communicating assessm
delMas et al., 1999).

6 Summary

There has been a tremendous increase in research studies focu

statistics and probability over the past 15 years. These studies cont
disciplines and differ in focus, theory, methodology and supportin
reviewed together, they suggest the difficulties students have in lea
revise traditional methods of teaching. The most recent studies on
types of learning outcomes and reasoning about special topics o
changes in curriculum and teaching methods. However, there are s
much work is needed to offer more specific guidance to teachers o
now elucidating some conceptual foundations (e.g. notion of distrib
and statistical inference) for statistics education, the consequence i
emerging as a discipline in its own right, not an appendage to mat
& Ben-Zvi, in press).
We find the most helpful results to come from collaborative rese
future researchers to find collaborators, ideally from different di
in the content area (statistics) student learning (education and/or p
Eventually, we hope to see larger studies on particular questions
several institutions, using high-quality measurement instruments.
in seeing studies that use newer methods of analysis (e.g. hierarchi
of longitudinal data) that allow the careful study of the growt
over different instructional settings and/or over a period of time.
statistical methods in mathematics education research (see Scheaffe
suggestions for improving the growing field of statistics educa
forward to the wealth of results from new studies that will be ava
will inform our knowledge about how students learn statistics.

Acknowledgements

We gratefully acknowledge the valuable contributions of Beth Ch

two anonymous reviewers to the preparation of this paper.

International Statistical Review (2007), 75, 3, 372-396

© 2007 The Authors. Journal compilation © 2007 International Statistical Institute

This content downloaded from

198.54.66.65 on Wed, 23 Aug 2023 11:41:52 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 390 J. Garfield & D. Ben-Zvi

References

Aberson, C.L., Berger, D.E., Healy, M.R., Kyle, D. & Romero, VL. (2000). Evaluation of an interactive tutorial for
teaching the Central Limit Theorem. Teaching Psychol., 27, 289-291.
Abrahamson, D., Janusz, R.M. & Wilensky, U. (2006, March). There once was a 9-block... - A middle-
school design for probability and statistics. J. Stat. Educ., 14(1). Retrieved July 15, 2007, from http://www.
amstat.org/publications/j se/v 1 4n 1/abrahamson.html
Angelo, T. & Cross, К. (1993). A Handbook of Classroom Assessment Techniques for College Teachers (2nd edition).
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Bakker, A. (2004, November). Reasoning about shape as a pattern in variability. Stat. Educ. Res. J., 3(2), 64-83.
Retrieved July 15, 2007, from http://www.stat.auckland.ac.nz/~iase/seij/SERJ3(2) _Bakker.pdf
Bakker, A. & Gravemeijer, K.RE. (2004). Learning to reason about distributions. In The Challenge of Developing
Statistical Literacy, Reasoning, and Thinking , Eds. D. Ben-Zvi and J. Garfield, pp. 147-168. Dordrecht: Kluwer
Academic.
Bakker, A. & Hoffmann, M. (2005). Diagrammatic reasoning as the basis for developing concepts: A semiotic analysis
of students' learning about statistical distribution. Educ. Studies Math., 60, 333-358.
Batanero, С., Estepa, A., Godino, J.D. & Green, D.R. (1996). Intuitive structures and preconceptions about association
in contingency tables. J. Res. Math. Educ., 27(2), 151-169.
Batanero, С. & Sánchez, E. (2005). What is the nature of high school student's conceptions and misconceptions about
probability? In Exploring Probability in School: Challenges for Teaching and Learning , Ed. G. Jones, pp. 260-289.
Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.
Ben-Zvi, D. (2000). Toward understanding the role of technological tools in statistical learning. Math. Thinking
Learning, 2(1 &2), 127-155.
Ben-Zvi, D. (2004a). Reasoning about data analysis. In The Challenge of Developing Statistical Literacy, Reasoning,
and Thinking, Eds. D. Ben-Zvi and J. Garfield, pp. 121-145. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.
Ben-Zvi, D. (2004b, November). Reasoning about variability in comparing distributions. Stat. Educ. Res. J., 3(2),
42-63. Retrieved July 15, 2007, from http://www.stat.auckland.ac. nz/~iase/seri/SERJ3(2) _BenZvi.pdf
Ben-Zvi, D. & Amir, Y. (2005). How do primary school students begin to reason about distributions? In Reasoning
about distribution: A collection of current research studies. Proceedings of the Fourth International Research Forum
on Statistical Reasoning, Thinking, and Literacy (SRTL-4), Ed. K. Makar, University of Auckland, New Zealand,
2-7 July, 2005. Brisbane: University of Queensland.
Ben-Zvi, D. & Arcavi, A. (2001). Junior high school students' construction of global views of data and data
representations. Educ. Studies Math., 45(1-3), 35-65.
Ben-Zvi, D. & Garfield, J. (2004). Statistical literacy, reasoning, and thinking: goals, definitions, and challenges. In
The Challenge of Developing Statistical Literacy, Reasoning, and Thinking, Eds. D. Ben-Zvi and J. Garfield, pp.
3-16. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.
Biehler, R. (1991). Computers in probability education. In Chance Encounters: Probability in Education, Eds. R.
Kapadia and M. Borovcnik, pp. 169-21 1. Amsterdam: Kluwer Academic.
Biehler, R. (2001). " Girls (tend to) watch less television than boys" - Students' hypotheses and data exploration
strategies in group comparison tasks. Talk presented at LOGOS #10, Mathematics Education Unit, Department of
Mathematics, The University of Auckland, New Zealand.
Bransford, J., Brown, A.L. & Cocking, R.R. (Eds.). (2000). How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School.
Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Bright, G.W. & Friel, S.N. (1 998). Graphical representations: Helping students interpret data. InReflections on Statistics:
Learning, Teaching, and Assessment in Grades K-12, Ed. S.R Lajoie, pp. 63-88. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Callingham, R.A. (1997). Teachers' multimodal functioning in relation to the concept of average. Math. Educ. Res. J.,
9(2), 205-224.
Canada, D. (2004). Pre-Service Elementary Teachers ' Conceptions of Variability. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
Portland State University, Portland, OR.
Canada, D. (2006, May). Elementary pre-service teachers' conceptions of variation in a probability context. Stat. Educ.
Res. J., 5(1), 36-64. Retrieved July 15, 2007, from http://www.stat.auckland.ac. nzA4ase/seij/SERJ5(l)_Canada.pdf
Chance, B.L. (2002, November). Components of statistical thinking and implications for instruction and assessment.
J. Stat. Educ., 10(3). Retrieved July 15, 2007, from http://www.amstat.org/publications/jse/vl0.n3/chance.html
Chance, В., delMas, R. & Garfield, J. (2004). Reasoning about sampling distributions. In The Challenge of Developing
Statistical Literacy, Reasoning, and Thinking, Eds. D. Ben-Zvi and J. Garfield, pp. 295-323. Dordrecht: Kluwer
Academic.

Chick, H.L. & Watson, J.M. (2002). Collaborative influences on emergent statistical thinking - a case study. J. Math.
Beh., 21, 371-400.

International Statistical Review (2007), 75, 3, 372-396

© 2007 The Authors. Journal compilation © 2007 International Statistical Institute

This content downloaded from

198.54.66.65 on Wed, 23 Aug 2023 11:41:52 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 How Students Learn Statistics Revisited 391

Ciancetta, M. (2007). Undergraduate and graduate statistics students' reasoning whe

Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Portland State University, Portland, OR.
Clark, J., Karuat, G., Mathews, D. & Wimbish, J. (2003). The Fundamental The
fying Student understanding of basic statistical concepts. Retrieved October 20, 2
hollins.edu/faculty/clarkjm/stat2c.pdf
Clement, J. (1987). Overcoming students' misconceptions in physics: The role of anchor
validity. Proceedings of the Second International Seminar, Misconceptions and Educ
and Mathematics. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University.
Cobb, P. (1999). Individual and collective mathematical development: The case of sta
Thinking Learning, 1(1), 5-43.
Cobb, P., Confrey, J., diSessa, A., Lehrer, R. & Schäuble, L. (2003a). Design experime
Educ. Res ., 32(1), 9-13.
Cobb, P., McClain, K. & Gravemeijer, K.P.E. (2003b). Learning about statistical covari
1-78.
Courtney, D.P., Courtney, M. & Nicholson, C. (1994). The effect of cooperative learning as an instructional practice
at the college level. College Student J. , 28, 471-477.
delMas, R. (2005). Activities to promote an understanding of variability. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the
American Mathematics Association of Two- Year Colleges (AMATYC). San Diego, CA, November 11.
delMas, R.C., Garfield, J. & Chance, B.L. (1999, November). A model of classroom research in action: developing
simulation activities to improve students' statistical reasoning. J. Stat. Educ., 7(3). Retrieved July 15, 2007, from
http://www.amstat.org/publications/jse/secure/v7n3/delmas.cfm
delMas, R., Garfield, J. & Ooms, A. (2005). Using assessment items to study students ' difficulty with reading and
interpreting graphical representations of distributions. Presented at the Fourth Forum on Statistical Reasoning,
Thinking, and Literacy (SRTL-4), July 6, 2005. Auckland, New Zealand.
delMas, R., Garfield, J., Ooms, A. & Chance, B. (in press). Assessing students' conceptual understanding after a first
course in statistics. Stat. Educ. Res. J.
delMas, R. & Liu, Y. (2005, May). Exploring students' conceptions of the standard deviation. Stat. Educ. Res. J., 4(1),
55-82. Retrieved July 15, 2007, from http://www.stat.auckland.ac. nz/~iase/ seij/SERJ4( 1 )_delMas _Liu.pdf
Earley, M.A. (2001). Improving statistics education through simulations: the case of the sampling distribution. Paper
presented at the Annual Meeting of the Mid- Western Educational Research Association. Chicago, Illinois, October
24-27.
Elmore, P.B. & Vasu, E.S. (1986). Model of statistics achievement using spatial ability, feminist attitudes and
mathematics-related variables as predictors. Educ. Psychol. Measure., 46, 215-222.
Falk, R. & Greenbaum, C. (1995). Significance tests die hard. Theory Psych., 5(1), 75-98.
Fast, G.R. (1997). Using analogies to produce long term conceptual change: Overcoming high school mathematics
students 'probability misconceptions. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research
Association, Chicago, IL.
Finney, S.J. (2000). The meaning of success for students in statistical methods courses: A phenomenological study.
Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans.
Franklin, C.A. & Mewborn, D.S. (2006). The statistical education of grades Pre-K-2 teachers: A shared responsibility.
In Thinking and Reasoning with Data and Chance : Sixty-eighth Yearbook, Ed. G.F. Burnii, Reston, VA: National
Council of Teachers of Mathematics (N CTM).
Gal, I. (Ed.) (2000). Adult Numeracy Development: Theory ; Research, Practice. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
Gal, I. (2002). Adults' statistical literacy: Meaning, components, responsibilities. Int. Stat. Rev., 70(1), 1-25.
Garfield, J. (1995). How students learn statistics. Int. Stat. Rev., 63, 25-34.
Garfield, J. (1999). Thinking about statistical reasoning, thinking, and literacy. Paper presented at First International
Research Forum on Statistical Reasoning, Thinking and Literacy (STRL-1), Kibbutz Be 'eri, Israel.
Garfield, J. (2002, November). The challenge of developing statistical reasoning. J. Stat. Educ., 10(3). Retrieved July
15, 2007, from http://www.amstat.org/publications/jse/vl0n3/garfield.html
Garfield, J. (2003). Assessing statistical reasoning. Stat. Educ. Res. J., 2(1), 22-38.
Garfield, J. (2006). Collaboration in statistics education research: Stories, reflections, and lessons learned. In
Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Teaching Statistics, Eds. A. Rossman and B. Chance,
[CD-ROM]. Voorburg, The Netherlands: International Statistical Institute.
Garfield, J. & Ahlgren, A. (1988). Difficulties in learning basic concepts in probability and statistics: implications for
research. J. Res. Math. Educ., 19(1), 44-63.

International Statistical Review (2007), 75, 3, 372-396

© 2007 The Authors. Journal compilation © 2007 International Statistical Institute

This content downloaded from

198.54.66.65 on Wed, 23 Aug 2023 11:41:52 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 392 J. Garfield & D. Ben-Zvi

Garfield, J. & Ben-Zvi, D. (2005, May). A framewor

ity. Stat. Educ. Res. J., 4(1), 92-99. Retrieved July 15
SERJ4( 1 )_Garfield JBenZvi.pdf
Garfield, J. & Ben-Zvi, D. (in press). Developing Studen
Practice. Dordrecht: Springer.
Garfield, J. & Chance, B. (2000). Assessment in statistics
2, 99-125.
Garfield, J., delMas, R. & Chance, B. (2007). Using students' informal notions of variability to develop an understanding
of formal measures of variability. In Thinking with Data , Eds. M. Lovett and R Shah, pp. 1 17-148. Mahwah, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum.

Gigerenzer, G. (1996). On narrow norms and vague heuristics: A reply to Kahneman and Tversky (1996). Psychol.
Rev., 103(3), 592-596.
Giraud, G. (1997, November). Cooperative learning and statistics instruction. J. Stat. Educ., 5(3). Retrieved July 15,
2007, from http://www.amstat.org/publications/jse/v5n3/giraud.html
Gould, R. (2004, November). Variability: One statistician's view. Stat. Educ. Res. J., 3(2), 7-16. Retrieved July 15,
2007, from http://www.stat.auckland.ac. nz/~iase/seij/SERJ3(2)_Gould.pdf
Groth, R.E. (2003). High school students' levels of thinking in regard to statistical study design. Math. Educ. Res. J.,
15, 252-269.
Groth, R.E. (2005). An investigation of statistical thinking in two different contexts: Detecting a signal in a noisy
process and determining a typical value. J. Math. Beh., 24(2), 109-124.
Groth, R.E. & Bergner, J.A. (2005, November). Preservice elementary school teachers' metaphors for the concept
of statistical sample. Stat. Educ. Res. J., 4(2), 27-42. Retrieved July 15, 2007, from http://www.stat.auckland.
ac.nz/ ~iase/ seij/SERJ4(2)_groth_bergner.pdf
Groth, R.E. & Bergner, J.A. (2006). Preservice elementary teachers' conceptual and procedural knowledge of mean,
median, and mode. Math. Thinking Learning, 8, 37-63.
Hammerman, J. & Rubin, A. (2003). Reasoning in the presence of variability. In Reasoning About Variability: A
Collection of Current Research Studies, Ed. C. Lee, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.
Hammerman, J.K. & Rubin, A. (2004, November). Strategies for managing statistical complexity with new
software tools. Stat. Educ. Res. J., 3(2), 17-41. Retrieved July 15, 2007, from http://www.stat.auckland.ac.nz/
Mase/seri/SERJ3(2)JHammerman_Rubin.pdf
Hancock, C., Kaput, J.J. & Goldsmith, L.T. (1992). Authentic inquiry with data: Critical barriers to classroom
implementation. Educ. Psychol., 27(3), 337-364.
Hirsch, L.S. & O'Donnell, A.M. (2001, July). Representativeness in statistical reasoning: Identifying and
assessing misconceptions. J. Stat. Educ. 9(2). Retrieved July 15, 2007, from http://www.amstat.org/
publications/j se/v9n2/hirsch.html
Huberty, C.J., Dresden, J. & Bak, B. (1993). Relations among dimensions of statistical knowledge. Educ. Psychol.
Measure., 53, 523-532.
Jones, G.A. (2005). Reflections. In Exploring Probability in School: Challenges for Teaching and Learning, Ed. G.A.
Jones, pp. 367-372. New York: Springer.
Jones, G.A., Langrall, C.W. & Mooney, E.S. (2007). Research in probability: Responding to classroom realities. In
The Second Handbook of Research on Mathematics, Ed. F.K. Lester, pp. 909-956. Reston, VA: National Council of
Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM).
Jones, G.A., Langrall, C.W., Mooney, E.S. & Thornton, C.A. (2004). Models of development in statistical reasoning.
In The Challenge of Developing Statistical Literacy, Reasoning, and Thinking, Eds. D. Ben-Zvi and J. Garfield, pp.
97-117. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.
Jones, G.A., Langrall, C.W., Thornton, C.A. & Mogill, A.T. (1999). Students' probabilistic thinking in instruction.
J. Res. Math. Educ., 30, 487-519.
Kahneman, D., Slovic, P. & Tversky, A. (Eds.). (1982). Judgment Under Uncertainty : Heuristics and Biases. New
York: Cambridge University Press.
Keeler, C.M. & Steinhorst, R.K. (1995, July). Using small groups to promote active learning in the in-
troductory statistics course: A report from the field. J. Stat. Educ., 3(2). Retrieved July 15, 2007, from
http://www.amstat.org/publications/ise/v3n2/keeler.html
Key Curriculum Press (2006). Fathom Dynamic Data™ Software (Version 2.03) [Computer software]. Emeryville,
CA: Key Curriculum Press. Available: http://www.keypress.com/x5656.xml
Konoid, С. (1989). Informal conceptions of probability. Cogn. Instruct., 6(1), 59-98.
Konoid, С. (1995, March). Issues in assessing conceptual understanding in probability and statistics. J. Stat. Educ.,
3(1). Retrieved July 15, 2007, from http://www.amstat.org/publications/jse/v3nl/konold.html

International Statistical Review (2007), 75, 3, 372-396

© 2007 The Authors. Journal compilation © 2007 International Statistical Institute

This content downloaded from

198.54.66.65 on Wed, 23 Aug 2023 11:41:52 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 How Students Learn Statistics Revisited 393

Konoid, С. & Higgins, T. (2003). Reasoning about data. In A Research Compani

School Mathematics, Eds. J. Kilpatrick, W.G. Martin and D.E. Schifter, pp. 193-2
of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM).
Konoid, С., Kazak, S., Dahlstrom-Hakki, I., Lehrer, R. & Kim, M.J. (2007, Augu
Paper presented at the Fifth International Research Forum on Statistical Reasoni
The University of Warwick, UK.
Konoid, С. & Miller, C.D. (2005). TinkerPlots : Dynamic Data Exploration ™ (V
Emeryville, CA: Key Curriculum Press. Available: http://www.keypress. com/x
Konoid, С. & Pollatsek, A. (2002). Data analysis as the search for signals in no
33(4), 259-289.
Konoid, С., Pollatsek, A., Well, A. & Gagnon, A. (1997). Students analyzing da
Research on the Role of Technology in Teaching and Learning Statistics , Eds. J
168. Voorburg, The Netherlands: International Statistical Institute.
Lane, D.M. & Peres, S.C. (2006). Interactive simulations in the teaching of statistics:
of the Seventh International Conference on Teaching Statistics. [CD-ROM],
Voorburg, The Netherlands: International Statistical Institute.
Lane, D.M. & Tang, Z. (2000). Effectiveness of simulation training on transfer of s
Res., 22(4), 383-396.
Leavy, A. (2006, November). Using Data comparisons to support a focus on di
teachers' understandings of distribution when engaged in statistical inquiry
Retrieved July 15, 2007, from http://www.stat.auckland.ac.nz/~iase/seri/SERJ
Lee, C., Zeleke, A. & Wachtel, H. (2002). Where do students get lost? The con
Statistically Literate Society : Proceedings of the Sixth International Conferenc
Ed. B. Phillips. Voorburg, The Netherlands: International Statistical Institute.
Lehrer, R. & Schäuble, L. (2002). Distribution: A resource for understanding error
of the Sixth International Conference on Teaching Statistics: Developing a St
Phillips. Voorburg, The Netherlands: International Statistical Institute.
Lehrer, R., & Schäuble, L. (2007). Contrasting emerging conceptions of distributi
variation. In Thinking with data, Eds., M. Lovett and P. Shah, pp. 149-176. Mah
Lovett, M.C. (2001). A Collaborative convergence on studying reasoning proce
Cognition and Instruction : Twenty-Five Years of Progress, Eds. S. Carver and D
Erlbaum.
Lunsford, M.L. Rowell, G.H. & Goodson-Espy, T. (2006, November). Classroom research: Assessment of student un-
derstanding of sampling distributions of means and the central limit theorem in post-calculus probability and statistics
classes. J. Stat. Educ., 14(3). Retrieved July 17, 2007, from www.amstat.org/publications/jse/vl4n3/lunsford.html
Magel, R.C. (1998, November). Using cooperative learning in a large introductory statistics class. J. Stat. Educ., 6(3).
Retrieved July 15, 2007, from http://www.amstat.org/publications/jse/v6 n3/magel.html
Makar, K. & Confrey, J. (2005). Using distributions as statistical evidence in well-structured and ill-structured problems.
In Reasoning About Distribution: A Collection of Current Research Studies. Proceedings of the Fourth International
Research Forum on Statistical Reasoning, Thinking, and Literacy (SRTL-4), Ed. K. Makar, University of Auckland,
New Zealand, 2-7 July. Brisbane: University of Queensland.
Mathews, D. & Clark, J. (2003). Successful Students ' Conceptions of Mean, Standard Deviation and the Central Limit
Theorem. Unpublished paper. Retrieved October 20, 2007, from http://wwwl .hollins.edu/faculty/clarkjm/statsl .pdf.
Meletiou, M. & Lee, C. (2002, December). Teaching students the stochastic nature of statistical concepts in an
introductory statistics course. Stat. Educ. Res. J., 1(2), 22-37. Retrieved July 15, 2007, fromhttp://www.stat.auckland.
ac.nz/Mase/seij/SERJ 1 (2).pdf
Meyer, O. & Lovett, M. (2002). Implementing a computerized tutor in a statistical reasonmg course: Getting the big
picture. In Proceedings of the sixth international conference on teaching statistics: Developing a statistically literate
society , Ed. B. Phillips. Voorburg, The Netherlands: International Statistical Institute.
Mickelson, W.T. & Heaton, R.M. (2004). Primary teachers' statistical reasoning about data. In The Challenge of
Developing Statistical Literacy, Reasoning, and Thinking, Eds. D. Ben-Zvi and J. Garfield, pp. 295-324. Dordrecht:
Kluwer Academic.
Mills, J.D. (2004). Learning abstract statistics concepts using simulation. Educ. Res. Q., 28(4), 18-33.
Mokros, J. & Russell, S.J. (1995). Children's concepts of average and representativeness. J. Res. Math. Educ., 26,
20-39.
Moore, D. (1998). Statistics among the liberal arts. J. Amer. Stat. Assoc., 93, 1253-1259.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM). (2000). Principles and Standards for School Mathematics.
Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, NCTM.

International Statistical Review (2007), 75, 3, 372-396

© 2007 The Authors. Journal compilation © 2007 International Statistical Institute

This content downloaded from

198.54.66.65 on Wed, 23 Aug 2023 11:41:52 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 394 J. Garfield & D. Ben-Zvi

Noll, J. (2007). Statistics teaching assistants' statistica

Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Portland, OR.: Portla
O'Connell, A.A. (1999). Errors in probability problem-s
O'Connell, A.A. & Corter, J.E. (1993). Student misconce
AERA Conference , pp. 1-15. Atlanta, GA.
Perkins, D.V & Saris, R.N. (2001). A "jigsaw classroom"
Psychol, 28, 111-113.
Petrosino, A.J., Lehrer, R. & Schäuble, L. (2003). Structur
fourth grade. Math. Thinking Learning , 5, 1 3 1-1 56.
Pfannkuch, M. (2005). Probability and statistical inferenc
In Exploring Probability in School: Challenges for Teach
Springer.
Pfannkuch, M. (2006, November). Comparing Box plot distributions: A teacher's reasoning. Stat. Educ. Res. J., 5(2),
27-45. Retrieved July 15, 2007, from httn://www.stat.auckland.ac.nz/~iase/seri/SERJ5(2)J>fannkuch.üdf
Pfannkuch, M. & Reading, C. (2006, November). Reasoning about distribution: A complex process. Stat. Educ. Res.
J.. 5C2). 4-9. Retrieved Julv 15. 2007. from htto ://www. stat. auckland. ac . nz/~i ase/seri /SER J5 ( 2 Vndf

Potthast, M.J. ( 1 999). Outcomes of using small-group cooperative learning experiences in introductory statistics courses.
College Student J 33, 34-42.
Pratt, D. (2007). How do teachers foster students' understanding of probability? In Exploring Probability in School:
Challenges for Teaching and Learning , Ed. G.A. Jones, pp. 182-201. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.
Prodromou, T. & Pratt, D. (2006, November). The role of causality in the co-ordination of two perspectives
on distribution within a virtual simulation. Stat. Educ. Res. J., 5(2), 69-88. Retrieved July 15, 2007, from
http://www.stat.auckland.ac.nz/~iase/seri/SERJ5(2).pdf
Quilici, J.L. & Mayer, R.E. (2002). Teaching students to recognize structural similarities between statistics word
problems. Appl. Cogn. Psychol., 16(3), 325-342.
Reading, C. (2004, November). Student description of variation while working with weather data. Stat. Educ. Res. J.,
3(2), 84-105. Retrieved July 15, 2007, from http://www.stat.auckland.ac.nz/~iase/seij/SERJ3(2)_Reading.pdf
Reading, C. & Reid, J. (2006, November). An emerging hierarchy of reasoning about distribution: From a vari-
ation perspective. Stat. Educ. Res. J., 5(2), 46-68. Retrieved July 15, 2007, from http://www.stat.auckland.
ac.nz/'4ase/seri/SERJ5(2)_reading_reid.pdf
Reading, C. & Shaughnessy, M. (2004). Reasoning about variation. In The Challenge of Developing Statistical Literacy,
Reasoning, and Thinking , Eds. D. Ben-Zvi and J. Garfield, pp. 201-226. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.
Rubin, A., Bruce, B. & Tenney, Y. (1991). Learning about sampling: Trouble at the core of statistics. In Proceedings
of the Third International Conference on Teaching Statistics, Ed. D. Vere-Jones, Vol. 1, pp. 314-319. Voorburg, The
Netherlands: International Statistical Institute.
Rubin, A., Hammerman, J., Cambell, C. & Puttick, G. (2005). The effect of distributional shape on group comparison
strategies (SRTL-4). In Reasoning about Distribution : A Collection of Current Research Studies. Proceedings of
the Fourth International Research Forum on Statistical Reasoning, Thinking, and Literacy (SRTL-4), Ed. K. Makar.
University of Auckland, New Zealand, 2-7 July. Brisbane: University of Queensland.
Rumsey, DJ. (2002, November). Statistical literacy as a goal for introductory statistics courses. J. Stat. Educ., 10(3).
Retrieved July 15, 2007, from http://www.amstat.ore/publications/ise/vlO n3/rumsey2.html
Russell, S.J. (1990). Issues in training teachers to teach statistics in the elementary school: A world of uncertainty. In
Training Teachers to Teach Statistics: Proceedings of the International Statistical Institute Round Table Conference,
Ed. A. Hawkins, pp. 59-71. Voorburg, The Netherlands: International Statistical Institute.
Russell, S.J. & Mokros, J. (1996). What do children understand about average? Teaching Children Math., 2, 360-364.
Saldanha, L. & Thompson, P. (2003). Conceptions of sample and their relationship to statistical inference. Educ. Studies
Math. , 51, 257-270.
Schau, С. & Mattern, N. (1997). Assessing students' connected understanding of statistical relationships. In The
Assessment Challenge in Statistics Education, Eds. I. Gal and J.B. Garfield, pp. 91-104. Amsterdam, The
Netherlands: IOS Press.

Scheaffer, R. (2007). Using Statistics effectively in mathematics education research : A report from a se-
ries of workshops organized by the American Statistical Association. Retrieved October 20, 2007, from:
http://www.amstat.org/research_grants/pdfs/SMERReport.pdf
Schwartz, D.L., Sears, D. & Chang, J. (2007). Reconsidering prior knowledge. In Thinking with Data , Eds.
M.C. Lovett and P. Shah, pp. 319-344. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Available: http://aaalab.stanford.edu/papers/
Schwartz_Reconsidering_Prior_K.pdf
Sedlmeier, P. (1999). Improving Statistical Reasoning: Theoretical Models and Practical Implications. Hillsdale, NJ:
Erlbaum.

International Statistical Review (2007), 75, 3, 372-396

© 2007 The Authors. Journal compilation © 2007 International Statistical Institute

This content downloaded from

198.54.66.65 on Wed, 23 Aug 2023 11:41:52 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 How Students Learn Statistics Revisited 395

Shaughnessy, J.M. (1977). Misconceptions of probability: An experiment with a sm

building approach to introductory probability at the college level. Educ. Studies M
Shaughnessy, J.M. (1992). Research in probability and statistics: Reflections and di
on Mathematics Teaching and Learning Ed. D. Grouws, pp. 465-494. New York: Ma
Shaughnessy, J.M. (1997). Missed opportunities in research on the teaching and lear
in Mathematics Education (Proceedings of the 20th annual meetings of the Mathe
of Australasia), Eds. F. Biddulph and K. Carr, pp. 6-22. Rotorua, New Zealand: M
Shaughnessy, J.M. (2003). Research on students' understanding of probability. In A
and Standards for School Mathematics , Eds. J. Kilpatrick, W.G. Martin, and D. Sc
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM).
Shaughnessy, J.M. (2007). Research on statistics learning and reasoning. In The
on Mathematics , Ed. EK. Lester, pp. 957-1010. Reston, VA: National Counc
(NCTM).
Shaughnessy, J.M., Ciancetta, M., Best, K. & Canada, D. (2004, April). Students' attention to variability when
comparing distributions. Paper presented at the Research Pre-session of the 82nd annual meeting of the National
Council of Teachers of Mathematics, Philadelphia, PA.
Shaughnessy, J.M., Garfield, J. & Greer, B. (1996). Data handling. In International Handbook of Mathematics
Education , Eds. A. J. Bishop, K. Clements, C. Keitel, J. Kilpatrick, and C. Laborde, Vol. 1, pp. 205-237. Dordrecht:
Kluwer Academic.
Shaughnessy, J.M., Watson, J., Moritz, J. & Reading, C. (1999). School mathematics students' acknowledgment of
statistical variation: There's more to life than centers. Paper presented at the Research Pre-session of the 77th
Annual meeting of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, San Francisco, CA.
Snell, L. (1999). Using chance media to promote statistical literacy. Paper presented at the 1999 Joint Statistical
Meetings, Dallas, TX.
Steife, L.P. & Thompson, P. W. (2000). Teaching experiment methodology: Underlying principles and essential elements.
In Handbook of Research Design in Mathematics and Science Education , Eds. A.E. Kelly and R. A. Lesh, pp. 267-
307. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Stohl, J. (2005). Probability in teacher education and development. In Exploring Probability in School: Challenges for
Teaching and Learning , Ed. G.A. Jones, pp. 345-366. New York: Springer.
Suanpang, P., Petocz, P. & Kalceff, W. (2004). Student attitudes to learning business statistics: comparison of online
and traditional methods. Educ. Technol. Soc., 7(3), 9-20.
Tarr, J.E. & Lannin, J.K. (2005). How can teachers build notions of conditional probability and independence? In
Exploring Probability in School : Challenges for Teaching and Learning , Ed. G.A. Jones, pp. 215-238. New York:
Springer.
Tempelaar, D.T., Gijselaers, W.H. & van der Loeff, S.S. (2006, March). Puzzles in statistical reasoning. J. Stat. Education ,
14П). Retrieved Julv 15. 2007, from http://www.amstat.ore/publications/ise/vl4nl/tempelaar.html
Utts, J. (2003). What educated citizens should know about statistics and probability. Amer. Stat., 57(2), 74-79.
Ward, B. (2004, November). The best of both worlds: A hybrid statistics course. J. Stat. Educ., 12(3), 74-79. Retrieved
Julv 15, 2007, from http://www.amstat.org/publications/jse/vl2n3/ward.html
Watson, J. (2004). Developing reasoning about samples. In The Challenge of Developing Statistical Literacy, Reasoning
and Thinking, Eds. D. Ben-Zvi and J. Garfield, pp. 277-294. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.
Watson, J. (2005). Developing an awareness of distribution. In Reasoning about distribution: A collection of research
studies. Proceedings of the Fourth International Forum on Statistical Reasoning, Thinking, and Literacy (SRTL-4),
Ed. K. Makar. University of Auckland, New Zealand, 2-7 July. Brisbane: University of Queensland [CD-ROM].
Watson, J.M. & Shaughnessy, J.M. (2004). Proportional reasoning: Lessons from research m data and chance. Math.
Teaching Middle School, 10, 104-109.
Wiggins, G. (1998). Understanding by design. Alexandria, VA: ASCD Press.
Wild, C. (2006, November). The concept of distribution. Stat. Educ. Res. J., 5(2), 10-26. Retrieved July 15, 2007, from
http://www.stat.auckland.ac.nz/~iase/seri/SERJ5(2)_Wild.pdf
Wild, C.J. & Pfannkuch, M. (1999). Statistical thinking in empirical enquiry. Int. Stat. Rev. 67(3), 223-265.
Wild, C., Triggs, C. & Pfannkuch, M. (1997). Assessment on a budget: Using traditional methods imaginatively. In
The Assessment Challenge in Statistics Education, Eds. I. Gal and J.B. Garfield. Amsterdam: IOS Press.
Wisenbaker, J. & Scott, J. (1997). Modeling aspects of students' attitudes and achievement in introductory statistics
courses. Paper presented at annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association (AERA), Chicago,
IL.
Yu, C.H. & Behrens, J. T. (1 995). Applications of multivariate visualization to behavioral sciences. Behav. Res. Methods,
Instrum. Comput., 27(2), 264-271.

International Statistical Review (2007), 75, 3, 372-396

© 2007 The Authors. Journal compilation © 2007 International Statistical Institute

This content downloaded from

198.54.66.65 on Wed, 23 Aug 2023 11:41:52 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 396 J. Garfield & D. Ben-Zvi

Zawojewski, J.S. & Shaughnessy, J.M. (2000). Mean and

School 5(7), 436-440.
Zieffler, S.A. (2006). A longitudinal investigation of th
data during an introductory statistics course. Unpublish
15, 2007, from http://www.stat.auckland.ac.nz/~iase/pu
Zieffler, S.A., Garfield, J., del Mas, R. & Gould, R. (200
about statistical inference. Paper presented at the Fif
Thinking and Literacy (SRTL-5). University of Warwic

Résumé

Cet article présente une vue d'ensemble de la recherche actuelle sur l'enseignement et l'étude de la statistique. Il
résume les analyses qui ont été menées par des chercheurs de disciplines différentes. Le travail s'organise autour de
questions de recherche générales qui ont été adressées, et suggère ce que l'on peut apprendre à partir de ces résultats
au sujet de chacune de ces questions. Les implications de la recherche sont décrites en termes de huit principes sur
l'étude de la statistique de Garfield (1995) qui sont repris selon les résultats d'études actuelles.

[Received March 2007 , accepted September 2007]

International Statistical Review (2007), 75, 3, 372-396

© 2007 The Authors. Journal compilation © 2007 International Statistical Institute

This content downloaded from

198.54.66.65 on Wed, 23 Aug 2023 11:41:52 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms