消除方差分析手工计算预测本科统计学课程掌握能力的提高

IF 0.7 4区 心理学 Q3 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Teaching of Psychology Pub Date : 2023-06-27 DOI:10.1177/00986283231183959
Angela G. Pirlott, Jarrod C. Hines
{"title":"消除方差分析手工计算预测本科统计学课程掌握能力的提高","authors":"Angela G. Pirlott, Jarrod C. Hines","doi":"10.1177/00986283231183959","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Presumably, most statistics professionals use a software program to perform statistical analyses, yet statistics textbooks and classes commonly teach hand calculations. This study examined whether, in an undergraduate psychology statistics course, hand calculations related to students' conceptual and applied analysis of variance (ANOVA) literacy. Quasi-experimentally, we compared 95 students’ mastery of one-factor between- and within-subjects ANOVAs, using the unit quiz and SPSS data analytics lab, between sections which did and did not include hand calculations. Controlling for GPA, gender, ethnicity, major, age, and math preparation to offset nonrandom assignment to section, eliminating ANOVA hand calculations predicted better performance on the quiz by 8% and on the SPSS lab by 6%. Shifting instructional focus away from hand calculations could enhance students’ conceptual and practical understanding of one-factor ANOVAs. Given time limitations, instructors might forgo teaching ANOVA hand calculations and focus on conceptual information and software applications.","PeriodicalId":47708,"journal":{"name":"Teaching of Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Eliminating ANOVA Hand Calculations Predicts Improved Mastery in an Undergraduate Statistics Course\",\"authors\":\"Angela G. Pirlott, Jarrod C. Hines\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/00986283231183959\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Presumably, most statistics professionals use a software program to perform statistical analyses, yet statistics textbooks and classes commonly teach hand calculations. This study examined whether, in an undergraduate psychology statistics course, hand calculations related to students' conceptual and applied analysis of variance (ANOVA) literacy. Quasi-experimentally, we compared 95 students’ mastery of one-factor between- and within-subjects ANOVAs, using the unit quiz and SPSS data analytics lab, between sections which did and did not include hand calculations. Controlling for GPA, gender, ethnicity, major, age, and math preparation to offset nonrandom assignment to section, eliminating ANOVA hand calculations predicted better performance on the quiz by 8% and on the SPSS lab by 6%. Shifting instructional focus away from hand calculations could enhance students’ conceptual and practical understanding of one-factor ANOVAs. Given time limitations, instructors might forgo teaching ANOVA hand calculations and focus on conceptual information and software applications.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47708,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Teaching of Psychology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Teaching of Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/00986283231183959\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Teaching of Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00986283231183959","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

据推测,大多数统计学专业人员使用软件程序进行统计分析,但统计学教科书和课程通常教授手工计算。这项研究考察了在本科生心理学统计学课程中,手工计算是否与学生的概念和应用方差分析(ANOVA)素养有关。准实验性地,我们使用单元测验和SPSS数据分析实验室,在包括手工计算和不包括手工计算的部分之间,比较了95名学生对受试者之间和受试者内部一个因素方差分析的掌握情况。控制GPA、性别、种族、专业、年龄和数学准备,以抵消非随机分配到章节的影响,消除ANOVA手工计算,可以预测在测验中更好的表现8%,在SPSS实验室中更好的成绩6%。将教学重点从手工计算转移开,可以提高学生对单因素方差分析的概念和实践理解。考虑到时间限制,教师可能会放弃教授方差分析手工计算,而专注于概念信息和软件应用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Eliminating ANOVA Hand Calculations Predicts Improved Mastery in an Undergraduate Statistics Course
Presumably, most statistics professionals use a software program to perform statistical analyses, yet statistics textbooks and classes commonly teach hand calculations. This study examined whether, in an undergraduate psychology statistics course, hand calculations related to students' conceptual and applied analysis of variance (ANOVA) literacy. Quasi-experimentally, we compared 95 students’ mastery of one-factor between- and within-subjects ANOVAs, using the unit quiz and SPSS data analytics lab, between sections which did and did not include hand calculations. Controlling for GPA, gender, ethnicity, major, age, and math preparation to offset nonrandom assignment to section, eliminating ANOVA hand calculations predicted better performance on the quiz by 8% and on the SPSS lab by 6%. Shifting instructional focus away from hand calculations could enhance students’ conceptual and practical understanding of one-factor ANOVAs. Given time limitations, instructors might forgo teaching ANOVA hand calculations and focus on conceptual information and software applications.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
22.20%
发文量
68
期刊介绍: Basic and introductory psychology courses are the most popular electives on college campuses and a rapidly growing addition to high school curriculums. As such, Teaching of Psychology is indispensable as a source book for teaching methods and as a forum for new ideas. Dedicated to improving the learning and teaching process at all educational levels, this journal has established itself as a leading source of information and inspiration for all who teach psychology. Coverage includes empirical research on teaching and learning; studies of teacher or student characteristics; subject matter or content reviews for class use; investigations of student, course, or teacher assessment; professional problems of teachers; essays on teaching.
期刊最新文献
Does Lecture Style Matter in Asynchronous Online Interteaching? Student and Faculty Perceptions of Generative Artificial Intelligence in Student Writing The Use of AI Disclosure Statements in Teaching: Developing Skills for Psychologists of the Future Navigating the New Frontier: Recommendations to Address the Crisis and Potential of AI in the Classroom Recommendations for Implementing Anti-Ableism Across the Psychology Curriculum
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1