Bottle Filling Task Reasoning: A Comparison of Matching Versus Constructed Student Responses
Proceedings of the Forty-First Annual Meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education
2019
- 421Usage
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Usage421
- Downloads342
- Abstract Views79
Conference Paper Description
In this paper, we compare the levels of reasoning elicited during the completion of three versions of a bottle filling task: high school level matching; middle school level matching and constructed response. The goal of the tasks was to make visible secondary students covariational reasoning methods. Video of students completing the task while explaining their reasoning during one-onone interviews were analyzed. Analysis demonstrated a wide range of reasoning when provided a matching version with a greater incidence of accuracy with students who exhibited lower levels of reasoning. Conversely, the constructed response task demonstrated higher levels of reasoning more consistently with decreased accuracy. Implications for assessment are discussed.
Bibliographic Details
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know