Research, statistics and mathematics educators in Nigeria: effect size perspective

K. Adeniji
{"title":"Research, statistics and mathematics educators in Nigeria: effect size perspective","authors":"K. Adeniji","doi":"10.4314/STECH.V5I2.3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Over reliance on the perspective of a dichotomous reject or fail-to-reject outcome from a null hypothesis testing framework to answer research questions has become a worrisome issue to research methodologists and statistics experts. Thus, the Journals of Mathematical Association of Nigeria, Abacus (2013 & 2014) were surveyed to investigate the effect size reports practice among Mathematics Educators in Nigeria. The study showed that majority (60%) of questions of research interests of Mathematics Educators were answered by Null Hypothesis Significant Testing (NHST) and less than one –fifth (16%) of this empirical studies reported Effect sizes (standardized) for their findings. However, the survey further revealed that though Effect sizes were mostly not reported but can be conveniently estimated from the associated descriptive statistics reported by the researchers except in the analyses which seek for relationship in categorical data. Recommendations made included that Editorial Policies and guidelines of Journals in Education, especially in Mathematics Education should include Effect sizes and Confidence Intervals reports for authors. Keywords: Research, Statistics, Effect size, Mathematics Educators, Empirical studies","PeriodicalId":272760,"journal":{"name":"AFRREV STECH: An International Journal of Science and Technology","volume":"37 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-10-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AFRREV STECH: An International Journal of Science and Technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4314/STECH.V5I2.3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Over reliance on the perspective of a dichotomous reject or fail-to-reject outcome from a null hypothesis testing framework to answer research questions has become a worrisome issue to research methodologists and statistics experts. Thus, the Journals of Mathematical Association of Nigeria, Abacus (2013 & 2014) were surveyed to investigate the effect size reports practice among Mathematics Educators in Nigeria. The study showed that majority (60%) of questions of research interests of Mathematics Educators were answered by Null Hypothesis Significant Testing (NHST) and less than one –fifth (16%) of this empirical studies reported Effect sizes (standardized) for their findings. However, the survey further revealed that though Effect sizes were mostly not reported but can be conveniently estimated from the associated descriptive statistics reported by the researchers except in the analyses which seek for relationship in categorical data. Recommendations made included that Editorial Policies and guidelines of Journals in Education, especially in Mathematics Education should include Effect sizes and Confidence Intervals reports for authors. Keywords: Research, Statistics, Effect size, Mathematics Educators, Empirical studies
尼日利亚的研究、统计和数学教育工作者:效应量视角
对于研究方法学家和统计专家来说,过度依赖零假设检验框架的二分拒绝或未拒绝结果的观点来回答研究问题已经成为一个令人担忧的问题。因此,对尼日利亚数学协会期刊Abacus(2013 & 2014)进行了调查,以调查尼日利亚数学教育者的效应大小报告实践。研究表明,数学教育者研究兴趣的大多数(60%)问题是通过零假设显著性检验(NHST)回答的,不到五分之一(16%)的实证研究报告了他们的发现的效应大小(标准化)。然而,调查进一步发现,除了在分类数据中寻求关系的分析外,大多数效应量没有报告,但可以方便地从研究人员报告的相关描述性统计中估计。建议包括教育期刊,特别是数学教育期刊的编辑政策和指南应该包括作者的效应大小和置信区间报告。关键词:研究、统计学、效应量、数学教育者、实证研究
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信