Understanding Graphical Literacy Using School Students’ Comprehension Strategies

Q3 Social Sciences
Sindhu Mathai, Parvathi Krishnan, Jaya Sreevalsan-Nair
{"title":"Understanding Graphical Literacy Using School Students’ Comprehension Strategies","authors":"Sindhu Mathai, Parvathi Krishnan, Jaya Sreevalsan-Nair","doi":"10.1177/09731849241242855","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Graphical literacy or graphicacy is a critical component of scientific literacy. Graphs are used to integrate and represent complex sets of information requiring abstraction from perceptual experience. They form essential parts of the Mathematics and Science curriculum across school curricular stages. A key to developing meaningful pedagogic practices to inculcate graphical literacy is in understanding how students perceive and comprehend features of graphs and interpret them. This study attempts to understand how children from the primary, middle and high school years, perceive and interpret information in bar and line graphs. Two hundred and twenty-nine children from four different school contexts in Grades 5, 7 and 9 were administered questionnaires and interviewed based on tasks requiring comprehension of graphs. It was found that children’s understanding of graphs was tied to the curricular progression which was significant at Grades 5 and 9. Comprehension of bar graphs with nominal data was easier compared to line graphs requiring integration of information from two dimensions and interpreting them. Further, graphs requiring preliminary levels of statistical understanding were easier to comprehend. While prior experience and facility with graphical conventions played a role, interpretation from spatial to symbolic representations posed challenges. Students did not have a clearly preferred strategy or a linear comprehension trajectory, but moved back and forth between conventions, clustering of graphical elements and written content in questions, to make meaning. Those who had performed well used various perceptual strategies simultaneously. Further, they were found to employ transformational reasoning based on a sense of ‘how things work’. It was observed that meaningful pedagogic practices at school and informal experiences outside the classroom aid graphical literacy.","PeriodicalId":37486,"journal":{"name":"Contemporary Education Dialogue","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Contemporary Education Dialogue","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09731849241242855","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Graphical literacy or graphicacy is a critical component of scientific literacy. Graphs are used to integrate and represent complex sets of information requiring abstraction from perceptual experience. They form essential parts of the Mathematics and Science curriculum across school curricular stages. A key to developing meaningful pedagogic practices to inculcate graphical literacy is in understanding how students perceive and comprehend features of graphs and interpret them. This study attempts to understand how children from the primary, middle and high school years, perceive and interpret information in bar and line graphs. Two hundred and twenty-nine children from four different school contexts in Grades 5, 7 and 9 were administered questionnaires and interviewed based on tasks requiring comprehension of graphs. It was found that children’s understanding of graphs was tied to the curricular progression which was significant at Grades 5 and 9. Comprehension of bar graphs with nominal data was easier compared to line graphs requiring integration of information from two dimensions and interpreting them. Further, graphs requiring preliminary levels of statistical understanding were easier to comprehend. While prior experience and facility with graphical conventions played a role, interpretation from spatial to symbolic representations posed challenges. Students did not have a clearly preferred strategy or a linear comprehension trajectory, but moved back and forth between conventions, clustering of graphical elements and written content in questions, to make meaning. Those who had performed well used various perceptual strategies simultaneously. Further, they were found to employ transformational reasoning based on a sense of ‘how things work’. It was observed that meaningful pedagogic practices at school and informal experiences outside the classroom aid graphical literacy.
利用小学生的理解策略了解图形识字法
图形素养或图形能力是科学素养的重要组成部分。图形用于整合和表示需要从感性经验中抽象出来的复杂信息集。它们是学校各课程阶段数学和科学课程的重要组成部分。要开发有意义的教学实践来灌输图形素养,关键在于了解学生如何感知和理解图形的特征并对其进行解释。本研究试图了解小学、初中和高中阶段的儿童如何感知和解读条形图和折线图中的信息。研究人员对来自四所不同学校五年级、七年级和九年级的 229 名儿童进行了问卷调查,并根据要求理解图形的任务对他们进行了访谈。结果发现,儿童对图形的理解与课程进度有关,这在五年级和九年级非常明显。与需要整合两个维度的信息并对其进行解释的折线图相比,理解带有名义数据的条形图更容易。此外,需要初步统计理解的图表也更容易理解。虽然先前的经验和对图形惯例的熟练掌握起到了一定的作用,但从空间表征到符号表征的解释却带来了挑战。学生们并没有明确的首选策略或线性理解轨迹,而是在问题中的惯例、图形元素的聚类和书写内容之间来回移动,以产生意义。那些表现出色的学生同时使用了各种感知策略。此外,他们还根据 "事物是如何运作的 "这一感觉进行转换推理。据观察,学校有意义的教学实践和课堂外的非正式经验有助于图形读写能力的提高。
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
Contemporary Education Dialogue
Contemporary Education Dialogue Social Sciences-Education
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
15
期刊介绍: Contemporary Education Dialogue serves as an independent open forum for researchers and practitioners to sustain a critical engagement with issues in education by engendering a reflective space that nurtures the discipline and promotes inter-disciplinary perspectives. The peer-reviewed journal allows for a refinement of theoretical and practical basis for improving the quality of education, furthering the opportunity to directly create reflective classroom practices. It invites contributions by academicians, policy-makers and practitioners on various topics related to education, particularly elementary education. Discussions and responses to published articles are also welcome.
×
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