Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/1959.11/8826
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorLawrie, Christineen
dc.contributor.authorAnderson, Peteren
dc.contributor.authorPegg, Johnen
dc.date.accessioned2011-11-08T12:38:00Z-
dc.date.created1998en
dc.date.issued1999-
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1959.11/8826-
dc.description.abstractThis study investigated the difficulties associated with the design of appropriate test items, and the advantages of different methods of assessing the understanding of students within the framework of the van Hiele theory. It is based on the diagnostic instrument developed by Mayberry (1981) for assessing van Hiele levels in geometry, and addresses the four design problems which Mayberry identified as associated with her study. A detailed testing and interview program of 60 first-year primary-teacher trainees was undertaken. Initially, the responses of students to a written version of the Mayberry items were assessed using her method of evaluation. The QUEST program (which utilises the Rasch measurement theory) was applied to the results, leading to the identification of design problems in the original test, and the development of an amended version of the Mayberry test. Finally, Mayberry's method of assessment was compared with the method developed by Gutierrez, Jaime and Fortuny (1991). The testing of four research themes provided the context for the investigation. The highest van Hiele level of understanding for the majority of students (77%) was shown to be Level 2, even though 60% had studied a senior secondary geometry course in which the instruction was assumed to be at least Level 3 content. Apparent inconsistencies in the thinking of some of the students also emerged. Interviews, while supporting the levels displayed by the students in the test, did not clarify reasons for the inconsistencies. Application of the QUEST program confirmed the results of the test. Two issues related to the inconsistencies emerged. First, the difficulty thresholds of some items indicated their unsuitability to measure reasoning at the specified thought levels. Second, the setting of the subjective success criteria for the Mayberry method of assessment did not appear to be consistent.en
dc.languageenen
dc.titleAn Investigation into the Assessment of Students' Van Hiele Levels of Understanding in Geometryen
dc.typeThesis Doctoralen
dcterms.accessRightsUNE Greenen
local.contributor.firstnameChristineen
local.contributor.firstnamePeteren
local.contributor.firstnameJohnen
dcterms.RightsStatementCopyright 1998 - Christine Lawrieen
dc.date.conferred1999en
local.thesis.degreelevelDoctoralen
local.thesis.degreenameDoctor of Philosophyen
local.contributor.grantorUniversity of New Englanden
local.profile.schoolSchool of Educationen
local.profile.emailjpegg@une.edu.auen
local.output.categoryT2en
local.record.placeauen
local.record.institutionUniversity of New Englanden
local.identifier.epublicationsrecordvtls008597864en
local.access.fulltextYesen
local.contributor.lastnameLawrieen
local.contributor.lastnameAndersonen
local.contributor.lastnamePeggen
dc.identifier.staffune-id:jpeggen
local.profile.roleauthoren
local.profile.rolesupervisoren
local.profile.rolesupervisoren
local.identifier.unepublicationidune:9016en
dc.identifier.academiclevelAcademicen
local.title.maintitleAn Investigation into the Assessment of Students' Van Hiele Levels of Understanding in Geometryen
local.output.categorydescriptionT2 Thesis - Doctorate by Researchen
local.thesis.borndigitalnoen
local.search.authorLawrie, Christineen
local.search.supervisorAnderson, Peteren
local.search.supervisorPegg, Johnen
local.open.fileurlhttps://rune.une.edu.au/web/retrieve/d775fcd5-0b42-4c4a-9408-bd92678c5d8een
local.open.fileurlhttps://rune.une.edu.au/web/retrieve/a0275849-53a8-4122-8e5c-4f38f3421f4een
local.open.fileurlhttps://rune.une.edu.au/web/retrieve/8ce0d88c-2356-41a6-81bc-5afbf610fa2cen
local.open.fileurlhttps://rune.une.edu.au/web/retrieve/e2ecf723-bd63-4874-bf63-f25128f86ac3en
local.open.fileurlhttps://rune.une.edu.au/web/retrieve/0bc2eddb-c01d-4b95-9324-ecbcb0772604en
local.open.fileurlhttps://rune.une.edu.au/web/retrieve/0744097d-1180-4c2b-800d-105e1eb00445en
local.uneassociationYesen
local.year.conferred1999en
local.fileurl.openhttps://rune.une.edu.au/web/retrieve/d775fcd5-0b42-4c4a-9408-bd92678c5d8een
local.fileurl.openhttps://rune.une.edu.au/web/retrieve/0bc2eddb-c01d-4b95-9324-ecbcb0772604en
local.fileurl.openhttps://rune.une.edu.au/web/retrieve/8ce0d88c-2356-41a6-81bc-5afbf610fa2cen
local.fileurl.openhttps://rune.une.edu.au/web/retrieve/0744097d-1180-4c2b-800d-105e1eb00445en
local.fileurl.openhttps://rune.une.edu.au/web/retrieve/e2ecf723-bd63-4874-bf63-f25128f86ac3en
local.fileurl.openhttps://rune.une.edu.au/web/retrieve/a0275849-53a8-4122-8e5c-4f38f3421f4een
Appears in Collections:The National Centre of Science, Information and Communication Technology, and Mathematics Education for Rural and Regional Australia (SiMERR)
Thesis Doctoral
Files in This Item:
11 files
File Description SizeFormat 
open/SOURCE08.pdfThesis, part 52.69 MBAdobe PDF
Download Adobe
View/Open
open/SOURCE05.pdfThesis, part 23.95 MBAdobe PDF
Download Adobe
View/Open
open/SOURCE06.pdfThesis, part 33.53 MBAdobe PDF
Download Adobe
View/Open
open/SOURCE03.pdfAbstract1.13 MBAdobe PDF
Download Adobe
View/Open
open/SOURCE07.pdfThesis, part 42.32 MBAdobe PDF
Download Adobe
View/Open
open/SOURCE04.pdfThesis, part 13.76 MBAdobe PDF
Download Adobe
View/Open
1 2 Next
Show simple item record

Page view(s)

3,262
checked on Jan 14, 2024

Download(s)

4,318
checked on Jan 14, 2024
Google Media

Google ScholarTM

Check


Items in Research UNE are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.