Đề xuất khung tư duy định lượng của sinh viên ngành kinh tế
Tóm tắt
In the context of digital transformation and the development of the data economy, quantitative thinking (QT) has become an increasingly important competence for economics students. This study aims to propose a QT framework oriented toward the training of economics students, comprising six components: (1) identifying and understanding quantitative information; (2) quantitative representation and modeling; (3) data collection and processing; (4) quantitative reasoning and inference; (5) applying QT to problem solving; and (6) critically evaluating quantitative information. The proposed framework was evaluated through a survey of 34 experts. Data were analyzed using the mean, standard deviation, median, interquartile range, Cronbach’s Alpha, and the Content Validity Index (CVI). The results showed that all six components and 12 criteria were rated as highly necessary and met the predefined consensus criterion. The findings provide preliminary evidence for the appropriateness of the proposed QT framework and a basis for further research on the development and assessment of quantitative thinking among economics students.
Tài liệu tham khảo
AAC&U. (2009). Quantitative literacy VALUE rubric. Association of American Colleges and Universities. https://www.aacu.org/value/rubrics/value-rubrics-quantitative-literacy
Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (Eds.). (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. Longman.
Bennett, J. O., & Briggs, W. L. (2008). Using and understanding mathematics: A quantitative reasoning approach (4th ed.). Pearson Addison Wesley.
Bressoud, D. M. (2009). Establishing the quantitative thinking program at Macalester. Numeracy, 2(1), Article 3. https://doi.org/10.5038/1936-4660.2.1.3
Budhathoki, D., Foley, G. D., & Shadik, S. (2024). Instructional decision making in a gateway quantitative reasoning course. Numeracy, 17(1), Article 2. https://doi.org/10.5038/1936-4660.17.1.1451
Chu, H. C., & Hwang, G. J. (2008). A Delphi-based approach to developing expert systems with the cooperation of multiple experts. Expert Systems with Applications, 34(4), 2826-2840. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2007.05.034
Elrod, E., & Park, J. Y. (2020). A comparison of students’ quantitative reasoning skills in STEM and non-STEM math pathways. Numeracy, 13(2), Article 3. https://doi.org/10.5038/1936-4660.13.2.1309
Everink, I. H. J., van Haastregt, J. C. M., Kempen, G. I. J. M., & Schols, J. M. G. A. (2020). Building consensus on an integrated care pathway in geriatric rehabilitation: A modified Delphi study among professional experts. Journal of Applied Gerontology, 39(4), 423-434. https://doi.org/10.1177/0733464818774629
Foley, G. D., Budhathoki, D., Thapa, A. B., & Aryal, H. P. (2023). Instructor perspectives on quantitative reasoning for critical citizenship. ZDM-Mathematics Education, 55, 1009-1020. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-023-01520-4
Follette, K. B., McCarthy, D. W., Dokter, E., Buxner, S., & Prather, E. (2015). The Quantitative Reasoning for College Science (QuaRCS) assessment, 1: Development and validation. Numeracy, 8(2), Article 2. https://doi.org/10.5038/1936-4660.8.2.2
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2019). Multivariate data analysis (8th ed.). Cengage.
Hsu, C. C., & Sandford, B. A. (2007). The Delphi technique: Making sense of consensus. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 12(10), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.7275/pdz9-th90
International Life Skills Survey (ILSS). (2000). Policy Research Initiative. Statistics Canada.
Karagöz Akar, G., Zembat, İ. Ö., Arslan, S., & Thompson, P. W. (Eds.). (2022). Quantitative reasoning in mathematics and science education. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-14553-7
Mayer-Schönberger, V., & Cukier, K. (2013). Big data: A revolution that will transform how we live, work, and think. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.
Mayes, R. L., Peterson, F., & Bonilla, R. (2013). Quantitative reasoning learning progressions for environmental science: Developing a framework. Numeracy, 6(1), Article 4. https://doi.org/10.5038/1936-4660.6.1.4
National Numeracy Network (2011). What is numeracy/QL/QR? http://serc.carleton.edu/nnn/resources/index.html
Niss, M. (2003). Mathematical competencies and the learning of mathematics: The Danish KOM project. In A. Gagatsis & S. Papastavridis (Eds.), Proceedings of the 3rd Mediterranean Conference on Mathematical Education (pp. 116-124). Hellenic Mathematical Society.
OECD (2019). OECD future of education and skills 2030: OECD learning compass 2030. OECD.
Polit, D. F., Beck, C. T., & Owen, S. V. (2007). Is the CVI an acceptable indicator of content validity? Appraisal and recommendations. Research in Nursing & Health, 30(4), 459-467. https://doi.org/10.1002/nur.20199
Prate, J., & Hsu, J. L. (2025). Student perceptions of supports and barriers for transferring quantitative reasoning in introductory biology lab courses. Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education, 26(2), e00229-24. https://doi.org/10.1128/jmbe.00229-24
Roohr, K. C., Graf, E. A., & Liu, O. L. (2014). Assessing quantitative literacy in higher education: An overview of existing research and assessments with recommendations for next-generation assessment. ETS Research Report Series, 2014(2), 1-26. https://doi.org/10.1002/ets2.12024
Schmidt, S., Zlatkin-Troitschanskaia, O., & Shavelson, R. J. (2023). Modeling and measuring domain-specific quantitative reasoning in higher education business and economics. Frontline Learning Research, 11(1), 40-56. https://doi.org/10.14786/flr.v11i1.885
Steen, L. A. (Ed.). (2001). Mathematics and democracy: The case for quantitative literacy. National Council on Education and the Disciplines.
Steen, L. A. (2004). Achieving quantitative literacy: An urgent challenge for higher education. Mathematical Association of America.
World Bank (2021). World development report 2021: Data for better lives. World Bank. https://doi.org/10.1596/978-1-4648-1600-0
Tải xuống
Đã Xuất bản
Cách trích dẫn
Số
Chuyên mục
Giấy phép
Bản quyền (c) 2026 Tạp chí Giáo dục
Tác phẩm này được cấp phép theo Ghi nhận tác giả của Creative Commons Giấy phép quốc tế 4.0 .
