Incorporating Inquiry-Based Class Sessions with Computer Assisted Instruction
We draw the following conclusions and implications from the data presented in the abstract:
- The inclusion of group work class meetings in lieu of lecture does not appear to affect adversely student success as measured by grades. (However, there is one anomalous group work subsection showing a positive effect on Test Sum at p<0.05, suggesting need for further analysis and study of the Instructor interaction effect.)
- Group work does have a positive effect on problem-solving and communications abilities (as measured together by our rubric-based score. Further analysis to separate hypotheses H2 and H4 is needed.)
- Success in a mathematics course increases mathematics self-efficacy among a population taking one of the lowest entry-level courses that carry college credit. (Further study is needed on other mathematics courses.)
- The addition of a weekly paper and pencil quiz to lecture treatment, over and above the regular quizzing done within the computer-assisted instruction, does not affect student performance in terms of grades or problem-solving/communication. (We will eliminate the Quiz/Lecture treatment from further studies.)
This research will inform our teaching of Finite Mathematics. In Spring Semester,
2009, we will teach all sections of Finite Mathematics using the group work
treatment. We will continue to gather data to corroborate the results of the
research reported above.
We expect to extend this study to Basic Algebra, Intermediate
Algebra, Pre-Calculus Algebra (OCT), and Pre-Calculus Trigonometry, using essentially the
same experimental design. Our projected study of Basic Algebra in Fall
Semester, 2009, will have two treatments: Group and Lecture, as described above.
Many pre-service elementary school teachers start in the non-credit course, Basic Algebra,
and take Intermediate Algebra, and Pre-Calculus Algebra, in addition to Finite
Mathematics.
As part of our MSP, we have designed courses that emphasize
mathematical reasoning and are entirely inquiry-based. These include two recommended
for pre-service elementary teachers: Patterns: the Foundation of Algebraic Reasoning, and
Geometry and Proportional Reasoning. The same courses are required for pre-service
middle school teachers in the Mathematical Reasoning track. Studies are underway in these
two courses. As yet few pre-service elementary teachers take both of the recommended
newly-designed courses. One long-term goal of our research program is to provide
evidence that the recommended courses are substantially better in terms of student
learning for pre-service teachers.
References
[BH] Betz, N. E. and Hackett, G. (1983). The
Relationship of Mathematics Self-Efficacy Expectations to the Selection of Science-based
College Majors. Journal of Vocational Psychology, 23(3):329-345.
[DB] Blais, D. M. (1988). Constructivism a
Theoretical Revolution for Algebra. Mathematics Teacher, Nov. 1988:49-56.
[DO] Doorn, D. and O'Brien, M. (2007). Assessing
the Gains from Concept Mapping in Introductory Statistics. International Journal for the
Scholarship of Teaching and Learning 1(2); online at http://digitalcommons.georgiasouthern.edu/ij-sotl/vol1/iss2/19/.
[GN] Gautreau, R. and Novemsky, L. (1997). Concepts
First-a Small Group Approach to Physics Learning. Am. J. Phys. 65(5): 418-429.
[HP] Hall, M. and Ponton, M. (2002). A
Comparative Analysis of Mathematics Self-Efficacy of Developmental and Non-Developmental
Mathematics Students. Preprint (Presented by Michael Hall at the 2002 meeting of the
Louisiana/Mississippi Section of the Mathematics Association of America.)
[HMK] Hoellwarth, C., Moelter, M. J., and Knight, R. D. (2005). A
direct comparison of conceptual learning and problem solving ability in traditional and
studio style classrooms. Am. J. Phys. 73(5):459-463.
[ID] The IDEA Center.
http://www.theideacenter.org/services/student-ratings/idea-online
[MR] Marrongelle, K. and
Rasmussen, C. (2008). Meeting New Teaching Challenges: Teaching Strategies that Mediate
Between All Lecture and All Student Discovery. In M. Carlson and C. Rasmussen (Eds.),
Making the Connection: Research to Practice in Undergraduate Mathematics, pp. 167-178.
Mathematical Association of America, Washington, DC.
[NCAT] National
Center for Academic Transformation. http://www.center.rpi.edu
[OCT] Oerhtman, M., Carlson, M., and
Thompson, P. (2008). Foundational Reasoning Abilities that Promote Coherence in Students'
Function Understanding. In M. Carlson and C. Rasmussen (Eds.), Making the Connection:
Research to Practice in Undergraduate Mathematics, pp. 65-80. Mathematical Association of
America, Washington, DC.
[RT]
Reformed Teaching Observation Protocol. Developed by ACEPT Project (Arizona State
University). http://physicsed.buffalostate.edu//
[W] Wiggins, G. (1989). The Futility of Trying to Teach Everything of Importance. Educational Leadership, Nov. 1989:71-78.
