# Innovations in MTH 100E

date post

25-Feb-2016Category

## Documents

view

40download

1

Embed Size (px)

description

### Transcript of Innovations in MTH 100E

Innovations in MTH 100E

Innovations in MTH 100EKristen Bieda and Raven McCrory, Teacher EducationSteven Wolf, Post-Doc in CREATE for STEM

Funded by the LPF Endowment through the CREATE for STEM InstituteRaven: Slides 1-8Kristen: Slides 9-25Steve: Slides 26-33Raven: Slides 34 -37

1PersonnelPavel Sikorskii, Julie Cioni, Ron Powers, Mathematics faculty supportJoanne Philhower, Jamie Wernet, Frances Harper, TE Teaching AssistantsJen Nimtz & Kenneth Bradfield, Graduate Research Assistants

Funded by the LPF Endowment through CREATE for STEM and by a TUES grant from NSFWhy this project? Remedial math at MSU: over 1000 students per year (Freshman class of 7800)High failure rates: 15-25% drop or failAnother 10-20% below 2.0Prerequisite for College AlgebraEssential for later success in STEM-related fieldsMath PerspectiveWhy this project?Future math teachers need realistic teaching experiencesMicroteaching Lab has been problematicTeacher Education PerspectiveWin-WinFor MathFor TEA non-credit, on-campus enrichment seminar (Intermediate Algebra Workshop) that meets twice a week for two hours a session

Open to students taking MTH 1825, an online developmental math course using ALEKS

~ 10 sections per semester. Enrollment in most sections capped at 20.

Most taught by undergraduate LAs (some of who are students taking TE secondary math ed coursework). What is MTH 100E?Who takes MTH 100E?Primarily freshman

Those who do not place into MTH 103 or higher based on their placement exam score Self-selected

Students in the College Admissions Achievement Program (CAAP) or College Assistance Migrant Program Scholars Initiative (CAMP)

Who takes MTH 100E?Approximately 40% are minorities by race

Approximately 15% intend to pursue STEM majors (based on 2012 data)

Some future mathematics teachers

What are the ongoing challenges in teaching MTH 100E?Reducing failures and drops in MTH1825 from ~30%

Students attitudes about math and math courses (Larnell, 2010)

Students prior knowledge and math coursework experience varies widely in 100E

Disparities in achievement levels and ALEKS performanceFall 2012 Pilot InterventionMTH 100ETuesdaysMTH 100EThursdaysMTH 100ETuesdaysTE 407 student instructorsInquiry-Oriented Curriculum & Group WorkCoaching by GAsFall 2012 Pilot InterventionMTH 100EThursdaysMTH 100E TuesdaysFall 2012 Pilot InterventionSecondary Mathematics Majors as InstructorsTE 407 is a 5 credit course that includes a microteaching lab experience

Lab is supervised by graduate TAs who are former secondary mathematics teachers and mathematics education graduate students

Beginning in 3rd week of semester, pairs of TE 407 students took responsibility to plan and enact instruction under supervision of TAs

Fellow TE 407 peers observed instruction and participated in a post-lesson discussion with instructors after TE 100E classInquiry-oriented curriculumMTH 100E students need to develop more than just procedural knowledge. Tasks in lessons were designed to develop conceptual understanding, problem solving skills, and reasoning.

Have audience actually do a part of a task in groups that was used that was especially well-received by MTH 100E students (approx. 20 minutes)14Example 1: Simplifying Rational ExpressionsKey Idea 1: Understanding the structure of rational expressions

i.e. that and are portioning a

whole into different size parts

15Example 1: Simplifying Rational ExpressionsKey Idea 1: Understanding the structure of rational expressions

i.e. that and are portioning a

whole into different size parts

Key Idea 2: Understanding the process/object distinction i.e. x + 3 describes a process AND is an object

16Example 1: Simplifying Rational ExpressionsKey Idea 1: Understanding the structure of rational expressions i.e. that and are portioning a whole into

different size parts

Key Idea 2: Understanding the process/object distinction i.e. x + 3 describes a process AND is an object

Key Idea 3: Understanding that simplifying fractions and rational expressions involves applying the multiplicative identity i.e. that x * 1 = x for all real numbers x.

17The Lesson on Simplifying Rational Expressions (from CPM curriculum 10.1.1)Part I: Have students consider what they know about the number 1.

Part II: Have students consider the claim that anything divided by itself equals 1. Students are asked to generate their own algebraic fractions that equal 1.

Part III: Students are asked to simplify and

Part IV: Students are asked to use what they know about the number 1 to simplify some given rational expressions

18Reflections from 100E StudentsThis is my favorite class this semester.19Reflections from 100E StudentsThis is my favorite class this semester.I found the equations surprisingly easy to create when usually its fairly difficult for me.20Reflections from 100E StudentsThis is my favorite class this semester.I found the equations surprisingly easy to create when usually its fairly difficult for me. This class wasnt helpful. Its more for math majors who want to deeply understand math. Not people who just want to know how to solve the problem.21Reflections from TE 407 studentsI really enjoy the fact that we have a micro-teaching lab, because being able to connect what we've talked about in lecture and put it to use in the classroom as been really neat to see. 22Reflections from TE 407 students"The micro teaching lab observation and discussions about them have helped me change my ways of thinking what makes a good teacher. How you can question students to help lead them to the answer without being too direct. It is still going to take time before it becomes second nature but it has definitely had an impact.23Reflections from TE 407 students I'd say the 5pm meetings on Tuesdays really help us to unravel all the different aspects of what is happening in the MTL. these meetings help clear up what and why we did, if it worked, and what we could do differently. I think the transparency it brings allows us to better accept changing of our image of teaching from telling to student-based learning.

24What data do we have?Course data:ALEKS (homework, assessments, time on task)Exams (final and interim)Math Placement Exam scoresMTH103 College Algebra enrollment and gradesMTH 100E and PSTs written reflections

2012 Results Summary100E students start out behind other 1825 students100E students end up even with or ahead of other 1825 students on the various measures100E Intervention students have the best performanceThese results carry over into MTH103 College AlgebraReport available: www.msu.edu/~mccrory/TEAMProject.html2012 MTH1825 Study PopulationOnly students in 1825 online sections Excludes Lyman Briggs and DREW students

Group 1: 1825 only: 701 studentsGroup 2: 100E non-intervention sections: 71 studentsGroup 3: 100E intervention sections: 34 students

Total: 806 students2012 MTH1825 Study PopulationOut of 806 students in the study, 100 unique majors in 15 colleges. The top three, and two others especially relevant to CREATE,CollegeNumberPercent of totalSocial Science16120.0Business13316.5Natural Science8210.2Education566.9Engineering374.628100E students start out behind

Scores for 100E (Groups 2 & 3 together) are significantly lower than those for Group 1 (1825 only)Statistically, Groups 2 & 3 are equivalent on these measuresUsing median because of outliers and non-normality of data

Difference between means and medians shows that there are outliers pulling the scores up or down.

MTH Placement exam: p=0.026ALEKS pre score: p=0.00129Comparative final results

Group 3 (intervention) scored higher on both measures: Final exam and ALEKS Post. Not statistically significant, but practically, predicts a higher grade in College Algebra by half a grade point. Kruskal ResultsFinal Exam: p=0.433ALEKS post score: p=0.02930Withdraw, Fail, DGroup 3 had lowest rate of failure/DGroup 3 had NO students who apparently dropped the course (Groups 1 and 2 had 7% and 3% respectively)Group 3 had NO students with zero on both the final exam and final grade (Groups 1 & 2 each had 1%)

% zero final grade %

*View more*