1 / 54

Increasing Retention in Pre-calculus

Increasing Retention in Pre-calculus. From the Darkness into the Light. Jay Martin: jemartin@waketech.edu Beth Tsai: mbtsai@waketech.edu. Math 171 at WTCC. This is the first of two courses designed to emphasize topics that are fundamental to the study of calculus.

gerek
Download Presentation

Increasing Retention in Pre-calculus

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Increasing Retention in Pre-calculus From the Darkness into the Light Jay Martin: jemartin@waketech.edu Beth Tsai: mbtsai@waketech.edu

  2. Math 171 at WTCC • This is the first of two courses designed to emphasize topics that are fundamental to the study of calculus. • Emphasis is placed on equations and inequalities, functions (linear, polynomial, rational, exponential, logarithmic), regressions, systems of equations and inequalities, and parametric equations. • Upon completion, students should be able to solve practical problems and use appropriate models for analysis and predictions. • In addition, all pre-calculus topics will be explored numerically and graphically using a graphics and programmable calculator. For the laboratory component, MAT 171A, emphasis is placed on experiences that enhance the materials presented in class. Upon completion, students should be able to solve problems, apply critical thinking, work in teams, and communicate effectively.

  3. Why the need to be concerned? • Ever growing and changing student population • Student preparedness at both the High School and College Level is changing • Legislative funding for education being severely scrutinized • Demands of a high tech world places more pressure on educators to prepare students to be productive members in this global economy • Math 171 - 42% passing rate in 2011-2012

  4. Math 171 Student PopulationThen and Now • Then: Associate of Science exclusively • Feeder for Engineering Calculus sequence • Now:Mixture of Associate of Arts and Associate of Science students • College enrollment has increased dramatically over the past decade as everyone • seeks to improve his/her job prospects in an ever bleak economy causing • a surge in the number of students enrolled in Math 171 • Less Students move into Calculus sequence (terminal course) • Then: Many students placed directly into Calculus sequence with 600 Math SAT • Course had more content • Now: Less prepared at the High School Level (now moving to Common Core) • Expect placement requirements to be relaxed in the near future • C Wall for course causing a high number of “repeaters”

  5. Change in College Readiness (Pre-requisite) Courses • Carnegie Method: Independently • paced with modules • Computer based and • therefore calculator assisted • entirely • Skill based rather than concept • based from student perspective • Limited instructional time

  6. Shift to Completion by Design Push by legislature for funding to be awarded based on student completion rather than FTE with success defined to be “those students who have completed Math 171 with a grade of C or higher” Push by lawmakers for students to earn a degree at WTCC which makes them marketable even it they do not go further in their education. This has caused us to be involved in creating Curriculum Pathways for student success

  7. Benchmarking – A WTCC Initiative • Issue to address • Contact leader outside NC • Conversation on expert’s solution to issue • Action plan to integrate ideas at WTCC

  8. Benchmarking – A WTCC Initiative • Retention in Math 171 (42% passing rate in ‘10-’11) • Contacted Paul Nolting (Academic Success Press President and Teaches at Univ. of South Florida)

  9. Paul’s Recommendations • Which students are “AT RISK”? • Are Pre-requisite Skills a Problem • Early Intervention is Crucial • Study Skills are usually weak

  10. Paul’s Study Skills Text WINNING at MATH • Your Math Learning Strengths • Math and Test Anxiety • Your Study Environment – Manage Your Time • Improving Your Memory • Listening and Note-Taking Skills • Homework Techniques • Motivate Yourself to Learn • Students with Disabilities

  11. MartinFall 2012 Intervention 1ILC Partnership • Address Pre-Requisite Skills from Math 080 • 10 Learning Objectives Identified and Reviewed • Skills Test Attempt #1 on the 10 LO’s • Module’s completed in ILC on each incorrect LO • Skills Test Attempt #2 given for students who completed modules • Skills Test Attempt #3

  12. MartinFall 2012 Intervention 1ILC Partnership Results • First attempt class average – 50% • Second attempt class average – 70% • Third attempt – few students participated and average not changed • Most students visited ILC within the first 2 weeks

  13. MartinFall 2012 Intervention 2Test Taking Skills • Write and take a practice test or two (problem log) • Get help on questions you do not know (not last minute) • Memory dump when you get the test • Preview test • Do easy questions first, then difficult ones you know, then one’s you do not directly know • Review test and take ALL time allotted

  14. MartinFall 2012 Intervention 3Time Management • Develop Weekly study/work/class plan • Each 1 hour in class = 2 hours studying outside class • Do homework as soon as possible after class • Alternate subjects when studying – math, english, chemistry, world history • Take study breaks • Use breaks effectively – school to work, at work, between classes

  15. MartinFall 2012 Intervention 4Data Collection – Advice to Future Students • Collected about 3000 pieces of data about 171 students • Survey conducted after Test 2 and prior to withdrawal date

  16. MartinFall 2012 Overall Results

  17. MartinFall 2012 Data Collection – Results • Math 171 Repeaters – How many and How do they do? 23% of 258 students in Math 171 fall 2012 were repeating Math 171

  18. MartinFall 2012 Data Collection – Results • What was their last math course and grade? Does it relate to Math 171?

  19. MartinFall 2012 Data Collection – Results • Last High School Math Course and Success in Math 171?

  20. MartinFall 2012 Data Collection – Results • How many hours do you study?

  21. MartinFall 2012 Data Collection – Results • Is WebAssign homework related to grades?

  22. MartinFall 2012 Data Collection – Results • When did you do your WebAssign homework?

  23. MartinFall 2012 Data Collection – Results • Class Attitude and grades in Math 171?

  24. MartinFall 2012 Data Collection – Results • How many hours do you work and what is your course load?

  25. MartinFall 2012 Data Collection – Results • Is the Math 171 Supplement helpful?

  26. MartinFall 2012 Highlighted Results • Students coming from Math 080 did worse in Math 171 than students coming from other courses • Math 171 grade usually goes down at least 1 letter grade from previous successful math course • Students that did at least 90% of their WebAssign homework have at least 10 point Math 171 grade higher than the other students • Less than half of our students did at least 90% of the WebAssigns and about 2/3 of them waited at least 3 days to do their WebAssign • Those that did WebAssigns on the day the material is taught in class made at least 6 points higher in Math 171 • Students with good attitudes towards Math do better

  27. TsaiSpring 2013 InterventionsDay 1---make a first impression • Approximately 40% of the students in my classes are “repeaters” • Icebreaker • VARK survey • Learning Objectives, “Which one scares you the most” • Worked on Learning Objectives in class with emphasis on VARK • Sent students home to work on the remainder with a test on Day 3 • Set up small group meetings with students. They are to fill out a time management survey and questionnaire and bring to this meeting.

  28. Spring 2013 InterventionsVARK Survey • Learning Styles are discussed • V = Visual • A = Auditory • R = Reader • K = Kinematic • Free VARK Questionnaire(opens in a new window)

  29. Spring 2013 InterventionsLearning Objectives from Pre-requisite MaterialSample LO2. Find equation of a line given two points Find equation of a line through the two points: (-1,3) & (2,5) (2,5) & (4,-3) (0,-4) & (-3,1) LO3. Find slope, x-intercept, and y-intercept given a linear equation in form ax + by = c Find the slope and intercepts of each line below: 2x+3y=6 4x-2y-2=0 2(x-2)-4(y+2)=12 LO9. Solve rational equations that require checking solutions Solve Solve LO10. Solve radical equations that require checking solutions Solve Solve

  30. 2013 InterventionsSample Student Response from Ice-Breaker Activity

  31. Spring 2013 InterventionsIncorporating VARK into Teaching/Reviewing • LO 2. Two column approach (Student work on the LHS):

  32. Spring 2013 InterventionIncorporating VARK into Teaching/Reviewing • Sample problem from LO: Check Your Solution X = 0, X = 8

  33. Spring 2013 InterventionsDay 2 • Took homework questions on the Learning • Objectives • Started new material • Small group meetings started

  34. Spring 2013 InterventionsTeaching Strategies--- Kinematic Activity • Introduction to Functions. • Objective: • Determine the symbolic, numeric and graphical representations for functions. • Scenarios in words. Assume in each case, this year’s tuition is • $2000 per academic year. • A. Tuition increases linearly at the rate of $500 per year. • B. Tuition doubles every year. • C. Tuition remains constant for the foreseeable future. • D. Tuition decreases at the rate of $100 per year.

  35. A. Tuition increases linearly at the rate of $500 per year. • B. Tuition doubles every year. • C. Tuition remains constant for the foreseeable future. • D. Tuition decreases at the rate of $100 per year.

  36. Spring 2013 InterventionsSmall Group Meetings • Collected surveys and questionnaires • Items for discussion: • Long term goals • Placement • Time management • Test anxiety and test taking strategies • Help available (me, ILC, STEM Center)

  37. Spring 2013 InterventionsSurvey Questions • This survey is intended for internal purposes only. It will help guide improvements to the course and hopefully aid in your success. Please bring this survey and time management table to your small group meeting. • About your career pathway: • Have you spoken with the advising center? When? • Do you consider yourself an AA (Associate of Arts) or AS (Associate of Science)student? • What is your major/field of study? • Do you know to which institution you are planning to transfer? If so, which? • About your math pathway: • Are you planning to take MAT 172? • Are you planning to take Calculus? If so, which MAT 271 or MAT 263? • About your prerequisites: • What was your last math course? • Where was it taken? • When was it taken? • About how much time did you devote to studying for that course each week?

  38. Spring 2013 InterventionsSurvey Questions • About your math pathway: • Are you planning to take MAT 172? • Are you planning to take Calculus? If so, which MAT 271 or MAT 263?

  39. Spring 2013 InterventionsSurvey Questions • About your pre-requisites: • What was your last math course? • Where was it taken? • When was it taken? • About how much time did you devote to studying for that course each week?

  40. Spring 2013 InterventionsTime Management Table

  41. Spring 2013 InterventionsAdvising Documents

  42. Spring 2013 InterventionsAdvising Documents

  43. Spring 2013 InterventionsDay 3--- Pre-requisite Skills Test, Attempt 1 40 minute test graded with no partial credit. Passed with a score of 70% or higher Section 4110: 6 out of 29 (approximately 21%) Section 4131: 8 out of 27 (approximately 30%) Did not meet 70% Section 4110: 23 out of 29 (approximately 79%) Section 4131: 19 out of 27 (approximately 70%) Averages: Section 4110: 45 Section 4131: 47

  44. Spring 2013 InterventionsDay 3---Pre-requisite Skills Test, Attempt 1 Combined 56 total students 14 out of 56 = 25% did meet 70% While 75% did not

  45. Spring 2013 InterventionsTwo weeks prior to Attempt 2 • Sent students to ILC • Continued with new material • Continued with small group meetings

  46. Spring 2013 InterventionsAttempt 2 • Passed with a score of 70% or higher • Section 4110: 8 out of 29 (approximately 28% up from 21%) • Section 4131: 14 out of 27 (approximately 52% up from 30%) • Did not meet 70% • Section 4110: 21 out of 29 (approximately 72% down from 79%) • Section 4131: 13 out of 27 (approximately 48% down from 70%) • Averages: • Section 4110: 52 (up from 45) • Section 4131: 66 (up from 47)

  47. Spring 2013 InterventionsAttempt 2 Combined 56 total students 22 out of 56 = 39% did meet 70% While 61% did not

  48. 2013 Spring InterventionsComparisons

  49. Spring 2013 InterventionsComparisons

  50. Spring 2013 InterventionsILC Partnership • Those who did NOT score at least 70% on either attempt sent an Early Warning Notice: • Section 4110: 20 out of 30 (approximately 67%) • Section 4131: 9 out of 28 (approximately 32%) • Who did NOT spend time in the ILC during the two week period between attempts: • Section 4110: 7 out of 29 (1 person scored 100 on first attempt) or approximately 25% • Section 4131: 4 out of 27 (1 person scored 100 on first attempt) or approximately 15%

More Related