An evaluation of the Supplemental Instruction programme in a first year calculus course

International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology

Volumn 39, Issue 7, 2008, Pages 843-855

  Fayowski, V ^a   MacMillan, P D ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NORTHERN BRITISH COLUMBIA   (Canada)

Author keywords

Assessment; Calculus; Collaborative learning; Supplemental instruction

Indexed keywords

EID: 52149100121     PISSN: 0020739X     EISSN: 14645211     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/00207390802054433     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. D.C Martin and D.R. Arendale, Supplemental Instruction: Improving First-Year Student Success in High-Risk Courses, National Resource Center for the Freshman Year Experience, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC, 1992.
2. Center for Supplemental Instruction, Review of Research Concerning the Effectiveness of SI. The University of Missouri-Kansas City and Other Institutions from Across the United States, 2000. Retrieved 19 December 2003. Available from http://www.umkc.edu/cad/si/.
3. D. Arendale, Understanding the Supplemental Instruction model, in Supplemental Instruction: Increasing Achievement and Retention, D.C. Martin and D. Arendale, eds., Jossey Bass, Inc., San Francisco, CA, 1994, pp. 11-22.
4. G. Widmar, Supplemental Instruction: from small beginnings to a national program, in Supplemental Instruction: Increasing Achievement and Retention, D.C. Martin and D. Arendale, eds., Jossey Bass, Inc., San Francisco, CA, 1994, pp. 3-10.
5. J.N. Visor, J.J. Johnson, and L.N. Cole, The relationship of Supplemental Instruction to affect, J. Dev. Educ. 16 (1992), pp. 12-14, 16-18.
6. G.R. LeFrancois, Psychology for Teaching, 9th ed., Wadsworth Publishing Company, Belmont, CA, 1997.
7. A. Chapman, Intertextuality in school mathematics: the case of functions, Linguistics Educ. 7 (1995), pp. 243-262.
8. J.P. Gee, Social Linguistics and Literacies: Ideology and Discourses, 2nd ed., Taylor & Francis, London, 1996.
9. P.A. Kenney and J.M. Kallison Jr, Research studies on the effectiveness of Supplemental Instruction in mathematics, in Supplemental Instruction: Increasing Achievement and Retention, D.C. Martin and D. Arendale, eds., Jossey Bass, Inc., San Francisco, CA, 1994, pp. 75-82.
10. M.C. Linn and C. Kessel, Success in mathematics: increasing talent and gender diversity among college majors, in Research in Collegiate Mathematics Education. II, J. Kaput, A.H. Schoenfeld, and E. Dubinsky, eds., American Mathematical Society, Rhode Island, 1996, pp. 101-143.
11. D.F. Steele, Using sociocultural theory to teach mathematics: a Vygotskian perspective. School Sci. Math. 101 (2001), pp. 404-417.
12. G. Wells, The development of a community of inquirers, in Action, Talk, & Text: Learning and teaching through inquiry, G. Wells, ed., Teachers College Press, New York, 2001, pp. 1-24.
13. L.S. Vygotsky, The development of higher psychological processes, in Mind in Society, M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, and E. Souberman, eds., Harvard University Press, Cambridge MA, 1978.
14. R. Gallimore and R. Tharp, Teaching Mind in Society: Teaching, Schooling, and Literate Discourse, Cambridge University Press, New York, 1988.
15. S.S. Kleinman, Local discourse matters: a case study of communication in an undergraduate calculus class, J. Women Minorities Sci. Eng. Lam Collect. 2 (1995), pp. 91-111.
16. G. Wells, The case for dialogic inquiry, in Action, Talk, & Text: Learning and Teaching Through Inquiry, G. Wells, ed., Teachers College Press, New York, 2001, pp. 171-194.
17. S.M. Bunch, The context of community: the initiation of graduate students in to the discourse of mathematics education researchers. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA, 1995.
18. H. Daniels, Pedagogic practices, tacit knowledge and discursive discrimination: Bernstein and post-Vygotskyian research, Brit. J. Sociol. Educ. 16 (1995), pp. 517-532.
19. A. Sfard, On reform movement and the limits of mathematical discourse, Math. Think. Learn. 2 (2000), pp. 157-189.
20. V. Zack and B. Graves, Making mathematical meaning through dialogue: "once you think of it, the Z minus three seems pretty weird", Educ. Stud. Math. 46 (2001), pp. 229-271.
21. S. Pinker, The Language Instinct: How the Mind Creates Language, William Morrow, New York, 1994.
22. J.A. Baxter and S.R. Williams, Dilemmas of discourse-oriented teaching in one middle school mathematics classroom, Element. School J. 97 (1996), pp. 19-38.
23. E. Forman and E. Ansell, The multiple voices of a mathematics classroom community, Educ. Stud. Math. 46 (2001), pp. 115-142.
24. R.A. Blanc, L.E. DeBuhr, and D.C. Martin, Breaking the attrition cycle: the effects of Supplemental Instruction on undergraduate performance and attrition, J. High. Educ. 54 (1983), pp. 80-89.
25. S.L. Burmeister, P.A. Kenney, and D.L. Nice, Analysis of the effectiveness of Supplemental Instruction (SI) sessions for college algebra, calculus, and statistics, in Research in Collegiate Mathematics Education. II, J. Kaput, A.H. Schoenfeld, and E. Dubinsky, eds., American Mathematical Society, Rhode Island, 1996, pp. 145-154.
26. D.H. Congos and N. Schoeps, Inside Supplemental Instruction sessions: one model of what happens that improves grades and retention, Res. Teach. Dev. Educ. 15 (1998), pp. 47-61.
27. P.A. Kenney, Supplemental Instruction in mathematics: needs and approaches, critical aspects of mathematics training and the role of SI, Unpublished manuscript (1989). Available from http://www.umkc.edu/centers/cad/ si/sidocs/pkmathematics93.htm
28. S.F. Chipman, Research on the women and mathematics issue: a personal case history, in Gender Differences in Mathematics, A.M. Gallagher and J.C. Kaufman, eds., Cambridge University Press, New York, 2005, pp. 1-24.
29. A.M. Gallagher and J.C. Kaufman, Gender Differences in Mathematics - An Integrative Psychological Approach, Cambridge University Press, New York, 2005.
30. B.S. Randhawa, Self-efficacy in mathematics, attitudes, and achievement of boys and girls from restricted samples in two countries, Perceptual Motor Skills 79 (1994), pp. 1011-1018.