Assessing Long-Term Effects of Inquiry-Based Learning: A Case Study from College Mathematics

Innovative Higher Education

Volumn 39, Issue 3, 2014, Pages 183-199

  Kogan, Marina ^a   Laursen, Sandra L ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO   (United States)

Author keywords

Academic records; Course selection; Grades; Inquiry based learning; Mathematics

Indexed keywords

EID: 84901201461     PISSN: 07425627     EISSN: 15731758     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10755-013-9269-9     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Ambrose, S. A., Bridges, M. W., DiPietro, M., Lovett, M. C., & Norman, M. K. (2010). How learning works: Seven research-based principles for smart teaching. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
2. thAnnual Conference on Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education, Vol. 3, pp. 3-33-3-38. Portland, OR. Retrieved from http://sigmaa. maa. org/rume/RUME_XIV_Proceedings_Volume_3. pdf.
3. Carrell, S. E., & West, J. E. (2010). Does professor quality matter? Evidence from random assignment of students to professors. Journal of Political Economy, 118, 409-432.
4. Cobb, P., Yackel, E., & McCain, K. (Eds.). (2000). Symbolizing and communicating in mathematics classrooms: Perspectives on discourse, tools, and instructional design. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
5. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
6. Davis, R. B., Maher, C. A., & Noddings, N. (Eds.) (1990). Constructivist views of the teaching and learning of mathematics. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, Monograph No. 4. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
7. De Paola, M. (2009). Does teacher quality affect student performance? Evidence from an Italian university. Bulletin of Economic Research, 61, 353-377.
8. Derting, T. L., & Ebert-May, D. (2010). Learner-centered inquiry in undergraduate biology: Positive relationships with long-term student achievement. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 9, 462-472.
9. Deslauriers, L., Schelew, E., & Wieman, C. (2011). Improved learning in a large-enrollment physics class. Science, 332, 862-864.
10. Dorans, N. J. (1999). Correspondence between ACT and SAT I scores. College Board Research Report 99-1. New York, NY: The College Board.
11. Dorans, N. J. (2004). Equating, concordance, and expectation. Applied Psychological Measurement, 28, 227-246.
12. Dorans, N. J., Lyu, C. F., Pommerich, M., & Houston, W. M. (1997). Concordance between ACT Assessment and recentered SAT I Sum scores. College and University, 73, 24-35.
13. Du, X., & Kolmos, A. (2009). Increasing the diversity of engineering education-a gender analysis in a PBL context. European Journal of Engineering Education, 34, 425-437.
14. Dubetz, T., Barreto, J. C., Deiros, D., Kakareka, J., Brow, D. W., & Ewald, C. (2008). Multiple pedagogical reforms implemented in a university science class to address diverse learning styles. Journal of College Science Teaching, 38(2), 39-43.
15. Ellis, J., Rasmussen, C., & Duncan, K. (2013). Switcher and persister experiences in Calculus 1. Sixteenth Annual Conference on Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education. Denver, CO. Retrieved from http://pzacad. pitzer. edu/~dbachman/RUME_XVI_Linked_Schedule/rume16_submission_93. pdf.
16. Farrell, J. J., Moog, R. S., & Spencer, J. N. (1999). A guided-inquiry general chemistry course. Journal of Chemical Education, 76, 570-574.
17. Froyd, J. E. (2008). White paper on promising practices in undergraduate STEM education. Commissioned paper, Board on Science Education, National Academies. Retrieved from http://sites. nationalacademies. org/DBASSE/BOSE/DBASSE_080106#. UUoV5hngJ8g.
18. Fullilove, R. E., & Treisman, P. U. (1990). Mathematics achievement among African American undergraduates at the University of California, Berkeley: An evaluation of the Mathematics Workshop Program. Journal of Negro Education, 59, 463-478.
19. Gafney, L., & Varma-Nelson, P. (2008). Peer-Led Team Learning: Evaluation, dissemination and institutionalization of a college-level initiative. New York, NY: Springer.
20. Good, C., Rattan, A., & Dweck, C. S. (2012). Why do women opt out? Sense of belonging and women's representation in mathematics. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102, 700-717.
21. Hake, R. R. (1998). Interactive-engagement vs. traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses. American Journal of Physics, 66, 64-74.
22. Hassi, M.-L., & Laursen, S. L. (2013). Transformative learning: Personal empowerment in learning mathematics. Manuscript in review.
23. Hoffman, J. L., & Lowitzki, K. E. (2005). Predicting college success with high school grades and test scores: Limitations for minority students. The Review of Higher Education, 28, 455-474.
24. Kuh, G. (2008). High-impact educational practices: What they are, who has access to them, and why they matter. Washington, DC: American Association of Colleges and Universities.
25. Kwon, O. N., Rasmussen, C., & Allen, K. (2005). Students' retention of mathematical knowledge and skills in differential equations. School Science and Mathematics, 105, 1-13.
26. Laursen, S., Hassi, M.-L., Kogan, M., Hunter, A.-B., & Weston, T. (2011). Evaluation of the IBL Mathematics Project: Student and Instructor Outcomes of Inquiry-Based Learning in College Mathematics. (Report to the Educational Advancement Foundation and the IBL Mathematics Centers) Boulder, CO: University of Colorado, Ethnography & Evaluation Research. Available at http://www. colorado. edu/eer/research/steminquiry. html.
27. Laursen, S. L., Hassi, M.-L., & Hough, S. (2013a). Inquiry-based learning in mathematics content courses for pre-service teachers. Manuscript submitted for publication.
28. Laursen, S. L., Hassi, M.-L., Kogan, M., & Weston, T. J. (2013b). From innovation to implementation: Multi-institution pedagogical reform in undergraduate mathematics. Manuscript submitted for publication.
29. Morris, S. B. (2008). Estimating effect sizes from pretest-posttest-control group designs. Organizational Research Methods, 11, 364-386.
30. Mostrom, A. M., & Blumberg, P. (2012). Does learning-centered teaching promote grade improvement? Innovative Higher Education, 37, 397-405.
31. Noble, J. P. (1991). Predicting college grades from ACT assessment scores and high school course work and grade information. ACT Research Report Series 91-3. American College Testing Program. Retrieved from http://www. act. org/research/researchers/reports/pdf/ACT_RR91-03. pdf.
32. Pattison, E., Grodsky, E., & Muller, C. (2013). Is the sky falling? Grade inflation and the signaling power of grades. Educational Researcher, 42, 259-265.
33. Prince, M., & Felder, R. (2007). The many facets of inductive teaching and learning. Journal of College Science Teaching, 36(5), 14-20.
34. Rasmussen, C., & Kwon, O. (2007). An inquiry oriented approach to undergraduate mathematics. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 26, 189-194.
35. Ruiz-Primo, M. A., Briggs, D., Iverson, H., Talbot, R., & Shepard, L. A. (2011). Impact of undergraduate science course innovations on learning. Science, 331, 1269-1270.
36. Seymour, E., & Hewitt, N. M. (1997). Talking about leaving: Why undergraduates leave the sciences. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
37. Springer, L., Stanne, M. E., & Donovan, S. (1999). Measuring the success of small-group learning in college-level SMET teaching: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 69, 21-51.
38. Stigler, J. W., Givvin, K. B., & Thompson, B. J. (2010). What community college developmental mathematics students understand about mathematics. MathAMATYC Educator, 1(3), 4-16.
39. Tai, R. H., Sadler, P. M., & Mintzes, J. J. (2006). Factors influencing college science success. Journal of College Science Teaching, 36(1), 52-56.
40. Tien, L. T., Roth, V., & Kampmeier, J. A. (2002). Implementation of a peer-led team learning instructional approach in an undergraduate organic chemistry course. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 606-632.
41. van Dinther, M., Dochy, F., & Segers, M. (2011). Factors affecting students' self-efficacy in higher education. Educational Research Review, 6, 95-108.
42. Watkins, J., & Mazur, E. (2013). Retaining students in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) majors. Journal of College Science Teaching, 42(5), 36-41.
43. Weinberg, B. A., Hashimoto, M., & Fleisher, B. M. (2009). Evaluating teaching in higher education. The Journal of Economic Education, 40, 227-261.
44. Yoshinobu, S., & Jones, M. G. (2012). The coverage issue. PRIMUS, 22, 303-316.