Retention of differential and integral calculus: a case study of a university student in physical chemistry

International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology

Volumn 45, Issue 8, 2014, Pages 1167-1187

  Jukić Matić, Ljerka ^a   Dahl, Bettina ^b  

^a JOSIP JURAJ STROSSMAYER UNIVERSITY OF OSIJEK   (Croatia)

^b AALBORG UNIVERSITY   (Denmark)

Author keywords

beliefs; calculus; knowledge; retention; three worlds of mathematics

Indexed keywords

EID: 84908485431     PISSN: 0020739X     EISSN: 14645211     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/0020739X.2014.920531     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. Maull W, Berry J. A questionnaire to elicit concept images of engineering students. Int J Math Educ Sci Technol. 2000;31(6):899–917.
2. Bingolbali E, Monaghan J, Roper T. Engineering students’ conceptions of the derivative and some implications for their mathematical education. Int J Math Educ Sci Technol. 2007;38(6):763–777.
3. Artigue M. The teaching and learning of mathematics at university level: crucial questions for contemporary research in education. Notices AMS. 1999;46(11):1377–1385.
4. Brandell G, Hemmi K, Thunberg H. The widening gap: a Swedish perspective. Math Educ Res J. 2008;20:38–56.
5. Dahl B. Transition problems in mathematics that face students moving from compulsory through to tertiary level education in Denmark: mismatch of competencies and progression. In: Tzekaki M, Kaldrimidou M, Sakonidis C, editors. Proceedings of the 33th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education. Thessaloniki: PME; 2009.
6. Brabrand C, Dahl B. Constructive alignment and the SOLO taxonomy: a comparative study of university competences in computer science vs. mathematics. In: Lister R, Simon, editors. Proceedings of the Seventh Baltic Sea Conference on Computing Education Research. Darlinghurst: Australian Computer Society; 2008.
7. Brabrand C, Dahl B. Using the SOLO-taxonomy to analyze competence progression of university science curricula. Higher Educ. 2009;8(4):531–549
8. Karsenty R. What adults remember from their high school mathematics? The case of linear functions. Educ Stud Math. 2003;51:117–144.
9. Jukić L, Dahl B. The retention of key derivative concepts by university students on calculus courses at a Croatian and Danish university. In: Pinto MMF, Kawasaki TF, editors. Proceedings of the 34th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education. Belo Horizonte: PME; 2010.
10. Jukić L, Dahl B. What affects retention of core calculus concepts among university students? A study of different teaching approaches in Croatia and Denmark. In: Pytlak M, Rowland T, Swoboda E, editors. Proceedings of the 7th Congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education. Rzeszów: CERME; 2011.
11. Jukić L, Dahl B. University students’ concept image and retention of the definite integral. In: Ubuz B, editor. Proceedings of the 35th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education. Ankara: PME; 2011.
12. Jukić L, Dahl B. University students’ retention of derivative concepts 14 months after the course: influence of ‘met-befores’ and ‘met-afters’. Int J Math Educ Sci Technol. 2012;43:749–764.
13. Hiebert J, Lefevre P. Conceptual and procedural knowledge in mathematics: an introductory analysis. In: Hiebert J, editor. Conceptual and procedural knowledge: the case of mathematics. Hillsdale (NJ): Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 1986. p. 1–27.
14. Haapasalo L, Kadijevich D. Two types of mathematical knowledge and their relation. J Math Did. 2000;21(2):139–157.
15. Tall D. The transition to formal thinking in mathematics. Math Educ Res J. 2008;20:5–24.
16. Pegg J, Tall D. The fundamental cycle of concept construction underlying various theoretical frameworks. In: Sriraman B, English L, editors. Theories of mathematics education. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer; 2005. p. 468–475.
17. Tall D, Gray EM, Bin Ali M, Crowley L, DeMarois P, McGowen M, Pitta D, Pinto M, Thomas M, Yusof Y. Symbols and the bifurcation between procedural and conceptual thinking. Can J Sci Math Tech Educ. 2001;1:80–104.
18. Custers EJFM. Long-term retention of basic science knowledge: a review study. Adv Health Sci Edu Theory Pract. 2010;15(1):109–128
19. Sousa DA. How the brain learns. Thousand Oaks (CA): Corwin Press; 2000.
20. Sikström S. Power function forgetting curves as an emergent property of biologically plausible neural network models. Int J Psychol. 1999;34(5/6):460–464.
21. Krutetskii VA. The psychology of mathematical abilities in schoolchildren. Chicago (IL): The University of Chicago Press; 1976.
22. Engelbrecht J, Harding A, Preez JD. Long-term retention of basic mathematical knowledge and skills with engineering students. Eur J Eng Educ. 2007;32(6):735–744.
23. Semb GB, Ellis JA, Araujo J. Long-term memory for knowledge learned in school. J Educ Psychol. 1993;85(2):305–316.
24. Rohrer D, Pashler H. Increasing retention without increasing study time. Curr Dir Psychol Sci. 2007;16:183–186.
25. Rohrer D, Taylor K. The effects of overlearning and distributed practice on the retention of mathematics knowledge. App Cogn Psychol. 2006;20:1209–1224.
26. Narli S. Is constructivist learning environment really effective on learning and long-term knowledge retention in mathematics? Example of the infinity concept. Educ Res Rev. 2011;6(1):36–49.
27. Selden J, Mason A, Selden A. Can average calculus students solve nonrutine problems?J Math Behav. 1998;8:45–50.
28. Selden J, Mason A, Selden A. Even good calculus students can't solve nonroutine problems? In: Kaput J, Dubinsky E, editors. Research issues in undergraduate mathematics learning. Washington, DC: Mathematical Association of America; p. 19–26.
29. Selden A, Selden J, Hauk S, Mason A. Do calculus students eventually learn to solve non-routine problems? Cookeville (TN): Department of Mathematics, Tennessee Technological University; 1999.
30. Garner B, Garner L. Retention of concepts and skills in traditional and reformed applied calculus. Math Educ Res J. 2001;13(3):165–184.
31. Arzi HJ, Ben-Zvi R, Ganiel U. Forgetting versus savings: the many facets of long-term retention. Sci Educ. 1986;70(2):171–188.
32. Goldin G, Rösken B, Törner G. Beliefs – no longer a hidden variable in mathematical teaching and learning processes. In: Maaß J, Schlöglmann W, editors. Beliefs and attitudes in mathematics education: new research results. Rotterdam: Sense Publisher; 2009. p. 9–28.
33. Leder GC, Forgasz HJ. Measuring mathematical beliefs and their impact on the learning of mathematics: a new approach. In: Leder GC, Pehkonen E, Törner G, editors. Mathematical beliefs and their impact on teaching and learning of mathematics. Dordrecht: Kluwer; 2002. p. 95–113
34. Archer J, Bourke S, Cantwell R. Mature age students in an ‘enabling’ course at university: their achievement goals, beliefs about learning, confidence, verbal ability, course satisfaction and performance. Paper presented at: Combined Meeting of the Educational Research Association (Singapore) and the Australian Association for Research in Education; 1996; Singapore.
35. Kember D, Wong A. Implications for evaluation from a study of students’ perceptions of good and poor teaching. Higher Educ. 2000;40(1):69–97.
36. Dart BC, Burnett PC, Purdie N, Boulton-Lewis G, Campbell J, Smith D. Students’ conceptions of learning, the classroom environment, and approaches to learning. J Educ Res. 2000;93:262–270.
37. Furinghetti F, Pehkonen E. Rethinking characterizations of beliefs. In: Leder GC, Pehkonen E, Törner G, editors. Beliefs: a hidden variable in mathematics education? Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers; 2002, p. 39–57
38. Johnston C. Student perceptions of learning in first year in an economics and commerce faculty. Higher Educ Res Dev. 2001;20:169–184.
39. Taylor P. Reflections on students’ conceptions of learning and perceptions of learning environments. Higher Educ Res Dev. 1996;15(2):223–237.
40. Pehkonen E. A hidden regulating factor in mathematics classrooms: mathematics-related beliefs. In: Ahtee M, Bjockqvist O, Pehkonen E, Vatanen V, editors. Research on mathematics and science education. Jyvaskyla: University of Jyvaskyla; 2001. p. 11–35.
41. Cohen L, Manion L, Morrison K. Research methods in education. Abingdon: Routledge; 2007.
42. Schofield JW. Increasing the generalizability of qualitative research. In: Eisner EW, Peshkin A, editors. Qualitative inquiry in education. New York: Teachers College; 1990. p. 201–232.
43. Goetz JP, LeCompte MD. Ethnography and qualitative design in educational research. London: Academic; 1984.
44. Kvale S. InterViews: an introduction to qualitative research interviewing. London: Sage; 1996.
45. Killen R. Effective teaching strategies: lessons from research and practice. South Melbourne: Thomson Social Science Press; 2006.
46. McQuarrie DA. Mathematics for physical chemistry: opening doors. Sausalito (CA): University Science Books; 2008.
47. Rattleff P, Schmidt K, Hussmann PM. Læser mindre, forstår mere: om ingeniørstuderendes matematikstudievaner [Read less, understand more: About engineering students’ study habits of mathematics]. MONA. 2009;4:21–41.
48. Tait H, Entwistle NJ, McCune V. ASSIST: a reconceptualisation of the approaches to studying inventory. In: Rust C, editor. Improving students as learners. Oxford: Oxford Brookes University; 1998. p. 262–271.
49. Uygur Kabael T. Cognitive development of applying the chain rule through three worlds of mathematics. Aust Senior Math J. 2010;24(2):14–28.
50. Cui L. Assessing college students’ retention and transfer from calculus to physics [PhD thesis]. Manhattan (KS): Kansas State University; 2001.
51. Schattschneider D. College precalculus can be a barrier to calculus. In: Hastings NB, editor. A fresh start for collegiate mathematics: rethinking the courses below calculus. Washington, DC: Mathematical Association of America; 2006. p. 285–294.
52. Britton S, New P, Roberts A, Sharma M. Investigating students’ ability to transfer mathematics. In: Brew A, Sachs J, editors. Transforming a university: the scholarship of teaching and learning in practice. Sydney: Sydney University Press; 2007. p. 127–140.
53. Hoban RA, Finlayson OE, Nolan BC. Transfer in chemistry: a study of students’ abilities in transferring mathematical knowledge to chemistry. Int J Math Educ Sci Technol. 2013;44(1):14–35.
54. Biggs J, Tang C. Teaching for quality learning at university. Berkshire: Open University Press; 2007.
55. Tall D. A sensible approach to the calculus. In: Pluvinage F, Cuevas A. editors. Handbook on calculus and its teaching. Forthcoming 2012.