Student perceptions of pedagogy and associated persistence in calculus

ZDM - International Journal on Mathematics Education

Volumn 46, Issue 4, 2014, Pages 661-673

  Ellis, Jessica ^a   Kelton, Molly L ^b,c   Rasmussen, Chris ^c  

^a Veterinary Dentistry and Oral Surgery   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^c SAN DIEGO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Calculus instruction; Data analysis and statistics; Instructional activities and practices; Post secondary education; Student persistence

Indexed keywords

EID: 84926282841     PISSN: 18639690     EISSN: 18639704     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11858-014-0577-z     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Bagley, S. (2013). A comparison of four pedagogical strategies in calculus. Poster presented at the 35th Annual Conference of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Chicago, IL.
2. Carnevale, A. P., Smith, N., & Melton, M. (2011). STEM: Science, technology, engineering, mathematics. Georgetown University, Center on Education and the Workforce. http://www.georgetown.edu/grad/gppi/hpi/cew/pdfs/stem-complete.pdf.
3. Ferguson, R. (2012). Can student surveys measure teaching quality? Phi Delta Kappan,94(3), 24–28.
4. Hurtado, S., Eagan, M.K., & Chang, M. (2010). Degrees of success: Bachelor’s degree completion rates among initial STEM majors. http://www.heri.ucla.edu/nih/downloads/2010Hurtado,Eagan,Chang-DegreesofSuccess.pdf.
5. Hutcheson, G. D., Pampaka, M., & Williams, J. (2011). Enrolment, achievement and retention on ‘traditional’ and ‘Use of Mathematics’ AS courses. Research in Mathematics Education,13(2), 147–168.
6. Kogan, M., & Laursen, S.L. (2013). Assessing long-term effects of inquiry-based learning: a case study from college mathematics. Innovative Higher Education, 1–17.
7. Kuh, G., Cruce, T., Shoup, R., Kinzie, J., & Gonyea, R. (2008). Unmasking the effects of student engagement on first-year college grades and persistence. The Journal of Higher Education,79(5), 540–563.
8. Lodico, M. G., Spaulding, D. T., & Voegtle, K. H. (2010). Methods in educational research: From theory to practice (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
9. Lutzer, D. J., Rodi, S. B., Kirkman, E. E., & Maxwell, J. W. (2007). Statistical abstract of undergraduate programs in the mathematical sciences in the United States. CBMS: American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI.
10. Mihaly, K., McCaffrey, D.F., Staiger, D.O., & Lockwood, J.R. (2013). A Composite Estimator of Effective Teaching. http://www.nbexcellence.org/cms_files/resources/Jan2013ACompositeEstimatorofEffectiveTeachingResearchPaper.pdf.
11. Pampaka, M., Williams, J., Hutcheson, G. D., Davis, P., & Wake, G. (2012). The association between mathematics pedagogy and learners’ dispositions for university study. British Educational Research Journal,38(3), 473–496.
12. President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST). (2012). Engage to excel: Producing one million additional college graduates with Degrees in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics. Washington, DC: The White House.
13. Rasmussen, C., & Ellis, J. (2013). Who is switching out of calculus and why? In A. M. Lindmeier & A. Heinze (Eds.), Proceedings of the 37th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 4, pp. 73–80). Kiel, Germany: PME.
14. Rasmussen, C., & Marrongelle, K. (2006). Pedagogical content tools: Integrating student reasoning and mathematics into instruction. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education,37, 388–420.
15. Seymour, E. (2006). Testimony offered by Elaine Seymour, Ph.D., University of Colorado at Boulder, to the Research Subcommittee of the Committee on Science of the US House of Representatives Hearing on Undergraduate Science, Math and Engineering Education: What’s Working? Wednesday, March 15, 2006.
16. Seymour, E., & Hewitt, N. M. (1997). Talking about leaving: Why undergraduate leave the sciences. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
17. Steen, L. A. (Ed.). (1988). Calculus for a New Century: a Pump, not a Filter, Mathematical Association of America, MAA Notes Number 8. DC: Washington.
18. Szafran, R. (2012). Answering questions with statistics. Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications.
19. Tinto, V. (2004). Linking learning and leaving. In J. M. Braxton (Ed.), Reworking the student departure puzzle. Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University Press.
20. van Langen, A., & Dekkers, H. (2005). Cross-national differences in participating in tertiary science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education. Comparative Education,41(3), 329–335.
21. Wagner, J. F., Speer, N. M., & Rossa, B. (2007). Beyond mathematical content knowledge: A mathematician’s knowledge needed for teaching an inquiry oriented differential equations course. Journal of Mathematical Behavior,26, 247–266.
22. Wake, G. (2011). Introduction to the Special Issue: deepening engagement in mathematics in pre-university education. Research in Mathematics Education 13(2), 109–118.
23. Wolniak, G. C., Mayhew, M. J., & Engberg, M. E. (2012). Learning’s weak link to persistence. The Journal of Higher Education,83(6), 795–823.