SACSCOC Fifth Year Interim Report
Spacer
Assessment : 2011 - 2012 : Educational Programs :
Mathematics BA
Mathematics BA
2 Goals 2 Objectives 2 Indicators 4 Criteria 4 Findings 2 Actions
| GOAL: Deliver A Lower-Level Curriculum With Appropriate Discipline Specific Skill Sets |
| Objective |
|
||||
| Mth142 (Calculus I): Students will demonstrate the following knowledge and skills: differentiation of standard mathematical functions, apply the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus to evaluate integrals, and use calculus techniques to solve optimization problems. |
| Indicator |
|
|||
|
All students in the program are required to complete Math1420. Students will be administered a final exam containing some common questions developed and approved by the faculty teaching Math1420. The exam will require the students to demonstrate the knowledge and skills mentioned in the objective. |
| Criterion |
|
|||
| On the final exam, 70% of the students will provide the correct derivative for a given mathematical function. |
| Finding |
|
|||
|
The following problem was included on all calculus finals: Find the derivative of f(x) = (sin(e^2x))/x^3 Of the 109 students who took the exam, 78 - 72% provided the correct derivative. |
| Criterion |
|
|||
| On the final exam, 70% of the students will correctly evaluate a definite integral using the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus |
| Finding |
|
|||
|
The following integration problem was included on all calculus finals: Find the definite integral of the function x^2 + x^(-1/3) between 1 and 4. Of the 109 students who took the exam, 67 - 61% were able to evaluate the integral correctly. |
| Criterion |
|
|||
| On the final exam, 70% of the students will use the appropriate calculus techniques to solve an optimization problem. |
| Finding |
|
|||
|
The following optimization problem was included on all calculus finals: An open box is to be made from a 3 ft. by 8 ft. piece of cardboard by cutting out squares of equal size from the four corners and then bending up the sides. Find the maximum volume of the box. On the final exam, 30 - 28% of 109 students answered the problem correctly. |
Actions for Objective:
| Action |
|
|||
|
The totals for all three assessments are similar to those done in the two previous assessments, with the exception of the optimization problem. The 28% passing rate is much lower (compared to 45% and 46% in the previous two years). One new approach was tried this year: two sections in the spring were taught as both writing-enhanced courses and as guided discovery courses. It was our hope that this non-traditional approach, which required much more student interaction, might lead to better results. The two sections were taught by instructors who are very experienced in this technique. Unfortunately, there does not appear to be any significant benefits. Of the 54 students from those two sections, the corresponding percentages are: 72% found the correct derivative, 51% found the correct integral, and 27% did the optimization correctly. The lack of improvement in the optimization problem is most disappointing. Faculty attended two on-line homework demonstrations (given by publishing representatives in the spring). We hope to have a couple sections of calculus pilot this idea next year to see if that helps with students' achievement in calculus. |
| GOAL: Deliver An Upper-Level Curriculum With Appropriate Discipline Specific Knowledge |
| Objective |
|
||||
| Students preparing to graduate will demonstrate advanced mathematics knowledge and skills. |
| Indicator |
|
|||
| Students will complete a project requiring them to use technology to create conjectures and then provide a proof of their conjecture. |
| Criterion |
|
|||
| At the end of the semester, 85% of the students submitting their project will receive a rating of 8 out of 10 or better according to the attached rubric. |
| Finding |
|
|||
| 20 projects were submitted, 19 of them received an 8 or better based on the given rubric. None, however, received a perfect grade of 10. |
Actions for Objective:
| Action |
|
|||
|
In the past, we have used two upper-level classes in our assessment. This was not possible this year. We had hoped to create a joint project with the geometry class and the history of mathematics class, but logistical problems prevented this. The results from the Geometry class are good, but there is still some concern about whether or not students are grasping the ideas behind proofs. It may be that next year we will use a different class (or classes) to see if we are meeting our objective. |
| Closing the Loop |
|
Last year, we indicated we would try to address our lack of success in calculus by having companies provide the department with demonstrations of on-line homework software. Because of scheduling problems, these demonstrations did not take place until the spring. We also had two professors try teaching calculus in a way that required more student interaction and a great deal more written explanation from students. While we did not expect too much of an impact on the skill objectives of differentiation and integration, we did hope there would be some benefit with the applied problem. Sadly, this was not the case - in either the traditional classes or the experimental ones. At this point, we are not sure how we plan to proceed, although we will be meeting with publishers to determine possible alternatives.
As for our upper division classes, assessment over the past two years shows we seem to be meeting our objective - at least for one or two upper-division classes. It is probably time to turn our attention to some of the other upper division classes. |