GreetingsTiME committee members and friends of the TiME committee.I want to thank all who have contributed to our newsletter and who have volunteered to contribute in the future and to again express my thanks to Renae Weber for editing the newsletter and to Phil Thurber for maintaining our web page.

This newsletter continues to be published totally electronically on the TiME committee homepage.Anyone wishing to contribute an article for the newsletter or having a suggestion for something to be added to the homepage, please send them to me at 

jkissick@pcc.edu.

The TiME committee will again be joining the other AMATYC committees in a Committee Showcase near the registration area at the AMATYC conference in Phoenix on Thursday.I would appreciate any suggestions the committee members have as to what we should put on display to encourage AMATYC members to join and support the committee.Last year we displayed our goals and objectives, position papers, and samples of the TiME newsletter.

As the time for the conference grows near, I want to prepare an agenda for the committee meetings.Anyone who has a technology related topic which you would like to discuss, please e-mail me and I will add it to our discussion list for the conference.To help with your planning for the conference, our committee meetings are scheduled for Friday 11/14 from 12:30 PM–1:30 PM and on Saturday 11/15 from 12:00 PM–1:00 PM.

The TiME committee is jointly sponsoring a Themed Short Session on Thursday in conjunction with the Distance Learning Committee.The title for the session is " Distance Learning and the Technology That Makes it Possible " and runs from 8:00 AM to 10:55 AM.The complete schedule follows this article.

This is the end of my second term as the TiME Committee Chair and there will be a new Chair following the conference.David Graser who has been an active member of the committee will take over the duties of Chair.I am sure that everyone will provide him all the support and help he will need in his role of Committee Chair.

I hope that fall classes are going well for everyone and I look forward to seeing all of you in Salt Lake City, especially at our TiME committee meetings.

Jerry

******************************************************************************

Each of us has our own preferences. I prefer to teach in a computer lab utilizing computer algebra software and the Internet. Some of my colleagues prefer to use graphing calculators. For other instructors, the overhead projector suits their needs perfectly. Are any of these tools the ideal way to teach mathematics? To answer this question we need to know what works in the classroom based on sound research findings. Good educational research helps to sort out what is innovative from what is effective. Even if we decide there is one type of technology that is preferred, by the time prospective teachers actually find themselves in the classroom, something new may have replaced this technology. Technology and its associated costs change at a pace that makes it difficult to recommend any particular technological tool in the mathematics classroom. There are too many different types of teachers, students, school districts and technological tools to impose one solution.

Does this mean we should duck the issue and make no recommendation? I think not. The key is to educate teachers on how to judge for themselves what is best for their teaching style, their students and the school district. A teacher needs to understand the issues involved in using technology effectively in the classroom. They need to be active lifelong learners and post-secondary institutions should be a part of this process.

Research findings on the effective use of technology in mathematics are hard to come by. Articles and conference presentations are dominated by “innovation”. By this I mean descriptions on the use of technology in the classroom, but not how effective it is. Many publications simply describe an innovative project, but do not include statistics on the increase in student achievement or other critical factors. Certainly they help to stimulate ideas, but why should I try a similar project if the increase in student learning and understanding is minimal? Why should I adopt an expensive technology solution if it will have little impact on student success rates? Prospective teachers need to read about what works educationally and is cost effective. A well constructed research study can keep them informed of the progress in educational technology so that they can invest their time and effort wisely.

A good starting point is the review report, “Handheld Graphing Technology in Secondary Mathematics: Research Findings and Implications for Classroom Practice” [1]. This report was produced by MichiganStateUniversity with a grant provided by Texas Instruments. The authors reviewed 180 published research reports to answer questions like:

1.What is the nature of the tasks for which technology is used?

2.How do students and teachers choose to use technology?

3.What is the impact of its use on student understanding?

4.Which students benefit from using technology?

The answers to these questions get to the heart of technology issues and a teacher looking to adopt some form of technology must examine these questions. With answers to these questions, an instructor can judge the effectiveness of a particular type of technology. By teaching our prospective teachers to look for these answers, they can judge technology for themselves against a background of change, budget cuts and time constraints. Good educational research should help a teacher discover the answers.

The report cited above analyzes the effectiveness of handheld graphing technology, but its focus can be used to assess any type of technology. Below I adopt the same questions posed by the report [1], but in a broader sense. By constructing studies that address these concerns, I hope to focus instructors on producing innovations that are proven to benefit students.

Do teachers use technology both inside and outside of the classroom? Does technology change how a teacher teaches? How does a teacher’s knowledge and skills with technology, mathematics and teaching effect their utilization of technology?

As members of the TIME committee, we are aware of the impact technology can have on our teaching. We are able to examine the technology and see how we can adapt our teaching styles to take advantage of it. To a new or prospective teacher, this connection is tenuous. These teachers often use technology as an extension of how they have always taught or how their instructors perceived they should teach. In order for technology to be effective, professional development needs to be centered on how to help teachers achieve course objectives.

When faced with a mathematical task, how does a student utilize technology to attack the task?

Students have traditionally been asked to perform many mathematical tasks by hand that are tedious. Certainly technology can help to ease the burden of these calculations. But is using technology in this method leading to deeper understanding of the underlying mathematics? Or, is doing these calculations by hand leading to a deeper understanding?

Students can use technology as an extension of traditional methods just as teachers do. If a computer is simply used as an oversized graphing calculator, is the expense worthwhile? If a graphing calculator is used to generate tables and graphs, is it really improving student achievement? Effective use of technology should not only emphasize repetitive tasks, but also investigation and exploration that would not be possible without technology.

Are some skills acquired more easily and thoroughly with the use of technology? Are the skills useful?

Many concepts in mathematics can be learned more thoroughly if they are presented visual, symbolic and tabular form. Traditional teaching methods often ignore this connection. A course centered on these principles and using technology could improve student understanding. On the other hand, a course could also get bogged down in the technology itself and never accomplish its objectives.

Many forms of technology have steep learning curves for the student and teacher. For a teacher this does not pose a problem as long as they get the proper amount of training. Students do not have the benefit of the same amount of training. They must become proficient at the same time as they are learning mathematics. If the student can see the utility of the technology in their other courses or after their education, the investment may be worthwhile. Unfortunately many products require this investment, but do not prove useful beyond a single class.

What is gained mathematically when students use technology that is not possible in a non-technology environment? 

Technology should enable students to make connections between topics and concepts that are not possible otherwise. The ability to work with real data and solve applied problems makes technology attractive, but if the students are not able to use these skills in other courses or after college, what is the point?

Technology also introduces some serious problems because of its limitations. Students may accept erroneous results from technology without question. They may be misled by technology or their ability to operate it adequately. Although a computer or a graphing calculator may help students to quickly recognize information on a graph or table, it may also lead to poor understanding and misconceptions.

What types of students benefit from technology?

Technology has the potential to transform students into active learners. Activities that allow students to explore mathematical concepts have the potential to empower them. In some cases, technology might level the mathematical playing field for students from different gender, racial, socio-economic and achievement groups. Applications of technology in the classroom that appeal to certain groups need to be identified so prospective teachers know what to expect from varied student backgrounds. In some cases certain forms of technology might not make sense because the student population at a school does not correspond to the group that has the greatest achievement gains.

Are the benefits of an investment in technology enough to outweigh the costs of infrastructure, time and training?

Technology offers many benefits. Any instructor planning to use computer software, the Internet, or a graphing calculator in the classroom for the first time needs to be aware of what might be possible.Any new teacher faced with a classroom of children and a certain amount of fear of mathematics is not in a position to take on more complex teaching tasks. Technology is not going to ease their fears. If anything, it is liable to increase their work load and expose potential gaps in their abilities. An unpleasant experience initially might sour an instructor on technology or lead to the instructor being evaluated poorly. If prospective teachers are aware of the gains that are possible in a classroom, it might make facing those concerns easier.

All teachers need to see measurable gains from the investment in technology. Those gains might be in their own knowledge or in the knowledge of their students. Students from different gender, racial, socio-economic, and achievement groups may see gains not observed in a non-technology environment. Student using technology may do better in subsequent classes or the gains might be in the ability of students to solve certain types of problems that have traditionally been difficult. Perhaps these benefits can help to mitigate the costs associated with adopting some type of technology. In any scenario, the benefits from technology need to outweigh costs and risks associated with technology.

Current education policy mandates that elementary and secondary teachers be qualified in their subject area. I suspect that if community colleges were to offer professional development opportunities to mathematics teachers, they would be overwhelmed with the response. Teachers do not want their students to be saddled with the underperforming label. Any opportunity to increase student performance and their own abilities would do tremendous good.

As instructors at two and four year institutions, we need to make sure the research findings are available for prospective teachers and the teachers that are already in the classroom. Perhaps we can work with teachers at the elementary and secondary levels to produce statistics documenting student achievement. We need to provide professional development opportunities for teachers to help them overcome their fears with mathematics and the technology that is used in the classroom. Once this is done, teachers can decide for themselves what really works.

[1] Burrill, G., Allison, J., Breaux, G.,Kastberg, S.,Leatham, K. and Sanchez, W. Handheld Graphing Technology in Secondary Mathematics: Research Findings and Implications for Classroom Practice.Research Report available from Texas Instruments, Dallas Texas (CL2872).

You can get a copy of the report by emailing ti-cares@ti.com and requesting a copy of CL 2872.

***************************************************************************************************

Overall title:Distance Learning and the Technology That Makes it Possible

Presented by

Technology in Mathematics Education (TiME) & Distance Learning Committees

The AMATYC Technology in Mathematics Education (TiME) and Distance Learning Committees are sponsoring a joint themed session on the technologies and instructional techniques that allow distance learning to be performed in a meaningful manner.This joint session consists of nine 15 minute presentations.

8:00 a.m. – 8:15 a.m.

Presenter:
 

Name Wayne F. Mackey

College NameUniversity of Arkansas

Title of Presentation:Assessment in DistanceMathematics Courses et al.

Summary:What should assignment of grades in a math course indicate – how much the student did or how much the student learned?

8: 20 a.m. – 8: 35 a.m.

Presenter:

NameKaren A Estes
 

College NameSt. Petersburg College

Title of Presentation:Projects for Online Elementary Statistics Summary: The presenter will discuss the use of group projects in an online Elementary Statistics Class.

8: 40 a.m. – 8: 55 a.m.

Presenter:
 

NamePat Rhodes

College NameTreasure Valley Community College

Title of Presentation: :Blackboard a Beginning Summary:Using Blackboard to teach mathematics can be challenging.Some ideas that have helped in setting up and using this online system for teaching mathematics including assessment and getting started

9:00 a.m. – 9:15 a.m.

Presenter:
 

NameFred Feldon

College NameCoastline Community College

Title of Presentation: Encouraging Participation in an Online Course Summary:Current research on best practices and learning outcomes requires that students and faculty participate actively and interact frequently. The presentor offers his experience after 4 years of teaching mathematics courses online.

9:20 a.m. – 9:35 a.m.

Presenter:
 

NameBrian Smith

College NameMcGillUniversity

Title of Presentation:On-Line Resources in the Statistics Classroom Summary: The author’s will discuss his experience in using Web-based resources in teaching a large statistics class. Applets, government agencies, and polling agencies will be included.

9:40 a.m. – 9:55 a.m.

Presenter:
 

Name Mary DeHart

College NameSussexCountyCommunity College

Title of Presentation:Using an Online Component to Enrich Calculus Courses Summary: This presentation will feature the use of supplementary online components for Calculus I and II courses in order to encourage students to examine both the fundamental assumption and beliefs on which calculus is based and explore the history of mathematics.

10:00 a.m. – 10:15 a.m.

10:20 a.m. 10:35 a.m.

Presenter:
 

NameJudy Ann Jones

College NameMadisonAreaTechnicalCollege

Title of Presentation: :Students in the Internet Classroom Summary: Why do students enroll in a Math Internet class?Who is successful? What do they say about their experiences? 5 years of teaching math Internet classes provided consistent results.

10:40 a.m. – 10:55 a.m.

Presenter:
 

NameJane Weber

Other Presenters from University of Alaska: John Bruder, Bristol Bay Campus Debra Moses, TananaValley Campus  Judy Atkinson, Interior-Aleutians Campus  Title of Presentation:Teaching Math across Alaska:from the audioconference to the whiteboard Summary: This presentation will discuss the various technologies used to deliver math classes both by distance and on-site in Alaska.Examples:audioconference, internet-based technologies, two-way tv.

****************************************************************************************************

Required Mathematics Courses and Retention

Introduction.

Since the fall semester of 1997, Mathematical Sciences has used a “Modular” program to improve the quality of some entry level and required courses.This involves the use of computers to give student feedback, to record homework and exam answers, and to insure student involvement in the course.This process, different from traditional courses, has an interesting benefit of allowing us to determine several things about our students.The purpose of this paper is to relate some of these data (which I found startling) from the fall semester of 2002 and to pose some questions whose answers should be helpful in our teaching and retention program.

The three courses involved are College Algebra (MATH 1203), Finite Mathematics (MATH 2053) and Beginning and Intermediate Algebra (MATH 0003). More than 95 percent of our students are required to take at least one course beyond College Algebra to satisfy degree requirements.For many students, the chosen course is Finite Mathematics.Our one remedial course is Beginning and Intermediate Algebra.By a campus faculty decision, this is the only remedial course we can offer and are permitted to offer.More than 40% of our enrollment in Fall of 2002 were in these three courses,2090 of 4750.

What is “modular mode” teaching?

We describe briefly how these ”Modular” courses differ from “traditional” teaching.Also, we will note what we feel are the strengths of the modular approach.At the university level, courses often involve an instructor presenting material to a class with assignments designed to help students master ideas, techniques and procedures.Most of our traditional classes involve three or four major exams including a comprehensive final.A Quiz/Homework grade is usually included at the lower level to encourage our students to do the needed practice and homework.

In the modular approach, the student does homework exercises interactively--answers pertinent questions and solves problems which are presented by a computer and types the response.The advantages include:

1.Students are given immediate feedback (there are “guided tours” giving examples).

2.Students must become involved in doing the work.In order to take the exams, a student must complete the module questions, and the module problems at an 80% success rate, and this must be done by a specified deadline.

3.Students become participants rather than spectators.

4.ALL homework is graded and recorded.

5.Students have a time to meet, a classroom and an instructor.In addition, we operate a Tutoring Center (MRTC) which is free to students and offers help in all these courses if the student chooses to use them.

6.Students are required to complete the homework at a reasonable level as a prerequisite for taking the exams.

7.Students may work ahead.A few have completed the next course in sequence during one semester.

8.We have tweaked the system as needed to improve the method and to enhance student learning in these courses.

9.We give more exams, which is easy to do in this mode.Students take exams at their convenience (when they choose to) since exams are taken in the testing center.The only exception to this is the deadline schedule for modules.Students are given deadlines for each module to complete preparation for the testing process and are not permitted to take exams after the deadlines.We have a late deadline for each test as well.In MATH 0003 there are six exams and a final (final counts double), in MATH 1203 and MATH 2053, there are eight exams and a final (counts double).If all exams are taken, then the final exam grade will replace the two lowest scores if applicable.

10.One interesting sidebar to this procedure is that we have a large bank of data that isn’t available in traditional classes.These data are the subject of this note.

The intent has been to insure that students get involved in the learning process and take personal responsibility for their work.We know from experience that this is a key to success.

Experience in MATH 0003

2.An additional 28 took exactly one exam (of six plus final).

Hence, 71 students (18.6%) were never engaged in the course in any serious way.A list of students who took exactly 0 or exactly 1 exam has been made.

3.Among the remaining 311 students, 211 persisted to the final exam.The grade distribution is given in the table below:

MATH 0003.BEGINNING AND INTERMEDIATE ALGEBRA (FALL, 02)
 

N	A	B	C	D	F	W	SUCCESS (%)
382	17	62	66	39	102	96	37.7
339	17	62	66	39	95	67	42.8
311	17	62	66	39	*	*	46.6
211	17	62	66	39	*	*	68.2

[Note:The division of F and W is not clear for the last two lines]

The grade distributions clearly show that among the students who enroll in MATH 0003, 18.6% never become engaged in the course and have no real contact with the department or faculty.On the other hand, the students who persist to the final exam have a reasonable rate (68.2%) of success for this course.The bottom line success rate of 68.2% is above all the peer schools we know about in their similar course.Their rates probably do not exclude the “drop-outs”.

4.A check of the total record of the 43 students who took no exams in MATH 0003, reveals the following grade distribution [Includes ALL grades except CR]:

ALL grades of students who took no exams in MATH 0003, Fall 02

Note that 79% of these grades are D or below (including W and I).

We can identify these students within the first two and one-half to three weeks of the start of the semester.Some intervention at this early stage might be appropriate and fruitful.

5.Another interesting facet of these data is the number of students with MATH

ACT scores of 13-18and how many did not have ACT scores at all.Since this is student sensitive, we have not included this list here.

Experience in College Algebra (MATH 1203)

College Algebra is required as a prerequisite for higher level math courses for those whose ACT math score is less than 23.Recall that the ACT corporation advises a score of 23 as a bottom score for entry into College Algebra.We will be proposing to raise the cut score to 21 for the fall semester of 2004 based on our experience and in keeping with the recommendation of the Mathematics Department Chairs in Arkansas.

Most students are enroll in this course because it is required for their degree programs.The material of the course is fundamental to Finite Mathematics (MATH 2053), Survey of Calculus (MATH2043) and, along with trigonometry , Calculus 1 (MATH 2554).Hence, there is a motivational problem for students in this course as well, and many students seem to have attitudes biased against quantitative learning and problem solving activities.Similar issues appear to be widespread nationally on both school and college levels, and are the subject of serious concern and debate.

The numbers for MATH 1203:A total of 1009 students enrolled in College Algebra in the fall of 2002.This included two sections taught in the traditional mode (100 students; 9 A, 16B, 15C, 5D, 21F and 34W), one section limited to students certified by the Center for Students with Disabilities (CSD) (7 students), and 24 sections taught in the modular mode.We will discuss only the modular sections since the information we will discuss can only be determined for this group.Looking at the student performance in depth:

1.123 of the 902 students did not take any tests and another 60 took only one test of the 8 exams and final.This means that 183 students enrolled in the course and seemingly never engaged in the material at all.This is 13.6% of the total modular enrollment.(See appendix 3)

2.Removing these 183 from the list, of the 719 students remaining 545 were successful; a success rate of 75.8%.

3.Finally, if we look at those students who persisted through the final exam, we have 545 successes out of 628 students or 87.4% success rate.

MATH 1203. College Algebra (Modular) Fall 02

[Note:The division of F’s and W’s is not clear from our data]

4.For purposes of retention, it is obvious that getting students engaged in the course at the start would be the most useful.Also, getting students to persist to the end might give an extremely high success rate of almost 88%.

5.As we checked in Math 0003, we looked at the total record of the 123 students who took no exams and evaluated their total records, the following grade distribution (excludes CR) was found:

MATH 1203 (modular): All grades of those with no exams taken in 1203:
 

	A	B	C	D	F	W	I
	46	70	64	39	127	224	13
	8%	12%	11%	7%	22%