Angela McClure and I worked on this as part of our calc I/phy I learning community. She and I plan to re-evaluate this in the Spring and I will also try this in the other learning community. I will be reaching out to some of my calculus colleagues to see if they are interested in trying this with some of our exams that are more "skill" based an not conceptual. Angela mentioned possibly looking into doing something like this with vectors in PHY121. Is this worth the time and effort with doing this? Are students willing to take advantage of this opportunity?
Please note: From speaking with faculty in the prerequisite coureses, they are incorporating reviews of rules of exponents and fractions. But, at what detail and how, I am unsure. Hopefully with the creation of SLOs and having Guided Pathways, we can come up with some activities and best practices as a group to help students understand these two concepts better. I am not happy with the idea of just accepting that students will not be able to integrate a fractional problem that requires rules of exponents. There has to be something out there to help our students be successful with this.
In fall 2010, I wrote a workbook to replace the $250 textbook. Please note: I do not receive royalties from this workbook. The workbook (wb) was used in the calculus/physics learning community as well as traditional calculus classes by me only. Over the years, I have made modification to the wb. As I became more comfortable with the flow of the course, changing my pedagogy and curriculum because of what I have learned from Dwain and Angela in the learning community, and really starting to grasp where students struggle and why, I adjusted the workbook.
Not all faculty have the time or nor want to teach in the calculus/physics learning community. So, how do we help faculty who teach stand alone calculus courses? Also, stand alone calculus courses do not have another instructor present to help emphasize concepts. So, Becky is teaching a stand alone calculus course in Fall 18 to see if she can cut down on some competencies, incorporate labs, and she will compare her course to other instructors who teach non-learning community calculus courses. Did Becky's class perform the same, worse or better on the common final? If worse, why?
The purpose of this CATS is to document a qualitative review on my experience in the 2nd semester calculus/physics learning community (MAT231/PHY131). Second semester physics covers charges, electric and magnetic fields, circuits, current (etc), and these concepts have been quite difficult for me to grasp and tie into calculus without Dwain’s help. The attached narrative provides my previous experiences, current experience, and plan for the future .
Gen Ed Abilities assessment participation is low I developed customized scoring templates for each section to simplify data entry, automate tabulation, & streamline reporting by pre-populating term, instructor, course, section, and student ID. Outcomes:
For many years now, physics/chemistry faculty require students to journal after each class period (note: there are other faculty on campus who have been journaling for years, as well). In Fall 2017, a few non-phy/chem faculty incorporated journaling in their classrooms for the first time. In Spring 2018, during week of accountability, approximately 15 instructors met and discussed best practices in journaling.
Every semester, students perfrom poorly on the final exam for calculus I (MAT22X); the average is typically a D/F. Students are given an indepth review guide of all topics in the course along with the answer key that includes detailed steps on how to do each problem. I often make changes to my pedagogy, handouts, activities, exams, homework, and other assessments every semester. In Spring 17, two main things changed in my MAT221 course.
Several years ago, Holly Dison, math faculty, found a calculus concept pre-post test to give in our MAT22X courses. This pre-post exam was copyrighted by another college, but approval was given to use it in our classes as long as we did not share the results with anyone. The exam consisted of 22 multiple choice questions. Each question is designed to see if students understand the CONCEPT; the problems are not procedural. Each multiple choice option is designed to be common misconceptions.