PBA Home > Institutional Research & Analysis > Outcomes Assessment > Unit Summaries > University Mathematics and Analytic Skills Program

University Mathematics and Analytic Skills Program

Quantitative reasoning and mathematical skills (QRMS) competence can be demonstrated by passing a special exam given at the start of each semester or by passing an approved course. Only a few students take the exam; most acquire or improve QRMS skills in courses. For example, students in majors that require three or more credits in Mathematics or Applied Mathematics at or above 1300-level courses meet QRMS requirements by fulfilling the standards of their majors and are assessed within their majors. Other students take one of several special courses designed to teach QRMS skills. The University Mathematics and Analytic Skills (UMAS) assessment focuses on these courses.

The UMAS Program offers the college's main quantitative reasoning and mathematical skills course (QRMS1010) as well as mathematics courses (MATH 1000 through 1100) given in a self-paced module format and, since Spring 1995, instructor-paced sections of college algebra (MATH 1011) as an alternative to the self-paced format. In fall 1992 a new program director and faculty advisory board assumed responsibility for the Program's annual evaluation. During 1992-93, the advisory board surveyed students and departments using UMAS courses to evaluate the curriculum and recommend changes.

Mathematics Module Program: Students in this program must take and pass any three mathematics modules (e.g., college algebra, college trigonometry). The modules are mastery oriented, and students can make several attempts at different versions of each module's exams. In 1990-91 and 1991-92, students needed an average of 1.9 attempts to pass each exam, indicating that, in general, students were achieving minimum mastery levels without having to take exams an excessive number of times. In addition, students taking math module courses in 1991-92 and 1992-93 were surveyed to discover how the program could better provide services to them.

One of the advisory board's projects was to clearly formulate goals for the module courses and to plan procedures to assess the program's success at meeting them. Students from every department in the college take math module courses, each for his or her own reason. Further, students in any given module course can have widely varied backgrounds and preparations. The advisory board plans to develop ways to group students coherently so that tailored sets of assessments can be used. As a first attempt in Spring 1995, the program offered three sections of traditional nonmodular college algebra, specifically designed for students who have dropped math module courses several times in the past because they were unable to manage the self-paced module format. About half of the 66 students in these sections had previously withdrawn from or failed self-paced math modules. Only 4 dropped the instructor-paced course, and the average grade for those who had previously been unsuccessful in self-paced modules was C+.

QRMS 1010: In 1990-91 and 1991-92, pre- and post-testing assessment was used in QRMS 1010. At the start of the term, a pre-test of QRMS skills was given. The same questions were embedded in the final exam to serve as a post-test. The questions were written by teams of faculty members. Pre- and post-test scores of students who completed the course and took both exams were compared. In 1990-91, the minimum pre-test score was 3 of 25 questions answered correctly, and the average score was 16.3 correct answers. The minimum on the post-test was 11 correct answers, with a mean of 19.1, showing that the students' skills had improved. 1991-92 results were similar.

The UMAS Program suspended assessment of QRMS 1010 in 1992-93 and 1993-94 because of ongoing administrative and curricular restructuring of the course. The large lecture/lab format was dropped and replaced with one involving multiple small sections.

Specific goal statements were developed for the revised course. These are:

1. Development of basic mathematical skills including facility with arithmetic, with algebraic equations (principally linear, exponential, and logarithmic) and their graphs, and in introductory topics from probability and statistics.
2. Integration of these mathematical skills into students' reasoning about topics of interest from their own fields of study.
3. Alleviating students' antipathy, and even fear of, the discipline and its methods.

Several assessment methods were piloted in 1994-95. The plan calls for assessing the skills mentioned in the first goal by including specially-written questions in the final exams of the various sections of QRMS1010. Exams and exercises were constructed cooperatively by all the instructors to keep evaluation fairly consistent across course sections that varied in their extra-mathematical content. Across sections, 95% of the students who enrolled completed the course, 55-60% with grades of B or better.

In assignments related to the second goal, students are asked to write papers devising questions from their own fields of study calling for quantitative analysis with the mathematical skills they have learned. A sample of these papers was evaluated by all QRMS instructors. Each instructor independently rated each paper in the sample, and their ratings were quite consistent with each other. Some students were very creative in thinking quantitatively within their own areas of interest; others were much less so. There did not seem to be any relationship between the students' mathematical skill levels (goal 1) and their creative application of their skills to their own fields of study.

As a first attempt to evaluate progress toward the third goal, alleviating math anxiety, students in one fall 1994 QRMS 1010 section made pre- and post-course self-evaluations. At the start of each term in the past, QRMS 1010 students have been asked to comment on their own attitudes toward mathematics in general and this course in particular. In the selected section, a similar self-evaluation was made at the end of the term. Students' responses were categorized as negative, neutral, or positive. There were far fewer negative responses at the end of the term (2, vs 11 at the start) and far more positive ones (9 vs 1). This pilot comparison seems promising, and the post- course self-evaluation will be used in all sections in 1995-96.

L:\www\outcomes\units\umas.htm

Last revision 07/12/02