Thursday, 1 February 2018

The Conversation/David Bressoud: Why colleges must change how they teach calculus

The Conversation
Edition:

Available editions
Africa

    Job Board

    Become an author
    Sign up as a reader
    Sign in

The Conversation
Academic rigour, journalistic flair

    Arts + Culture
    Business + Economy
    Education
    Environment + Energy
    Health + Medicine
    Politics + Society
    Science + Technology
    In French

Why colleges must change how they teach calculus
January 31, 2018 1.42pm SAST
Author

    David Bressoud

    DeWitt Wallace Professor of Mathematics and Director of the Conference Board of the Mathematical Sciences, Macalester College

Disclosure statement

David Bressoud receives funding from the National Science Foundation to study calculus instruction in the United States and serves as an advisor to the APLU SEMINAL Project. He is Director of the Conference Board of the Mathematical Sciences that works to coordinate the activities of the professional societies in mathematics including the Mathematical Association of America and the American Mathematical Association of Two-Year Colleges.
Partners

The Conversation is funded by Barclays Africa and seven universities, including the Cape Peninsula University of Technology, Rhodes University and the Universities of Cape Town, Johannesburg, Kwa-Zulu Natal, Pretoria, and South Africa. It is hosted by the Universities of the Witwatersrand and Western Cape, the African Population and Health Research Centre and the Nigerian Academy of Science. The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is a Strategic Partner. more
Republish this article

Republish
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under Creative Commons licence.
Many college students who take calculus fail to earn a C or better. Could ‘active learning’ help turn things around? pixabay

    Email
    Twitter32
    Facebook158
    LinkedIn5
    Print

Math departments fail too many calculus students and do not adequately prepare those they pass.

That is the message heard from engineering colleges across the country. Calculus has often been viewed as a tool for screening who should be allowed into engineering programs. But it appears to be failing in that regard, too. That is, it is preventing students who should be proceeding from going on, and it is letting students through who do not have the mathematical preparation that they need.

Each fall, according to forthcoming data expected to be published here this spring, more than 300,000 students enroll in first-semester calculus in colleges and universities throughout the U.S. Most of those students are aiming for a degree in engineering, physics, chemistry, computer science or the biological sciences. About a quarter of them will fail to earn the C or higher needed to continue. Many more are so discouraged by their experience that they abandon their career plans.

While some blame may rest with inadequate preparation, most colleges and universities try to place students so that only those who are prepared are allowed into calculus. In fact, most of these students have already passed calculus while in high school. Comparing data from student intended majors when they enter college to the number of bachelor’s degrees awarded each year, we lose 45 percent of the students who want to be engineers. For instance, 184,000 entered in 2011 with the intention of majoring in engineering, but only 98,000 graduated with this major in 2015. Similarly, we lose almost 35 percent of those heading into the biological sciences (167,000 entered in 2011, but only 110,000 graduated in 2015), and 30 percent of those pursuing physics or chemistry (43,000 entered in 2011, but just 30,000 graduated in 2015).

At the same time that a new National Science Board report indicates that China is overtaking the United States in research and development, we are bleeding large numbers of potential researchers. Calculus is one of the chief barriers to their progress. We don’t have measures of the fraction, but both the “Engage to Excel” report from the President’s Council of Advisors for Science and Technology and the work of Elaine Seymour and Nancy Hewitt criticize the nature of mathematics instruction as a primary reason for leaving STEM fields.
An ‘active learning’ approach

We now know that much of the problem rests with an outdated mode of instruction, a lecture format in which students are reduced to scribes. This may have worked in an earlier age when calculus was for a small elite group that excelled in mathematics. Today, professions that require calculus make up 5 percent of the workforce, a proportion that is growing at a rate that is 50 percent higher than overall job growth. We can no longer afford to ignore what we know about how to improve the student experience, both inside and outside the classroom.

There are a variety of approaches that are known to promote active engagement with mathematics, helping students to understand and be able to use their mathematical knowledge outside of their math class. They generally go under the name “active learning.” One such technique is to challenge students with a question that uses the knowledge they have, but in an unfamiliar way. One classic example is the following, which can be used to spur discussion. The question is not novel, but using questions like this to force students to use their knowledge within a classroom setting is one example of active learning.

Imagine that there is a rope around the equator of the Earth. Add a 20-meter segment of rope to it. The new rope is held in a circular shape centered about the Earth. Then the following can walk beneath the rope without touching it:

a) an amoeba

b) an ant

c) I (the student)

d) all of the above

(The answer is (d), according to this paper from the GoodQuestions Project at Cornell University.)

Another example is to require students to read the relevant section of their textbook or watch a video before class, answer questions about the material to ensure they have done the assignment, and then describe their own questions and uncertainties. These can be great launch points for classroom interaction.
Efforts to change

Active learning does not mean ban all lectures. A lecture is still the most effective means for conveying a great deal of information in a short amount of time. But the most useful lectures come in short bursts when students are primed with a need and desire to know the information. A lecture is a poor substitute for giving students the time they need to discover the answers themselves.

The presidents of the professional societies in the mathematical sciences have endorsed these methods of teaching. Yet despite clear evidence that they greatly improve student learning, science and mathematics faculty have been slow to adopt them. Part of this is reluctance on the part of faculty to diverge from what worked for them. But a greater obstacle is that faculty need both departmental encouragement and a supportive network if they are to make the transition to more effective teaching.

Several organizations are working to build these networks. One of the most recent examples is a $3 million five-year project funded by the National Science Foundation. It is called SEMINAL, an acronym for Student Engagement in Mathematics Through an Institutional Network for Active Learning. Through this initiative, 12 public universities, led by San Diego State University, the University of Colorado-Boulder and the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, will work together to show how active learning can be implemented and supported in mathematics classes from precalculus through higher forms of calculus.

The days when we could afford to teach mathematics as an elite subject, that has often disadvantaged women and students from underrepresented minority groups, are long gone. According to the federal Digest of Education Statistics, women earn 57 percent of all bachelor’s degrees but only 20 percent of engineering degrees, 38 percent of degrees in the physical sciences, and 43 percent in the mathematical science. African-Americans earn over 10 percent of all bachelor’s degrees, but only 4 percent of engineering degrees and 5 percent of degrees in the physical or mathematical sciences.

While active learning approaches help all students, they have been shown to be most effective for the students who are at the greatest risk of failing to earn a satisfactory grade or dropping out of the sequence of courses needed for their intended career. The demographics of those entering the workforce are changing, and we can no longer afford to ignore traditionally underrepresented groups of students. White students, which were 73 percent of all high school graduates in 1995, will account for less than 50 percent by 2025. Black students will comprise 14 percent and Hispanic students 27 percent of these graduates. If the United States is to maintain its preeminence in science and technology, it will require a skilled workforce whose racial and ethnic makeup reflects the diversity of this country. This workforce needs sophisticated mathematical skills, increasingly including a working knowledge of calculus.

    Learning
    Teaching
    STEM education
    College
    Calculus

    Tweet
    Share
    Get newsletter

You might also like
Some fear that e-learning will erode African knowledge. This isn’t true
Masculine culture responsible for keeping women out of computer science, engineering
The rush to calculus is bad for students and their futures in STEM
Beliefs about innate talent may dissuade students from STEM
Sign in to comment
6 Comments
Oldest Newest

    ReplaceTheGOP

    logged in via Twitter

    How about we do some simple math… Universities are a BUSINESS. Businesses need MONEY. Opening the flood gates equals more volume. So, if the were to cancel the 45% washouts in their first year, that’s A LOT OF MONEY! #HackCollege
    15 hours ago
    Report
    Carl Landsness
    Carl Landsness is a Friend of The Conversation

    logged in via Google

    A sensitive issue for me… having excelled in calculus (years ago)… but disappointed in it applications in engineering (because of computers and competition)… plus seeing so much engineering used to dominate and destroy life (vs. serve and nurture in fulfilling and empowering ways).
    14 hours ago
    Report

Show all comments
Most popular on The Conversation

    Remembering Hugh Masekela: the horn player with a shrewd ear for music of the day
    West Africa: empirehood and colonialism offer lessons in integration
    Free higher education in South Africa: cutting through the lies and statistics
    Did Steinhoff’s board structure contribute to the scandal?
    Is the net about to close on Zuma and his Gupta patronage network?

    Zimbabwe’s LGBT community: why civil rights and health issues go hand in hand
    Cape Town’s water crisis: driven by politics more than drought
    Is South Africa seeing a return to the rule of law? More evidence is needed
    Why Cape Town’s drought was so hard to forecast
    Cape Town water crisis: 7 myths that must be bust

Expert Database

    Find experts with knowledge in:*

Want to write?

Write an article and join a growing community of more than 61,900 academics and researchers from 2,270 institutions.

Register now
The Conversation
Community

    Community standards
    Republishing guidelines
    Research and Expert Database
    Analytics
    Job Board
    Our feeds

Company

    Who we are
    Our charter
    Our team
    Partners and funders
    Contributing institutions
    Resource for media
    Contact us

Stay informed
Subscribe to our Newsletters
Follow us on social media

Privacy policy Terms and conditions Corrections

Copyright © 2010–2018, The Conversation Africa, Inc.

No comments: