Small-Scale Learning in a Large-Scale Class: A Blended Model for Team Teaching in Mathematics

REFERENCES

• Bligh, D. A. 1971. What’s the use of lectures? Middlesex, UK: Penguin Education.
   Google Scholar
• Code, W., S. Merchant, W. Maciejewski, M. Thomas, and J. Lo. 2016. The Mathematics Attitudes and Perceptions Survey: An instrument to assess expert-like views and dispositions among undergraduate mathematics students. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology. 47(6): 917–937.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Code, W., C. Piccolo, D. Kohler, and M. MacLean. 2014. Teaching methods comparison in a large calculus class. ZDM. 46(4): 589–601.
   Google Scholar
• Cooley, J. 2002. Writing in calculus and reflective abstraction. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior. 21(3): 255–282.
   Google Scholar
• Davidson, N. 1990. Cooperative Learning in Mathematics: A Handbook for Teachers. Menlo Park, CA: Addison-Wesley.
   Google Scholar
• DePree, J. 1998. Small-group instruction: Impact on basic algebra students. Journal of Developmental Education. 22(1): 2–6.
   Google Scholar
• French, S. and G. Kennedy. 2017. Reassessing the value of university lectures.Teaching in Higher Education. 22(6): 639–654.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goodykoontz, E. 2008. Factors that affect college students’ attitude towards mathematics. EdD Dissertation. West Virginia University, Morgantown WV.
   Google Scholar
• Hake, R. 1998. Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses. American Journal of Physics. 66(64): 64–74.
   Google Scholar
• Harris, G., J. Froman, and J. Surles. 2009. The professional development of graduate mathematics teaching assistants. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology. 40(1): 157–172.
   Google Scholar
• Hayward, C. N., M. Kogan, and S. L. Laursen. 2016. Facilitating instructor adoption of inquiry-based learning in college mathematics. International Journal of Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education. 2(1): 59–82.
   Google Scholar
• Hill, H. C., D. L. Ball, and S. G. Schilling. 2008. Unpacking pedagogical content knowledge: Conceptualizing and measuring teachers’ topic-specific knowledge of students. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education. 39(4): 372–400.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson, D. W., R. T. Johnson, and K. A. Smith. 1991. Active Learning: Cooperation in the College Classroom. Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company.
   Google Scholar
• Jungić, V., H. Kaur, J. Mulholland, and C. Xin. 2015. On flipping the classroom in large first year calculus courses.International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology. 46(4): 508–520.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kadry, S. and A. El Hami. 2014. Flipped classroom model in calculus II. Education. 4(4): 103–107.
   Google Scholar
• Leung, F.-S., A. Prat, and V. Radzimski. 2019. Performance and attitudes of first year calculus students in a blended model. In review.
   Google Scholar
• Mathematics Association of America. 2017. Handbook for mathematics teaching assistants. https://www.maa.org/programs/students/student-resources/a-handbook-for-mathematics-teaching-assistants. Accessed 29 September 2017.
   Google Scholar
• Mazur, E. 1997. Peer Instruction: A User’s Manual. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Musgrave, S. and M. P. Carlson. 2017. Understanding and advancing graduate teaching assistants’ mathematical knowledge for teaching.The Journal of Mathematical Behavior. 45: 137–149.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rios, J. N. 2017. The effects of different teaching methods on student attitude and achievement in calculus recitations. http://digitalrepository.unm.edu/math_etds/103. Accessed 7 September 2017.
   Google Scholar
• Schoenfeld, A. 1995. A brief biography of calculus reform. UME Trends: News and Reports on Undergraduate Mathematics Education. 6(6): 3–5.
   Google Scholar
• Scott, C. E., L. E. Green, and D. L. Etheridge. 2016. A comparison between flipped and lecture-based instruction in the calculus classroom. Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education. 8(2): 252–264.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shulman, L. 1986. Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher. 15: 4–14.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, D. A. and L. C. Moore. 1991. Project CALC: An integrated laboratory course. In Leinbach, L. C., Hundhausen, J. R., Ostebee, A. M., Senechal, L. J., and Small, D.B. (Eds), The Laboratory Approach to Teaching Calculus, pp. 81–92. Washington, DC: Mathematical Association of America.
   Google Scholar
• Speer, N. 2008. Collections of beliefs and their relationship to mathematics teachers’ instructional practices. Cognition and Instruction. 26: 218–267.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Speer, N. M., J. P. Smith, and A. Horvath. 2010. Collegiate mathematics teaching: An unexamined practice. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior. 29(2): 99–114.
   Google Scholar
• Steen, L. A. 1988. Calculus for a new Century: A Pump, not a Filter, Washington, DC: Mathematical Association of America.
   Google Scholar
• Townsend, M., D. Moore, B. Tuck, and K. Wilton. 1998. Self-concept and anxiety in university students studying social science statistics within a cooperative learning structure. Educational Psychology. 18(1): 1–14.
   Google Scholar
• Turner, J. C., C. Midgley, D. K. Meyer, M. Gheen, E. M. Anderman, Y. Kang, and H. Patrick. 2002. The classroom environment and students’ reports of avoidance strategies in mathematics: A multimethod study. Journal of Educational Psychology. 94(1): 88–106.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yoshinobu, S. and M. G. Jones. 2012. The coverage issue. PRIMUS. 22(4): 303–316.
   Google Scholar
• Yusof, Y. M. and D. Tall. 1999. Changing attitudes to university mathematics through problem solving. Educational Studies in Mathematics. 37: 67–82.
   Google Scholar