Connecting the Stakeholders: Departments, Policy, and Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education

REFERENCES

• Andrews, T. M., M.J. Leonard, C. A. Colgrove, and S.T. Kalinowski. 2011. Active learning not associated with student learning in a random sample of college biology courses. CBE – Life Sciences Education. 10: 394–405. doi: 10.1187/cbe.11-07-0061
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Apkarian, N., J. Bowers, M. E. O’Sullivan, and C. Rasmussen. 2018. A case study of change in the teaching and learning of precalculus to calculus 2: What we are doing with what we have. PRIMUS. 28(6): 528–549. doi: 10.1080/10511970.2017.1388319
   Google Scholar
• Apkarian, N. and D. Kirin. 2017. Progress Through Calculus: Census Survey Technical Report. Washington, DC: Mathematical Association of America. http://bit.ly/PtCCensusReport. Accessed 29 March 2019.
   Google Scholar
• Battey, D., R. A. Neal, L. Leyva, and K. Adams-Wiggins. 2016. The interconnectedness of relational and content dimensions of quality instruction: Supportive teacher-student relationships in urban elementary mathematics classrooms. Journal of Mathematical Behavior. 42: 1–19. doi: 10.1016/j.jmathb.2016.01.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Braun, B., P. Bremser, A. M. Duval, E. Lockwood, and D. White. 2015. Active learning in mathematics, parts I-VI. http://blogs.ams.org/matheducation/tag/activelearning-series-2015. Accessed 29 March 2019.
   Google Scholar
• Braun, B., P. Bremser, A. M. Duval, E. Lockwood, and D. White. 2017. What does active learning mean for mathematicians? Notices of the American Mathematical Society. 64(2): 124–129. https://doi.org/10.1090/noti1472.
   Google Scholar
• Braun, V. and V. Clarke. 2006. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology. 3(2): 77–101. doi: 10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
   Google Scholar
• Bressoud, D., V. Mesa, and C. Rasmussen. (Eds). 2015. Insights and Recommendations from the MAA National Study of College Calculus. Washington, DC: MAA Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bryk, A. S., L. M. Gomez, and A. Grunow. 2011. Getting ideas into action: Building networked improvement communities in education. In M. T. Hallinan (Ed.), Frontiers in Sociology of Education, pp. 127–162. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Burkhardt, H. 2009. On strategic design . http://www.educationaldesigner.org/ed/volume1/issue3/article9/pdf/ed_1_3_burkhardt_09.pdf. Accessed 29 March 2019.
   Google Scholar
• Carlson, M. P., B. Madison, and R. D. West. 2015. A study of students’ readiness to learn calculus. International Journal for Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education. 1: 209–233. doi: 10.1007/s40753-015-0013-y
   Google Scholar
• Carlson, M. P., M. Oehrtman, and N. Engelke. 2010. The precalculus concept assessment (PCA) instrument: A tool for assessing reasoning patterns, understandings, and knowledge of precalculus level students. Cognition and Instruction. 28(2): 113–145. doi: 10.1080/07370001003676587
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Conference Board of the Mathematical Sciences. 2016. Active learning in post-secondary mathematics education. http://www.cbmsweb.org/Statements/Active_Learning_Statement.pdf. Accessed 29 March 2019.
   Google Scholar
• Corbo, J. C., D. L. Reinholz, M. H. Dancy, S. Deetz, and N. Finkelstein. 2016. Framework for transforming departmental culture to support educational innovation. Physical Review Physics Education Research. 12(1). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.12.010113. Accessed 29 March 2019.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ernst, D. C., A. Hodge, and S. Yoshinobu. 2017. What is inquiry-based learning? Notices of the American Mathematical Society. 64(6): 570–574. doi: 10.1090/noti1536
   Google Scholar
• Freeman, S., S. L. Eddy, M. McDonough, M. K. Smith, N. Okoroafor, H. Jordt, and M. P. Wenderoth. 2014. Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 111(23): 8410–8415. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1319030111.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hassi, M.-L. and S. L. Laursen. 2015. Transformative learning: Personal empowerment in learning mathematics. Journal of Transformative Education. 13(4): 316–340. https://doi.org/10.1177/1541344615587111.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Henderson, C., A. Beach, and N. Finkelstein. 2011. Facilitating change in undergraduate STEM instructional practices: An analytic review of the literature. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 48(8): 952–984. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20439.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Henderson, C. and M. Dancy. 2007. Barriers to the use of research-based instructional strategies: The influence of both individual and situational characteristics. Physical Review Special Topics – Physics Education Research. 3(2): 1–14.
   Google Scholar
• Hsu, E. and D. Bressoud. 2015. Placement and student performance in calculus I. In D. Bressoud, V. Mesa, & C. Rasmussen (Eds.), Insights and Recommendations from the MAA National Study of College Calculus, pp. 59–68. Washington, DC: MAA Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hsu, E., T. J. Murphy, and U. Treisman. 2008. Supporting high achievement in introductory mathematics courses: What we have learned from 30 years of the Emerging Scholars program. In M. P. Carlson & C. Rasmussen (Eds.), Making the Connection: Research and Teaching in Undergraduate Mathematics, pp. 205–220. Washington, DC: Mathematical Association of America.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson, E., C. Andrews-Larson, K. Keene, K. Melhuish, R. Keller, and N. Fortune. in press. Inquiry and gender inequity in undergraduate mathematics classroom. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education .
   Google Scholar
• Kogan, M. and S. L. Laursen. 2014. Assessing long-term effects of inquiry-based learning: A case study from college mathematics. Innovative Higher Education. 39(3): 183–199. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-013-9269-9.
   Google Scholar
• Kotter, J. P. 1996. Leading Change. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Review Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kuster, G., E. Johnson, K. Keene, and C. Andrews-Larson. 2018. Inquiry-oriented instruction: A conceptualization of the instructional principles. PRIMUS. 28(1): 13–30. https://doi.org/10.1080/10511970.2017.1338807
   Google Scholar
• Larsen, S., E. Glover, and K. Melhuish. 2015. Beyond good teaching: The benefits and challenges of implementing ambitious teaching. In D. Bressoud, V. Mesa, & C. Rasmussen (Eds.), Insights and Recommendations from the MAA National Study of College Calculus, pp. 93–105. Washington, DC: MAA Press.
   Google Scholar
• Laursen, S. L., M.-L. Hassi, M. Kogan, and T. J. Weston. 2014. Benefits for women and men of inquiry-based learning in college mathematics: A multi-institution study. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education. 45(4): 406–418. doi: 10.5951/jresematheduc.45.4.0406
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Laursen, S. L. and C. Rasmussen. 2019. I on the prize: Inquiry approaches in undergraduate mathematics. International Journal of Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education. 5(1): 129–146. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40753-019-00085-6.
   Google Scholar
• Ludwig, L., M. Abell, H. Soto-Johnson, L. Braddy, and D. Ensley. 2018. Guide to Evidence-based Instructional Practices in Undergraduate Mathematics. Washington, DC: Mathematical Association of America.
   Google Scholar
• Martin, W. G. and H. Gobstein. 2015. Generating a networked improvement community to improve secondary mathematics teacher preparation. Journal of Teacher Education. 66(5): 482–493. doi: 10.1177/0022487115602312
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Research Council. 2013. The Mathematical Sciences in 2025. Washington, DC.: National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/15269.
   Google Scholar
• Pascarella, E. T., C. T. Pierson, G. C. Wolniak, and P. T. Terenzini. 2004. First-generation college students: Additional evidence on college experiences and outcomes. Journal of Higher Education. 75(3): 249–284.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• PCAST. 2012. Engage to Excel: Producing One Million Additional College Graduates with Degrees in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics. Washington, DC: Office of Science and Technology Policy.
   Google Scholar
• Rasmussen, C., N. Apkarian, J. Ellis Hagman, E. Johnson, S. Larsen, D. Bressoud, and Progress through Calculus Team. 2019. Characteristics of precalculus through calculus 2 programs: Insights from a national census survey. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education. 50(1): 98–112. doi: 10.5951/jresematheduc.50.1.0098
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rasmussen, C. and J. Ellis. 2015. Calculus coordination at PhD-granting universities: More than just using the same syllabus, textbook, and final exam. In D. Bressoud, V., Mesa, & C. Rasmussen (Eds.), Insights and Recommendations from the MAA National Study of College Calculus, pp. 107–116. Washington, DC: MAA Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rasmussen, C., J. Ellis, D. Zazkis, and D. Bressoud. 2014. Features of successful calculus programs at five doctoral degree granting institutions. In S. Oesterle, P. Liljedahl, C. Nicol, & D. Allan (Eds.), Proceedings of the 38th Conference of the International Group for Psychology of Mathematics Education and the 36th Conference of the North American Chapter of the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Vol. 5, pp. 33–40. Vancouver, Canada: PME.
   Google Scholar
• Rasmussen, C., K. Marrongelle, O. N. Kwon, and A. Hodge. 2017. Four goals for instructors using inquiry-based learning. Notices of the American Mathematical Society. 64(11): 1308–1311. https://doi.org/10.1090/noti1597.
   Google Scholar
• Reinholz, D. L. 2018. A primer on small group instruction in undergraduate mathematics. PRIMUS. 28(10): 904–919. https://doi.org/10.1080/10511970.2018.1471632.
   Google Scholar
• Reinholz, D. L. and N. Apkarian. 2018. Four frames for systemic change in STEM departments. International Journal of STEM Education. 5(1): 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-018-0103-x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sadler, P. and G. Sonnert. 2018. The path to college calculus: The impact of high school mathematics coursework. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education. 49(3): 292–329. doi: 10.5951/jresematheduc.49.3.0292
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saxe, K. and L. Braddy. 2015. A Common Vision for Undergraduate Mathematical Sciences Programs in 2025. Washington, DC: MAA.
   Google Scholar
• Seymour, E. 2006. Testimony offered to the Research Subcommittee of the Committee on Science of the U.S. House of Representatives hearing on Undergraduate Science, Mathematics, and Engineering Education: What’s Working ? http://commdocs.house.gov/committees/science/hsy26481.000/hsy26481_0f.htm. Accessed 29 March 2019.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, M. S. and M. K. Stein. 2011. Five Practices for Orchestrating Productive Mathematics Discussions. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
   Google Scholar
• Speer, N. and J. Wagner. 2009. Knowledge needed by a teacher to provide analytic scaffolding during undergraduate mathematics classroom discussions. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education. 40(5): 530–562.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tallman, M. A., M. P. Carlson, D. M. Bressoud, and M. Pearson. 2016. A characterization of calculus I final exams in U.S. colleges and universities. International Journal of Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education. 2(1): 105–133. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40753-015-0023-9.
   Google Scholar
• Tinto, V. 1998. Colleges as communities: Taking research on student persistence seriously. The Review of Higher Education. 21(2): 167–177.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tinto, V. 2004. Linking learning and leaving. In J. M. Braxton (Ed.), Reworking the Student Departure Puzzle, pp. 81–94. Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Tinto, V. 2006. Research and practice of student retention: What next? Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory, and Practice. 8(1): 1–19.
   Google Scholar
• TPSEMath. 2015. Transforming Post-Secondary Education in Mathematics: Report of a Meeting. Princeton, NJ: Institute for Advanced Studies.
   Google Scholar
• Zazkis, D. and G. Nuñez. 2015. How departments use local data to inform and refine program improvements. In D. Bressoud, V. Mesa, & C. Rasmussen (Eds.), Insights and Recommendations from the MAA National Study of College Calculus, pp. 123–129. Washington, DC: MAA Press.
   Google Scholar
• Zorn, P., J. Bailer, L. Braddy, J. Carpenter, W. Jaco, and P. Turner. 2014. The INGenIOuS Project: Mathematics, Statistics, and Preparing the 21st Century Workforce. Washington, DC: The Mathematical Association of America.
   Google Scholar