Abstract
Individuals on postgraduate and non-degree bearing courses undertaken as mid-career technological updates require a specific level of mathematical ability. An e-assessment diagnostic test is used to discover knowledge gaps and provide formative feedback. Analysis of the test results reflects student cohort heterogeneity and identifies weaker students who are shown to struggle in other subject areas due to lower mathematical ability. Instead of developing conceptual understanding of maths, these students become fixated on ‘facts’ assumed to guarantee passing the exam required to progress with their course. Technology-enhanced learning (TEL) interventions are proposed for augmenting face-to-face remedial activities. Student learning through group-work using interactive geometry and algebra visualisation software and with peer-to-peer support is proposed for further evaluation. The software allows learners to see the results of using direct mathematical input to complete a designated task with the aim of improving their perception and understanding of maths concepts and the ability to apply them in their study of physics and chemistry. A process model for combining TEL interventions with e-assessment is presented.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Anthony, L., Yang, J., & Koedinger, K. R. (2005). Evaluation of multimodal input for entering mathematical equations on the computer. In G.C. van der Veer & C.Gale (Eds.)CHI ’05 extended abstracts on human factors in computing systems (pp. 1184–1187). Portland: ACM.
Biggs, J. (2003). Teaching for quality learning at university: What the student does. Philadelphia: Open University Press.
Biggs, J., & Tang, C. (2007). Teaching for quality learning at university: What the student does (The Society for Research into Higher Education) (3rd ed.). Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill.
Bird, J. O., & Kahn, P. (2009). Key aspects of teaching and learning in mathematics and statistics. A handbook for teaching and learning in higher education: Enhancing academic practice (3rd ed., pp. 246–263). New York: Routledge.
Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C., Marshall, B., & Wiliam, D. (2003). Assessment for learning: Putting it into practice. Maidenhead: Open University Press.
Croft, T. (2002). Mathematics: The teaching, learning and support of non-specialists. In P. Kahn & J. Kyle (Eds.), Effective learning and teaching in mathematics and its applications (pp. 144–157). London: Kogan Page.
Haßler, B., Atkinson, R., Quinney, D., & Barry, M. (2004). The experience of fresher students in mathematics diagnostic testing. MSOR Connections, 4(3), 17–23.
Hawkes, T., & Savage, M. (2000). Measuring the mathematics problem. London: Engineering Council.
Heal, K. (2000). Maple 6 learning guide. Waterloo: Waterloo Maple.
Irons, A. (2008). Enhancing learning through formative assessment and feedback. London: Routledge.
Jurkovic, N. (2001). Diagnosing and correcting student’s misconceptions in an educational computer algebra system. Proceedings of the 2001 International Symposium on Symbolic and Algebraic Computation—ISSAC ’01 (pp. 195–200). Presented at the 2001 International Symposium London, Ontario, Canada. http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=384101.384128. Accessed 28 May 2010.
Klein, D. (2007). A quarter century of US “math wars” and political partisanship. BSHM Bulletin: Journal of the British Society for the History of Mathematics, 22(1), 22–33.
Laurillard, D. (2002). Rethinking university teaching: A framework for the effective use of learning technologies (2nd ed.). London: Routledge-Falmer.
Lee, S., Harrison, M., Pell, G., & Robinson, C. (2008). Predicting performance of first year engineering students and the importance of assessment tools therein. Engineering Education: Journal of the Higher Education Academy Engineering Subject Centre, 3(1), 30–43.
Lester, J. (n.d.). June Lester—recent electronic activities. http://thejuniverse.org/PUBLIC/Professional/WebCV/recent.html#mdp. Accessed 28 May 2010.
London Mathematical Society. (1995). Tackling the mathematics problem. London: Mathematical Society.
LTSN MathsTEAM Project. (2003). Diagnostic testing for mathematics. [S.l.]: LTSN Maths TEAM Project.
Mayer, R. E., & Bayman, P. (1981). Psychology of calculator languages: A framework for describing differences in users’ knowledge. Communications of the ACM, 24(8), 511–520. doi:10.1145/358722.358735
Merrill, M. (2009). First principles of instruction. In C. M. Reigeluth & A. Carr-Chellman (Eds.), Instructional-design theories and models: Building a common knowledge base (Vol. 3). New York: Routledge.
Miller, H., & Upton, D. (2007). Computer manipulatives in an ordinary differential equations course: Development, implementation, and assessment. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 17(2), 124–137.
Nicol, D., & MacFarlane-Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 199–218.
O’Donovan, B., Price, M., & Rust, C. (2004). Know what I mean? Enhancing student understanding of assessment standards and criteria. Teaching in Higher Education, 9(3), 325–335.
Pell, G., & Croft, T. (2008). Mathematics support-support for all? Teaching Mathematics and its Applications, 27(4), 167–173.
Pimm, D. (1987). Speaking mathematically: Communication in mathematics classrooms. London: Routledge.
Ramsden, P. (2003). Learning to teach in higher education (2nd ed.). London: Routledge-Falmer.
Renninger, K., & Shumar, W. (2002). Community building with and for teachers at The Math Forum. In W. Shumar (Ed.), Building virtual communities: Learning and change in cyberspace (pp. 60–95). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ripley, M., Tafler, J., Ridgway, J., Harding, R., & Hakan, R. (2009). Review of advanced e-assessment techniques (JISC Final Report). UK: Joint Information Systems Committee. http://www.jisc.ac.uk/whatwedo/projects/raeat.aspx. Accessed 5 Jan 2011.
Rowntree, D. (1987). Assessing students: How shall we know them? (1st ed.). London: Routledge.
Sacristán, A. I., Calder, N., Rojano, T., Santos-Trigo, M., Friedlander, A., Tabach, M., Moreno, L., et al. (2010). The influence and shaping of digital technologies on the learning—and learning trajectories—of mathematical concepts. In C. Hoyles & J-B. Lagrange (Eds.), New ICMI study series: Mathematics education and technology-rethinking the terrain: The 17th ICMI study, (Vol. 13, pp. 179–226). New York: Springer.
Sangwin, C. (2007). A brief review of GeoGebra: Dynamic mathematics. MSOR Connections, 7(2), 36–38.
Sangwin, C., Cazes, C., Lee, A., & Wong, K. L. (2010). Micro-level automatic assessment supported by digital technologies. In C. Hoyles & J-B. Lagrange (Eds.), New ICMI study series: Mathematics education and technology-rethinking the terrain: The 17th ICMI study, (pp. 227–250). New York: Springer.
Sleeman, D. (1984). An attempt to understand students’ understanding of basic algebra. Cognitive Science, 8(4), 387–412.
Stotsky, S. (2009). Who needs mathematicians for math, anyway? The ed schools’ pedagogy adds up to trouble. City Journal, 19(1). http://www.city-journal.org/2009/eon1113ss.html. Accessed 14 July 2010.
Thimbleby, H. (1995). A new calculator and why it is necessary. The Computer Journal, 38(6), 418–433. doi:10.1093/comjnl/38.6.418.
Wheeler, D. (1983). Mathematics and language. In C. Verhille (Ed.), Proceedings of the Canadian mathematics education study group (pp. 86–89). Presented at the 1983 Annual Meeting, Vancouver: University of British Columbia.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2012 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Sastry, V., MacLean, P. (2012). Opportunities for Technology-Enhanced Remedial Maths. In: Van den Bossche, P., Gijselaers, W., Milter, R. (eds) Learning at the Crossroads of Theory and Practice. Advances in Business Education and Training, vol 4. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2846-2_12
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2846-2_12
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-2845-5
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-2846-2
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawEducation (R0)