Supporting Assessment in Undergraduate Mathematics This volume is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation (NSF) under Grant No. DUE-0127694. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NSF. Copyright ©2006 by The Mathematical Association of America (Incorporated) Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 2005936440 ISBN 0-88385-820-7 Printed in the United States of America Current printing (last digit): 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Supporting Assessment in Undergraduate Mathematics Editor Lynn Arthur Steen Case Studies Editors Bonnie Gold Laurie Hopkins Dick Jardine William A. Marion Bernard L. Madison, Project Director William E. Haver, Workshops Director Peter Ewell, Project Evaluator Thomas Rishel, Principal Investigator (2001–02) Michael Pearson, Principal Investigator (2002–05) Published and Distributed by The Mathematical Association of America Contents Introduction Tensions and Tethers: Assessing Learning in Undergraduate Mathematics Bernard L. Madison, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville . 3 Asking the Right Questions Lynn Arthur Steen, St. Olaf College . 11 Assessing Assessment: The SAUM Evaluator’s Perspective Peter Ewell, National Center for Higher Education Management Systems (NCHEMS) . 19 Case Studies Developmental, Quantitative Literacy, and Precalculus Programs Assessment of Developmental, Quantitative Literacy, and Precalculus Programs Bonnie Gold, Monmouth University . 29 Assessing Introductory Calculus and Precalculus Courses Ronald Harrell & Tamara Lakins, Allegheny College . 37 Mathematics Assessment in the First Two Years Erica Johnson, Jeffrey Berg, & David Heddens, Arapahoe Community College . 41 Using Assessment to Troubleshoot and Improve Developmental Mathematics Roy Cavanaugh, Brian Karasek, & Daniel Russow, Arizona Western College . 47 Questions about College Algebra Tim Warkentin & Mark Whisler, Cloud County Community College . 55 Assessing the General Education Mathematics Courses at a Liberal Arts College for Women Abdel Naser Al-Hasan & Patricia Jaberg, Mount Mary College . 59 Assessment of Quantitative Reasoning in Applied Psychology Robert R. Sinclair, Dalton Miller-Jones, & Jennifer A. Sommers, Portland State University . 65 Assessing Quantitative Literacy Needs across the University M. Paul Latiolais, Allan Collins Zahra Baloch, & David Loewi, Portland State University . 71 Precalculus in Transition: A Preliminary Report Trisha Bergthold & Ho Kuen Ng, San Jose State University . .75 An Assessment of General Education Mathematics Courses’ Contribution to Quantitative Literacy Aimee J. Ellington, Virginia Commonwealth University . 81 v Contents vi Mathematics-Intensive Programs Assessment of Mathematics-Intensive Programs Dick Jardine, Keene State College . 89 Developing a Departmental Assessment Program William O. Martin & Dogan Çömez, North Dakota State University . 93 Assessing the Use of Technology and Using Technology to Assess Alex Heidenberg & Michael Huber, United States Military Academy . 103 A Comprehensive Assessment Program — Three Years Later Kenneth B. Hannsgen, Virginia Tech . 109 Assessment of a New American Program in the Middle East Thomas W. Rishel, Weill Cornel Medical College, Qatar . 113 Mathematics Programs to Prepare Future Teachers Assessment of Mathematics Programs to Prepare Future Teachers Laurie Hopkins, Columbia College . 121 Assessment in a Middle School Mathematics Teacher Preparation Program Bonnie Gold, Monmouth University . 125 Using Practice Tests in Assessment of Teacher Preparation Programs Jerzy Mogilski, Jorge E. Navarro, & Zhong L. Xu, University of Texas at Brownsville and Texas Southernmost College . 133 Undergraduate Major in Mathematics Assessing the Undergraduate Major in Mathematics William A. Marion, Valparaiso University . 139 Learning Outcomes Assessment: Stimulating Faculty Involvement Rather Than Dismay Dan Kalman, Matt Pascal, & Virginia Stallings, American University . 143 The Development, Implementation, and Revision of a Departmental Assessment Plan Barbara M. Moskal, Colorado School of Mines . 149 Assessing Student Oral Presentation of Mathematics Dick Jardine & Vincent Ferlini, Keene State College . 157 Keeping Assessment Simple Jesús Jiménez & Maria Zack, Point Loma Nazerene University . 163 Surveying Majors in Developing a Capstone Course M. Paul Latiolais, Joyce O’Halloran, & Amy Cakebread, Portland State University . 171 Assessing Written and Oral Communication of Senior Projects Kevin Dennis, Saint Mary’s University of Minnesota . 177 Assessing the Mathematics Major: A Multifaceted Approach Brian Hopkins, Eileen Poiani, & Katherine Safford, Saint Peter’s College . 183 Assessing the Mathematics Major Through a Senior Seminar Donna Flint & Daniel Kemp, South Dakota State University . 191 Assessment of Bachelors’ Degree Programs James R. Fulmer & Thomas C. McMillan, University of Arkansas, Little Rock . 201 Assessment of the Undergraduate Major without Faculty Buy-in Edward C. Keppelmann, University of Nevada, Reno . 207 Contents vii Assessing the Mathematics Major with a Bottom-Up Approach Sarah V. Cook, Washburn University . 213 Personnel SAUM Assessment Workshops . 221 SAUM Project Steering Committee . 225 Appendix CUPM Guidelines for Assessment of Student Learning . 229 Introduction n 2001, after a decade of encouraging and supporting comprehensive assessment of learning in undergraduate Imathematics, the Mathematical Association of America (MAA) was well positioned to seize an opportunity for funding from the National Science Foundation (NSF) to intensify and extend this support. As a result, NSF awarded MAA a half-million dollars for a three-year project Tensions and Tethers: “Supporting Assessment in Undergraduate Mathematics” (SAUM) that provided a much-needed stimulus for assess- Assessing Learning in ment at the departmental level. The need for such a program is rooted in the various and often conflicting views of Undergraduate assessment stemming from worry about uses of the results, difficulties and complexities of the work, and possible con- Mathematics flicts with traditional practices. Faculty navigating through these views to develop effective assessment programs encounter numerous tensions between alternative routes and limiting tethers that restrict options. Against this back- Bernard L. Madison ground the MAA launched SAUM in January 2002. The goal of SAUM was to encourage and support facul- Department of Mathematics ty in designing and implementing effective programs of University of Arkansas assessment of student learning in some curricular block of Fayetteville, AR undergraduate mathematics. SAUM leaders were reason- [email protected] ably sure that many faculty would welcome help with assessment because many colleges and universities were under mandates to develop and implement programs to assess student learning—mandates originating in most cases from external entities such as regional accrediting bodies. Our expectations were accurate. We found many faculty willing to tackle assessment but unenthusiastic and even skeptical about the work. During the three years of SAUM we promoted assess- ment to hundreds of faculty in professional forums and worked directly with 68 teams of one to five faculty from 66 colleges or universities in SAUM workshops. The final SAUM workshop—restricted to assessing learning in the major—will conclude in January 2006. Most of the 68 teams had two or three members, with two usually attend- ing the workshop sessions. As these teams worked at the face-to-face workshop sessions, as they continued their work back home, and as we promoted assessment to the larger audiences in professional forums, skepticism was evident in lack of enthusiasm and inevitably brought forth arguments against assessment as we were advocating it. The arguments were basically of two types: tensions and tethers. Tensions are forces that mitigate against meaning- ful and effective assessment, pulling toward easier and less effective models. A common example is the tension between doing assessment that is effective in plumbing the depths of student understanding and doing assessment that is practical and more superficial. Most tethers are ties to 3 4 Supporting Assessment in Undergraduate Mathematics past and present practices that are likely to continue and Third, we urged workshop participants to engage in possibly prevent or restrict developing effective assessment. designing and implementing an assessment program at their For example, many instructional programs are tied to tradi- home institutons. Face-to-face workshop sessions required tional in-course testing and have no plans to change, plac- exit tickets that were plans for actions until the next face-to- ing significant limits on assessment. face session. Teams presented these plans to their workshop Below, I describe some of these assessment tensions and colleagues and then reported at the next session on what had tethers, along with some ways SAUM tried to ease the ten- been done. As noted by Peter Ewell in his evaluator’s report sions and untie the tethers. First, however, I will explore (pp. 19–26), this strategy provided strong incentive for par- SAUM retrospectively and describe how it evolved from a ticipants to make progress at their own institution so that decade of assessment activity by the MAA. The paper con- they would have something to report at the next session of cludes with a more detailed description of SAUM. the workshop.