The papers (abstract) for discussion are available for downloading here.

Lars Filipsson and Hans Thunberg,  Aims versus expectations : a Swedish study of problems related to the transition from secondary to tertiary education in mathematics (Down)

Carmen Sessa and Analia Berge, Is creative and critical mathematics considerer at the entry in tertiary level? (Down)

Wei-Chi Yang, Increase Our Learning Horizon with Evolving Technology (Down)

Max Stephens,  (Down)

Sang-Gu Lee, Korean experience on changes of learning environment for tertiary math education (Down)

More to come!!

2008     ICME 11    DG 8  

(Final Report of DG 8-Draft)

 

The role of Mathematics in access to

Tertiary education

 

Mathematics is one of the “critical filters” regulating entry into tertiary education. At its simplest level,

l     What mathematics courses are students required to complete in order to graduate from high school and to qualify for entry to tertiary education?

l     Does mathematics play an even more decisive role in determining access to tertiary courses when formal mathematical requirements are set for entry to certain courses, or where substantial mathematical knowledge is assumed in areas such as bio-informatics, finance, econometrics and modeling?

l     Also with an expectation that a growing young people will continue their education after high school in courses of further education and training, as distinct from university courses, how does mathematics affect access to these programs?

l     What bridging and service courses are needed?

Team chairs:

·                     Max Stephens (Australia)  m.stephens@unimelb.edu.au

·                     Sang Gu Lee (Korea) sglee@skku.edu

Team members:

·                     Kiril Bankov (Bulgaria) kbankov@fmi.uni-sofia.bg

·                     Carmen Sessa (Argentina) pirata@dm.uba.ar

·                     Agustín Grijalva (Mexico) guty@gauss.mat.uson.mx

 

 

Session 1 (2 hrs) : Opening up the theme

 

Welcome and introduction (Max Stephens and Sang-Gu Lee)

 

Outline of Scope and goals of the work of DG 8. Drawing attention to what has been posted on the web-site. (We need to advise all members of the Organizing Team to become familiar with what has been posted on the web-site before they come to the meeting.) Remind all participants of ICME 11

 

Working Rule #1: participants are expected to attend all scheduled sessions of DG 8.

 

Working Rule #2: Valuing different experiences, norms, values and judgements.

 

Self introductions of  members of the Organizing Team and participants

Kiril Bankov (Bulgaria) kbankov@fmi.uni-sofia.bg  

Lars Filipsson (Sweden) lfn@math.kth.se Royal Institute of Technology

Hans Thunberg (Sweden)   thunberg@math.kth.se Royal Institute of Technology

Agustín Grijalva (Mexico) guty@gauss.mat.uson.mx

Nadia Hardy (Canada) nhardy@dawsoncollege.qc.ca

Carmen.Sessa (Argentina) pirata@dm.uba.ar

Analia Bergé (Québec) College of Rimouski, analia.berge@cegep-rimouski.qc.ca

Patricia Sadovsky (Argentina)  patsadov@mail.retina.ar

Leticia Losamo letilosamo@gmail.com

Ivan Jimenez navi_tkd@hotmail.com

Anne D’Arcy-Warmington (Australia)  anne@statistica.com.au

Jennifer Love love.jenn@comcast.net

Raquel Ruiz de Eguino (Mexico) rruiz@up.edu.mx

Jennifer Weisbart-Moreno jenniper.weisbart@cgu.edu

Wei-Chi Yang (USA) Radford University wyang@radford.edu  

Umi De Las Ping (Philippine) mlp@mathsci.math.atmu.edu.ph

Max Stephens (Australia) m.stephens@unimelb.edu.au  

Sang Gu Lee (Korea) sglee@skku.edu  

Linda  Galligan galligan@usq.edu.au

Roberto Oliveira roiveira@itelefonica.com.br

 

l    Questions for everyone:

 

Why did you join DG 8?

What is important about its theme for you and your country?

 

Each participant prepared a short response.

 

 

Some Answers:

“For the last decade there was a big difference in both knowledge and interest in mathematics among the young generation in Bulgaria. TIMMS results show that pupils’ achievement in mathematics has been decreased. This trend has also been seen in other studies and exams.

 On the other hand, the university requirements for entering mathematics courses remain unchanged. These requirements usually ask for quite a good and sound understanding of secondary school mathematics.

As a consequence, there is a big gap between the actual mathematics knowledge that the students enter the university and the demands of the university professor starting the mathematics courses.

How this gap can be made smaller? What can be done so that the first grade university students do not experience “bad feeling” while starting university mathematics courses.”

 

“I joined DG 8 because I have taught math to many disadvantaged high school students who are far below math standards but have career interests that involve college.

I have also taught remedial math at community colleges. I am studying for a PhD with focus on supporting disadvantaged students into higher education with assisting them in overcoming barriers such as math difficulties.

 I’d like to discuss the role in math in the many different college programs and transition and support services that assist students in mastering math essential.”

 

“My personal interest and job revolves around the entrance of freshmen at university level. The field of developmental mathematics continues to expand and the need for educators continues to grow.  I felt my place would fit nicely within this group as a recent college graduate and having a brother entering college this upcoming semester. In addition, I see on a daily basis the struggles of students and the mathematics that create problems. (i.e. the areas to be improved at its level.)

 

I personally have a strong desire for research and would like to see the need for current research or potential collaborations. “

 

There are several ways in which tertiary courses in mathematics, especially for beginning students, can affect access and success. Students who are weak in school mathematics may be required to undertake a college remedial course before commencing regular study. Sometimes this remedial courses not for credit. In other cases, students may elect to commence mathematical studies at college at a basic level, usually for credit. Before they enter a  program which assumes knowledge and competency in school mathematics. Some colleges and universities also have a compulsory service courses in mathematics for those studying courses such as environmental science, geology etc. Failure to complete these service courses can hold up graduation. Also some colleges and universities have a compulsory mathematics requirement for liberal arts majors. The contents of these compulsory courses may not always be appropriate for the needs and interests of liberal arts students.  

 

Small groups: sharing of responses. Small groups to identify connections from these responses to the theme and issues outlined in our position paper. (Members of Organizing Team (OT) to be leaders of small groups and to report back at end of Session 1. At least one small group will be chaired by a Spanish-speaking member of the OT. This will apply at every session. )

 

Summary from DAY 1

(Group A: 5 members)  We raised several questions on tertiary math education, tried to find a couple of common problems such as how to get well prepared for those students at the period of transition from high school to college.

 

 Our small group talked about situations at each institution where they are working. There were many differences at each country and each institute.   Since we are here to find a best possible way or answer or even questions to do better job on our teaching and research.  

 

Even with different situations and many differences at the problems of each of us, we may agree that we can always start with our own class first to see the possible improvement.

 

 (In one case, before the tenure appointment, it will be recommended to try to learn and use some positive models from all possible seniors who have shown a better role in tertiary education. That is important because we need to fully understand the possible and impossible situation of learning and administrative environment at where we are first. It will be a good time to try to develop our own model which may not be very successful at the first stage. But it will be worth to continue until we get the confidence that we really need before we meet our students. )

 

 We discussed some possible models. We have not found any conclusions yet. But we hope that we can see a better vision and get more confidence in this week from our whole DG 8 discussions.

 

(Group B: Spanish speaking, 5 members)

 

We identified three problems with the transition from secondary level to tertiary level (in mathematics).

1.               Both institutions had t share the responsibility for transition.

2.               2. What kind of mathematics in secondary school is needed to prepare students for tertiary level? More focus on autonomy is needed.

3.               Public policies (their presence or absence).  This condition institutional arrangements and pedagogic strategies that result in exclusion/inclusion of students at tertiary level.

 

(Group C: 5 members)

 

Continuation of discussion on the role of service courses that are required for graduation in courses such as geology; compulsory mathematics courses for non-science majors; remedial courses for those who are not judged ready to enter regular mathematics program; and the desirability of having different entry points as opposed to bridging courses to make up for deficiencies in school mathematics background.

 

Range of backgrounds and ages presents special problems for those proving service courses and for the students themselves. There needs to be closer consultation with those faculties that require service courses and with students themselves. Courses can easily become rigid, and fail to help students to appreciate the role of mathematics in their discipline.

Similar considerations apply for those liberal arts majors who are required to complete a mathematics subject as part of their degree. At the Ateneo in Manila, aspects of geometry including Escher have proved to be interesting and relevant to Fine Arts students.

 

Voluntary enrolment in semester long bridging courses for “weaker” students has also led to a significant reduction in failure in first-year courses. On the other hand, there is a problem of how to provide for those students who have done very well in the final year of school. Multiple entry points may provide a solution here, as well as more appropriate use of technology (e.g. web-sites or i-campus) for teachers and tutors to disseminate questions and answers to specific questions posed by students.

Whole group: relating responses to key elements of our theme and position paper.

 

Some of us will talk about them more with our prepared presentation on Wed.  Which include?

 

1. Aims versus expectations – a Swedish study of problems related to the transition from secondary to tertiary education in mathematics

By Lars Filipsson and  Hans Thunberg

lfn@math.kth.se thunberg@math.kth.se

 

2. Is creative and critical mathematics considerer at the entry in tertiary level?

By Carmen Sessa and Analia Bergé

 

3. Increase Our Learning Horizon with Evolving Technology

Wei-Chi Yang  Radford University  wyang@radford.edu  with Umi De Las Ping (Philippine) mlp@mathsci.math.atmu.edu.ph

 

4. "Korean experience on changes of learning environment for tertiary math education for the last hundred years."

By Sang-Gu Lee, Sungkyunkwan University

 

Session 2 (2 hours) : National perspectives

 

Welcome to Session 2.

 

Quick summary of what was achieved in Session 1. (MS and SGL)

 

Whole group: Stimulating in-depth discussion on the key issues:

 

A series of short inputs from people who have been identified by MS and SGL. MS and SGL have already spoken at the start of this session on key issues that were identified yesterday.

 

 Here we will ask Carmen & Analia and Hans & Lars to make some focussed comments from their papers in the light of the previous day’s discussions.

 

(Each group of writers will have approximately 10 minutes. This is an effective way of utilising their contributions without allowing paper presentations)

 

1. Aims versus expectations – a Swedish study of problems related to the transition from secondary to tertiary education in mathematics

By Lars Filipsson Hans Thunberg

lfn@math.kth.se thunberg@math.kth.se  (file will be added)

 

2. Is creative and critical mathematics considerer at the entry in tertiary level?

By Carmen Sessa U de Buenos Aires and Analia Bergé College of Rimouski, Rimouski, Québec,  (file is ready 2)

 

3. Increase Our Learning Horizon with Evolving Technology

Wei-Chi Yang  Radford University  wyang@radford.edu  with Umi De Las Ping (Philippine) mlp@mathsci.math.atmu.edu.ph  (file is ready 3)

 

4. "Korean experience on changes of learning environment for tertiary math education for the last hundred years."

By Sang-Gu Lee, Sungkyunkwan University  (file is ready 3)

 

  4 talks were given and discussions on the presentation were made. It will be posted on the web. 

 

Small groups examine national perspectives on these issues. Members of  OT  to act as leaders of small groups and to report back at end of Session 2.

 

Reporting back briefly from small groups.

 

 Please note Working Rule #2: Valuing different experiences, norms, values and judgements.

 

 

Session 3 (1 and half hour)

 − Bringing our discussion to a conclusion

 

Summarising briefly what was achieved in the preceding two sessions (MS and SGL) and what is needed in today’s shorter session.

 

Whole group. Question: Are there any outstanding issues relating to our theme that have not been discussed so far or discussed as fully as people would like?

 

Small groups (if necessary): dealing with any unresolved issues. (10 minutes only)

 

Question for everyone: What for you are the most important results or findings of DG 8 that should be included in our published report?

(Valuing different experiences, norms, values and judgements.)

 

l    All participants to prepare a short (written) response.

Participants met in small groups to discuss what for them were the key issues resulting from our work as a DG which Max and Sang-Gu need to give attention to in the final report of the DG.

 

Whole group. Presenting responses to the above question.

Responses from three small groups:

 

Group A (Spanish speaking)

Difficulties in the entry to tertiary level concerns both secondary school and tertiary level. This pre-supposes a collaborative work focussed on thinking about what kind of mathematics would be suitable for a better transition.

In our opinion, giving the tools to students to be the producers (of mathematics) seems to be central to overcoming the obstacles concerning entry to tertiary level.

 

Group B

For a successful school to university, there needs to a coherence in content, culture and competencies. This dependent on shared understanding of good teaching and assessment (but a question remains: are the goals and objectives the same?).

 

How can technology be used to help bridge the gap? Does the technology make it flexible for student learning and what scaffolding is given by the teacher?

 

Group C

Highlight the need for collaboration between secondary and tertiary.

 

Consider how technology resources – e.g. bulletin boards and recordings of lectures – can help students to be more responsible and autonomous.

 

Written responses to be handed to SGL and MS at end of session.    (m.stephens@unimelb.edu.au or  sglee@skku.edu)

 

Closing word s

A big thank-you to all participants. Special thanks also to student assistant Ivan Ximinez for his daily  support.

 

Things promised:

 

Hans and Lars will send electronic copy of their PPT (and article) to Sang-Gu. Carmen and Analia will do the same.

 

Final report:

 

Max said that the first draft of our final report should take account of any work that might have been done at ICME 10 on the theme. (The conference report of ICME 10 has not been available before this meeting, but it is being posted out.) Our first draft will be circulated as soon as possible to members of DG 8, and comments will be welcomed. In preparing final copy, we will also be guided by word (length) limits that may be specified by the editors of the ICME 11 Proceedings.

 

Mailing address:

 kbankov@fmi.uni-sofia.bg,lfn@math.kth.se,,thunberg@math.kth.se, guty@gauss.mat.uson.mx,nhardy@dawsoncollege.qc.ca,pirata@dm.uba.ar, analia.berge@cegep-rimouski.qc.ca,,patsadov@mail.retina.ar,letilosamo@gmail.com, navi_tkd@hotmail.com,anne@statistica.com.au,love.jenn@comcast.net,rruiz@up.edu.mx,jenniper.weisbart@cgu.edu,wyang@radford.edu,mlp@mathsci.math.atmu.edu.ph, m.stephens@unimelb.edu.au,sglee@skku.edu,galligan@usq.edu.au,roiveira@itelefonica.com.br