Search for: All records

Over the last several decades, Emerging Scholars Programs (ESPs) have incorporated active learning strategies and challenging problems into collegiate mathematics, resulting in students, underrepresented minority (URM) students in particular, earning at least half of a letter grade higher than other students in Calculus. In 2009, West Virginia University (WVU) adapted ESP models for use in Calculus I in an effort to support the success and retention of URM STEM students by embedding group and inquiry-based learning into a designated section of Calculus I. Seats in the class were reserved for URM and first-generation students. We anticipated that supporting students in courses in the calculus sequence, including Calculus I, would support URM Calculus I students in building learning communities and serve as a mechanism to provide a strong foundation for long-term retention. In this study we analyze the success of students that have progressed through our ESP Calculus courses and compare them to their non-ESP counterparts. Results show that ESP URM students succeed in the Calculus sequence at substantially higher rates than URM students in non-ESP sections of Calculus courses in the sequence (81% of URM students pass ESP Calculus I while only 50% of URM students pass non-ESP Calculus I). In addition, ESP URM and ESP non-URM (first-generation but not URM) students succeed at similar levels in the ESP Calculus sequence of courses (81% of URM students and 82% of non-URM students pass ESP Calculus I). Finally, ESP URM students’ one-year retention rates are similar to those of ESP non-URM students and significantly higher than those of URM students in non-ESP sections of Calculus (92% of ESP URM Calculus I students were retained after one year, while only 83% of URM non-ESP Calculus I students were retained). These results suggest that ESP is ideally suited for retaining and graduating URM STEM majors, helping them overcome obstacles and barriers in STEM, and increasing diversity, equity, and inclusion in Calculus. 

Abstract This paper presents the development and validation of the 17-item mathematics Graduate Student Instructor Observation Protocol (GSIOP) at two universities. The development of this instrument attended to some unique needs of novice undergraduate mathematics instructors while building on an existing instrument that focused on classroom interactions particularly relevant for students’ development of conceptual understanding, called the Mathematical Classroom Observation Protocol for Practices (MCOP²). Instrument validation involved content input from mathematics education researchers and upper-level mathematics graduate student instructors at two universities, internal consistency analysis, interrater reliability analysis, and structure analyses via scree plot analysis and exploratory factor analysis. A Cronbach-Alpha level of 0.868 illustrated a viable level for internal consistency. Crosstabulation and correlations illustrate high level of interrater reliability for all but one item, and high levels across all subsections. Collaborating a scree plot with the exploratory factor analysis illustrated three critical groupings aligning with the factors from the MCOP²(student engagement and teacher facilitation) while adding a third factor, lesson design practices. Taken collectively, these results indicate that the GSIOP measures the degree to which instructors’ and students’ actions in undergraduate mathematics classrooms align with practices recommended by the Mathematical Association of America (MAA) using a three-factor structure of teacher facilitation, student engagement, and design practices. 

In this study, two universities created and implemented a student-centered graduate student instructor observation protocol (GSIOP) and a post-observational Red-Yellow-Green feedback structure (RYG feedback). The GSIOP and RYG feedback was used with novice mathematics graduate student instructors (GSIs) by experienced GSIs through a peer-mentorship program. Ten trained mentor GSIs observed novice GSIs, completed a GSIOP, and provided RYG feedback as part of an observation-feedback cycle. This generated 50 semester-long data sets of three observation-feedback cycles of novice GSIs. Analyzing these data sets helped identify how certain feedback influenced GSIOP scores. 

In this study, two universities created and implemented a student-centered graduate student instructor observation protocol (GSIOP) and a post-observational Red-Yellow-Green feedback structure (RYG feedback). The GSIOP and RYG feedback was used with novice graduate student instructors (GSIs) by experienced GSIs through a peer-mentorship program. Ten trained mentor GSIs completed 50 sets of three observations of novice GSIs. Analyzing 151 GSIOPs and 151 RYG feedback meetings longitudinally provided insight to identify what types of feedback informed and influenced GSIOP scores. After qualitatively coding feedback along multiple dimensions, we found certain forms of feedback were more influential for GSI development than others with respect to change in GSIOP score. Our results indicate contextually-specific feedback leads to more observed changes and improvement across multiple observations than decontextualized feedback.