Search for: All records

Abstract In this paper, we discuss our experience in collaborating with mathematicians to increase their use of active learning pedagogy in a proof-based linear algebra course. The mathematicians we worked with valued using active learning pedagogy to increase student engagement but were reluctant to use active learning pedagogy due to time constraints. Our mathematicians perceived obligations in their teaching that increased the time it would take to implement some of the active learning pedagogy that we suggested, leading them to view this pedagogy as inviable. By attending to mathematicians’ obligations, we were able to design active learning strategies that met the interests and needs of the mathematics educators and mathematicians collaborating on this project. 

Undergraduate mathematics education can be experienced in discouraging and marginalizing ways among Black students, Latin
students, and white women. Precalculus and calculus courses, in particular, operate as gatekeepers that contribute to racialized and gendered attrition in persistence with mathematics coursework and pursuits in STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics). However, student perceptions of instruction in these introductory mathematics courses have yet to be systematically examined as a contributor to such attrition. This paper presents findings from a study of 20 historically marginalized students’ perceptions of precalculus and calculus instruction to document features that they found discouraging and marginalizing. Our analysis revealed how students across different race-gender identities reported stereotyping as well as issues of representation in introductory mathematics classrooms and STEM fields as shaping their perceptions of instruction. These perceptions pointed to the operation of three racialized and gendered mechanisms in instruction: (i) creating differential opportunities for participation and support, (ii) limiting support from same-race, same-gender peers to manage negativity in instruction, and (iii) activating exclusionary ideas about who belongs in STEM fields. We draw on our findings to raise implications for research and practice in undergraduate mathematics education.