Improving Student Achievement in Mathematics Courses Taught in Foundation Year at University

Year 2019, Volume: 14 , 1 - 12, 20.09.2019

Thuraya Ali Kenan Saeed Abuzour Crinela Pıslaru Abdussalam Elzawı

Abstract

This paper presents how student achievement in
foundation year mathematics courses may be improved by planning learning
experiences which are responsive both to the students’ learning needs and to
the discipline of mathematics. A case study was conducted involving 372
students enrolled at Manchester Metropolitan University (MMU), United Kingdom,
who completed an initial test for preliminary assessment of their mathematical
knowledge. The results of quantitative and qualitative analysis of their
answers, together with the I-Cube model, were used for planning and delivery of
the mathematics learning
experiences included in lectures, the aim being to enable students to build on
their existing interests, proficiencies, experiences and competencies. The
students then completed a second test which aimed to assess the learners’
conceptual development. The results of quantitative
and qualitative analysis of these answers showed an improvement in student
achievement. The paper also contains suggestions for improvement of I-Cube
model implementation through the design and application of online versions of
the two tests. This would enable greater personalisation of learning and assessment
and allow feedback to be given in real-time, thus making the mathematics
lectures more enjoyable and effective in developing students’ knowledge and
skills. In addition, the development of online tutorials for students to
study at home before attending face-to-face tutorials (blended learning
approach) would enable the students to develop positive mathematical identities
and become strong mathematical learners.

Keywords

Mathematics, Fractions, Teaching, Foundation and Manchester Metropolitan university

References

• Firmender, J. M., Gavin, M. K., & Coach, D. B. M. (2014). Examining the relationship between teachers’ instructional practices and students’ mathematics achievement. Journal of Advanced Academics, 25(3), 214-236. Alcock, L., & Simpson, A. (2011). Classification and concept consistency. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 11(2), 91-106. Artin, E. (1958). A Freshman honors course in calculus and analytic geometry taught at Princeton University. Buffalo, NY: Committee on the Undergraduate Program of the Mathematical Association of America. Code, W., Piccolo, C., Kohler, D., & MacLean, M. (2014). Teaching methods comparison in a large calculus class. ZDM Mathematics Education, 46, 589-601. Eichler, A., & Erens, R. (2014). Teachers’ beliefs towards teaching calculus. ZDM Mathematics Education, 46, 647–659. Viirman, O. (2014). The functions of function discourse—University mathematics teaching from a commognitive standpoint. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 45(4), 512-527. Aksu, M. (2012). Student Performance in Dealing with Fractions. The Journal of Educational Research, 90, 375-380. doi: 10.1080/00220671.1997.10544595. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCOTOM) (2007). The learning of mathematics: 69th NCTM year book. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. National Mathematics Advisory Panel (NMAP) (2008). Foundations for success: The final report of the National Mathematics Advisory Panel. Washington, DC: National Academies Press. Getenet, S., & Callingham, R. (2017). Teaching fractions for understanding: addressing interrelated concepts. In Proceedings of the 40th annual conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia, Melbourne, Australia. ISBN 978-1-920846-30-5 (2017). Kenan, T., Pislaru, C., & Elzawi, A. (2017). A novel I-Cube model used to support the educational changes through technologies in higher education. 8th international Conference on Languages, Social Sciences, Education and Interdisciplinary Studies (ICLSSE-17), London (UK). ISBN 978-93-86878-05-2. Retrieved from www.heaig.org. Kenan, T. (2015) Improving the Effectiveness of E-Learning Implementation in the School of Engineering at Tripoli University. Doctoral thesis, University of Huddersfield. Retrieved from http://eprints.hud.ac.uk/id/eprint/28702/ Bloom, B., & Krathwohl, D. (1956). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Classification of Educational Goals, by a committee of college and university examiners. Handbook I: Cognitive Domain. NY, NY: Longmans, Green. Carayannis, E. G. (2015). Innovation, Technology, and Education for Growth. Retrieved from:http://www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/products/books/notable/page.htm?id9781785604652#sthash.MScLnoDE.dpuf. ISSN: 2059-2841. Ludden, D. (2017). Why Is Doing Arithmetic with Fractions So Difficult? Psychology Today Magazine. Retrieved from https://www.psychologytoday.com/gb/blog/talking-apes/201709/why-is-doing-arithmetic-fractions-so-difficult Siegler, R., & Lortie-Forgues, H. (2017). Hard lessons: Why rational number arithmetic is so difficult for so many people. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 26, 346-351. The Guardian (2018). How to teach…fractions. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/education/teacher-blog/2018/oct/28/teaching-resources-fractions Masters, G. (2017, June 5). Assessment online: informing teaching and learning. Teacher Magazine. Retrieved from https://www.teachermagazine.com.au/columnists/geoff-masters/assessment-online-informing-teaching-and-learning), 05 June 2017.