The effects of different versions of a gateway STEM course on student attitudes and beliefs

Background Substantial research has been conducted focusing on student outcomes in mathematics courses in order to better understand the ways in which these outcomes depend on the underlying instructional methodologies found in the courses. From 2009 to 2014, the Mathematical Association of America (MAA) studied Calculus I instruction in United States (US) colleges and universities in the Characteristics of Successful Programs of College Calculus (CSPCC). One aspect of this study attempted to understand the impact of these courses on student experience. Results In this paper, we describe results from an examination of the effect of course structure on students’ attitudes and beliefs across different versions of Calculus I at a large research university in the USA. To do this, we implemented a follow-up study of the national MAA study of calculus programs in part to identify potential relationships between various course structures and changes in attitudes and beliefs during the course. We compare our results both internally across these course structures and to the national data set. Conclusions We find that the statistically significant changes measured in confidence and enjoyment exhibit differences across the different calculus implementations and that these changes are statistically independent of the underlying student academic backgrounds as shown by standardized test scores and high school GPA. This suggests that these observed changes in attitudes and beliefs relate to the experience in our varied course structures and not to the academic characteristics of students as they enter the course. In addition to our findings, we show how this national study can be used locally to study effects of courses on student affective traits

Conflicts and configurations in a liminal space: SoTL scholars’ identity development

Although academic identity has received attention in the literature, there have been few attempts to understand the influence on identity from engagement with the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL). In this aper, we (a group of eight scholars from five different countries) describe how our interactions with SoTL have impacted the shaping of our academic identities. We have struggled to define the value, purpose, outcomes, and meanings of being a disciplined SoTL scholar, sometimes in addition to and sometimes in opposition to being a disciplinary scholar. Through analysis of our own 100-word reflective narratives, we identify common conflicts and configurations around our experiences of developing a SoTL identity. We describe how navigating among conflicting identities can lead us into a troublesome but deeply reflective liminal space, prompting profound realizations and the reconstruction of academic identity. Drawing on this notion of liminality helps us to understand our journeys as moving through a necessary and important transformational landscape, and allows us to suggest ways to support those engaging with SoTL to develop an integrative SoTL identity