brief report on the umkc college algebra redesign pilot ncat mid-course sharing workshop june 20,...
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Brief Report on the UMKC College Algebra Redesign Pilot NCAT Mid-course Sharing Workshop June 20, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022080916/56649e6a5503460f94b6849a/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Brief Report on the UMKC College Algebra Redesign Pilot
NCAT Mid-course Sharing WorkshopJune 20, 2012
![Page 2: Brief Report on the UMKC College Algebra Redesign Pilot NCAT Mid-course Sharing Workshop June 20, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022080916/56649e6a5503460f94b6849a/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Exam Scores, Course Grades
Student success rates are strange compared with the final exam scores.
Competency:Course Grade C or better
Traditional Redesign
sample size 106 87
Competency (course grade C or better)
79% 56%
Final Exam Stats Traditional Redesignsample size 97 73Mean 57.9 59.1SD 20.9 22.0Competency rate(score 70 or more)
27% 41%
No difference inmean final exam scores:
Here’s a difference:
![Page 3: Brief Report on the UMKC College Algebra Redesign Pilot NCAT Mid-course Sharing Workshop June 20, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022080916/56649e6a5503460f94b6849a/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Implementation Challenges
• Insufficient preparedness/training of GTAs assigned to lab sessions
• Participation-tracking technology (clickers, card swipe) problems
• Late enrollment of students• Lack of student engagement and interaction
![Page 4: Brief Report on the UMKC College Algebra Redesign Pilot NCAT Mid-course Sharing Workshop June 20, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022080916/56649e6a5503460f94b6849a/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Addressing Challenges
• Attention to GTA training and expectations. (Note: During the pilot, the GTAs involved in the redesign also had traditional sections.)
• Card swipe issues are now understood. Clickers?
• Allowing less late enrollment? Intro to course format and philosophy on video