Paper ID #49298Work-in-Progress: Reflections on Dynamical Systems Curriculum and PedagogyLauren Lazarus, Wentworth Institute of Technology Lauren Lazarus Melfi is an Assistant Professor of Applied Mathematics in the School of Computing and Data Science at Wentworth Institute of Technology. She most commonly teaches differential equations, linear algebra, and the calculus sequence. Her research in dynamical systems focuses on coupled oscillator networks and bifurcations in delayed oscillator models. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2025 Work-in-Progress
approaches, such as substituting x = 0 to match the resulting y-values, given that allfour graphs have unique intercepts. This assesses only basic arithmetic and reflects an ‘Action’-level conception within the APOS framework; a construct from which we aspire our students toprogress. While omitting axis values may prevent such procedural shortcuts and promotereasoning to some extent, this alone does not address the broader issue of failing to definitivelyassess whether students attain ‘Object’-level understanding, a limitation acknowledged by theauthors themselves [7]. Figure 1. Item 6 from the Function Concept Inventory [14].A more effective approach would involve restructuring the task into three separate questions,each focusing on
in Communicating Mathematical ContentAbstractThis Work in Progress study explores the impact of weekly journaling assignments onengineering students’ ability to communicate mathematical concepts effectively in designprojects. At Louisiana Tech University, first-year engineering students participate in the “Livingwith the Lab” course sequence, culminating in the First-Year Projects Showcase. While studentsexcel at explaining their product’s purpose and hardware, they often struggle to articulate theunderlying STEM principles, especially in mathematics.To address this gap, a targeted journaling assignment was integrated into the calculus sequence toenhance reflection on mathematical concepts and their connection to engineering
theirbroader societal implications [11, 12]. Therefore, engineering education needs to transitiontoward more complex problem approaches that integrate both disciplinary and societalknowledge [13]. This transition will require research in engineering education to inform teachingmethods that promote the engineering students’ integration of disciplinary and societalknowledge.This paper is part of a larger study. The research presented in this manuscript aims to contributeto the field of mathematics engineering education by exploring the processes through whichengineering students integrate disciplinary knowledge and critical reflections while participatingin modeling activities, specifically MEAs. In this evidence-based research paper we present
improving the retention of under-performingstudents, but these tools are too labor-intensive for faculty to apply in large introductory courses.Additionally, many struggling students are limited by non-cognitive factors such as fear offailure, social anxiety, and general overwhelm. There is a need for large-format, scalableinstructional tools that both engage students in course material and address non-cognitive factorsin an appropriate way.This Work In Progress will present the effects of a remedial intervention, the “reflectiveknowledge inventory”, at improving student outcomes in Calculus 1. In the intervention, studentsimprove their exam score by submitting a “reflective knowledge inventory”. Expert learnersknow that new skills are best built
our instructional approach, still inits development stage, in its first classroom setting. At the beginning of the term, we gatheredpre-course reflections from students that guided our adaptations to teaching methods. Post-coursefeedback was used to evaluate the success of our implementation. Initial observations from thisfirst iteration reveal both successes and challenges in promoting contextualized learning aseducators. In addition to enhancing problem-solving skills and applying numerical methods tovarious real-world scenarios, we also emphasize the application of computer programmingabilities, which are essential in engineering contexts.Since our approach is still in the development phase and this is our first implementation iteration,we
theconcepts, music was used as a thread for the program. Contextualized courses have been foundto improve student confidence and learning (Govindasamy et al., 2018) and tackling engineeringdesign problems has been shown to increase engineering identity and persistence (Gray et al.,2021; Morelock, 2017). Through the STEM course students: 1. Used mathematics to solve engineering and physics related problems; 2. Built and tuned a thumb piano; 2. Used breadboards to create an electric circuit and an electronic piano; 3. Reflected on their own learning.Some of the materials for the FYSEP program were adapted from a highly successfulMathematical Concepts in Engineering course that was created and taught by one of the authors.ALL students who
, faculty members at theseinstitutions sought a grading system that would better reflect students’ comprehension andsupport their academic growth. Standards-based grading (SBG) was implemented to meet theseneeds by shifting the focus away from partial credit accumulation and toward a more meaningfulassessment of learning.SBG was adopted in College Algebra courses to encourage students to master specific learningobjectives through an iterative process of reassessment. Unlike traditional weighted averagegrading (WAG), SBG emphasizes mastery of content, giving students multiple opportunities todemonstrate their understanding. This paper will present a statistical analysis between studentoutcomes in SBG and WAG college algebra courses.Supported by
, interesting, motivated, and efficient. Secondly, the aimwas to better illustrate the power of linear algebra to explain fundamental principles andsimplify calculations in various fields, including engineering, computer science, mathematics,physics, biology, economics, and statistics. Thirdly, the focus was on better communicatingthe importance of linear algebra in the applied field, reflecting it as a scientific tool. Lastly,the objective was to empower students’ abilities to solve more complicated and applicableproblems in the real world. This paper’s primary focus is on the redesign effort, whichincorporates MATLAB and introduces active learning into the course, while still coveringall the core topics in any basic linear algebra class. This
) N Most days, students are required to complete a PCW before class. These PCWs help review material from previous classes or prepare students for new content, encouraging reflection before class. Students may only use class notes and prior knowledge to answer the questions. PCWs are graded for completion. In-class worksheets (ICW) Y ICWs are the primary source of content, where students answer
-minute TA-leddiscussion section once a week. In a typical semester (before the change in grading scheme)students would submit weekly graded homework consisting of textbook problems, take a“homework quiz” during the first 10-15 minutes of discussion section, take two preliminary(midterm) exams, and take a comprehensive final exam.Changes for Fall 2022The main goals of the new grading scheme were to: stop collecting and grading writtenhomework; require correct answers for credit; give ample opportunity for reflection and feedbackon mistakes. To accomplish these goals, we devised the following outline for the logistics of thecourse. • Textbook practice problems were posted each week, and full solutions posted a few days later. These were
conceptual aspects of Linear Algebra.Maple primarily serves as a computational tool in this context. Moreover, in team-basedcomputer lab settings, students engage actively with their peers and occasionally with theinstructor, creating a dynamic learning atmosphere that enhances comprehension andcollaboration.Lab, Online Assessments, Application in Interactive Jupyter Notebooks. Silva et al. [60]redesigned the linear algebra course with multiple innovations and students reflected positivelyabout this approach in the paper. Firstly, there was a reorganization of the course structure. Thetraditional linear algebra curriculum, typically consisting of three lecture hours per week, wasredesigned. The theoretical components were condensed into two lectures
difficulty, 2-with difficulty, 3- with some difficulty, 4- neutral, 5-somewhat easily, 6-easily, 7-very easilyIn this specific set of questions, 115 students provided responses to all sub-questions in both thepre-survey and post-survey. Descriptive analysis, as presented in Table 1, indicated an increasein the average Likert scale. Simultaneously, the paired t-tests, reflected by small p-values,revealed significant improvements in students' perceptions of MATLAB. Specifically, by the endof the course after the incorporation of MATLAB, students found it significantly easier toremember instructions and coding styles, select the correct codes for desired outputs, and debugcodes.Set 2: Please indicate how overwhelmed you feel about the following
those who would have struggled more in their absence.Following the Fall 2022 quarter, a survey was given to the SS students to provide feedback ontheir perception of the SI sessions. Nineteen of the twenty-four responded. While a more in depthlook at the survey is planned for the future, an initial review of the feedback indicates allrespondents viewed the SI sessions as beneficial to their overall course grades in math andengineering. They also had unanimous positive reflections on the community building aspects ofthe SI sessions. Some sample responses to the prompt “Do you think the community buildingaspect of the SUCCESS Scholars Program helped your performance in the math and engineeringclasses? Explain” are: “I do because it helps me
, instructors and researchers found that students feel lessstress or anxiety during timed assessments [7], and they appreciate the opportunities to reattemptthe concepts, without being penalized for early mistakes. Instructors also feel that their gradesare a better reflection of students' actual learning [1].Purpose and research questionsIn light of the importance of helping students succeed in this class, which sets the foundation forfuture courses, and the benefit that alternative grading systems can help students reduce theirstress levels and focus on learning, the author has implemented the mastery grading approach inher Calculus I class, described below. The following questions guided this pilot study: 1. How, if at all, do student
importance of planning, executing and evaluating subjects that are linked to the interestsand objectives of the courses in which these ones are being offered, reflecting on what skillswe want students to acquire and how these are used in their careers.Prado [4] also suggest that it is necessary to develop a more contextualized, consolidated andattractive course, applying multidisciplinary and transdisciplinary activities, using activemethodologies, articulating practice and theory with the support of software, a fact that is alsohighlighted in the document that in Brazil guides the organization of engineering programs,the National Curriculum Regulations for Engineering Education (DCN1) [13].Stewart, Larson, and Zandieh [7] emphasize the need of
are able to revise with sufficient reflection and convert the score toa successful demonstration of mastery. Because of the strict grading of individual problems,multiple opportunities (two to five) must be available for most LOs, except those covered towardsthe very end of the semester.The Checkpoints are Canvas quizzes—partially auto-graded, partially manually graded—takenand submitted by students outside of class in an unproctored environment. To help maintainacademic integrity, we needed large banks of randomized questions. Building these Checkpointquizzes in a way that allows randomization but relatively efficient grading is a crucial part of asuccessful implementation of our grading scheme. Final course grades are based entirely on
backgrounds and their struggles are reflected in a higher rate ofD/F/W’s (18% in Fall 2021) than students entering at other calculus levels.Mastery grading was introduced in Calculus I in Fall 2022, largely to address disparities in thepreparation of the students, and to combat anxiety and lack of confidence. Key features ofmastery grading include breaking the course material into distinct learning outcomes. Studentsare allowed multiple attempts to demonstrate mastery in each learning outcome [1]. Thisapproach aims to create a supportive and inclusive environment where students can achievemastery at their own pace and foster a growth mindset by emphasizing continual learning overgrades. Two sections were taught using the mastery grading approach, and
thepumped water initially did not place the cup horizontally, but one of the team memberssuggested placing the cup on the table to check the measurement accurately. As the team tookmeasurements, they engaged in reflective discussions about the pumping phenomenon as seen intheir data sheet (Fig. 3). Fig. 3. Notes Extract from Team 1’s Data Collection.Team 1 also developed their interpretation of the efficiency concept based on their measurementprocess, pump manipulation, and interpretation of using the pump to supply water to las coloniascommunity. [Professor]: how would you define efficiency? [Team 1]: We can see that during the in between like three minutes and five minutes, there’s a big spike in like the
game itself is meant toreinforce the skills of right triangle trigonometry, and to create an environment in which studentscan better identify the benefits of solving literal equations. In the extension to this lab, students tosolve a literal equation for the vertical position of the end-effector (which was not necessary forthe game). They also complete a metacognitive reflection about their strategy during the gameand how they could have better prepared for it.Results and DiscussionInitial student feedback results are promising. For each lab piloted in 2024-25, we administeredan anonymous survey to collect student impressions of the activity. The survey uses a standardLikert scale with 1 = Strongly Disagree, 2 = Somewhat Disagree, 3= Neutral
finalized codebook. Table 2 defines the four S’s alongside the transition types in the study context. We organized the results by the type of transition and highlighted how students' experiences map to the four S’s of Schlossberg’s transition theory. . TrustworthinessEReporting on the quality, credibility, and validation of qualitative research are best practices to ensure the study's trustworthiness[33]. In engineeringeducation, Walther et al.[34]provide validation strategies to ensure the quality and trustworthiness of qualitative research. heoretical validation of a study should reflect the complexity of the lived experience underTinvestigation. This can be validated through the use of an opposing case
the gap betweensecondary and tertiary mathematics. According to Clark and Lovric (2008), this is one of themajor causes of failure in the transition and relates to the poor communication betweensecondary level and university” [22, p. 835]. Only one citation references inflated grades insecondary mathematics. “One factor that appears to have a significant effect on the predictivevalue of high school grades on university is grade inflation” [23, p. 1234]. For the affectivetheme, the student’s attitude toward mathematics is reflected in the citations as well as theiremotions related to the disruption in their routine.Remedial efforts, 4.8%, and synthetic model, 1.6%, themes describe how students struggle oncethey are in college mathematics. The
automatically registered for the MAC 1906 course. Communications continued a weekbefore the start of classes notifying students of their subject assignment and expectations for thefirst week of class. Timely and informative communications from the program administrationcontinued throughout the semester in addition to instructor in-class announcements. At theconclusion of the semester, student enrollment was swapped from MAC 1906 to reflect thehighest math subject earned. The new course posted to the transcript allowing students to easilymeet degree requirements even if the student transferred internally to a new major or externallyto another institution.The cocurricular human link provided by Math Launch was just as important as the support inthe
engineering coursework at a calculus level and the lack of structured support being offeredto students in this situation.ParticipantsStudents who start the engineering program without being calculus-ready are invited toparticipate in this study. In the first year of the full study that is currently in progress(2024-2025), 10 of 33 first-year engineering students started the program at a pre-calculus level.This work-in-progress paper reflects the pilot trial for this study and follows one student whoentered the engineering program during the 2023-2024 school year not at the calculus level. Thisstudent entered the program enrolled in pre-calculus and had both a strong interest in engineeringand self-reported struggles with math coursework, making him
using worksheets and students were required to write theirwork into a bound notebook (3-ring binder, science notebook, or spiral bound). This handwrittenhomework approach was used to develop student’s ability to express their work clearly. Duringeach test, the notebooks were collected and scored. The instructor gave feedback on errors thatwere noticed and gave a score that reflected the student’s ability to communicate and execute thematerial. The scores did not impact the student’s course grade; however, if a student earned apassing score on all the notebook checks, then the final’s scaled percentage was able to replacethe lowest exam grade.Second Iteration (Winter 2022-2023)In the second quarter, two sections consisting of 62 students were
as the average of all items. Previous research efforts have shown that thismeasure of outcome expectations is directly related to social cognitive outcomes, includingpersistence intentions [36], [45]. Good internal reliability for the three items was obtained withCronbach’s 𝛼 = .90. Engineering Identity. The Identity as a Scientist instrument developed by Chemers andcolleagues (2010) was adopted and modified specifically for engineering to reflect a student’sself-identification as an engineer. Participants’ engineering identity was measured using three ofChemers and colleagues’ [46] original six identity items. Items were rated on a scale 7-pointLikert scale (1-strongly disagree to 7-strongly agree). Participants indicated their
research andtheir recognition of our work. It should be noted that the opinions, results, conclusions, orrecommendations expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views ofthe National Science Foundation.References[1] I. Kleiner, "History of the Infinitely Small and the Infinitely Large in Calculus Author(s)," Springer, vol. 48, pp. 137-174, 2001.[2] E. F. Redish, R. N. Steinberg, and J. M.. Saul, "Student difficulties with math in physics: Giving meaning to symbols," Physics Education Research Group, 1996.[3] S.R. Jones., Applying Mathematics to Physics and Engineering: Symbolic Forms of the Integral, Maryland, 2010.[4] R. Bajracharya., "Student Application of the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus with