Gerald Kruse and David Drews Juniata College Huntingdon, PA

Outline of Status Report/Mentoring Session History Experimental Design Data Tentative Plans Comments/Suggestions

MA 103, Quantitative Methods, aka “QM” “Mathematics 103 prepares students to be quantitatively literate citizens in today's world. By learning to think critically about quantitative issues, students will be able to make responsible decisions in their daily lives. Problems are analyzed and solved using numerical, graphical, statistical, and algebraic reasoning. Technology is used to help visualize data and facilitate calculations, as well as to present quantitative output and verbal arguments. ” Collegiate Learning Assessment, (CLA), Performance Task Goals “Critical Thinking, Analytic Reasoning, and Problem Solving “Written Communication”

MA 103, Quantitative Methods at Juniata College Juniata has a Quantitative Skills Requirement Non-majors course: MA 103, Quantitative Methods Pre and Post Assessment (Skills and Attitudes) - 55 min exam given on the first and last day of semester - Fall 2009 transition from math skills to CLA performance task Three Projects during the semester - began using CLA performance tasks Spring one class period to present and start, then due over one week later - students appreciate open-ended assignment

Assessment Schedule, Fall 2009

Evaluating Evidence Analysis / Synthesis / Conclusion Presenting / “creating” evidence Acknowledging alternatives to THEIR conclusion Completeness Mechanics/Persuasiveness Higher-Order Skills Assessed in Rubric

Identifying relevant evidence, evaluating evidence credibility, reliability, relevance Not Attempted (0) Emerging (1,2) Mentions one or two documents, with: - No or wrong evaluation on both (1) - cursory-to-OK eval on document C, flawed on other (2) Developing (3,4) Mentions two documents (one must be C), with: - cursory-to-OK evaluation on both (3) - good evaluation on both (4) Mastering (5,6) Evaluation of C is good, and evaluates two other doc with: - acceptable evaluations (5) - good evaluations (6) Evaluating Evidence Category on Rubric

Rubric Reliability Dimension Question 1 Question 2 % spot on % +/- 1 % spot on % +/- 1 Evaluation Conclusions Create Alternatives Completeness Mechanics Overall: spot on = 63.6%+/- 1 = 91.3 %

Rubric Reliability, continued Question 1 total score: r =.713, p = Question 2 total score: r =.828, p = Total score: r =. 873, p = 0.000

Question 1 Mean by group and pre/post

Question 2 Mean by group and pre/post

Total Score Mean by group and pre/post

Explore the connection between the critical thinking rubric and assessments/grades used for the in-class tasks Provide more critical thinking feedback to the students More attention in class on the module analyzing sources (some low scores on the pre/post assessment were a result of students accepting flawed documents, done the day before fall break in 2009…) Your ideas here… Possible changes for Spring 2011

Identifying relevant evidence, evaluating evidence credibility, reliability, relevance Not Attempted (0) Emerging (1,2) Incorrectly implies, or states directly, agrees that “banning aspartame would improve the health of the state’s citizens” with: - no evidence (1) - evidence (2) Developing (3,4) Implies, or directly disagrees, with Sauer, noting inconsistency of claim with data in doc C but reason is: - inaccurate/unclear or incomplete(3) - good (4) Mastering (5,6) - Says C doesn’t support claim and is clear about reason and uses F reasonably well (5) - Satisfactorily uses conditional probability when discussing relationship between headaches and aspartame usage (6) Analysis/Synthesis/Conclusion Category on Rubric

Sen. Nathan Dulce is running for re-election vs. Pat Sauer Proposed bill to ban aspartame, an artificial sweetener, from being added to any soft drink or food product, Dulce opposes, Sauer approves. Pat Sauer made two arguments during a recent TV interview: (1) Strong correlation between the number of people who consume aspartame and headaches, so,“banning aspartame would improve the health of the state’s citizens.” (2)“Aspartame should be banned and replaced with sucralose.” Pat Sauer supported this argument by referring to a news release. Performance Task Scenario for Pre and Post-Assessment

Question #1 Pat Sauer claims that “banning aspartame would improve the health of the state’s citizens” (Documents E contains the chart he presented, and it is based on data from the tables in Document C). What are the strengths and/or limitations of Pat Sauer’s position on this matter? Based on the evidence, what conclusion should be drawn about Pat Sauer’s claim? Why? What specific information in the documents led you to this conclusion? Question #2 Pat Sauer claims that “aspartame should be banned and replaced with sucralose.” What are the strengths and/or limitations of Pat Sauer’s position on this matter? Based on the evidence, what conclusion should be drawn about Pat Sauer’s claim? Why? Is there a better solution, and if so, what are the its strengths and/or limitations? Be sure to cite the information in the documents as well as any other factors you considered (such as the quality of the research conducted on aspartame) that led you to this conclusion. Questions on Pre/Post Assessment

Making good arguments involves... Clearly stating a conclusion Evaluating and selecting evidence Creating links between evidence and conclusion We can then consider quantitative reasoning as critical thinking involving numbers/data… Critical thinking involves evaluating/making good arguments