Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Technology assessment in math 2400 calculus 2 spring assessment day 2010 jenn berg.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Technology assessment in math 2400 calculus 2 spring assessment day 2010 jenn berg."— Presentation transcript:

1 technology assessment in math 2400 calculus 2 spring assessment day 2010 jenn berg

2 overview of project goal motivation method  integrate criteria from department level assessment into course level assessment  to effectively communicate to the students our expectations of them  use similar rubric to account for half of the students lab grade

3 be able to read, write, listen, and speak mathematically, as well as to be able to read and understand technically-based materials and to contribute effectively to group efforts assessment plangoal 3

4 connections to department level assessment  logical argumentation and organization  complete and accurate interpretation of results  english phraseology  explanation of solution strategy or the steps you are using on a problem departmentcourse

5 connections to department level assessment  creates graphs with appropriate scale  graphs centered on region of interest and made with an appropriate scale departmentcourse

6 have an understanding of the appropriate use of technology in mathematics assessment plangoal 4

7 connections to department level assessment  uses technology efficiently  technology used efficiently mathematically (e.g., defines useful functions, uses call lines) departmentcourse

8 three main criteria verbal 1 graphing 2 technology 1 explanations of solution strategy or the steps you are using on a problem graphs are centered on region of interest to problem and with an appropriate scale for the problem technology used effectively mathematically (e.g., defines useful functions, uses call lines) performance ratings: excellent - 4good - 3adequate - 2poor - 1

9 all students end with average performance ratings of 2 or above in these three criteria benchmark

10 results

11 students’ performance will improve over time secret naïve hope (i.e., failed benchmark)

12 student performance over time

13 lessons  more focus in lab time on effective use of technology  two presentation criteria need to be addressed  I may have become a rubric addict

14 questions?  mathematics department assessment committee  office of assessment many thanks to:


Download ppt "Technology assessment in math 2400 calculus 2 spring assessment day 2010 jenn berg."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google