1 of 1

A Study of Instructional Tools �for Quantitative Reasoning

Research

Questions

Data Collection

Correlations

​

​

The study consists of mostly deaf and hard-of-hearing students who take QR courses as a general requirement.

The data has been analyzed using a variety of descriptive statistics from three surveys:

1. Student profile questionnaire,
2. Fifteen-week survey as a wrap-up for the semester, and
3. Reflective journal to encapsulate the overall learning experience.

​

1. Can educational technology be used in a way to allow students taking online courses to achieve the same learning outcomes as students who take these same classes face-to-face?
2. Which tools are most appropriate for helping DHH students achieve better results in QR?

The primary focus of this study is to examine different instructional tools for Quantitative Reasoning (QR) for Deaf and Hard of Hearing (DHH) college students. The lack of QR skills among college students is a growing problem in the United States (Dwyer, Gallagher, Leven, & Morley, 2003).

According to Dwyer et al. (2003), QR is the application of basic mathematics skills, such as algebra and geometry, to the analysis and interpretation of real-world problems. e.g., credit cards, mortgages, and student loans. Many leading experts in the field of Education and Developmental Psychology attest that developing QR skills is essential for financial independence and autonomy as adults (Marschark, Shaver, Nagle, & Newman, 2015). The GSR 104 QR course at Gallaudet University (GU) is mainly focused on finance and statistics.

Susanna Henderson

Department of Science,

Technology and Mathematics

Introduction

Methodology

Study consisted of 69 participants from five different classes during the Fall of 2015 (n = 41) and the Spring of 2016 (n = 29).

Figure 6. Online and/or face-to-face preferences.

�

The relationship between ASL movies and post-assessment scores demonstrates weak or moderate correlations (0.29 to 0.58) between these two variables. Additionally, there seems to be a strong relationship between MML and postassessment scores (coefficient scores: 0.39 and 0.88). �

Figure 5. Ranking of tools used during hybrid courses.

�

Figure 1. Student-based performance tests.

​

Note. HS-F: Hybrid Synchronous-Fall. HS-S: Hybrid Synchronous-Spring. HA-S: Hybrid Asynchronous-Spring. OS-F: Online Synchronous-Fall.

OA-F: Online Asynchronous-Fall. �

Figure 1. Preference of online and face-to-face students

Figure 2. Ranking of tools used by online synchronous students

Figure 3. Ranking of tools preferred by hybrid synchronous students

Results

The data above shows the importance of having different instructional tools as part of the learning process. The OA-F section suggests a higher percentage of postassessment scores due to having a stronger language foundation at home.

Literature Review

References

Anderson, T. (2008). The theory and practice of online learning. (2nd ed.). Edmonton, Canada: Athabasca University Press.

Bissell, N. A. (2012, October). Architecture and impact of an open online, remixable, and multimedia-rich Algebra I. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Network, 16(5), 49-59.

Cheung, C. & Cable, J. (2015). Eight principles of effective online teaching. [PowerPoint]. Bethesda, MD: Lilly International Spring Conference.

Dwyer, C. A., Gallagher, A., Levin J., & Morley, M. E. (2003). What is quantitative reasoning? Defining the construct for assessment purposes (ETS Report RR-03-30). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service. Retrieved from https://www.ets.org/Media/Research/pdf/RR-03-30-Dwyer.pdf

Ernest, P. (2010). Reflections on theories of learning. In B. Sriraman & L. English (Eds.), Theories of Mathematics Education, Advances in Mathematics Education, pp. 39-47. doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-00742-2_4

Harasim, L. (2012). Learning theory and online technology: How new technologies are transforming learning opportunities

Harrison, L. (2014). What is digital literacy? Retrieved from http://pomo.com.au/blog/digital-literacy/

Marschark, M., Shaver, D. M., Nagle, K. M., & Newman, L. A. (2015). Predicting the academic achievement of deaf and hard-of-hearing students from individual, household, communication, and educational factors. Exceptional Children, 81, 350-369. doi: 10.1177/0014402914563700

OpenColleges. (2012). Components of a 21^st century classroom. Retrieved from http://discover.novadesk.com/hs-fs/hub/84375/file-375052165-jpg/images/8422.21st_century_classroom.jpg

Wiesenberg, F. P., & Stacey, E. Teaching philosophy: Moving from face-to-face to online classrooms. Canadian Journal of University Continuing Education, 34, 63-79. doi: 10.21225/d5jp4g

Instructional Tools

1. Quantitative Reasoning Course (GSR 104 Course Tour and MyMathLab)
2. GSR 104 Classmates (using BlackBoard)
3. American Sign Language Movies
4. Screenshots and Web2.0Calc
5. Excel
6. Games (Kahoot.it, PollEverywhere, Jeopardy, and MML’s Learning Catalytics)  
7. Classroom Management (NetSupport)
8. Webconferencing

Encouraging news for the future:

1. Classroom film recordings. A team from the Center of Bilingual Teaching and Learning (CBTL) videotaped four different classes during the spring of 2015. This benefits the studyby being able to analyze the attitudes of students relating to Mathematics.
2. Zoom.us webconferencing. The investigator has been encouraged to continue to use Zoom.us for online courses. As part of professional development, this can help set up future training [online] modules for faculty and tutors (Wiesenberg & Stracey, 2013).
3. Visual learning. Helpful for identifying different

learning style(s), e.g., Visual,

Auditory, Read/ Write, and

Kinesthetic (VARK).

Future Research

More than half of the nation’s high school seniors are not prepared for entry-level college mathematics courses (Bissell, 2012). Bissell’s question of “whether technology in general, and open educational resources (OER) in particular, might offer some light for improving math scores across the nation” (p. 49). Critics who have further examined this situation found that many faculties across the nation are dissuaded, and even prohibited, from keeping up with the latest trends for successful instruction, including the use of technology-based intervention (Bissell, 2012; Harasim, 2012).

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

Increased knowledge of digital literacy for employment is critically important since we now live in a technology-driven society (J. Diaz-Herrera, November 6, 2015, personal communication). Diaz-Herrera mentions the importance of using digital literacy in all courses as part of developing skills appropriate for future employment.

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

There are three different theories that can help understand how teaching can be effective within the 21st century pedagogy paradigm. These theories are: (1) constructivism, (2) cognitivism, and (3) online collaborative learning. Constructivism is defined as “learning is made by doing,” cognitivism as “learning as processing information,” and online collaborative learning being as “learning as intellectual convergence through discourse” (Anderson, 2008, p. 14).

Related to the constructivist theory, the learning process is a constellation of situated learning and assimilation of knowledge (Anderson, 2008; Ernest, 2010). This theory includes using active learning, learning-by-doing, scaffolding, and collaborative learning (Harasim, 2012), e.g., finance and statistics projects. It also includes Vygotsky’s social constructivism. Social constructivism involves scaffolding resources, e.g., ASL movies and MyMathLab.

(OpenColleges, 2012)

(Harrison, 2014)

Scan the QR code to find Google Drive’s link that includes: (1) Surveys, (2) PowerPoint, & (3) English texts/

ASL videos

Quick

Response

Approved by IRB (PJID# 2708)

Table 1

Table 2

Quick

Response

Code

have

have

have

​

The majority of students prefer (1) MyMathLab, and (2) ASL movies for online courses. However, with face-to-face, the ranking shifts more to a preference for lecture (15-20 minutes).

�q-r.to/bal9HZ